Japan’s military pivot: US-Philippine drills reveal escalating regional arms race amid unaddressed root causes of tension

Indigenous communities in the Philippines, such as the Lumad, have long resisted military encroachment on their ancestral lands, framing drills as existential threats to their sovereignty and cultural survival. Their resistance is often criminalised or ignored in mainstream narratives, which prioritise state security over indigenous land rights. Traditional ecological knowledge, which could offer alternative conflict-resolution models, is systematically excluded from security discussions.

The US-Philippine military relationship traces back to the 1898 Philippine-American War and the Cold War-era Mutual Defense Treaty, embedding a legacy of external intervention that shapes contemporary perceptions of security. Japan’s post-WWII pacifism was enshrined in its constitution, but the 2015 reinterpretation of Article 9 to allow 'collective self-defense' marks a pivotal shift aligned with US strategic interests. Historical grievances, such as Japan’s wartime occupation of the Philippines, continue to influence regional trust deficits.

In Southeast Asia, non-alignment and ASEAN centrality are cultural pillars that often clash with bilateral military alliances, reflecting a preference for multilateral diplomacy over bloc politics. Japan’s embrace of deterrence contrasts with its pacifist constitution, revealing a cultural tension between historical guilt and contemporary geopolitical pragmatism. Meanwhile, China’s 'peaceful rise' narrative is rooted in Confucian ideals of harmony, which are juxtaposed against Western realist security paradigms.

Security dilemma theory in international relations suggests that military exercises often trigger reciprocal actions, escalating tensions rather than reducing them. Studies on arms races indicate that increased military spending correlates with higher conflict risk, particularly in regions with unresolved territorial disputes. The scientific literature on deterrence effectiveness remains contested, with evidence showing both success and failure in preventing aggression.

Artistic expressions in the Philippines, such as protest songs by Lumad musicians, critique militarisation as a violation of sacred land and ancestral rights. In Japan, anime and literature often explore pacifist themes, reflecting cultural resistance to remilitarisation. Spiritual leaders, including Buddhist monks in both countries, have condemned arms races as antithetical to principles of non-violence and interdependence.

Scenario modelling suggests that unchecked militarisation could lead to a regional arms race, with smaller states like Vietnam or Indonesia being drawn into proxy conflicts. Climate change exacerbates resource scarcity, potentially intensifying competition over fisheries and maritime zones, further straining diplomatic relations. Alternative futures include strengthened ASEAN-led conflict resolution mechanisms or the emergence of a non-aligned bloc advocating for demilitarisation.

Marginalised groups, including indigenous peoples, women peace activists, and rural communities, are disproportionately affected by military drills but rarely consulted in security policy. Women’s organisations in the Philippines have documented how militarisation increases gender-based violence, yet their insights are excluded from mainstream analyses. Economic migrants and displaced communities bear the brunt of land seizures for military use, with no recourse in current frameworks.