U.S. has few good options for response to Philippines' Duterte

President Duterte's latest outburst casts further doubt on the seven-decade U.S.-Philippine alliance.

REUTERS/ Wu Hong/ Pool
Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte (L) speaks during a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, October 20, 2016.

The Obama administration has few good options and limited leverage as it struggles to craft a response to Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's increasingly hostile rhetoric towards the United States and his warm embrace of China.

For months, Washington has played down Duterte's anti-American insults and broadsides. But the flamboyant new leader raised the stakes to a new level on Thursday when he announced his "separation" from long-time ally the United States and realignment with Beijing and possibly even Moscow, America's two main strategic rivals.

Duterte's latest outburst, less than three weeks before the U.S. presidential election, casts further doubt on the seven-decade U.S.-Philippine alliance and threatens to further undermine President Barack Obama's faltering "pivot" to Asia as a counterbalance to China's growing assertiveness.

Potentially at stake is the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, reached under Duterte's predecessor, allowing the United States to rotate ships, aircraft, and personnel through five Philippines bases, an arrangement seen as crucial to projecting U.S. military power on China's doorstep.

Mindful of Duterte's volatile nature, the Obama administration has trod carefully so far, seeking to avoid provoking him even as it chides him over his deadly war on drugs, U.S. officials say.

One U.S. official, who did not want to be identified, said there had been an active internal debate in recent months on how far to go in criticizing Duterte's government on human rights and that the measured tone adopted was not as strong as some aides would have liked.

U.S. attempts to raise questions about Duterte's campaign against drugs, in which more than 3,000 people have been killed since he took office in June, have drawn angry denunciations by Duterte. He has derided Obama as a "a son of bitch" and said he should "go to hell."

"It doesn't seem to help to say anything because the minute you say something, he just lets loose his barrage of obscenities," said Murray Hiebert, deputy director of the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I think for the U.S. to just blast him constantly is probably not very effective."

There is a suspicion in Washington that Duterte could swing back to the United States - if he decides it suits his interests.

"There is no question that Duterte is...trying to play the well-worn game of playing us off against the Chinese," another U.S. official said, on condition of anonymity.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said on Thursday that the United States will seek an explanation from Duterte over his "separation" announcement, which he made during a visit to China. But he limited criticism to calling the remarks "baffling" and "inexplicably at odds" with close ties between Washington and Manila.


U.S. officials are concerned about Duterte's unpredictability, but say that despite his words the Philippines has not yet canceled military exercises or formally requested any tangible change in the security relationship.

With relations souring further, the senior U.S. diplomat for Asia, Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Russel, was due to visit Manila this weekend on what the State Department said was a previously scheduled trip. He would seek to clarify Duterte's comments, the State Department said.

If it chose to respond more vigorously to human rights concerns, the United States could decide to cut military aid to the Philippines, or make it contingent upon an end to the drug killings or more careful judicial procedures.

But Philippine officials have suggested their country could live without the U.S. assistance, and overtures to China and Russia suggest they might seek assistance elsewhere.

Duterte's trade secretary, Ramon Lopez, said $13.5 billion in deals would be signed during Duterte's China trip, though it was unclear how much of that amount was in the form of final deals rather than preliminary agreements. The White House said current U.S. direct investment to the Philippines is over $4.7 billion.

Members of the U.S. Congress, including Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, a strong voice on foreign policy issues, have indicated they will consider conditions on U.S. aid to the Philippines if the killings continue apace.

Washington has provided the Philippines with millions of dollars in extra military aid in the last two years as part of an effort to bolster allies to counter China's pursuit of expansive territorial claims in the South China Sea.

Kurt Campbell, a former assistant secretary of state for East Asia under Obama who may have an administration role should Hillary Clinton win the U.S. election, has been among those urging a tougher line on the human rights issue.

"What's happening in the Philippines is starting to raise larger questions and concern," he said.

"This idea, that 'No, no, we'll ignore this and maintain quietly our military and strategic operational activities,' (I) think is going to be difficult." 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to U.S. has few good options for response to Philippines' Duterte
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today