In my column last week, I pointed out the reasons why former president Noynoy Aquino and President Bongbong Marcos elected to lean on the US rather than China. There are at least six reasons for their decision:
Philippine sovereignty is not under threat with the US, as it is with China. China’s bullying tactics have become untenable for the Philippines, especially towards the fisherfolk. China has proven unworthy of trust, what with multiple commitments broken, not the least of which is the freedom to fish in the disputed waters and multibillion-dollar investment commitments that never materialized. The Philippines and the US are of like minds. Both value democracy, the liberty to pursue individual goals, free trade and pluralism. We know how to navigate the American system and have proven to thrive in it. Chinese style authoritarianism goes against Filipino sensibilities.
With the expansion of EDCA, the Philippines is firmly aligned with the US in as far as Indo-Pacific geopolitics goes.
But as we are all aware, China aspires to install a new world order based on the values of the Chinese Communist Party. They want to re-write global rules to fit their agenda. They aim to expand their territorial domain, economic influence, military sway, diplomatic persuasion and cultural influence. In short, they want to replace the US as the new superpower.
China has an expansionist policy for which they have territorial disputes with ten countries, including the Philippines. It has engaged in unsavory actions, including illegal territorial grabs, disregard for maritime and aerial boundaries, disregard for global treaties and unlawful missile testing.
China has a formidable naval armada strategically positioned up to the Indian Ocean and edge of Africa.
How is America responding?
The US Department of Defense recently released its National Defense Strategy, which includes its nuclear and missile defense posture for the next few years. The strategy identifies China as America’s “most consequential strategic competition in the coming decades.” It stresses the urgency to recalibrate the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.
How was the US defense posture in the Indo-Pacific before the rivalry intensified? It was formidable but insufficient to deter China’s ever-strengthening forces. The US operated from five countries/territories for which it has bases or access thereto. Eight thousand troops were deployed in Guam, 45,000 troops were stationed in Japan while 23,000 troops were positioned in South Korea.
In Singapore, the US Navy can operate from the Changi Naval base. In the Philippines, American forces were allowed to maintain troops, build military installations and maintain pre-positioned supplies in five military bases. These are located in Nueva Ecija, Pampanga, Cagayan de Oro, Mactan and Puerto Princesa.
The US Department of Defense deemed its defense posture insufficient to match Chinese forces. And rightfully so. Hence, it stressed the need for “integrated deterrence” to keep China at bay. The revised American strategy involves expanding its defenses in the first island chain to create a barrier to deter Chinese forces. Consider it a wall of missiles and communication jamming devises meant to foil Chinese access.
How does the new defense posture of America look like?
In the Far East, weaponries and troops have been reinforced in Guam.
Now, imagine the eastern seaboard of Asia where you have Japan on top (with South Korea to Japan’s west), followed by Taiwan below, then Philippines and Indonesia further south. This is known as the first island chain.
In southern Japan is a chain of land formations called the Ryukyu islands which extends all the way to Taiwan. It is well within striking distance to the Chinese mainland.
The Japanese-American alliance is building a military base in Magashima island (top of the Ryukyu island chain), complete with an airstrip. In the next island of Amami, the Japanese have deployed long-range and anti-ship missiles. Further south in Okinawa, long-range missiles and electronic warfare units were added to disrupt and deny communications of enemy forces. Further south, nearing Taiwan, is Miyako Jima and Ishigaki islands. Both islands were rigged with long-range missiles suitable for attacking enemy warships and aircraft. The last island in the Ryukyu chain is Yonaguni, which is closest to Taiwan. Here, more electronic warfare units were installed.
All these are funded by the Japanese government using weaponries from the US. The Japanese increased their defense budget by 97 percent in response to China’s aggression.
Further south in the first island chain is the Philippines. In addition to the five existing bases in which American forces operate, access was given to four more bases located in Isabela, Cagayan, Zambales and Palawan. The defense chain extends to Singapore.But it does not stop there.
The next component to the defense strategy is AUKUS, a military pact involving the US, the UK and Australia. The three countries are working together to create a unified submarine force to patrol the waters of the Indo-Pacific and to close choke points where China can penetrate. These submarines carry nuclear weapons, thereby adding yet another layer of deterrence.
Down south, Australia is building a permanent hangar in the Tindal Airbase, northern Australia, to house US Bomber aircrafts.
This closes the wall of deterrence of the US-led forces. Theoretically, it should be strong enough to contain Chinese aggression for the next decade. But again, we can never under estimate China.
In response, Xi Jinping has called the American strategy an act of bullying and “policy of encirclement and suppression.” Xi’s cries are largely ignored as it is simply seen as getting a taste of his own medicine.
All these have made the Indo-Pacific the decisive theater of the US-China rivalry. Apart from relying on the US for our external defenses, the Philippines will do well to build its own credible defenses. It is long overdue.
* * *
Email: [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @aj_masigan
