Independence and the Illusion of Equality
A note after July 4 – U.S. Independence Day,
Philippine Republic Day, and Filipino‑American Friendship Day
July 4 is a date heavy with symbolism — for the United States, a celebration of its independence from colonial rule; for the Philippines, once observed as Republic Day, marking the formal recognition of independence by the U.S. in 1946; and for many, Filipino-American Friendship Day, a commemoration of shared history.
But in truth, this friendship remains strained by history and shadowed by inequality. Despite the warm rhetoric of partnership, recent developments expose an enduring dynamic where the Philippines is often expected to accommodate, comply, or assist — rather than act as an equal sovereign voice.
Independence, But Not Equality
It is historically accurate, yet painfully ironic, that the Philippines won its independence only after being handed off from one colonizer to another. The 1898 Philippine revolutionaries, having drawn inspiration from George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, found themselves betrayed — first by the Treaty of Paris, then by the Philippine-American War that followed. July 4, 1946, may have marked formal independence, but the structural relationship between the two countries never truly shed its colonial contours.
As global tensions mount once again — particularly in the Asia-Pacific — old patterns are resurfacing. Recent events highlight the persistent imbalance:
- The deployment of the U.S. Typhon missile system in the Philippines during the Balikatan exercises was hailed by American defense officials as a strategic breakthrough. But while it demonstrated U.S. forward capability, it also positioned the Philippines dangerously close to confrontation with regional powers like China — without a clear domestic debate on the risks.
- Repeated maritime drills in the South China Sea, often far from disputed zones, serve symbolic deterrence. Yet the Philippines’ role remains ambiguous: are these defensive measures or rehearsals for a larger U.S.-led strategic posture in the region?
- The Luzon Economic Corridor, part of the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific economic initiative, promises infrastructure investment. However, concerns linger that this may echo earlier projects that enriched foreign contractors more than local economies.
- The 2025 Philippine military reorganization, forming a single command over the West Philippine Sea and Taiwan Strait, aligns closely with U.S. interests — prompting fears of deepening entanglement.
Despite diplomatic statements emphasizing mutual respect, these developments show an asymmetry in consultation, accountability, and long-term consequence. Military cooperation appears deepening, but so too does Filipino vulnerability — strategically and politically.
Filipino Americans: Between Identity and Invisibility
Even as ties remain strong between peoples, Filipino Americans — over four million strong — continue to experience forms of marginalization that reflect this broader imbalance.
Despite being the second-largest Asian American ethnic group, Filipino-Americans remain underrepresented in U.S. politics, media, and policymaking. Their long history of service — from the U.S. Navy to frontline COVID-19 healthcare — has not translated into lasting institutional recognition. The 2021 wave of anti-Asian hate crimes revealed how vulnerable the community remains, despite its deep-rooted contributions to American society.
Meanwhile, immigration policies — such as long visa backlogs and the persistent delays in family reunification for Filipinos — stand in contradiction to the narrative of a special relationship. The Filipino WWII Veterans Parole Program, while temporarily extended under the Biden administration, remains insufficient to address historical injustices suffered by those promised citizenship and recognition for their service.
In schools and textbooks, the Philippine-American War — one of the most brutal episodes of U.S. imperial expansion — is often a footnote. Filipino American history, identity, and struggle are largely invisible in the mainstream narrative, revealing that the “friendship” celebrated on July 4 is often shallow, transactional, or selectively remembered.
The Cost of Conditional Friendship
The Filipino people are not anti-American — they continue to admire the ideals the U.S. proclaims: liberty, justice, democratic governance. But what they resist, and rightly so, is the continuing legacy of vassalage. They reject a “friendship” that requires silence, loyalty, or complicity in exchange for aid or protection.
To call the Philippines a “partner” while deploying missile systems without full civilian oversight, or while allowing lopsided trade arrangements, is to diminish the meaning of partnership itself.
Likewise, to refer to the United States as an “ally” while ignoring the day-to-day struggles of Filipino Americans — their invisibility, their second-class treatment in immigration, their marginalization in national memory — is to reveal a friendship that is more rhetorical than real.
A Way Forward: Dignity, Dialogue, and Detachment from Dependency
This July 4, as flags wave and diplomatic statements are exchanged, it is time to reflect on what true friendship between nations looks like:
- For the Philippines, it means asserting national interest in every agreement, demanding transparency in military deployments, and protecting domestic industries from exploitative trade liberalism masked as opportunity.
- For the United States, it means respecting its former colony as a sovereign equal — not a staging ground for strategic competition, nor a convenient symbol of alliance.
- For Filipino-Americans, it means being seen, heard, and included. Their history is not an anecdote. It is a testament to resilience — and a demand for justice within the very country that once ruled their homeland.
The Call of the Moment
The moment demands clarity. The Philippines must be more than a “junior partner.” It must be sovereign, not just in name but in power. And the United States, if it is to live up to the ideals it celebrates each July 4, must treat friends with equality — not conditional tolerance.
History will not judge alliances by how often leaders shake hands. It will judge them by the justice they bring, and the dignity they uphold.
Let Filipino-American friendship, if it is to be celebrated, be forged in equity, not convenience.
Let independence, if it is to be honored, mean more than ceremony — let it mean power shared, sovereignty upheld, and truth acknowledged.
Only then can July 4 be a day of mutual pride — not mutual pretense.