FOR decades, the Philippines has held onto the principle of an independent foreign policy, summarized by the oft-repeated bon mot, “a friend to all, and enemy to none.” While the adherence to this principle has not always been perfect, with the country being perceived as leaning in favor of the West or the East, depending on who occupies Malacañang at the time, it has never been completely abandoned. As a consequence, the Philippines has largely benefited from it, avoiding destructive conflict with any other nations and gaining from trade and cultural exchange.
Recent events, however, have raised questions about whether or not the Philippines can continue to maintain this nonaligned position, though most agree it would be best for the country if it could continue to do so. The time when the Philippines will be forced to “choose sides” seems to be fast approaching, and in fact may already be here.
On Sept. 8, a coalition of a dozen countries, namely the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden — all countries with which the Philippines has excellent, productive relations — declared a boycott of trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank of Palestine. The ban prohibits the import of goods produced by Israeli settlements beyond the “Green Line,” the internationally recognized boundary between the Israeli state and the Palestinian state, as well a ban on businesses and individuals providing financing, construction, infrastructure, real estate and advertising services that support settlement expansion.
This obviously puts the Philippines between the proverbial rock and a hard place. We have excellent relations with all of the above countries, as well as a long and very cordial relationship with the State of Israel. The Philippines also recognizes the State of Palestine, and maintains formal diplomatic relations with it. While the 12 boycotting countries have not stated that they would penalize other countries for not recognizing and adhering to their ban, there is a risk that not agreeing with it could harm relations. And of course, ignoring the ban could very well be regarded by the growing number of countries and even our own population as supporting what is condemned as a campaign of genocide by the Israeli state against Palestinians. On the other hand, going along with it, perhaps even in so mild a form as not commenting on it at all, could harm the Philippines’ otherwise fruitful relations with Israel.
‘Lose-lose’ positions
In another example, United States President Donald Trump’s recent declaration that he would inflict “economic Armageddon” on Iran in an effort to end the war with that country has come with a rather alarming revelation. The US State Department last week sent instructions to all of its foreign missions to inform their host countries that no business with Iran should be done, on pain of possible sanctions or other penalties from the US. Whether that message has been delivered to our government by the US diplomatic representation here is not known, but it is another instance in which the Philippines is put in a difficult position. We obviously have excellent relations with the US that transcend the questionable nature of that country’s current government, and likewise, the Philippines has long had a friendly relationship with Iran.
Similarly, there have been reports that the current US government intends to make investment and development under the “Pax Silica” initiative contingent on the agreement of participants not to do business with China in artificial intelligence and related tech areas. Despite our dispute with China over jurisdiction in the West Philippine Sea, our trade, cultural and even ethnic relationships have been strong for centuries. The US is an equally important friend, ally and trading partner. The Philippines cannot afford to sacrifice either relationship for the sake of the other.
There are no easy answers to any of this, except if the Philippines were to simply withdraw from relations with any of the countries involved in these various dilemmas, which is unthinkable. What is particularly frustrating is that the country has been put in these various “lose-lose” positions through no fault of its own, but by the embrace of tension and polarization by the rest of the world. All the current administration, and very likely the next administration, can do is to tread carefully, adhere to international law, and make decisions based on the greater good for the Filipino people.
