Going rogue: The Philippines

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Case-in-point as per the monthly topic: The Philippines. Their bombastic president Rodrigo Duterte has become prominent for showing the middle finger to America, actually calling Obama a sonofabitch, and generally turning his back on the US interests in the Pacific. Last month he ordered a halt to his nation's long-time military alliance with the US (read: being a US puppet), and got entangled in a bitter war of words with the global empire. Now he's ordering the US troops to leave the country, and America to stop treating the Philippines "as a doormat".

To put this into perspective, this has been building up for more than a century - ever since the US decided to pursue the Periphery vs Heartland geopolitical stategy, which was most clearly outlined in the Grand Chessboard doctrine: control the naval zones, and suffocate the continental core of Eurasia. And the Philippines are an integral part of this game. It started as early as the 1890s when the US started grabbing the former colonies of the waning Spanish Empire by brutally invading the Philippines (as well as Puerto Rico, Cuba and half a dozen other places). The Filippinos have always resented this, but had been cowed into submission for a century or more. All that has changed is that the Philoppines now have a new master: China. And Duterte has become a Chinese tool. Because China is the new player in this equation, and they're asserting their position ever more boldly.

Want proof? Here it is.

China firm bags land reclamation contract with Philippines

While the US under Obama has been making a coy pivot to Asia, Duterte has done a full 180 and made a real pivot to China. Now he has commissioned a state-owned Chinese infrastructure group to build artificial islands in the South China Sea, which is exactly what Duterte's predecessor had sought to restrict via UN intervention. As hilarious as the fact may be that the Philippines (who until recently used to whine about China grabbing portions of that sea) is now actively seeking China's help to build islands in order to grab land in the sea, the whole thing starts reeking of Castro's Cuba.

I wonder what the US State Department thinks of all this. A coup coming to the Philippines anytime soon perhaps? We already know the drill, right?

Ps. Oh, and while we're bickering around here, China is stepping ever harder into Africa.

Egypt is getting a new capital - courtesy of China

Comments

[dreamville-bg.livejournal.com]

He's taking a huge gamble with this geopolitical shift of his, but that could hardly be called "rogue" behavior. He's having his reasons to opt for China at America's expense. Perhaps he can recognize a sinking ship. He comes from a country that consists of thousands of islands, after all.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Well, the US is thousands of miles away, and China is just next door. And it's become ever more assertive. Would be suicidal not to try to find common ground with an aggressive neighbor while relying on some imaginary aid from afar.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

First of all, "The Filippinos have always resented this, but had been cowed into submission for a century or more." is a bit off base. Compared with Filipinos, Canadians and Brits are seething balls of Anti-American hatred. Filipinos love America way more than we deserve, even more than Americans do, and it's not like we don't excel at self-love. This is a bit of a long chart, but it makes the point:

I don't think oral sex would get 90% favorable ratings.

I also think it's incredibly ironic that you're linking the Economic Hitman story to a country switching their allegiances to China. If you look at what China did with Venezuela, a country that received more loans from China than any other South American country, it looks exactly like what was described in the book. There are a large number of Chinese financed and built projects, many still unfinished, which were plagued with mismanagement and corruption. As a result, China is able to make a claim on Venezuela's natural resources. This has played a huge part in the downfall of Venezuela's economy.

Last, there is actually a huge silver lining to this, the South China Sea is no longer likely to cause a conflict. The two countries that most of China's claims overlap with what the UN would consider other country's EEZs are Vietnam and Philippines. While there is zero chance that the US will go to bat for Vietnam, the US was pretty much obligated to back up the Philippines, which presented a huge risk if someone made a huge miscalculation. This obligation has pretty much been removed. The US will still of course still navigate through areas it considers to be international waters, which so far has lined up with what the UN thinks of as international waters, but nobody is going to start a conflict over this. I expect the South China Sea will be in the news a lot less in the future, which is a good thing.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

Oh my, Russian love for America has waned so much...

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

My guess is that it's mutual.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Venezuela's economy became a one-trick-pony banana-republic type of economy because of its dependence on oil exports, predominantly to North America, in the first place. You can't possibly be blaming Venezuela's structural economic woes on China!? This would be incredibly simplistic and short-sighted. China was nowhere around at the time Venezuela was being shaped into a Third-World energy appendix to the US.

And yes, the South China Sea will no longer be an issue, because China has effectively won that geopolitical battle by taking the Philippines on their side. Sure the US vessels will "navigate" through some areas, but that region is no longer under US geopolitical dominance. I suppose congrats are in order.

Nice chart, though.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

"You can't possibly be blaming Venezuela's structural economic woes on China!?"

Where did I do this? I said that China's behavior in Venezuela was pretty much exactly what was described in The Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Venezuela's problems are due to the corruption and incompetence of its own government along with an overdependence on oil. Of course the incompetence and corruption made Venezuela more dependent on oil than it had been in the past, so I guess they should be bolded or something.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Venezuela's problems are due to the corruption and incompetence of its own government along with an overdependence on oil.

Exactly.

And, one big Realpolitik player substituting another one in exploiting lesser countries using the Economic Hitman scenario, is hardly a surprise - and neither does that make it "ironic" to point out that said lesser countries have long been exploited by big Realpolitik players over the years.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

It's ironic that you are saying "A coup coming to the Philippines anytime soon perhaps? We already know the drill, right?" and linking to the Economic Hitman while China is likely going to be assuming this role.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Why exactly is it ironic? Has the US not provided ample examples of doing just what I predict they could do now?

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Yeah, China has totally got a history of staging a number of coups or outright bombing countries that didn't comply with their interests. I sure see the irony - because the "likely" hypotheticals that we're talking about here in China's case, are absolutely an argument as valid as America's actual historical record that points to that sort of behavior being the norm rather than exception.

Did I say totally?

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Didn't Filipinos burn US flags on the streets last year ahead of the APEC summit? If memory serves, they demanded that the US stops meddling in their dispute with China over that sea.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Well, 8% of Filipinos is still almost 8 million people, plenty to protest, burn flags, and such.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

So these were just an exception? Is that what you're saying?

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's pretty much what I said. Maybe a higher percent of Filipinos would like the US to play less of a role in the dispute, I don't really know, but I doubt the 92ish% who have a favorable view of the US are burning US flags. Is there some flaw with this line of thought that you can see?

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Define "favorability", then. What is meant by "having a favorable view of the US"? Perhaps if we dig somewhat deeper into the question, we'd gain some more insight on these matters. By simply splashing some number in a chart, you're not explaining much. Not to mention that nuances like "want the US to play less of a role in the dispute" are hardly reflected in a simple "Do you like America: Yes or No" sort of poll. You do know how such polls could be manipulated or misused to arrive at one desired conclusion or another, right?

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

This chart wasn't meant to indicate how Filipinos perceive US involvement with this dispute in the South China Sea, it was meant to counter the claim that "brutally invading the Philippines ... The Filippinos have always resented this, but had been cowed into submission for a century or more." I don't think there are many colonies which think as highly of their former colonizers and it's actually pretty remarkable. The overwhelming majority of Filipinos have a favorable view of the US, whatever having a favorable view of something might mean. Of course this may be manipulated, but I think Pew is a pretty reliable source.

As far as what Filipinos think of US involvement in the SCS dispute, it's really more relevant what their government thinks. The previous government seemed very happy to have US support, the current one is going a different route. Maybe Filipinos are onboard, maybe not, but this is up to the Philippine government to address, not the US.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

No, I'm saying the "X views Y favorably" can be misused in many ways to match a desired conclusion and narrative. Not that Pew is pulling data out of their ass or any such thing.

I actually agree that what the populace thinks of another populace or country is pretty much irrelevant to policy, which is why bringing up data about how much this or the other people likes America is irrelevant, save for scoring a couple of meaningless Internet points by appearing to refute a minor line in someone's post that doesn't even matter that much in the larger picture of things, and neither is anywhere near being central to the point.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

"The Filippinos have always resented this" -- This, being the fact that the US has brutally invaded the Philippines.

Has your Pew research asked the actual question, "Do you resent the fact that the US has brutally invaded your country"? Because that would be a bit different from "Do you view America favorably, whatever that means".

And here we're talking-about-talking. Does this minor bit even matter that much to you, that we've basically hijacked most of the thread with this non-issue?

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Fine, fine. I was just answering questions, but this is really beside the point.

Really, the US was stuck with two obligations in the South China Sea, the first was to ensure the freedom of navigation, the second was to defend our allies. The first is not so much a problem, even if China claims an EEZ or territorial waters around half-submerged rocks, ships can still travel freely through them. Freedom of navigation is actually a pretty minor point that doesn't deserve the press it gets.

Maybe Mr. Duarte got the concessions he wanted from China. Since China was always pretty vague about what it meant when it said it claimed the area within the 9-dashed line, if it meant it was an EEZ or something different, if it claimed the whole area or just the islands, etc... there is certainly some area for negotiation. All in all a pretty smart way to go about it. Regardless, the US is pretty much off the hook on this one where the Philippines are concerned, or we can "go to hell" to use Mr. Duarte's exact words. I suspect the reaction by the state department is more along the lines of "Woo-Hoo!" than to plan a coup. Conflict with China wasn't the goal, it was something to be avoided. If we went to war with China, who would sell us TVs and loan us the money to buy them?

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Curious, Turkey's favorability for the US is sub-par, and yet their leaders have long been allies (before Erdogan, that is). Care to explain this discrepancy between public perception and policy?

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Seems LJ ate my first reply, if it's duplicated, it's because LJ went ruminant.

My take is that pretty much every Islamic country that isn't Indonesia kinda hates the US.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

But there's a discrepancy between public perception and official policy. Could it be, then, that the same phenomenon, but with a reversed direction, exists in the Philippines as well? I mean, people in Turkey hate the US, yet the Turkish governments have consistently worked with the US. Conversely, people in the Philippines love the US (presumably), yet their government now works against the US.

What I'm saying is, public opinion and policy do not necessarily match.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Wow. What a huge chart, just for a nitpick. This must matter to you a lot.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Honestly, it really doesn't. It was one of the three points in my post but the one that everyone responded to. I probably should have ignored replies to it.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

That's the risk with including points that bear little to no relevance to the topic, granted.