As the United States redirects its strategic focus to the Indo-Pacific, its rivalry with China intensifies. In 2025, Japan will join the Philippines and the U.S. in the “Balikatan” exercise as a full participant, showcasing advanced missile systems—a move signaling America’s renewed resolve to counter China’s expansion through enhanced alliances and military upgrades1. Central to this contest, the Philippines stands out due to its pivotal South China Sea position. Compared to Taiwan, it poses a greater risk as a flashpoint, its political and military stance shaping the First Island Chain’s stability and the region’s future. Yet, even if China gains a temporary edge, its authoritarian system’s inherent weaknesses doom it to eventual failure.
The Philippines’ Geostrategic Edge
At the Indo-Pacific’s core, the Philippines anchors the First Island Chain, its location making it a key to mastering the South China Sea. This vital waterway sustains global shipping and energy flows, with Pacific access hinging on Philippine oversight. Alignment with the U.S. or China would decisively alter regional security and geopolitics. For America, the Philippines underpins its alliance framework and checks China’s maritime reach; for China, it secures energy lifelines and regional influence. Hence, its South China Sea role places it at the forefront of U.S.-China contention.
U.S. Reliance on the Philippines: South China Sea Dominance
For the U.S., the Indo-Pacific hinges on the South China Sea, where the Philippines serves as a vital foothold and chosen theater. This sea channels the world’s busiest trade and energy routes, its mastery affecting U.S. and allied economic and military stability. Straddling the First Island Chain, the Philippines governs South China Sea-to-Pacific pathways, offering unmatched leverage. Through its alliance with Manila, the U.S. positions forces to disrupt China’s maritime supply lines and curb its energy and trade flows, securing a competitive edge. Opting for the South China Sea aligns with U.S. strengths—a frontline against China and a bedrock for its defense network—with the Philippines as its cornerstone.
Beyond that, securing the South China Sea outstrips direct defense of Taiwan in safeguarding it. Taiwan’s nearness to China invites intense pressure, and U.S. reliance on garrisons or direct aid risks unsustainable supply lines. Conversely, holding the Philippines and the South China Sea hampers China’s power projection toward Taiwan—restraining its navy or logistics—while preserving Taiwan’s sea routes. Thus, for the U.S., commanding this sea ensures Taiwan’s safety, with the Philippines as the critical anchor.
China’s Philippines Play: Securing the South China Sea
For China, the Philippines’ South China Sea perch is both a springboard for economic and military growth and a linchpin for settling Taiwan’s fate. A direct Taiwan invasion is unfeasible, its costs dwarfing benefits: an assault would raze Taiwan’s infrastructure and economy, yielding little immediate gain, while coercion would spark defiance, governance woes, and steep rebuilding expenses. This imbalance pushes China toward mastering South China Sea routes for a subtler, more effective approach.
First, the South China Sea is China’s energy and trade lifeline. Without its command, China’s economic and wartime resilience would erode—crucially in a Taiwan clash, where severed supply lines could spell collapse. Thus, securing this region, centered on the Philippines, is foundational to any Taiwan plan. Second, the Philippines weakens U.S. intervention. America’s Indo-Pacific stance rests on the First Island Chain; if the Philippines falls to China’s orbit, U.S. operations in the Western Pacific falter, diminishing Taiwan’s support.
Critically, mastering the South China Sea through the Philippines could settle Taiwan’s status without combat. Taiwan’s economy and security rely on sea access; once this sea is China’s, Taiwan faces isolation, its energy and trade imperiled, potentially breaking its resistance and prompting concessions. This “encircle and outflank” tactic—using the Philippines to check the U.S. and squeeze Taiwan—avoids the heavy toll of direct assault, achieving unification more efficiently. For China, the Philippines is an indirect yet essential arena for Taiwan Strait success.
China’s Fragile Gains and Systemic Flaws
Even if China briefly prevails in seizing the Philippines and the South China Sea, its authoritarian framework’s structural defects will thwart sustained success, likely triggering collapse from within.
Authoritarianism’s Cultural Constraints and Expansion Limits
China’s centralized system excels at rapid resource mobilization, but its cultural rigidity and inflexibility cap long-term expansion. Its uniform policies and ideology resist diverse perspectives and global complexity. At home, despite decades of rule, Uyghurs, Tibetans, Mongolians, and Hong Kongers defy a shared identity, underscoring the regime’s integration failures—a portent of external woes. The Belt and Road Initiative echoes this: economic outreach stumbles as cultural disconnect fuels distrust and pushback. Even if war grants China military sway over the Philippines and the South China Sea, assimilating these areas would falter, with soaring security and governance costs weakening its might.
Centralized Power’s Double-Edged Impact
Authoritarianism enables swift decisions and action, yet unchecked judgment invites costly errors. In war or crises, overconfident leaders might over-focus resources, exposing vulnerabilities elsewhere. Moreover, neglecting civilian needs and economic foundations sows instability, magnified in wartime. This “centralized power for grand feats” drives peacetime gains but risks turning into “centralized power for blunders” in conflict, leading to ruin.
Conclusion: The Endgame of U.S.-China Contention
The Philippines, anchored in the South China Sea, is the crux of U.S.-China competition. Outpacing Taiwan, its strategic weight to both sides is immediate. The U.S. harnesses it to command the South China Sea, upholding Indo-Pacific primacy and Taiwan’s safety; China uses it to sap U.S. intervention and indirectly resolve Taiwan’s fate. Yet, even a short-term Chinese win would falter—its rigid authoritarianism and cultural exclusivity cannot sustain gains, buckling under governance burdens.
Long-term, China’s “centralized power for grand feats” aids peacetime growth but proves fatal in war. The U.S., with institutional adaptability and global backing, holds enduring strength. Under Trump’s vision, post-Ukraine and domestic renewal, America will refocus on the Indo-Pacific, where the Philippines—the First Island Chain’s “geopolitical crossroads”—will command global attention. Time favors not China; even if it triumphs in this struggle, it may collapse first.
1 “Japan to Join Balikatan 2025 as Full-Fledged Participant,” Naval News, March 2025, https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/03/japan-to-join-balikatan-2025-as-full-fledged-participant/; “Balikatan 2025 to Showcase Major Missile Systems,” The Philippine Star, March 29, 2025, https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2025/03/29/2431886/balikatan-2025-showcase-major-missile-systems/.
Leave a Reply