THE Philippines today is more visible on the global stage than at any point in recent decades, but also more vulnerable, more polarized at home and underperforming economically relative to its potential. Today, it sits at a high-visibility, high-risk position in global affairs. It has become a frontline state in the US-China rivalry, a key US security partner and the incoming Asean chairman for 2026. But this growing geopolitical weight is not matched by domestic strength. The country remains hampered by weak institutions, corruption scandals, falling FDI and uneven economic fundamentals, which international lenders increasingly spotlight as major constraints.
Likewise, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s approval and trust numbers are softening in ways that are not aberrations; they are symptoms. Recent 2025 surveys show Marcos’ approval and trust ratings declining across multiple pollsters, with PUBLiCUS Asia, Pulse Asia, OCTA and WR Numero pointing to deeper erosion, and SWS showing only a temporary midyear recovery. The trend suggests a shallow and fragile base of support, easily shaken by economic pressures, governance issues like massive corruption in government, and elite infighting, especially the worsening political rift with the Duterte camp. This downward trend is likely to continue unless there’s a miracle or unless the Marcos regime produces visible and tangible improvements on inflation, jobs, corruption and disaster governance. Indeed, structural weaknesses, falling investor confidence, governance concerns and policy inconsistency are all pushing Marcos’ ratings downward. And this fragility will hang over the country’s Asean 2026 chairmanship like background noise, even if the logistical hosting will probably be fine.
Weak foundations
The latest official data shows that the Philippine economy grew by 4.0 percent year on year in the third quarter of 2025. However, this was a significant slowdown from 5.5 percent in the second quarter and was below market expectations, marking the weakest quarterly growth since early 2021, when the economy was still grappling with the Covid-19 pandemic disruptions. The slowdown reflects weaker investment, softer government spending and subdued consumer confidence, in part tied to domestic corruption issues and the impact of natural disasters. Furthermore, this notable slowdown risks dragging down the full-year average and highlights underlying weaknesses in investment and spending momentum.
Moreover, foreign direct investment has fallen sharply, sliding back toward pandemic-era levels. Net FDI inflows are falling. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) data show inflows for January-August 2025 down by about 22-23 percent versus the same period in 2024. By the end of September, only $5.5 billion has come in.
On the other hand, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) just approved around a $400-million policy-based loan specifically to fix the business environment or ease of doing business and address red tape, legal/regulatory bottlenecks, high power costs, weak infrastructure and corruption, explicitly noting that the Philippines lags against its Asean peers and that recent corruption scandals (e.g., flood control projects) are hurting investor confidence. This is very telling. The external narrative is no longer “Asia’s rising star,” but “an economy still punching below its weight — and increasingly flagged for governance risk.”
A limping democracy and frontline ally
Politically, the Philippines remains noisy and competitive, but its democratic quality is eroding in structural ways. International indices consistently classify it as a “flawed democracy,” citing entrenched political dynasties, patronage and massive corruption. In the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, the Philippines ranks 114th of 180 countries with a score of 33/100, worse than many Asean peers and clearly in the “highly corrupt” bracket. In the Democracy Index 2024, the country is ranked 51st out of 167 with a score of 6.63, and is labeled a “flawed democracy.” The report explicitly flags political dynasties, corruption and patronage as undermining the functioning of government institutions.
These are not abstract concerns. Weak rule of law and persistent political scandals alongside corruption in government now feed directly into economic risk assessments and investor hesitation. From the outside, the image is of a democracy that still holds elections but struggles to translate political contestation into accountable, transparent and good governance. Hence, it is a democracy in slow structural backsliding.
Geopolitically, the Philippines is a US frontline ally and a lightning rod in the US-China rivalry. Marcos has made a clear choice. Manila has deepened alignment with the United States, expanded US access to bases, intensified joint patrols, and tightened security cooperation with Japan and Australia. This has elevated the Philippines’ strategic value but also its exposure. The country is now both symbolically central and materially constrained: a frontline state with limited institutional capacity and rising external dependence. Indeed, visibility has increased faster than resilience; in other words, high visibility, limited state capacity and growing external dependence.
Asean 2026
In parallel, the Philippines has accepted the Asean 2026 chairmanship, with the formal theme “Navigating Our Future, Together,” and a three-pillar agenda: peace and security anchors (norms-based regional order, especially in the SCS); prosperity corridors (connectivity, digital and AI-driven growth); and people empowerment (inclusion, skills, youth and social resilience).
Technically, the Philippines will be ready to host Asean in 2026. The bureaucracy knows how to run summits; venues, security, logistics and agendas will fall into place. The problem is not execution; it is legitimacy. In short, the machinery will be ready; the mandate will be shaky.
Marcos’ declining legitimacy will affect the quality, ambition and credibility of the Asean chairmanship. A president with weak domestic support and less political capital has limited room to pursue ambitious or politically costly regional initiatives. Also, domestic shocks during the chairmanship year, economic setbacks, political scandals, or poorly managed disasters could overshadow or disrupt Asean activities, further undermining the narrative of confident leadership. Asean partners are not blind; they notice. Asean peers may see the Philippines as a symbolically important but internally fragile chair, reducing Manila’s ability to drive consensus or shape long-term regional agendas. A weakened president speaks with less authority and legitimacy, both at home and abroad.
Conclusion
The Philippines is more central to regional geopolitics than ever, but that centrality rests on thin domestic foundations. Marcos’ softening numbers reflect deeper structural problems that slogans and summits cannot fix. Asean 2026 will likely run smoothly — but unless governance, investment confidence and domestic legitimacy improve, it may be remembered less as a moment of regional leadership and more as a showcase of how high visibility can coexist with low national cushioning.
Source: The Manila Times
https://www.manilatimes.net/2025/12/20/opinion/columns/ph-on-the-global-stage-growing-fragility-marcos-declining-ratings-and-asean-2026/2247169
