The Market Monitor Minding the Nation's Business
Invoking the “best interest” of the Philippines, and declaring that Filipinos “are not ready to accept,” President Duterte, upon arriving in Davao City late Friday evening from his state visit to China, backpedaled on his declaration in the Chinese capital to sever military and economic ties with the United States.
Relations with the the US will be maintained, the President said, adding that his statement before an assembly of Filipino and Chinese businessmen in Beijing last Thursday that the Philippines was separating from the US should not be taken as severing ties with America.
“It’s not severance of ties. When you say severance of ties, you cut the diplomatic relations. I cannot do that. Why? It’s to the best interest of my country that we maintain that relationship. Why? Because there are many Filipinos in the United States… Americans of Filipino ancestry. Why? Because the people of my country are not ready to accept,” the President said.
Severing diplomatic ties with the US was not feasible, Mr. Duterte said. “Why? Because the Filipinos in the United States will kill me,” he said, obviously in jest.
The President said that what he meant by the statement that shocked many was that there was a need for a Philippines foreign policy that did not have to dovetail or interlock with the foreign policy of the US.
He noted that in the past, the Philippines has always followed the cue from the United States.
“We follow. We always follow. I will not follow,” he said.
BSP Deputy Governor Diwa Guinigundo earlier cautioned against kneejerk reactions to the President’s statements and urged that the people wait until Mr. Duterte has returned home and expound on his surprise pronouncement.
”We don’t have the benefit of the policy translation of those pronouncements of the President in China. Those are pronouncements he made.
How ithey’re going to be translated into policies is something else,” Guinigundo said.
US officials called Mr. Duterte’s statement baffling but at the same time expressed suspicions it was but part of his patented colorful language.
An official of the US Department of State also said the US would not be opposed to the Philippines and China having a closer relationship.
“Relationships in that part of the world or in any part of the world are not zero-sum games,” the official said.
The President, who visited China for four days beginning Oct. 18, announced last Thursday his decision to end military and economic ties with the US and vowed stronger relations with China. Guinigundo said that whatever the policies on this would be, people should not forget that the Philippines’s macroeconomic fundamentals remained strong and continue to back the domestic economy from global and domestic uncertainties.
He said fuels of domestic growth have been diversified, such as on external trade, and stressed that main growth drivers, namely consumption, private spending and public investments, remained strong.
“It’s also important that we take note of our strong fundamentals and increasing diversification of our economy and the greater flexibility of our economy,” he added.
The country’s economic managers, in a statement released Thursday, added that the Duterte administration “will move strongly and swiftly toward regional economic re-balancing for closer integration in Asia.”
“We will maintain relations with the West, but we desire stronger integration with our neighbors,” the statement said, citing that Filipinos “share the oriental culture conducive to better understanding with our regional partners.”
The statement explained that the Asian regional integration “is similar to what has been done in the North American Free-Trade Agreement (Nafta) in North America, European Union, and Mercosur in South America.” “The Philippines is, therefore, integrating with the Asean, China, Japan, and South Korea,” it said.
“In a way, Asian economic integration is long overdue compared with the regional integrations elsewhere.”
Mr. Duterte’s Beijing trip was earlier seen as a confidence-building visit after the belligerent stance of his predecessor, former President Benigno S. Aquino III on the Philippines’s territorial dispute with China. Mr. Duterte said Sunday before his trip to China that he would not “bargain” away any territory and would discuss the decision of The Hague-based Permanent Code of Arbitration that favored the Philippines.
But it was learned that the President and his Chinese counterpart touched on the sea dispute only briefly during their meeting.
In exchange for avoiding confrontation on maritime issues, the Philippines scored a number of agreements for economic assistance.
More than 300 business leaders, including an executive from leading Philippine conglomerate SM Investments, accompanied Mr. Duterte in hopes of winning special contracts in China.
“It isn’t just the United States that is baffled by this rhetoric,” US State Department Spokesman John Kirby said at a briefing on Mr. Duterte’s China statement.
“We have heard from many of our friends and partners in the region who are likewise confused about where this is going, and also, we believe, are trying to learn more on their own about what it portends,” he said. Kirby said it was unclear to US officials what Duterte meant by a “separation.”
“We are going to be seeking an explanation of exactly what the President meant when he talked about separation from the US,” Kirby said.
“It’s not clear to us exactly what that means in all its ramifications.” Daniel Russell, assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, will travel to Manila this weekend in what Kirby said was a previously planned trip that US that officials hope would provide an opportunity to get a clarification.
Despite Mr. Duterte’s comments, Kirby said the US would not be opposed to the Philippines and China having a closer relationship. “Relationships in that part of the world or in any part of the world are not zero-sum games,” Kirby said. “We have long said that we would welcome a closer relationship between the Philippines and China, between other nations and China. This does not have to be binary.”