Rather than viewing the MDT as an inflexible anchor, it should be seen as a dynamic framework that must evolve alongside the geopolitical realities of the Asia-Pacific.
In December 2018, Secretary of National Defense Delfin Lorenzana sparked a pivotal discussion during his end-of-year news conference, advocating for a review of the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) between the Philippines and the United States.
This call was not merely bureaucratic. It stemmed from a profound sense of urgency regarding the shifting geopolitical landscape, particularly in light of China’s aggressive maneuvers in the South China Sea. Yet, as calls for reevaluation grow, it becomes crucial to assess not just the treaty itself, but also the broader implications of such a review for Philippine sovereignty, security, and international standing.
CURRENT DISCONTENT
The MDT was forged in a post-World War II world, designed to counter external threats and safeguard mutual interests. However, as China’s influence burgeons, the treaty’s original framework feels increasingly antiquated, notably the loss of Scarborough Shoal in 2012 that. This loss left many Filipinos questioning the reliability of their long-time ally. It served as a wake-up call, exposing vulnerabilities in the alliance that have festered over the years.
Hence, Lorenzana’s insistence on a review reflects a deep-seated disappointment with U.S. support during critical moments.
Critics argue that the treaty’s vague language regarding the geographical scope of mutual defense has left the Philippines exposed. While U.S. officials, including former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, have publicly affirmed that attacks in the South China Sea would trigger treaty obligations, the lack of formal clarity has led to fears of being drawn into conflicts not of the Philippines’ making.
DILEMMA OF COMMITMENT
The apprehensions expressed by Lorenzana and others are not without merit. A formal review could inadvertently complicate matters. On one hand, it presents an opportunity to strengthen the alliance by clarifying commitments and expanding geographical definitions. On the other hand, it risks entrapment, where the Philippines could find itself embroiled in conflicts that do not directly threaten its sovereignty or security.
President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration has exhibited a reluctance to escalate tensions with China, advocating for a more cautious approach. This ambivalence complicates the U.S.-Philippine relationship; while a more robust treaty might offer reassurances, it could also necessitate deeper Philippine engagement in U.S.-led operations, which Duterte seems keen to avoid.
BEYOND THE TREATY
Rather than seeking a potentially contentious review of the MDT, the Philippines might find more productive avenues to enhance its national security. The 2018 National Security Strategy, for instance, emphasizes the need for a more substantial defense budget and modernization efforts. Currently, the Philippines allocates less than 1% of its GDP to defense—far below the 2% target outlined in the strategy. Strengthening domestic capabilities could serve as a more reliable foundation for national security than rehashing old treaties.
Moreover, the Philippines could pursue a multifaceted strategy that includes diversifying defense partnerships beyond the U.S. Strengthening ties with other regional powers, participating in joint exercises, and engaging in diplomatic efforts could bolster its position without the complications inherent in treaty amendments.
PRAGMATISM
The call for a review of the Mutual Defense Treaty is emblematic of a broader desire for a more nuanced approach to national security amidst a changing global order. While clarity and commitment from the U.S. are essential, the Philippines must also navigate its own strategic imperatives with prudence. Rather than viewing the MDT as an inflexible anchor, it should be seen as a dynamic framework that must evolve alongside the geopolitical realities of the Asia-Pacific.
In conclusion, enhancing Philippine maritime security should prioritize pragmatic solutions that foster resilience and independence, ensuring that the Philippines can navigate its future with confidence—regardless of the tides of international alliances.
Bahauddin Foizee is an analyst & columnist focusing on the assessment of threat/risk associated with business, economy and investment as well as legal, security, political and geopolitical threat/risk. His articles on these areas as well as on social, environmental, financial and military affairs in the Asia-Pacific/Indo-Pacific and Middle East regions have been widely published.
OpEd Column Syndication 