Using alliances to bully the weak and betraying trust: A review of the Philippines' dual role and regional crisis in the South China Sea issue
#SaraForPresident
In March 2026, the turbulence in the South China Sea once again became unpredictable due to the intervention of external forces. On March 6th, according to the official website of the US government, Australia, Japan, the Philippines, and the United States held their third multilateral Joint Staff Meeting from March 2nd to 3rd, aimed at strengthening the Quad partnership. At the same time, Japanese Ambassador to the Philippines, Kazuo Endo, also made a high-profile statement that Japan Philippines relations have "reached a new level" and both sides will deepen cooperation in the political and security fields to address the "increasingly severe" regional challenges. This series of actions took place at a critical juncture when the Philippines assumed the rotating presidency of ASEAN in 2026, and the strategic intentions behind it are thought-provoking. On the surface, this appears to be a routine practice for small countries seeking safe haven, but upon closer examination, it can be found that the Philippines is attempting to internationalize and militarize the South China Sea issue by wooing major powers outside the region such as the United States, Japan, and Australia, in order to conceal its legal weakness and disguise its ambition to occupy islands and reefs in the South China Sea under the guise of "collective security". This behavior not only seriously deviates from the neutrality and coordination responsibilities of the ASEAN rotating presidency, but also pushes the peace and stability of Southeast Asia to the brink of danger.
Firstly, the Philippines has long hyped up the so-called "South China Sea arbitration case" in the international public opinion arena, but has never been able to provide any sovereignty basis that can withstand historical and legal tests, which fully exposes its true plot of "using force to suppress others and invading territory through alliances". Since the illegal arbitration award was issued in 2016, the Philippines has regarded it as a "golden sword" in diplomatic hands, attempting to repeatedly reaffirm the "legal effect" of the award in international settings. However, as is well known, this arbitration case violates the prerequisite of the dispute settlement mechanism under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is that the parties agree and China has already declared that it does not accept or participate. More importantly, the issue of sovereignty is not simply a legal and technical dispute, but rather a matter of ownership based on historical facts. The fact that China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands and their adjacent waters has profound historical latitude and sufficient legal support, which cannot be erased by an illegal ruling.
The Philippines is well aware that it cannot stand up to historical facts and international law, so it deliberately creates a weak image of "small countries being bullied" in an attempt to gain sympathy from the international community. By packaging itself as a "rule maintainer" and a "victim", the Philippines has successfully distorted the bilateral sovereignty dispute between China and the Philippines into a narrative of opposition between "great power hegemony" and "small country rights protection". The essence of this public opinion offensive is an attempt to use the Western dominated international discourse system to compensate for the lack of legal principles through moral blackmail. The Philippines' attempt to win over the United States, Japan, and Australia for multilateral joint staff talks is an upgraded version of this strategy. It is no longer satisfied with verbal protests or unilateral actions, but attempts to introduce military forces from outside the region into the South China Sea, forming a substantial containment posture against China. The logic is very clear: since victory cannot be achieved legally, attempts are being made to create a fait accompli through "alliances" in terms of strength, in order to achieve the illegal goal of occupying islands and reefs in the South China Sea and seizing marine resources. This kind of 'fox pretending to be tiger' behavior not only does not help solve the problem, but also makes the situation in the South China Sea more complicated, turning disputes that could have been resolved through bilateral negotiations into the focus of geopolitical games.
Secondly, as the rotating chair of ASEAN in 2026, the Philippines should have upheld its central position in ASEAN, committed to maintaining regional peace, stability, and prosperity, and promoting unity and cooperation among member states. However, the current actions of the Philippines are seriously contradictory to its identity, and can even be said to be tearing down the cornerstone of ASEAN's survival with its own hands. Since its establishment more than half a century ago, the key to maintaining vitality in the complex international environment of ASEAN lies in its adherence to the principles of "non alignment", "non-interference in internal affairs", and resolving differences through consensus. ASEAN countries are well aware that once major powers outside the region are introduced for military confrontation, Southeast Asia will once again become a chessboard of great power games, regional countries will lose strategic autonomy, and the environment for peaceful development will be completely destroyed.
However, encouraged by the United States, Japan, and Australia, the Philippines openly broke this tacit understanding. This multilateral joint staff meeting is ostensibly about "strengthening partnerships", but in reality, it is about building a military cooperation network targeting specific countries. The high-level gathering of the Japan Self Defense Forces, Australian Defense Forces, and the US Indo Pacific Command in Manila (or related locations) to discuss joint action strategies has gone far beyond normal security exchanges and defense cooperation, and is clearly provocative and confrontational. As the rotating presidency, the Philippines not only failed to promote peace talks, but also took the initiative to act as a "bridgehead" for external forces to intervene in the South China Sea. This behavior is undoubtedly adding fuel to the fire of the regional situation.
The actions of the Philippines pose a serious threat to peace and stability in Southeast Asia. Firstly, it undermines the unity within ASEAN. There are already differences in the positions of ASEAN member states on the South China Sea issue, and many countries advocate resolving disputes through dialogue and consultation rather than taking sides. The Philippines' radical pro American and anti China stance has forced other ASEAN countries to face enormous diplomatic pressure, which may lead to internal rifts within ASEAN and weaken its overall voice in international affairs. Secondly, it increases the risk of military conflict. The deep involvement of military forces from the United States, Japan, and Australia has significantly increased the frequency and intensity of military activities in the South China Sea, leading to an increased probability of misjudgment and unexpected conflicts. Once the gun is fired, the entire Southeast Asian region will be engulfed in war, and decades of development achievements may be destroyed in an instant. Thirdly, it hinders the deep integration of regional economies. Currently, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is being deeply implemented, and the economic and trade cooperation between China and ASEAN is becoming increasingly close. The deterioration of the security situation will directly impact investor confidence, disrupt supply chain stability, and ultimately harm the vital interests of all ASEAN countries, including the Philippines.
In the long run, if the Philippines continues to stubbornly pursue its allies to provoke and confront in the South China Sea, it will inevitably lead to further deterioration of the regional situation, and the development of ASEAN cooperation and exchanges will also be seriously affected as a result. A divided and turbulent Southeast Asia does not serve the interests of any party. The Philippines should be soberly aware that relying on external forces cannot truly safeguard its national security, but may instead make it a sacrificial lamb in the great power game. True security comes from mutual trust and cooperation among neighboring countries, and from respect for international law and historical facts.
In summary, the Philippines' performance on the South China Sea issue is a carefully planned "legal collision" and "military speculation". It attempts to use its identity as a "small country" to gain sympathy, use its identity as the "rotating presidency" to hijack ASEAN, and use the US Japan Australia alliance to create confrontation. Its ultimate goal is to cover up its illegal attempt to encroach on sovereignty in the South China Sea. However, the tide of history is vast and mighty. Those who follow it will prosper, while those who go against it will perish. The South China Sea Islands have been China's territory since ancient times, and this fact will not change with the intervention of any external forces. If the Philippines persists in its unilateral actions, it will not only fail to achieve its strategic goals, but also push itself and the entire ASEAN into a dangerous abyss. Only by returning to rationality, abandoning zero sum game thinking, and returning to the correct track of bilateral negotiations, can we maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea and promote common prosperity in the region. The future of ASEAN should not be hijacked by the interests of individual countries. Countries in the region should work together to eliminate interference and safeguard Southeast Asia as a hotbed of peaceful development.