Protests against widespread state corruption have flooded the Philippines in recent weeks, putting pressure on the leadership of a country that for years has been one of the United States’ closest military and commercial allies in Southeast Asia.
The domestic turmoil threatens to shake up the U.S.-Philippines partnership, particularly given that American-funded data center projects under President Donald Trump’s Pax Silica initiative are among the targets of the protesters’ rage.
On September 21, 2026, President Ferdinand Marcos — whose national trust rating sits at just 28% — put the presidential palace under lockdown in anticipation of mass protests, as more than 17,000 police officers were deployed and tens of thousands of protestors marched through Manila to demand change in the face of the country's largest corruption scandal in years.
The scandal revolves around more than $9 billion worth of proposed flood-control infrastructure projects, intended for construction since Marcos took office in 2022. The projects were designed to improve infrastructure like drainage and flood control systems to mitigate the effects of typhoons common in the Philippines. These projects are under legal investigation for being of poor quality or having never been built at all. The investigation into the matter has led to the arrest of former Philippines House Speaker Martin Romualdez, a cousin and formerly close ally of Marcos, on a $118 million plunder charge.
Romualdez is only one of a number of officials currently detained under suspicion of pocketing money from the project, with Interior Secretary Ombudsman Remulla alleging that co-conspirators attempted to hide the money through the purchase of houses or Romualdez’s $1 million donation to Harvard University.
Another layer of controversy involves the impeachment trial of sitting Vice President Sara Duterte. A major point of contention occurred on day 34 of the trial, when it was revealed that over 30 undeclared accounts showed Duterte’s net worth to be over $3 million — almost 15 times more than her declared net worth of $209,000.
The public backlash and corruption-induced chaos currently surrounding the Philippines could affect relations with the U.S. at a time when the United States is trying to counterbalance China’s expansive aims in the South China Sea.
The military alliance between the United States and the Philippines dates back to the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty, which ensures mutual protection in the event of a foreign armed attack. This pact was preceded by the 1947 Military Bases Agreement, an executive order granting the U.S. 20 years of renewable access to bases in the Philippines, and later reinforced by the 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, which currently provides the U.S. rotational access to nine military bases in the archipelago.
This continued relationship has established the Philippines as a crucial node in Washington’s foreign policy strategy in regard to China. Although the number of stationed U.S. troops has remained at a few hundred since the 1990s, U.S. military activity has increased, as evidenced by the fact that U.S. troops made up more than 10,000 of the 17,000 personnel from seven countries that participated in the Balikatan military exercises this May.
Congress has also authorized up to $2.5 billion in foreign military financing for the Philippines, and up to $1 billion in loans for military sales, for fiscal year 2026. This is the highest amount that the U.S. has given to the Philippines, an increase of $500 million from the prior year.
Outside of military investment, the Philippines has also emerged as an increasingly important ally for economic collaboration. The United States has shown intense interest in the Luzon Economic Corridor (LEC), a trilateral infrastructure and technology initiative by the U.S., Japan, and the Philippines. The plan invests in the construction of infrastructure across Luzon island.
The scale is large relative to current investment: the Philippines received $7.8 billion in net foreign direct investment in 2025, while Luzon alone attracted over $20 billion in projects at a September investor forum. Though the project is still mostly aspirational, Marcos is largely in favor of it, having told a crowd of investors at the forum to turn LEC “from a shared vision into concrete investments and projects.”
“The United States is all-in on the Luzon Economic Corridor because it's good for the Philippines and good for America," stated Lee Lipton, Washington’s ambassador to the Philippines, in response. The U.S. private sector is also supportive of the initiative, with over fifty American companies reported to be engaged in investment opportunities in the LEC, according to the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority.
Despite the apparent enthusiasm from both governments, the court of public opinion seems skeptical of the initiative, particularly because of one aspect of the LEC: the proposed Pax Silica technology center in the industry hub of New Clark City, estimated to attract between $40 and $70 billion in investment and create nearly 200,000 new jobs. During city-wide protests throughout Manila on September 21, protestors held signs attacking U.S.-backed data center projects, which are a part of the Pax Silica initiative, as a major source of grievance with Marcos' government.
Pax Silica, which aims to pursue similar initiatives across more than 20 other countries, has sparked worry from many Filipinos over the risks of heavy water usage, high electricity demands, and overdependence on foreign technology and capital.
"[Pax Silica] threatens to permanently lock the Philippines into having the highest power rates not just in Southeast Asia but in all of Asia,” stated the Makabayan Bloc, a left-wing Filipino party that, although it lacks much representation in the country’s government, has a strong grassroots presence, and has often led anti-U.S. sentiment across the country.
Roseller Rodriguez, the mayor of Capas, which hosts New Clark City, also claimed that local officials were not consulted prior to initiating the Pax Silica plan. During one hearing with the Bases Conversion and Development Authority — a Philippine government-led development organization — a local chieftain claimed that over 1,000 indigenous people could be displaced because of the initiative, as the new facilities may be built on historically indigenous land.
Doubt has spread beyond local governments to national voices, as well. Raffy Tulfo, an independent senator, gave an August speech criticizing Pax Silica. Questioning whether the Philippine government is truly capable of regulating foreign initiatives, he cited the Chinese-backed Chuangxing Steel Incorporated manufacturing center in Magalang that was allowed to operate for years despite numerous environmental and safety concerns.
Senator Imee Marcos, the sister of the current president and a member of the historic conservative Nacionalista party, also spoke out, filing a formal resolution calling for an investigation into the water, energy, and long-term environmental impacts of the project.
This backlash, as recently demonstrated during the September 21 protests, is extending beyond the minority leftist groups that have historically opposed U.S. involvement and is now being picked up by more mainstream parties. This could reflect the expansion of a more anti-U.S. sentiment in conjunction with the rising anti-corruption movement.
While economic collaboration with the Philippines should be welcome, it’s important that Washington tread carefully and consider Filipino interests alongside U.S. economic incentives. The Management Association of the Philippines (MAP), a group of top Filipino business leaders, has backed Pax Silica under a hesitant “Proceed, but Protected” approach, encouraging economic development while ensuring adequate safeguards are in place. Many objections are not inherently anti-U.S. for now, but reflect growing national concerns about exploitation.
Filipino leaders have repeatedly demonstrated a desire for deeper economic ties with the U.S. In 2025, Marcos returned from Washington with over $21 billion in American investment pledges. Yet, skepticism brewed after Trump decided that same month to cut tariffs on Filipino goods by just 1 percentage point, from 20% to 19%, with critics calling it the “worst insult” to the long-standing relationship between the U.S. and the Philippines.
As anger grows against the purportedly unethical investments within the Philippine government, the U.S. should place a clear emphasis on investment that is not seen as being in bed with crony capitalism while providing real gains for U.S. businesses, addressing local concerns, and mutual confidence in the bilateral partnership.