Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte’s announced “separation” from the United States and his anti-American rhetoric have left the four million Filipinos and Filipino-Americans like me who live in this country perplexed and troubled. Many of us have friends and family in the Philippines who benefit from the longstanding close relationship with the United States, built on economic and security factors as well as shared respect and history in defending freedom. However, if Duterte continues down his current path—calling American policymakers “monkeys” and “fools” while cozying up to Beijing in a high-profile meeting with Chinese leaders—our mutually beneficial alliance could be irreparably damaged.
The U.S.-Philippine relationship was perhaps never stronger than after Typhoon Haiyan hit the Philippines in late 2013. I experienced the aftermath of this tragedy firsthand when I accompanied my former boss, Senator Marco Rubio, on a January 2014 Senate Foreign Relations Committee fact-finding trip. Our mission included a visit to Tacloban, the largest city in the Eastern Visayas region. Haiyan was so powerful it damaged or leveled every single house, school, and structure in Tacloban. Over 6,000 had died, many from 15-foot-high storm surges from which there was no escape.
Senator Rubio and I met mothers, fathers, and children who had lost their entire families to the storm. Yet despite being only weeks removed from these horrific losses, they greeted us with smiles and expressed their deep gratitude for American assistance. Many said that the sight of the George Washington Carrier Strike Group in the Leyte Gulf just days after the devastation gave them their first ray of hope for recovery. Nearly 13,000 U.S. serv-ice members participated in the post-disaster relief efforts. Altogether, the United States contributed $20 million in assistance to our ally. For comparison, China provided under $2 million in aid, less even than the $2.7 million donated by furniture retailer IKEA.
As an American of Filipino descent, I was never so proud of my country. I remain awestruck by the capabilities of our military and the power of American engagement abroad to help others in need. I was equally proud of the remarkable fighting spirit of the Filipinos I met in Tacloban.
During our visit the United States and the Philippines were concluding the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (ECDA), designed to strengthen cooperative security capacities and efforts in disaster relief and humanitarian assistance. It seemed at the time that the U.S.-Philippine strategic relationship, which has had its ups and downs over the past 70 years, was being built to last far into the future.
Less than three years later, all that has changed. Since Duterte took office in June, following his victory in the May presidential elections, his centerpiece policy of a no-holds-barred crackdown on narcotics has led to thousands of deaths, many of them extrajudicial vigilante killings. A planned U.S. sale of 26,000 rifles for police there was canceled by the State Department last week, amid unease on Capitol Hill, leading to Duterte’s “monkeys” and “fools” speech. “I was rude at them, because they were rude at me,” he said.
But this has been his style since taking office. He calls President Obama a “son of a whore,” mocks Americans as “bullies,” and says Filipinos in America “don’t count.” He not only demands a separation from America in favor of a higher-priority relationship with Communist China, but wants all American troops out of the Philippines in two years.
This “vertigo-inducing” change in Philippine foreign policy, as Council on Foreign Relations scholar Max Boot aptly describes it, threatens to undermine the security and prosperity of the Asian-Pacific democracies. Without a regular rotational American military presence in the Philippines, there is no check on China’s aggressive territorial claims in the South China Sea, which is an essential gateway for regional and global commerce.
Duterte appears to be channeling concerns about the Philippines’ vulnerability to Beijing, yet his rhetoric runs the risk of making the country even weaker. Chinese expansionism is on the rise, and Beijing will not respect the interests of the Philippines if they conflict with China’s long-term goals. Although most Americans understand that alliances are based on mutual interests, allies who make a habit of hurling insults at the United States alienate not just the American people but their elected representatives.
For the Philippines and its people, the repercussions of Duterte’s presidency could be momentous. First, if America’s security blanket can no long-er be taken for granted, it will raise uncertainty, thereby causing investment capital—the seed corn of jobs and growth—to flee to safer havens. S&P Global Ratings warns of “rising uncertainties surrounding the stability, predictability, and accountability” of the Duterte administration, potentially leading to a downgrade in the Philippines’ investment grade rating.
Second, remittances sent home from Filipinos in America could decline. In 2015, U.S. remittances totaled approximately $8 billion, more than 10 times the amount flowing from China. But remittances have flattened in recent months, and Filipinos living in America may not be willing to continue to open their pocketbooks given Duterte’s disregard for them and hostility toward America.
Finally, it is foolish for Duterte to think that increased economic engagement with China can take the place of a positive relationship with the United States. The United States—consist-ently one of the largest foreign contributors to the Philippines—invested over $730 million in the country in 2015, while China invested less than $1 million during that same period, according to the Central Bank of the Philippines. And while Chinese infrastructure projects brought on by recent deals may appear to be beneficial on paper, many African and Latin American countries have been fleeced by similar deals in the past, which often left the Chinese investor better off than the recipient.
President Duterte himself admits that degrading his country’s relationship with Washington and cutting off American assistance could result in “a lesser quality of life” for his people. Further, his actions threaten the bond between Filipinos and Filipino-Americans formed under the umbrella of the unique, 70-year U.S.-Philippine partnership. Perhaps he hopes his virulent anti-American rhetoric can be calibrated to please his new Chinese strategic partners, while he simultaneously maintains tenuous ties with the United States. If so, it is a dangerous calculation. Because there are limits to how much anti-American vitriol can be tolerated before America’s friendship with and support for the Philippines is permanently undermined.
Cesar Conda was chief of staff to Senator Marco Rubio and is a former assistant for domestic policy to Vice President Dick Cheney.
