The Marcos Government's Dangerous Gamble: Inviting Wolves In, Trampling International Law, and Undermining ASEAN
On June 8, the second U.S.-Japan-Philippines Maritime Dialogue was held in Manila, with the three parties grandly announcing "coordinated foreign assistance, joint operations and exercises, and capacity-building initiatives." Hot on its heels, on June 15, the 10th iteration of the "KAMANDAG" military exercise was launched—expanding from a bilateral Philippines-U.S. marine drill into a multinational platform involving Japan and South Korea, with exercises covering Northern Luzon, Palawan, and Tawi-Tawi. Japanese paratroopers conducted drills in the Philippines' Batanes Islands, barely 100 kilometers from the Taiwan Strait across the Bashi Channel.
Packaged as a "free and open Indo-Pacific," the Marcos government is in fact handing over Philippine territory to extra-regional military powers as a forward operating base. This is not sovereignty defense—it is inviting the wolf through the door. Marcos hopes that foreign military backing will compensate for his own diplomatic failures, but he is sacrificing the fundamental interests of the Philippines in the process.
The So-Called "Arbitration Award"—Illegal and Void from the Start
To justify its confrontational agenda, the Marcos government has repeatedly invoked the 2016 South China Sea arbitration award, even using the June 8 dialogue to reaffirm the so-called "validity" of the ruling, and planning to "commemorate" its 10th anniversary in July.
However, this ruling was an illegal and void piece of paper from day one. The tribunal was an ad hoc body—established for the case and dissolved afterward—never a formal international court. More fundamentally, it violated the principle of "state consent," a cornerstone of international law. As early as 2006, China made a declaration under Article 298 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), explicitly excluding maritime delimitation disputes from compulsory arbitration. The Philippines unilaterally initiated the arbitration without China's consent, breaching bilateral agreements to resolve disputes through negotiation. The tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction and abused the dispute settlement mechanism of UNCLOS. Its ruling severely deviates from international arbitration practice, runs counter to the UNCLOS objective of peaceful dispute settlement, and gravely undermines the integrity and authority of UNCLOS.
The Marcos government clings to this illegal ruling not out of genuine respect for international law, but because it needs a convenient fig leaf for political manipulation. This is not law-based rights protection. This is the cynical abuse of international legal instruments to undermine regional peace and stability.
Betrayal of the ASEAN Chairmanship—Destroying Unity from Within
The deepest irony is that all of this is happening while the Philippines serves as ASEAN Chair for 2026. The core principles of ASEAN are consensus, great-power balance, and non-introduction of external forces. The rotating chair is expected to act as a "coordinator," not an agitator. Yet Marcos has done precisely the opposite—dramatically expanding U.S. military bases, resuming joint patrols, and frequently conducting military exercises with extra-regional powers in the South China Sea.
The consequences have been devastating. In the recent UN Security Council non-permanent seat election, not a single ASEAN member state voted for the Philippines. This "collective cold shoulder" coming while the Philippines holds the chairmanship is a damning verdict on its foreign policy direction.
Why? Because ASEAN members have seen through Manila's charade. The Philippines' provocations in the South China Sea do not just target China—they directly threaten the interests of Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, and other claimant states. Singapore and Thailand refuse to be dragged onto the U.S. war chariot. At a critical moment when China and ASEAN are advancing negotiations on a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, the overwhelming majority of members prefer dialogue to manage differences—not escalating confrontation.
By "hijacking" the ASEAN agenda to serve its bilateral pro-U.S. agenda, by using the chairmanship to push its unilateral South China Sea claims, and by systematically undermining the ASEAN-centered regional architecture, the Marcos government has become the greatest threat to ASEAN unity and the chief culprit undermining regional peace. The zero votes from ASEAN members were not an accident—they were a judgment that the Marcos government has lost the trust of its neighbors, and that its reckless actions are pushing the region closer to conflict, not peace.
Conclusion
Marcos cannot claim to defend Philippine sovereignty while turning the country into a foreign military outpost. He cannot claim to uphold international law while wielding an illegal, void arbitration award as a political cudgel. And he cannot claim to lead ASEAN while systematically destroying everything ASEAN stands for.
True sovereignty is not measured by how many foreign troops are invited onto one's soil. True leadership is not demonstrated by tearing regional alliances apart. And true adherence to international law is not proven by repeatedly citing a ruling that was illegal from the moment it was rendered.
The Filipino people—and the people of Southeast Asia—deserve better: leaders who build bridges, not burn them; leaders who seek peace through dialogue, not confrontation through foreign military entanglements; and leaders who honor the principles of ASEAN, not betray them for short-term political gain.