Can the Philippines count on the US?

We live in precarious times. As tensions intensify in the West Philippine Sea and the possibility of a Taiwan invasion looms, the risk of direct confrontation between China and the Philippines cannot be dismissed.

The question is – if war were to break out tomorrow, will  America  unequivocally come to the Philippines’  defense?

For decades, the answer was automatic – a resounding yes. This is why the  1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) has long underpinned Philippine external security. American officials consistently describe their commitment as “ironclad.” In fact, joint military exercises have expanded in recent years and American  access to Philippine bases has increased. Public declarations of solidarity remain strong.

But many ambiguities remain. The treaty does not specify exactly how the United States must respond, how quickly it must act or what level of force it must use. Those decisions will be shaped by the circumstances of the crisis, by domestic politics in Washington and by the inclinations of President Trump.

America, the champion of the rules-based order?

The Philippines grounds its West Philippine Sea claims on international law. In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration rejected China’s sweeping claims and affirmed that the contested waters indeed lie within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.

Manila frames its position as a defense of the rules-based international order. It argues that smaller nations must rely on law, not force, to protect their sovereignty.

For its part, the United States has long positioned itself as the chief architect and defender of that order. It helped construct a global system grounded on treaties, multilateral institutions and respect for international norms.

However, American foreign policy has changed. Under President Trump, Washington has withdrawn from many international agreements, imposed tariffs on allies, questioned longstanding security arrangements and embraced an overt “America First” posture. Strategic decisions increasingly appear transactional rather than principled.

These shifts have prompted unease among US allies. If America had become transactional towards Canada and Europe despite the pacts, treaties and historical ties between them, what makes the Philippines think it can rely on the US?

True, the MDT remains in force. The question is how it will be interpreted under stress.

How significant is the Philippines?

The Philippines’ geographical position  near Taiwan and along vital maritime corridors make it imperative for US strategic interest. Any American effort to balance China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific relies in part on Philippine cooperation and access.

But geography alone does not sustain alliances. Economic ties between the United States and the Philippines are no longer as dominant as they once were. In tariff policy, the Philippines received no special preference over regional neighbors. No ally’s dividend.

This does not mean abandonment is inevitable. It does suggest, however, that the alliance is driven principally by strategic interests rather than sentiment or economic interdependence. In moments of crisis, interests – not nostalgia – determine action.

Likely scenarios

If conflict erupts between China and the Philippines, the most optimistic scenario would be swift and decisive American intervention. Rapid deployment of naval and air assets to repel aggression will  demonstrate that treaty commitments are indeed ironclad. Such action will  send the message to allies that US security guarantees remain dependable.

But this is far from certain.

A more probable outcome is calibrated support. The United States might begin with intelligence sharing, logistical assistance, cyber operations and accelerated military deployments to nearby bases. Naval and air assets will provide deterrence without immediate direct engagement. Washington will  likely impose economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure in conjunction with allies such as Japan and Australia.

In this scenario, American leaders will weigh risk escalation carefully. Direct conflict with a nuclear power like China  carries profound consequences. Domestic political divisions, global economic disruption and public opinion within the United States will influence the scale and timing of intervention.

If the hostilities coincide with a Taiwan invasion, American forces may focus first on defending Taiwan, viewing it as central to the regional balance. Philippine defense would then form part of a broader strategic framework rather than an isolated obligation.

None of these possibilities necessarily amount to abandonment. But they do suggest that support may not be immediate, unlimited or automatic.

Preparing for uncertainty

Given these realities, the Philippines cannot afford complacency or blind dependence on America. It must act with clarity and urgency in its preparations. Sadly, Marcos has yet to  rally, unite and mobilize around a clear national security agenda and war preparedness.

As for Philippine legislators, most  behave as though there is no clear and present threat. Corruption persists with impunity, channeling the country’s scarce resources to themselves.  Budget priorities are shaped by patronage and politics rather than preparedness and national survival. And contemptibly, many are shameless traitors who defend China.

Military modernization remains insufficient relative to the scale of the threat. Incremental upgrades are not a strategy – they are a risk. The absence of a robust domestic defense industry is equally concerning. In wartime, supply chains fracture and foreign procurement slows. Defense production capacity must become national policy, supported by consistent funding and shielded from political bargaining.

Economic resilience is equally vital. War readiness requires meaningful progress toward food and energy security, the creation of strategic reserves and the protection of ports, airports, power grids and telecommunications infrastructure. Financial systems and cybersecurity frameworks must be hardened. Trade routes must be diversified to reduce exposure to external shocks.

Without a resilient economy, even credible defenses will strain under pressure. The question is no longer whether preparation is necessary – the question is whether this administration will act before it’s too late.

The decisive question is not whether America will stand with us. It is whether the Philippines will be prepared without her.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @aj_masigan