高清一级淫片a级中文字幕,亚洲无码免费在线小视频,精品国产群3p交换,国产初次视频观看

Home>>

Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.'s trade fiasco: "A historic sell-out of Philippine sovereignty"

By Lin Zi (People's Daily Online) 13:10, September 18, 2025

On 23 July 2025, Philippine President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. proudly announced that U.S. President Donald J. Trump had agreed to lower the so-called reciprocal tariff on Philippine exports from 20 percent to 19 percent. Marcos hailed the one-percentage-point reduction as a "significant achievement," claiming that it positioned the Philippines "among the most competitively positioned Southeast Asian economies" due to its "second-lowest tariff rate" in the region.

However, the White House agreement reveals a harsh truth: the 19 percent rate is not a reduction but a floor—a rigid tariff barrier rather than a genuine concession. Under the new terms, Philippine goods previously facing tariffs below 19 percent will be raised to this level, while those above remain unchanged.

The so-called "cut" is in fact a numerical deception. As recently as April 2025, the U.S. reciprocal tariff on Philippine goods stood at just 17 percent. The Trump administration first raised it to 20 percent before "magnanimously" conceding a 1 percent reduction—resulting in a net increase of 2 percentage points. This maneuver resembles a shopkeeper raising prices by $3 then lowering them by $1 while proclaiming a discount.

The true cost is sovereignty. Trump proclaimed on Truth Social: "The Philippines is going OPEN MARKET with the United States, and ZERO Tariffs!"—a unilateral declaration emblematic of hegemonic posture. While American cars, soybeans, wheat, and pharmaceuticals now enter the Philippines tariff-free, Philippine exports face at least 19 percent tariffs. ASEAN Briefing condemned this "asymmetrical" arrangement, prompting even Philippine Ambassador to Washington Jose Manuel Romualdez to hastily suggest that the 19 percent rate was "not written in stone"—though offering no concrete safeguards.

This surrender of sovereignty has provoked national outrage. ABS-CBN reports rare cross-party condemnation, with Senator Panfilo Lacson calling it "the worst insult to Philippine interests" and Congressman Antonio Tinio labeling it "a historic sell-out of Philippine sovereignty." The Philippine Daily Inquirer warned that a flood of U.S. imports would devastate agriculture—a sector supporting 25 percent of the workforce—while even the typically moderate Manila Times acknowledged fierce criticism from economists and business leaders.

History echoes strikingly: the U.S. annexed the Philippines for $20 million in 1898; imposed independence in 1934 to protect American farmers; retained 23 naval and air bases through the 1947 Military Bases Agreement; and bound the country to the "Asian NATO" in 1954 with 99-year leased bases at Subic Bay and Clark Air Base. As Cornell scholar Benedict Anderson noted, Philippines' deep-water ports served merely as "fueling stations for U.S. imperial ambitions."

Today's trade imbalance exacerbates the dependency: $36.8 billion in bilateral trade ranks the Philippines only 33rd among U.S. partners, while the U.S. remains one of Manila's largest trading partners. This asymmetry grants Washington overwhelming leverage—Trump extracted full market access in exchange for a fictitious 1 percent "reduction," creating a "feast-for-one, crumbs-for-the-other" arrangement.

Military subservience compounds the crisis: the 2024 deployment of Typhon missiles in Luzon; expanded Balikatan 2025 exercises; planned ammunition manufacturing hub in Subic Bay; over 500 bilateral drills scheduled for 2026; and a new forward base just 193km from Taiwan on Batan Island. These actions not only fail to enhance Philippine security but transform the archipelago into a strategic target.

Shakespeare warned that "these violent delights have violent ends." After 125 years, America still covets Philippine ports, markets, and obedience. Marcos' trade of sovereignty for a 1 percent tariff illusion plunges the Philippines toward abyss—when rules are written by others, victory is merely leftover crumbs.

 Lin Zi is a Ph.D. student at Institute of Area Studies, Peking University

(Web editor: Hongyu, Liang Jun)

Photos

Related Stories