Joshua Lance Martin T.

Albar
11432349

Mr. Ren De los Santos

INTTREL A51

ANALYSIS OUTPUT 1
An independent foreign policy has been aimed to pursue by the current Duterte administration,
which sparked and headlined the national and international media in the previous month.
President Duterte declared this motion after the ASEAN Summit in Vietnam and his working
visit in Jakarta, Indonesia. (GMA News and Current Affairs, 2016) He intends to promote
sovereign equality and independence, and a commitment to peaceful settlement disputes by
launching such approach to our foreign policy. A Philippine independent foreign policy would
decline any interference by foreign states and would carry out policies and arrangements that will
defend our national interests and to accomplish our intents inside the international relations
environment. (Nawal, 2016) Duterte sees this as a step towards our independence from our
former colonial rulers and a message to other foreign government that we have the right to adopt
an independent foreign policy without any meddling from external actors. Numerous Die-hard
duterte supporters and other nationalist movement groups were pleased by this direction but it
also received a lot of criticisms from various political analysts and former politicians.
Nevertheless, the pursuit towards an independent foreign policy is not a new trend created by the
current administration but its significance was already mentioned and outlined under the 1987
Constitution. It was stated that The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its
relations with other states, the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial
integrity, national interest and the right to self-determination. (Nawal, 2016) However, this
could be interpreted in several ways and it depends on the head of the state and the citizenry on
how they would perceive the concept of an independent foreign policy. Hence, the structure of
this movement lies on how does the President wants to apply it and on how do the Filipinos
interpret it collectively.
If the concept of independent foreign policy has already been introduced in the 1987
Constitution, then why did President Duterte revived and emphasized it all of a sudden? The
president made such remarks upon his arrival from the ASEAN Summit and his visit in
Indonesia, and it was also preceded by the use of his colorful language towards President
Barack Obama due to the inquiries about the human rights violation in the country. (Almonte,
2016) This led to the cancellation of their one-on-one meeting in the Summit and from my own
perspective, he became a nobody during that day. I think he got offended by the way he was
treated during the Summit which is why he wanted to pursue such approach to foreign policy or
maybe something happened during his working visit in Jakarta wherein he was accompanied by
President Widodo. But of course, all of these are only speculations and baseless opinions.
However, there is one thats for sure on why he suddenly became interested on becoming
independent in the international relations environment. In his own version of War on Drugs, he
received a massive number of criticisms from the media even in the international community.

They questioned his capacity in eradicating crime and drugs in the country and at the same time,
promoting and not violating any human rights. His ego would not let him be a victim of these
criticisms, so he immediately answered and fought back through the use of his controversial
street language. The United States and the United Nations have tried to interfere with his stance
on the war on drugs by counseling him about the significance of human rights. (Ocampo, 2016)
He did not take this lightly and he immediately rejected their attempt. This actuated his pursuit
towards a decision-making process without any interference or meddling from foreign actors and
thus declared his posture in emphasizing independent foreign policy. However, he could not
make his wish granted without the support of the majority of the citizenry. So in order to
persuade the Filipinos to follow his lead, he had to manipulate their interpretation and perception
towards the foreign countries especially the United States of America. He keeps on reiterating
the past mistakes done by the Americans during pre-World War 2 and tries to tell all of the
Filipinos that America had already stopped helping us. A lot of Filipinos, which mostly consists
of Die-hard Duterte supporters, wanted to pursue an independent foreign policy because they
thought that this would grant their genuine independence and would free them from the hands of
the Americans. Using the constructivism approach, the negative perception towards the US
became a social construct that manipulated the beliefs of these Filipinos about reality. In this
case, it manipulated their view towards the international relations environment and they are
thinking right now that the Philippines has and still been in the disadvantage compared to other
countries. Despite all of the foreign aid given by the US in our military and economic power, and
in times of disaster, the Filipinos easily forgot and got stuck to the fantasy that we are not being
aided by the US. Hence, they are striving right now for sovereignty and independence which
would support Dutertes stance in the international community. This intersubjective perception
towards the US is very powerful since it could distort reality and could make a state or an
international organization disappear.
According to Gotinga (2016), the current administration believes that this movement towards an
independent foreign balance will create a balance in our position in the international relations
environment. This effect would be unlikely since our President continues to rant against foreign
states even our ally countries. Sen. Drilon has mentioned that our economy will be heavily
affected due to the attitude of our head of state and his pursuit towards an independent foreign
policy would cause a massive withdrawal of foreign aid from the US and the United Nations.
(Torregoza, 2016) Not because of Dutertes stance in the said approach to our foreign policy,
since it is really our right to adopt it, but because of his own interpretation of it. It would be very
likely that our military and economy will experience a great downfall since these aspects are
heavily supported by the said foreign state actors. This would eventually lead to a change of
allies in the international community where we would side with the favorite countries of the
President, Russia and China. It would be possible that our military arms and equipment will be
purchased or traded from these states, but we must be vigilant of negative impacts caused by this
shift since these countries cannot be easily trusted. (Tatad, 2016) Nevertheless, we are not the
only one who will face horrible consequences if such event will occur since the US will also

experience an obliteration of their identity. From a constructivist perspective, if the US will

withdraw and forbid its intervention in the military affairs of the country then their identity as a
powerful helping state will deteriorate. The structure that binds the two states together would
break and fall apart. It would eventually lead to a loss of an intersubjective agreement that the
US has power over the Philippines. Since the Filipinos will not be able to receive any help from
the US, then they would perceive this great state as one that lost his power and capacity in the
international relations environment. This basically depicts that actors and the structures that bind
them together have a mutual effect with each other since both have power in producing
collectively held meanings and notions in the international relations. (Hopf, 1998)

REFERENCES

Adler, E. (1997, September 1). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World
Politics. European Journal of International Relations. Retrieved October 12, 2016, from
http://ejt.sagepub.com/content/3/3/319
Almonte, J. T. (2016, September 24). Towards an independent foreign policy. Retrieved
October 17, 2016, from http://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/146873-independentforeign-policy-philippines-duterte
Duterte declares independent foreign policy. (2016, September 10). Retrieved October
17, 2016, from http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/580839/news/nation/dutertedeclares-independent-foreign-policy
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (2001). Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research
Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics. Annual Review Political
Science. Retrieved October 12, 2016.
Gotinga, J. (2016, September 15). DFA: Independent foreign policy is about 'balance'
Retrieved October 17, 2016, from
http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/09/15/department-of-foreign-affairs-independentforeign-policy-balance.html
Hopf, T. (1998). The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory.
International Security, 23(1), 171-200. Retrieved October 17, 2016.
Nawal, A. (2016, September 10). Duterte: Govt to pursue independent foreign policy.
Retrieved October 17, 2016, from http://globalnation.inquirer.net/144563/duterte-govt-topursue-independent-foreign-policy
Ocampo, S. C. (2016, September 17). Towards an independent foreign policy for RP.
Retrieved October 17, 2016, from
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2016/09/17/1624546/towards-independent-foreignpolicy-rp
Sterling-Folker, J. (2002). Realism and the Constructivist Challenge: Rejecting,
Reconstructing, or Rereading. International Studies Review, 4(1), 73-97. Retrieved
October 17, 2016, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3186275
Tatad, F. (2016, September 16). An independent foreign policy? - The Manila Times
Online. Retrieved October 17, 2016, from http://www.manilatimes.net/an-independentforeign-policy/286085/
Torregoza, H. (2016, October 14). Drilon: Duterte rants may impact on economic ties.
Retrieved October 17, 2016, from http://www.mb.com.ph/drilon-duterte-rants-mayimpact-on-economic-ties/