THERE are a lot of opinions about Pax Silica, even though very little is still known about what we, the Philippines, exactly signed up for. The silence and lack of transparency are deafening. The misleading analysis, distracting. The frantic rush, alarming. In simple terms, Pax Silica is a US-led international partnership aimed at securing global supply chains for computer chips, AI technology, and critical minerals among the US and its allies. The goal is to strengthen the US position relative to China in the race for AI dominance, and if you’re an ally it is supposed to be good for you. The original signatories with the US in December 2025 were Australia, Japan, Israel, Singapore, South Korea and the United Kingdom. The Philippines signed on by Spring 2026. Canada, America’s closest ally geographically, did not sign on to Pax Silica and remains an observer.
While it cannot be said that Canada rejected outright Pax Silica, it is important to understand why it didn’t jump on the bandwagon. Canada is imposing its sovereignty as a country with its own national industrial strategy. Canada has the minerals and wants to mine, process and manufacture at home and supply to trusted partners. Pax Silica is building a network of trusted technology and supply-chain partners, with the Philippines as one of the locations for manufacturing and processing within that network. This distinction is important for the Philippines because Pax Silica has a deeper geopolitical dimension. Historically, China holds immense economic leverage over the Philippines’ mining sector. Between 2020 and 2024, over 92 percent of all raw Philippine nickel ore was shipped directly to China. It’s complicated.
In the interest of good urbanism, we cannot ignore the impact of AI data centers on residents. Their demands for electricity, water and land, as well as the noise and infrastructure, have consequences that extend beyond the boundaries of the development site. Cities have a responsibility to consider not only the economic benefits of data centers, but also how these facilities affect the daily lives, the environment, and long-term livability of the communities that host them. In a region like New Clark City, where water security, energy reliability and flooding are already pressing concerns, the arrival of large Pax Silica data centers could place additional strain on infrastructure and natural resources.
Across the world, local governments are temporarily blocking or slowing new data-center projects not because they oppose AI altogether but because they are not yet sure who will pay, who benefits, and what the real environmental costs are. Again, it’s the lack of transparency. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on AI companies to publicly disclose the full environmental impact of data centers, including water resources, land footprint and carbon emissions. The UN is also calling on data centers to be fully powered by renewable energy by 2030, in keeping with the Paris Agreement. In Pope Leo’s first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, he called for deceleration or an intentional pause in the fast corporate and AI race. Even the Pope wants a slower pace in order for humanity to reclaim control over AI tools, and for society to protect human dignity, labor markets and the environment.
The Canada experience serves as a useful example, especially as the Philippines considers itself to be a player in the infrastructure demands of the AI economy. In July 2026, my home city Mississauga, Ontario, approved a one-year moratorium on new AI data centers, giving it time to develop regulations for this industry and its demands for electricity, water and land. The concerns are not simply about the technology itself, but about how large facilities could affect surrounding neighborhoods and municipal infrastructure. In nearby Hamilton, Ontario, what was initially a move toward a proposed one-year pause on approving new data centers was rejected by the city council, arguing that a moratorium could discourage investment and jeopardize smaller data-center projects, particularly those needed for research. This is the healthy debate we are not yet seeing in the Philippines. Just a few days ago Philippine ambassador to the US, Babes Romualdez, said the Philippines might lose its “opportunity” to host US-led Pax Silica, “if, for some reason, we drop the ball, other Asian countries would take over.”
Elon Musk is not dropping the ball. He is building orbital data centers with SpaceX. In a recent conversation with The Economist, Musk said China has the advantage to lead the global AI race, not because of its dominance in semiconductor chips, but because of its massive ability to generate electricity. And in order to bypass the terrestrial electricity grid constraints faced by the Western world, Musk wants to move energy-hungry data centers into orbit in outer space. This plan runs contrary to America’s Pax Silica vision of establishing a web of allied suppliers designed to isolate China.
While the super powers and super thinkers are crafting their well-designed strategies for AI, will the Philippines truly be a major player and a meaningful supplier in the global AI value chain through Pax Silica? Or will our cities just become convenient sites for foreign facilities? US policy is guided by the principle of “America First.” Canada maintains its sovereign industrial strategy. The Philippines might want to do the same. Because while we position ourselves for the AI economy, our Philippine cities are still struggling with basic urban necessities like water and energy while battling floods and choking in our massive waste.
