LAST November 2, leaders of 23 business, labor, education, agriculture, and academic and civic-society organizations urged the Philippine government to exercise restraint amid renewed tensions with China.
Warning that escalation could damage the economy, their joint statement called for measured diplomacy and sustained dialogue thru official channels rather than by inflammatory rhetoric and public exchanges.
The groups stressed that stable ties with China support Philippine jobs, tourism, trade, investment, manufacturing, agriculture, infrastructure, energy, and other industries.
They also highlighted the 350,000 overseas Filipino workers in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macao and their billions of dollars in remittances that is the only lifeline of our economy nowadays..
Among the groups who made the call are: The Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Employers Confederation of the Philippines; Semiconductor and Electronic Industries in the Philippines; Federation of Filipino-Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, Inc.; Federation of Philippine Industries, Inc.; Foreign Buyers Association of the Philippines;
OFW Foundation; Philippine Amalgamated Supermarkets Association; Philippine Association of Legitimate Service Contractors; Philippine Association of Salt Industry Networks Inc.; and Philippine Chamber of Agriculture and Food, Inc.
To me, the statement was a forceful rebuke of what I regard as destructive, U.S.-backed anti-China campaigning associated with Raymond Powell, Defense Secretary Gibo Teodoro, Rear Admiral Jay Tarriela, and several of our politicians, who have since softened their rhetoric. Teodoro and Tarriela, however, remain defiant—a stance I believe disregards the economic welfare of 120 million Filipinos.
Responding to call, Teodoro even doubled down on his extremist position, insisting that “the country should not allow economic considerations to weaken its position in defending its interests.”
I see no viable strategy from Teodoro and Tarriela, only the danger of a disastrous U.S. proxy war. Filipinos and netizens should challenge U.S.-aligned anti-China rhetoric through public debate and hold its advocates accountable.
But what ‘national interest’ is served if it does not improve Filipinos’ lives, especially in a country many now view as ASEAN’s economic laggard?
He and Tarriela also reject China’s “win-win” proposal for joint oil and gas development, offered by then Chinese Premier Deng Xiaoping as far back as 1988.
I see no viable strategy from Teodoro and Tarriela, only the danger of a disastrous U.S. proxy war. Filipinos and netizens should challenge U.S.-aligned anti-China rhetoric through public debate and hold its advocates accountable.
Meanwhile, the Department of Foreign Affairs, led by Secretary Teresa Lazaro, has worked patiently to repair the diplomatic damage I attribute to their actions.
Its latest effort was Lazaro’s requested telephone conversation with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on November 3, 2026. She described the exchange on X:
“I had a telephone call with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi this afternoon and had a frank and constructive discussion on the direction of Philippines-China relations.
“Both sides emphasized the need for continued diplomatic dialogue and the proper management of differences anchored on mutual respect.”
I believe however that the Philippines will continue to suffer unless President Bongbong Marcos reins in the U.S.-aligned anti-China voices within his government.
The better path, in my view, is cooperation with China, as other ASEAN countries are doing to strengthen their economies.
I argue that basing our position on the hollow ‘victory’ we gained from the 2016 arbitral ruling in our dispute with China in the South China Sea is no winning strategy.
I maintain that no other country recognizes it—not one ASEAN country issued a statement of support to the Philippine position last July when our officials and other US lackeys “commemorated” (again) the 10th year of the arbitral ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.