Philippines set for ‘more robust' Balikatan joint drills, but no mention of Typhon
The Philippines is gearing up for its biggest joint military exercise this year, aimed at enhancing its defence capabilities, with observers suggesting Manila should still showcase a controversial US-made missile system that Beijing is firmly against.
Advertisement
Without giving detailed information on the dates and number of soldiers slated to join the drills, Brigadier General Michael Logico, Balikatan's executive agent, said last week that the 40th Balikatan exercises would be a full battle test.
'There will be participation coming from the Australian Defence Force and the Japanese Self Defence Force,' Logico told reporters at a briefing after a live fire exercise last week in Capas, Tarlac, adding he was waiting for 'newer developments from other countries' before giving further details on this year's Balikatan.
Like last year, the drills will feature sinking exercises 12 nautical miles outside the Philippines' territorial waters.
The Typhon missile system was deployed in the Philippines during the first phase of the Salaknib exercise in April of last year and used in the Balikatan joint exercises the following month.
Advertisement
Muhammad Faizal Bin Abdul Rahman, a research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, told This Week in Asia the coming Balikatan drills would continue to serve as a deterrent against China along the first island chain, where Philippine interests in the South China Sea and the security of the Taiwan Strait were implicitly linked.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AllAfrica
6 hours ago
- AllAfrica
India's trade gambit: sovereignty vs. Trump's tariff deadline
With just days remaining before President Trump's July 9 deadline to reimpose steep 'reciprocal tariffs,' US-India trade talks have reached a critical juncture. Trump's recent declaration of a 'very big deal' with India, one that would 'open up' its markets stands in stark contrast to the gridlock reported by negotiators in Washington. As an Indian delegation races against time, fundamental disagreements over agriculture, industrial goods and fair reciprocity threaten to derail a pact both leaders have touted as transformative. The delegation, led by Rajesh Agarwal, faces immense pressure to concede, but New Delhi's resolve to protect its economic sovereignty has only intensified. With both nations refusing to blink, the outcome may redefine not just bilateral trade but India's resolve to protect its economic sovereignty while navigating Trump's high-pressure tactics. Agriculture, India's hill to die on: The US demand for tariff cuts on soybeans, corn, and dairy and market access for genetically modified (GM) crops strikes at India's most sensitive nerve. Washington frames this as 'fair trade,' but India sees an existential threat to its agrarian economy, which sustains 700 million people. US farm subsidies, exceeding $30 billion annually, create artificially cheap exports that could devastate India's smallholders (average landholding: 1.15 hectares). Politically, concessions are untenable as farmer unions still recall the 2020-21 protests. Ajay Srivastava of the Global Trade Research Initiative has said 'No tariff cuts are expected for dairy or key food grains.' Industrial asymmetry, a lopsided battle: India's push for relief from Trump's 26% reciprocal tariffs faces stiff resistance, especially on steel and auto parts. Meanwhile, the US insists India slash duties on American cars (currently 100-110%) and alcohol (150%). This imbalance mirrors the US-UK 'mini-deal,' where Britain accepted permanent 10% US tariffs while dismantling its own steel protections. For India, such terms would institutionalize disadvantage: Its exports are facing 'MFN+10%' rates in the US, while American goods gain significantly expanded access to Indian markets through deep tariff reductions. Trump's negotiation strategy thrives on ambiguity. His June 27 statement about the July 9 deadline, 'We can do whatever we want,' shows his use of unpredictability as a weapon. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hinted talks could extend to US Labor Day (September 1), while White House officials casually remarked that the deadline is 'not critical.' Yet Trump simultaneously threatens letters to 'non-deal' countries imposing 25-45% tariffs. This carrot-and-stick approach aims to spook India into concessions. Here, the recent US-China 'signed deal' offers a cautionary lesson. Although Trump hailed it as a breakthrough, that deal's substance is fragile: China's vague promise to 'review export applications' for rare earths (which dominate 90% of global supply) secured only loose US pledges to ease chip-material curbs, while Trump's 20% tariffs imposed on Chinese goods over Beijing's alleged failure to curb fentanyl precursor flows remain in place. For India, this highlights the peril of prioritizing optics over enforceable terms – a risk it cannot afford. India enters these talks with unusual leverage. April-May 2025 exports to the US surged 22% year-on-year to $17.25 billion, proving resilience despite tariffs. As S&P revises India's growth forecast upward (6.5%) and domestic consumption rebounds, officials project calm: 'We are keen, but not desperate,' one negotiator reiterated. India's counterstrategy hinges on diversification and unwavering red lines. Domestically, rejecting GM crops protects seed sovereignty and biodiverse farming; upholding data localization rules shields citizens from surveillance capitalism; and auto tariffs defend a $100 billion manufacturing ecosystem. Externally, India is mitigating US pressure through advanced EU FTA talks (accessing a $450 billion market), a sealed UK pact and Global South alliances with ASEAN and Africa. Crucially, robust domestic consumption (60% of GDP) insulates the Indian economy, although rupee flexibility and pharma strengths remain strategic projections rather than negotiation table commitments. Even if a limited pact emerges by July 9 – token concessions on almonds or LNG, paired with face-saving US tariff tweaks – the truce will be fragile. Trump's 'national security' tariffs on semiconductors, pharma and critical minerals, now under active Commerce Department probes, could target India by August. For India, signing a lopsided agreement risks perceptions of capitulation, while walking away affirms 'strategic autonomy' but invites 26% tariffs on key exports like textiles and seafood. Globally, others face similar challenges: Vietnam has rejected US claims of currency manipulation, and Trump ended talks with Canada over a digital tax, showing how US positions can shift quickly. A limited 'early harvest' deal appears the most plausible outcome, one covering $100-150 billion in bilateral trade while deferring contentious issues like agriculture, autos and data governance. India may offer calibrated concessions: reduced tariffs on US almonds, walnuts or LNG to narrow its trade surplus, alongside symbolic commitments on digital trade facilitation. The US, in turn, might suspend its 26% reciprocal tariffs but retain a 10% baseline duty on Indian goods mirroring its recent pact with the UK. Such an arrangement would let President Trump declare victory in 'opening up' India while India showcases 'protected national interests.' Yet this minimalist approach would paper over deeper asymmetries. The US demand for sweeping agricultural access clashes irreconcilably with India's defense of food sovereignty and smallholder livelihoods. Similarly, the United States' resistance to lifting auto and steel tariffs contradicts its rhetoric of 'fair reciprocity.' These tensions reflect a structural divide: The US views trade through mercantilist lenses (exports = wins), while India prioritizes developmental equity (protection = survival). As the head of Indian Institute of Foreign Trade notes, ' The ball is in the U.S. court. India isn't for a win-lose partnership . ' The China precedent remains instructive: Beijing's rare earths 'deal' with the US secured temporary relief but left core grievances unresolved. India, too, must weigh whether a hurried pact solves problems or merely postpones them. It remains to be seen whether both nations build a balanced framework that respects India's development needs while offering genuine US market access? Or will 'reciprocity' remain a one-way street? Lasting solutions require patient negotiation of equitable frameworks, not tactical concessions under deadline duress. Whether both nations can transcend zero-sum politics remains the real test beyond July's theatrics. Naina Sharma is a research assistant at the Center of Policy Research and Governance (CPRG).
RTHK
8 hours ago
- RTHK
Wang Yi off to seal 'anchor of stability' with Europe
Wang Yi off to seal 'anchor of stability' with Europe Wang Yi will meet his EU, German and French counterparts during his EU trip. File photo: AFP China's top diplomat heads to Europe on Monday for a visit that Beijing said will highlight ties as an "anchor of stability" in a world in turmoil. Wang Yi's tour will take him to the European Union's headquarters in Brussels as well as France and Germany as China seeks to improve relations with the bloc as a counterweight to the United States. But deep frictions remain over the economy – including a yawning trade deficit of US$357.1 billion between China and the European Union – and the Russian-Ukraine war. "The world is undergoing an accelerated evolution of a century-old change, with unilateralism, protectionism and bullying behaviour becoming rampant," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Guo Jiakun said on Friday. Guo said Beijing and the European bloc must "keep the world peaceful and stable, safeguard multilateralism, free trade, international rules, fairness and justice, and act firmly as anchors of stability and constructive forces in a volatile world". Wang will meet his EU counterpart, Kaja Kallas, at the bloc's headquarters in Brussels for "high-level strategic dialogue". In Germany, he will hold talks with Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul on diplomacy and security – his first visit since Berlin's new conservative-led government took power in May. And in France, Wang will meet minister for Europe and foreign affairs Jean-Noel Barrot, who visited China in March. (AFP)
AllAfrica
14 hours ago
- AllAfrica
US loath to drop 'economic bunker buster' on China, India, Russia
US Senator Lindsey Graham recently said that his bill to impose 500% tariffs on every country that imports Russian resources is 'an economic bunker buster against China, India, and Russia' – yet, for all his tough talk, the US is still reluctant to drop it. The Wall Street Journal reported that the Trump Administration is 'quietly pressuring' the Senate to water down the legislation by turning 'the word 'shall' into 'may' wherever it appears in the bill's text, removing the mandatory nature of the prescribed reprimands.' The Journal's report was lent credence when Graham himself proposed an exemption for countries that aid Ukraine, thus averting an unprecedented US-EU trade war in the event that his bill passes into law. Trump's remark to Politico in mid-June about how 'sanctions cost us a lot of money' suggest that he's not interested in going this route, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio later adding that sanctions could derail the Ukrainian peace process, although he also didn't rule them out in the future. These are sensible explanations for the United States' reluctance to drop its 'economic bunker buster' on Russia but they don't account for its reluctance to drop it on China and India, which have served as invaluable valves for Russia from the West's sanctions pressure due to their large-scale import of its oil. Graham expects that they'll cut off their purchases if the US threatens them with 500% tariffs but they're unlikely to comply since they know that the US would also harm its own economy through such means. Not only that, but the trade deal that US and China recently agreed to would be jeopardized, as would the ongoing talks with India over a similar such agreement. Trump is pleased with both and doesn't want to rock the boat right now. While he might revert back to his previous tariff pressure if things don't go his way, he could just unilaterally impose more tariffs against either in that scenario, and they probably wouldn't be anywhere near the counterproductive level that Graham's legislation demands. Seeing as how the US is once again trying to 'subordinate India,' which is part of his administration's efforts to reshape South Asian geopolitics, he's more prone to imposing higher tariffs against it instead of China but it's premature to predict that he ultimately will. In any case, the pretext probably wouldn't be energy-related given that he has surprisingly posted that 'China can continue to purchase Oil from Iran' in spite of early February's Executive Order that explicitly aims to 'drive Iran's export of oil to zero.' It would therefore be utterly bizarre for Trump to impose tariffs of any level on India or whoever else for purchasing Russian resources when he now no longer cares about the United States' systemic rival China purchasing oil from none other than Iran, which he just bombed, in defiance of his own decree. The aforementioned calculations make it very unlikely that Trump will drop Graham's 'bunker buster' on either of those two. If his bill should become law, it's likely that a loophole would be found to avoid complying with it. This prediction brings the analysis back around to the future of Graham's 'economic bunker buster.' Quite clearly, the Trump Administration doesn't want him to move it through Congress. He may respect the administration's wishes, thus leading to his bill becoming nothing but bluster. This is especially likely if his team signals that it's already found a loophole to get around it unless he changes the language as reportedly requested. China, India, and Russia, therefore, almost certainly have nothing to worry about.
