The Philippines’ electoral indolence trap
At the halfway mark of President Marcos‘ single term, his administration appears adrift. While it has implemented tactical measures, it has failed to provide the kind of compelling vision his father once sought with the controversial “New Society” and “Revolution from the Center.” Unlike his father, who hijacked the 1935 Constitution to establish a constitutional authoritarian regime, Mr. Marcos has yet to assert a definitive national direction.
His initial indecisiveness, such as his prolonged inability to appoint an agriculture secretary, was dismissed by some as a strategic move. However, the disarray in the agricultural sector and the lackluster rollout of the Maharlika Investment Fund reveal a leadership more dilettante than deliberate.
Mr. Marcos, however, deserves credit where it truly matters—reversing his predecessor’s pro-China pivot in the West Philippine Sea (WPS). By reasserting Philippine sovereignty, his administration has galvanized public opinion and allowed the Armed Forces of the Philippines to pivot from an obsessive focus on internal security to a more coherent external defense posture.
The AFP’s acquisition of modern ships, weaponry, and facilities has reinvigorated its ranks, enabling it to assertively confront China’s bullying tactics against Filipino fishermen and naval forces. Each publicized incident of Chinese aggression chips away at China’s international image, bolstered by the AFP’s diplomatic finesse and transparency. Moreover, Mr. Marcos’ strategic increase in Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement sites and alignment with countries wary of China’s regional bullying are moves of brilliance.
Despite these foreign policy successes, Mr. Marcos has failed to decisively remove the internal security threat that a potential presidency of Sara Duterte in May 2028 represents. Mr. Marcos has backpedaled the moves to impeach Sara Duterte, who has purportedly betrayed public trust in her irregular use and justification for the confidential and intelligence funds of the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education. Her political breakup with the President and her subsequent public threat of the “conditional” assassination of Mr. Marcos, the First Lady, and Speaker of the House of Representatives made derisory international news.
The recent revelation of Chinese spies surveilling critical Philippine infrastructure underscores the importance of competent leadership. Sara Duterte’s simplistic views on national security, which seem rooted in outdated Cold War paradigms, highlight the risks of her leading the country in an era of heightened geopolitical complexity.
As the Philippines prepares for the May 2025 midterm elections and the May 2028 presidential elections, the nation risks falling into its recurring “electoral indolence trap.” Entertainment personalities, political dynasties, and ill-equipped candidates continue to dominate electoral slates. On the other hand, civic organizations, educational institutions, and media fail to provide voters with relevant and actionable information on how to “vote wisely.”
To escape this trap, the Philippines must operationalize the concept of “voting wisely.” This begins with imagining the desired future (foresighting) and working backward to identify the decisions and actions necessary to achieve it (backcasting).
To illustrate this in attaining full Philippine control over the WPS, the nation must anticipate scenarios over the next decade. Using “geopolitical alliances” and “national leadership” as the two most critical and uncertain drivers, four plausible scenarios emerge:
(1) “United Defense”: A resilient coalition where strong leadership aligns with high geopolitical alliances. The Philippines galvanizes allies and implements robust defense and diplomatic strategies.
(2) “Lone Defender”: Strong leadership but weak international support. The Philippines faces China’s aggression with determination but lacks external backing, making progress slow and arduous.
(3) “Dependent Sovereignty”: Weak leadership but robust alliances. Allies support Philippine sovereignty, but weak governance undermines internal cohesion and strategy.
(4) “Abandoned Waters”: Weak leadership and low geopolitical alliances. The Philippines cedes control over the WPS to China, with minimal resistance from either the government or international allies.
Civil society, media, the academe, and other social institutions play a crucial role in breaking the electoral indolence trap to install sustainable strong leadership. They must, in the upcoming elections:
(1) Develop tools, such as comprehensive rubrics, to assess candidates’ platforms, focusing on sovereignty, governance, and integrity, and disseminate this information widely through forums, debates, and social media.
(2) Encourage the youth and first-time voters to participate in elections and support candidates who prioritize sovereignty and good governance.
(3) Advocate for and capacitate leaders to envision long-term solutions to geopolitical and domestic challenges.
The electoral indolence trap is not an insurmountable obstacle. By combining future thinking with civic engagement, the Philippines can reshape its political landscape, from electoral stagnation into electoral revitalization.
—————–
doyromero@gmail.com
