The Necessity of Socioeconomic Self-Reliance in a Time of Multilateralism
For too long, the Philippines has been led to believe that security and prosperity lie in the hands of foreign powers. From the days of colonial rule to the present entanglements of military pacts and economic dependencies, the nation has been conditioned to look outward for protection and development. But recent events—most notably the tense exchange between former US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy—offer a stark reminder that alliances shift, commitments waver, and nations must ultimately fend for themselves.
The meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, which ended in diplomatic discord, is more than a spectacle of American realpolitik. It is a lesson for nations like the Philippines, which have long placed their faith in Washington’s security guarantees. The illusion of an “ironclad” alliance is crumbling under the weight of changing global priorities, and the Philippines must now ask itself: Can it truly entrust its survival to the shifting moods of a foreign government?
This is not simply a question of military affairs. The deeper issue is economic sovereignty. For a nation to be truly independent, it must not only secure its borders but also sustain itself from within. A country that depends on foreign investments, imported goods, and overseas aid is a country at the mercy of external forces. A nation that cannot feed its people, power its industries, or dictate its own economic policies is not sovereign—it is subservient.
As time goes by, reality becomes “on the position of strength”—and Filipinos have the capacity for such strength, only to have it downplayed, whether by the establishment or by various factors, including the country’s decades-old subservience. This may sound political, but it goes beyond politics; it becomes sociocultural. It is ingrained in how the nation perceives itself, how it defines progress, and how it allows external forces to shape its destiny.
For sure, some will say, “It is impossible”—especially in the face of threats from China. If so, then what is the point of studying, of building institutions, of training leaders, only to remain dependent on foreign assistance all the time? Blame the oligarchs? How about the very establishment itself—the roots that have nurtured and benefited these oligarchs? This goes deeper than just a handful of elites; it is about the very structure that has kept the country in a cycle of dependence.
Look at Vietnam—it has allies, but it has also emphasized its own position as much as possible. The “other China”—Taiwan—had to strengthen itself after US support was reduced. And yet, the Philippines remains economically dependent on half-baked promises, channeling its nationalism into aesthetics rather than substance. One must truly question: Why has the country not broken free?
The post-war years have seen a world increasingly interconnected, with trade pacts, regional alliances, and multinational corporations dictating the flow of capital and resources. But while some hail this era of multilateralism as a triumph of cooperation, the reality is that it has entrenched economic imbalances. The great industrial nations dictate terms, while smaller countries, like the Philippines, remain dependent on exports of raw materials and remittances from their labor force abroad.
The only viable path forward is self-reliance. This does not mean isolationism, nor does it reject cooperation with the wider world. Rather, it calls for a national economy that is strong enough to stand on its own—an economy that does not collapse when foreign aid is withdrawn or when a superpower’s policies shift.
Agricultural self-sufficiency must be a priority. A country that cannot feed its people is a country forever vulnerable. Industrialization, too, must be pursued—not as a subsidiary of foreign corporations but through national initiatives that put Filipino industries, innovation, and creativity first. The wealth of the nation must serve the nation.
Moreover, the Philippines must reject economic policies dictated by foreign creditors and institutions that seek to shape its development in their own interest. The push for self-reliance is not just economic; it is political. A government that is beholden to foreign interests cannot truly act in the best interests of its own people.
Now is the time for the Philippines to recognize the hard truth: no nation will safeguard its prosperity except itself. The unraveling of supposed “ironclad” alliances should not be met with fear but with resolve. The path ahead is clear—national dignity and survival demand self-reliance. Anything less is surrender.