By Adolfo Quizon Paglinawan

 

Part 15: Where Brawner sees War, China sees Diplomacy

The biggest purveyor of fake news that comes from the government in the Philippines is the mainstream media, that is under the control of collaborating oligarchic interests and foreign intervenors.

This is why it is reassuring that the outside world knows what is happening inside the country from the lens of Asia Times, of Bangkok origins but now based in Hongkong, supported by bureaus in Seoul, Beijing, Singapore, and New York.

Its recent headline last June 17, caught my attention – “Philippine naval upgrade more spectacle than strategy”

Its lead paragraph explains it all.

“As tensions rise with China in the South China Sea, the Philippines may be advancing a naval modernization strategy centered more on signaling, high on optics and alliances and alignment (rather) than actual deterrence.”

The HK-based news organization cites a report from the US Naval Institute organ, USNI News, saying that the Philippine Navy (PN) launched its first Rajah Solayman-class offshore patrol vessel (OPV) in Ulsan, South Korea, marking a significant step in its maritime modernization.

No command infrastructure

Yet, beneath these moves is a crucial strategic question: Are they aimed at real deterrence, or are they crafted more for show, particularly to China?

Asia Times notes, “In line with the Philippines’ de facto ‘assertive transparency’ strategy to name and shame China’s assertive actions in the South China Sea and galvanize international support for its cause, Manila requires high-profile, high-visibility assets, such as frigates, OPVs, and light combat aircraft, to effectively respond to China’s gray zone challenges.”

But it was quick to note that the survivability of such assets in the event of escalating tensions with China may be questionable. “As seen in Taiwan’s case, high-visibility platforms, such as surface warships and fighter jets, are vulnerable to rapid destruction in a Chinese first strike, prompting substantial investment in asymmetric warfare assets, including submarines.”

For now, the Brahmos missile system has become the centerpiece of the country’s asymmetric deterrent posture with Philippine submarine procurement still in the early planning phase.

In a July 2024 article for The Print, Ashley Tellis however wrote “without supporting Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) infrastructure for dynamic targeting, these missiles will remain largely symbolic.”

Tellis said those deficiencies mean the missiles will be useful only against fixed, nearby targets, such as the contested Scarborough Shoal, and are not credible tools for flexible or long-range deterrence.

Comparative strengths

Nonetheless, given its massive shipbuilding capabilities China could easily repair or replace damaged or destroyed warships. According to a 2025 US Congressional Research Service (CRS)report, China’s shipbuilding capacity is 230 times that of the US.

Asia Times notes that if the Philippines truly recognized the urgency of building asymmetric capabilities, it might be willing to make more difficult defense trade-offs.

Felix K. Chang, a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and chief operating officer of DecisionQ, an artificial intelligence engineering company, mentioned a November 2019 FPRI study that Vietnam, a similarly challenged maritime neighbor, acquired six Kilo-class submarines from Russia in 2009 at a cost of US$2 billion, equivalent to half its defense budget. “While Vietnam’s proximity to China and history of conflict justify such investment, the Philippines has not demonstrated the same urgency or strategic commitment to undersea deterrence.”

Asia Times says, such stealth investments appear to be mismatched with the Philippines’ budget constraints and its current emphasis on diplomatic visibility through multilateral defense engagement.

To compensate for this, the Philippines has been signing military access agreements with US allies, such as Japan, Australia and New Zealand, with the possible goal of maintaining a high tempo of high-publicity multinational naval exercises in the South China Sea.

It is however still unclear whether these US allies, “when push comes to shove in the South China Sea”, will come to aid the Philippines. During past incidents with China, even the US, its most capable and only treaty partner, has more than once prioritized its broader strategic interests over Philippine concerns.

At the political level, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr has been using multinational naval exercises to claim legitimacy among wealthy liberal democracies despite the historical controversies associated with the Marcos dynasty.

It was under his watch that the US has indefinitely stationed the Typhon and NMESIS missile systems in the Philippines, arguably for training purposes. Typhon is armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles that can reach mainland China from the Philippines, while NMESIS is an anti-ship system that could hit Chinese warships transiting the Bashi Channel.

Misreading priorities, legitimacy

Meanwhile, the 2022 US National Defense Strategy prioritizes Taiwan and the broader Indo-Pacific region, while accepting a higher risk in theaters such as Europe. This focus gives Marcos Jr room to rely on US support to enhance his security credentials and consolidate domestic legitimacy.

So a February 2025 Social Weather Station (SWS) survey was commissioned to indicate 75%support political candidates “who assert sovereign rights against China’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea”. But the survey has been exposed as a manipulated preconditioning propaganda for the May 2025 midterm elections in the Philippines.

It was commissioned by the Stratbase Group, the local agent of the Washington DC-based Center for Strategic and International Studies lobbying for the American military estate complex or what is commonly referred to in the dark corridors of the Capitol Hill as the DeepState.

The actual results of the midterm elections was fatal to what the survey showed. Opposition candidates dominated the winning senatorial slots. What was more damning, is that among late absentee voters, 90% of 50,000 who were mostly military and police personnel, none of the President Marcos’ candidates for senators made it to the magic 12.

Re-electionist Francis Tolentino who positioned himself as a legislator who stood up against China and its bullying in the West Philippine Sea, ranked 25th.

What the final tallies instead confirmed, were the earlier quarterly 2004 independent surveys by Pulse Asia that consistently revealed that only 5% of Filipinos consider “sovereignty” and “protection of sovereign territory” as their most urgent national concern.

No existential threat

This also coincides with Asia Times observation that the Philippines does not face any existential threat on the level of Taiwan, Ukraine, Israel and South Korea, as no country since World War II has threatened its destruction.

The country’s primary threats are internal, including poverty, political instability, insurgency and terrorism. Again, this was supported by the Pulse Asia surveys of 2024, which ranked inflation at 72% as top priority concern followed by food security, employment and social order.

Asia Times concedes that while China has been a “troublesome” neighbor for the Philippines, it does not seek the destruction of the Philippine state, making China more of a challenge to be managed than a threat to be dealt with.

“Even if Philippine policymakers understand that nuance, and Marcos Jr courts Chinese investment while under rising economic pressure; his previous hardline stance and the Philippines’ longstanding dependency on US politico-military ties may prevent anything substantial from happening in the near term.

“But as long as Philippine defense planning is shaped by external validation rather than internal resolve, its military buildup risks remaining more symbolic than strategic.”

It’s economy, stupid

Actually tourism, not the military, is our first line of defense.

Tourism arrivals serve as a crucial first line of defense for a growing economy because they inject much-needed foreign exchange, stimulate local businesses, and create jobs.

The influx of tourists drives demand for goods and services, leading to increased revenue for various sectors and contributing to overall economic growth. Tourism revenue, particularly from international tourists, brings in foreign currency, which is essential for a country to pay for imports, service debts, and invest in development projects.

It has often been bruited about that one tourist creates two jobs. The tourism industry directly and indirectly supports a wide range of jobs, from hotel staff and tour guides to restaurant workers and souvenir sellers. Tourism creates demand for local products and services, benefiting businesses such as restaurants, hotels, transportation providers, and craft shops. 

Increased tourism often leads to improvements in infrastructure, such as roads, airports, and public transportation, which can benefit both tourists and local residents. For economies heavily reliant on a single industry, tourism can provide a valuable diversification opportunity, reducing vulnerability to fluctuations in global commodity prices or other sectors. 

Tourism can facilitate cultural exchange and understanding between different societies, promoting tolerance and appreciation for diverse cultures. It can revitalize lagging regions by bringing in revenue and creating opportunities in areas that might otherwise be economically depressed.

Declining tourist arrivals

            But at this time, we showcase Philippine tourism, as hardest hit.

            Last year, the Department of Tourism was 23% short of its target, garnering only 5.949 million arrivals versus its targeted 7.7 million.

            If we factor what Tourism Promotions Board (TPB) Philippines Chief Operating Officer Maria Margarita Montemayor Nograles estimate as at least US$ 2,073 as what incoming tourists spend per arrival, then last year we lost P239 billion in potential revenues.

Tourist arrivals in the Philippines are experiencing a decline due to a combination of factors, including geopolitical tensions, administrative hurdles, and rising costs, particularly impacting key markets like China and South Korea. Additionally, safety concerns, perceived lack of cultural experience, and expensive flights contribute to the downturn.

On geopolitical and administrative issues, foremost is the suspension of the e-visa system for Chinese tourists in late 2023. While official explanation blames concerns about fraudulent applications, the more logical explanation surfacing is the US-influenced embargo on Chinese tourists as an offshoot of the signing of four additional EDCA sites for American bases in the Philippines.

Chinese arrivals that have already attaine higher marks from 1 million in 2017 to 1.3 million in 2018 and finally 1.7 million in 2019, or four million in three years, before the Covid pandemic.

After the pandemic, instead of attraction, the China market has been slapped advisories and restrictions despite ongoing efforts to restore the e-visa system. As a result, this market dampened to only 39,627 in 2022; 264,922 in 2023 and 313,856 in 2024 or 618,405 in three years, according to the Department of Tourism (DOT).

If we extrapolate the Chinese traffic that we have missed to 3,381,595 that would be equivalent to an additional opportunity loss of P400 billion.

Political instability amid geopolitical tensions and governance setbacks have also been cited as major drivers of the decline, aggravated by increased crime rates, including incidents targeting specific nationalities like South Koreans, have raised safety concerns and negatively impacted tourism from those areas.

South Korean visitors which are the biggest source of tourists in the Philippines, recorded a 35.0% fall in April to only 73,278.

Inflation also have manifested in terms of expensive flights – high air fare even for domestic flights, coupled with high cost of tourist spots, especially in popular areas like Bohol, are now comparable to those in European countries, making the Philippines a less attractive option compared to other ASEAN countries.

Some argue that the Philippines has become too Westernized, with a perceived lack of authentic cultural experiences and promotion of Filipino culture. There is a perception that Manila, in particular, lacks iconic landmarks and attractions, contributing to a less appealing tourist experience.

The next factor is that many tourists are also drawn to the Philippines for its unique food scene, and the perceived decline in street food options and diverse culinary offerings serves as a drawback.

Problems with transportation, including traffic congestion and lack of efficient public transport, has also been factored to create hassles for tourists. 

Finally, it appears that the government leadership has been tardy in adopting newfangled strategies and incentives to inspire a strong private sector push. Promotional efforts seem inadequate, failing to effectively reach target markets and highlight the country’s attractions.

Secretary Christine Frasco cannot do it alone. The overall political, social and economic environment that President Bongbong Marcos Jr. has created during his first three years in office has been a losing proposition.

As we approach the month of July, nobody seem to be interested on what he would say at his State-of-the-Nation address, as pundits are whispering that it should not have been the cabinet that was asked to resign.

But the president.

To be continued.

   

Email: contact@asiancenturyph.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/asiancenturyph/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AsianCenturyPH

Substack:

Also read: