Written by John Rovic Catangay, Rhaña Santos, and Gerald Dino
On February 24, 2022, Ukrainian citizens from the capital of Kyiv woke up to the sound of air raid sirens blaring across the city. Russian missiles were deployed upon Ukrainian air bases as Russian military vehicles pushed upon the northern, eastern, and southern borders of the country. The airspace closed, citizens rushed to flee the capital, and martial law was declared by President Volodymyr Zelensky. Days before this invasion, Russian President Vladimir Putin formally recognized the independence of the breakaway regions in Ukraine as people’s republics. This move is only part of the grander strategy of Putin to destabilize Ukraine and deter the country’s NATO military alliance with the USA. Aggression has been evident for years but these recent developments have culminated in an invasion and the very real possibility of a major war.
As political violence and turmoil seems to find its ground again in society, perspectives seem to be challenged as well. The idea that no single approach in international relations can dominate another might be in the midst of being questioned. However, these approaches also serve as a filtering lens that can help explain the relationships between states. The constant contention between realism, liberalism, and constructivism seems to be coming closer to an end, with realism being the probable victor. Because of the recent developments in the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the idea that issues of security, self-preservation, and power are of utmost importance to state actors push realism to have a better vantage point in explaining this crisis. Of course, cooperation between states in order to ensure the maintenance of democracy in Ukraine seems to show that liberalism is still alive and kicking. Meanwhile, Ukrainians assert their identities on a global scale, claiming that the soil to which they stand is theirs alone. Constructivism, in this sense, is also far from breathing its final breath. More importantly, theories do not stand without praxis; however way one sees international relations, they must always come back to how its actors are affected by the current unrest.
Despite the leagues of distance between the Philippines and the conflict in Ukraine and Russia, it would be a mistake to dismiss this issue as a sole problem of the West. The Philippines has a long history with the USA and has recently established closer ties with Russia and China. We are bound to be sitting at a critical juncture between world actors who decide the trajectory of large-scale conflict and the ripples it sets across the globe. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte visited Russia in 2019 and emphasized his plans of an independent foreign policy that went beyond the traditional allies of the country. He recounted unfavorable experiences with Western countries, a speech that catered to the sentiments of an audience that Putin was a part of. Ironically, Duterte cited the same country that accompanies our history and present governance. The Philippines and US have a Mutual Defense Treaty wherein both nations are called to support each other if either were attacked by an external party. This treaty, along with the annual military exercise between the Philippines and US, is proof of the enduring military history between the two. Moreover, the Philippines also stands at a tight spot if it aims to still please China, a close neighbor. Putin recently met with Chinese President Xi Jinping just weeks before when they further cemented their partnership as counterparts to US influence in the globe. China is currently refusing to call the conflict an ‘invasion’ as of February 24, and is expected to support Russia diplomatically and economically as the country faces sanctions. Considering that we maintain relations with all three countries, the Philippines may either do a balancing act or it might be compelled to express clear support or condemnation. No move of ours will be left unnoticed because of the precarious position we’ve established in befriending opposing sides to the global order.
The country’s vast distance from the battlegrounds will not save it from the impending global economic catastrophe already brewing. The Ukraine-Russia conflict is a recipe for resource crisis, especially as global trade relies on these belligerent states for important raw material exports. Russia and Ukraine are top players of the cereal market, producing almost ⅓ of the global wheat export. Experts are certain that the ongoing war will cause a sudden increase in the prices of grain, which already manifested last Thursday with record high spikes in the European wheat prices. Furthermore, oil and natural gas are also major points of concern. As of February 24, Brent crude, which is a component ingredient for gasoline, was priced at a 6-year high of 105 USD, and British gas, most of which comes from Russian pipelines, had its price increase by 53 percent. While these may seem that it would pose little threat to Philippine trade, given our relatively small trade with Ukraine and our still-stable relationship with Russia, the impact it would bring in the global food and energy supply chains would be disastrous, affecting many other countries directly import-reliant to both countries. The import-reliant Filipino economy will immediately feel its effects, starting with the continuously rapid increase of oil prices. As transportation costs start to increase, businesses would then be prompted to adjust prices to compensate for higher operational expenses. From then on, the ball will start rolling – if it had not yet already.
Filipinos standing on Ukraine soil are also at risk of losing their occupations and worse, their lives. Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr. has already expressed his commitment to the safety of Filipino citizens in Ukraine, stating that they are his department’s “chief and singular concern”, along with sending a consular team in Lviv, Ukraine last February 18 for faster response. Along with other countries like India, the Philippines has also offered voluntary repatriation for its citizens in Ukraine. So far, six Filipinos have arrived back home last February 18 while four more arrived on February 24, in the advent of Russia’s invasion. Alarms must still be sounded however, as the proportion of Filipinos that have been repatriated is nowhere near the total number of Filipinos residing in Ukraine. 181 Filipinos have been accounted for in Ukraine, living in times of turmoil as the government maintains alert level 2, making repatriation still voluntary. One must then ask the vital question: is this enough? As more and more airways are being bombed by the Russian military, the access for safe repatriation becomes slimmer and slimmer. Even worse, the number of Filipinos still under a war-torn Ukraine is still proportionally high compared to those that have already been repatriated. The Department of Foreign Affairs have also met criticisms from some who claim that they are being too slow in their actions. As the situation in Ukraine becomes more uncertain by the minute, the government must ask themselves one vital question: why are Filipinos not home yet? Any answer that they will stumble upon must immediately be addressed with proper actions.
As violence continues to spread farther and deeper into Ukraine territory, the world watches and raises their own alarm bells. The United States has provided sanctions but seems to still thread the line carefully. Their penalties and freezing of Russian assets may look good on paper, but major decisions like the removal of Russia from SWIFT seems to be dismissed as of now. Japan and the G-7 nations have followed suit and applied their own set of sanctions. These sanctions, however, seem to do nothing but slap the wrist of Putin, all while his soldiers get their hands dirty with harrowing work. “We are defending our country alone”, says President Zelenskyy, and his words ring true as the bigger nations wash their hands and remain unwilling to provide defense support for Ukraine. Certainly, in the fight of imperialist giants, smaller and weaker countries are caught in the crossfire. Liberalism seems to come at a full-stop as bigger countries talk about solutions only in the language of money.
How, then, can countries like the Philippines act? States like ours, who have no means for resources to provide Ukraine with either guns or butter seemingly stand still. While we work our hardest to bring back our own people while also bracing ourselves with the economic implications of war, it seems like there’s nothing else to do. But in a world of interconnectedness and anarchy, every voice matters. The Philippines must assert its condemnation to all forms of violence. It must strive to be a part of multiple voices of reason that calls on both governments to settle conflicts with diplomacy. Other known figures have also spoken their stances on the issue either by calling for Duterte’s non-alignment for a war that will only make the rich richer or by highlighting the need to repatriate the Filipinos in Ukraine and ensure their safety by all possible means. However, this non-alignment must come with a bias for peace, as we must keep on demanding different state actors to adhere to international law and to uphold our invaluable human rights. After all, this war affects everyone, not just states in the front lines. As unrest continues, local prices will inevitably rise, making us as much of a stakeholder in this war as everybody else. Death by poverty and starvation are still deaths caused by war.
As the war continues to take countless lives, President Duterte remains silent, avoiding any sign of condemnation or support. "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis" may have a good ring to it, but it becomes a death wish for smaller states with more to lose. As we remain uncertain as to how the Philippines would act, we must remind ourselves that President Duterte once shook the hand of the devil himself. This stance of neutrality might be ending sooner than expected. The Philippines, unfortunately, might be up to something sinister. Then, it becomes the responsibility of every Filipino people to join the struggle in the fight for peace.
Comments