AMID the blaring horns of “America First,” where alliances are now quantified in tariff brackets and loyalty is rewarded with economic kneecapping, the Philippines just got its “thank-you” note from Washington — a 19-percent tariff on its exports, while US goods waltz into the Philippine market under the so-called zero tariff or open market scheme with unfiltered access, while losing our MFN (most favored nation) status, the country’s strategic trade leverage as a developing economy.
But wait, there’s more: the latest cherry on this bitter economic sundae is a 100-percent tariff on chip imports that don’t originate from, or aren’t planning to set up shop in, the United States. A direct threat to the Philippines’ electronics industry, which ironically remains the country’s top export sector. Is this a strategic partnership or a strategic punishment?
And here’s the punchline: all of this comes despite President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s and his administration’s unwavering allegiance to Washington. It’s almost poetic. It seems that the more the Philippines aligns with US strategic interests and its Indo-Pacific strategy, the more it’s economically gutted and distraught.
What we have here is a masterclass in neocolonial, protectionist and neo-extractive economics of the 21st century, where the subservient state waves the American flag while its industries burn all in the name of so-called ironclad and strategic partnership.
What else can I say but, Well done! Bravo! Mr. President Marcos Jr., your loyalty to Washington has never looked so… profitable for them, and so catastrophic for us. Terrifying? Disturbing? Absolutely. Indeed, Marcos, in the grand tradition of loyal sidekicks, you’ve managed to take all the punches for the team, except the team is Washington, and the bruises are all ours. Is this what you call “strategic tough love”?
Strategic tough love?
So, tell me again, Mr. President, where exactly is that much-hyped “ironclad” relationship with the US? Is this what “ironclad” looks like, when our biggest export sector is about to get kneecapped by a 100-percent tariff courtesy of your so-called treaty ally? Where’s the protective clause in that “Reciprocal Trade Agreement”? Where’s the transparency? Because right now, it looks like the Philippines is playing loyal sidekick to Uncle Sam’s geopolitical circus, and what does it get in return? A sledgehammer to its $30-billion semiconductor industry? Ah, yes, is this what you call a tragic symphony of alliance and exploitation?
And let’s not pretend this is unexpected. The writing’s been on the wall ever since Washington shifted from globalization to weaponized trade, or what many across the world have termed as “Trump 2.0 Tariff Trade War.” But sure, let’s keep clapping every time Washington says “shared prosperity,” ”ironclad relations” and “strategic partnership” while they pull the economic rug out from under us.
By the way, the imposition of a 100-percent tariff on chip imports by the US raises serious red flags for the Philippine economy, particularly its semiconductor and electronics export sector, which is the country’s largest and most significant export contributor. This move could render Philippine semiconductors uncompetitive in the US market, force shutdowns or relocation of operations and cause a domino effect on downstream industries (logistics, packaging, labor, etc.). Note that the sector accounts for 70 percent of Philippine exports, valued at $30 billion in 2024 and supports approximately 3 million jobs directly and indirectly.
This represents a strategic vulnerability for the Philippines. Unlike Malaysia or South Korea, the Philippines lacks a robust domestic technology policy, research and development infrastructure, and bilateral safeguards in high-tech trade. This leaves the country exposed to external policy shocks, unable to influence or negotiate from a position of strength and at risk of becoming a low-end subcontractor in the global chip war. While it has been noted that many Philippine firms “have expansion plans in the US,” this raises another issue: Will these expansions create jobs in the Philippines, or outsource value to the US?
For the Philippines, a lower-middle-income country dependent on electronics exports, this is tantamount to “industrial blackmail and strong-arm diplomacy” by the US. The Philippines is now being coerced into investing in the US to retain access to its market. Where is the reciprocity there? Why should a sovereign nation be forced to offshore its investments to survive?
So again, Mr. President Marcos Jr., what exactly are you doing about this? Because the Filipino people deserve to know. They deserve a real policy response, not blind loyalty to Uncle Sam.
Policy incoherence
Moreover, perhaps, the most absurd and nonsensical display in this entire geopolitical circus is the glaring policy incoherence of the Marcos administration. On one hand, it enthusiastically signs up for Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy and security agenda — free real estate for the US military bases dressed up as EDCA sites, the expanding US military access and footprint planted firmly on Philippine soil, the pre-positioned stockpiles of high-grade weaponry and missile systems, and of course, the regular rotation of US boots on a supposedly sovereign land. Yet, on the other hand, Marcos and his administration offer no coherent plan, let alone urgency, to shield the Philippines’ most crucial export industry and the whole Philippine economy from being crushed by US trade protectionism.
Hence, it is imperative to ask, how exactly does Malacañang plan to respond to this economic gut punch delivered by its so-called closest ally or best friend? Or are we expected to just wave tiny flags and smile while our industries and our economy bleed? Seriously?
Let’s be blunt. Look, the situation is quite crazy as far as the Philippines is concerned. The country is being remade into a convenient forward operating base for the US in Asia. Military presence? Fully welcomed under a Marcos presidency. Economic cooperation? Casually discarded and sidelined in favor of US economic protectionism. This isn’t a partnership; it’s a geopolitical bait-and-switch.
Bluntly speaking, the Philippines is being used as a military platform, a forward base of the US in the Asia-Pacific, while being punished economically. In this regard, one may ask, what kind of friendship demands unwavering defense cooperation on one hand, while imposing economic penalties on the other? If this is alliance solidarity, it’s a one-sided affair, military intimacy in exchange for economic subjugation. The dissonance is deafening. Indeed, if irony were a currency, we’d be rich. Too bad Washington’s not taxing that. Not yet!
Conclusion
Indeed, the irony is suffocating, much like the Manila smog. While the US secures prime Philippine real estate for its Indo-Pacific ambitions, the Philippines gets hit with tariffs. This is no strategic cooperation, but rather strategic extortion.
Now, do the so-called leaders of the country still have the gall to call this an “alliance? If so, they might want to revisit the definition, unless, of course, they’ve decided that serving Washington’s geopolitical agenda matters more than securing the future of the country and the Filipino people. At this rate, it’s getting harder to tell whether they’re representing a sovereign nation or just managing an outpost.
Source: The Manila Times
https://www.manilatimes.net/2025/08/09/opinion/columns/strategic-tough-love-or-strategic-abuse-us-gets-bases-ph-gets-tariffs/2164954
