The Art of the One-Sided Deal Under the PH–U.S. ART Framework: All In for Uncle Sam?

In the wake of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s trip to the United States, where he is reportedly scheduled to meet with U.S. President Donald Trump, Filipinos should remain alert, not just vigilant. Ostensibly, the talks will center on negotiating the crippling 20% U.S. tariff on Philippine exports and potentially deepening the already one-sided PH-U.S. military-security alliance. But let’s be honest, if history and Marcos Jr.’s track record are any indicators, don’t be surprised if he comes home waving yet another lopsided agreement(s) with the U.S. to the disadvantage of the Philippines but disguised as a “win.”

In this context, I managed to obtain a copy of a rather telling document: a “MESSAGE TO THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP” under the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) concerning the Philippines–U.S. Reciprocal Trade Agreement under the so-called ART Framework.

This message, issued on behalf of the DTI and directed to the technical working group for its meeting on July 16, conveys President Marcos Jr.’s instructions for the future of Philippine–U.S. trade negotiations. But let’s not sugarcoat it. This document doesn’t read like a trade strategy. It reads more like a confession letter of strategic dependence, if not an outright blueprint for economic submission.

Lo and behold, the message emphasizes that “the Philippines cannot live without US.”

That alone sets the tone. The Philippines, as articulated in this official communication, will "sustain U.S. strategic interest" and "go all out" in support of the Trump administration’s tariff policies. In turn, it offers full and preferential access to U.S. industries in six strategic sectors: agriculture, automotive, AI-driven technologies, advanced manufacturing, alternative energy, and access to critical minerals. Yes, even the country’s critical minerals, arguably one of its few remaining strategic levers, are on the table.

According to the document, the Philippines must ensure that U.S. farmers, ranchers, factory workers, and businesses can reap nearly $500 billion in commercial benefits over the next four years. And if that weren’t enough, the country is also “open to negotiate and make these concessions permanent. Here’s the salient points of the said document:

📌 SALIENT POINTS

🔹 Presidential Directive

President Marcos instructed the negotiating team that “PH cannot live without US”, and that the Philippines must sustain U.S. strategic interests, especially aligning with the Trump Administration's tariff policies.

There is an expressed commitment to go “all out” in support of U.S. trade priorities, particularly its 6A sectors: agriculture, automotive, AI technologies, advanced manufacturing, alternative energy, and assured access to critical minerals.

🔹 Trade Concessions:

1. The Philippines will eliminate the Most Favored Nation (MFN) tariff rate on soybeans and reduce its tariff rate for crude oil from 7% to 3%.

2. The Philippines will eliminate MNF tariff rate on wheat meslin, wheat starch, and wheat gluten, and reduce its tariff rate of 7% for wheat seed to 3%.

3. The Philippines will eliminate MFN tariff rate of 15% for lead acid batteries.

4. PH to increase importation of the following US Major Export to the Philippines:

• The Philippines will increase its imports to 16,000 metric tons of soybeans and 16,000 metric tons of wheat from the United States, valued at approximately USD 12 million and USD 5.2 million, respectively.

• The Philippines will increase its importation of chicken leg quarters from the United States by an average of 15% in volume, resulting in an estimated increase in import value of around USD 1.8 million.

🔹 PH Market Access Offers to the US under ART:

• The Philippines will increase its importation of dairy products, raw materials for the manufacture of firearms, and hardwood for the manufacture of furniture from the United States.

• The Philippines will establish a High-Level Task Force to promote and increase the complementary trade of Philippine and US products.

• The Philippines will implement an exemption for the United States from pre-border technical verification under AO No. 23.

🔹 Energy:

• The Philippines will also increase importation of LNG and Ethanol from the United States.

• The Philippines will facilitate US companies' application and award of exploration rights in West Philippine Sea.

• The Philippines will facilitate investment opportunities for US companies in oil and gas exploration as well as geothermal development.

• The Philippines will facilitate the investments of US companies to build and operate an LNG reception-regasification-storage complex in Subic area.

• The Philippines will provide special allowances to oil and gas contractors for exploration, production, and development.

🔹 Minerals:

• The Philippines will offer preferential access to critical mineral resources such as nickel, cobalt, and copper.

Critical Implications drawn from the Salient Points of the MESSAGE to the TWG:

1. Philippine strategic subservience is normalized: The phrase "PH cannot live without US" frames the country’s foreign and trade policy within a dependency complex rather than sovereign interest.

2. Preferential access for the U.S. across six major sectors, including critical minerals, undermines the Philippines’ leverage and long-term strategic autonomy.

3. The Marcos Jr. administration’s stance aligns unilaterally with the Trump administration’s tariff strategy, despite global concern over its protectionist and destabilizing effects.

4. No reciprocal terms mentioned: While the document emphasizes what the U.S. will gain, it is notably vague, or entirely silent, on what tangible, balanced benefits the Philippines might receive in return.

5. Permanent concessions considered: The willingness to “make concessions permanent” raises alarm over the erosion of economic policy flexibility and future bargaining power.

Indeed, the said document reveals that the Philippines is making significant economic concessions and granting market access benefits to the United States across agriculture, energy, and strategic minerals, in exchange for presumed U.S. economic and geopolitical support. These commitments are presented as a geopolitical necessity, reflecting a strong alignment with U.S. interests.

Critical Insights and Implications:

1. Strategic Autonomy Undermined: Rather than diversifying economic partners or seeking balanced terms, the message signals a deepening of asymmetrical dependence on a single superpower. This is dangerous in a multipolar world.

2. Economic Gains for the Few, Not the Many: Granting privileged access to U.S. corporations may benefit a handful of Philippine elites or conglomerates, but it risks stifling local industries, undermining agriculture, and exacerbating inequality.

3. Resource Surrender: By opening the gates to critical minerals, possibly including nickel, cobalt, and rare earth elements, the Philippines may be surrendering its national wealth to external interests without safeguards or value-added industries.

4. Policy Lock-in: Permanent concessions would tie the hands of future administrations, leaving little room for policy reform or renegotiation in changing geopolitical or economic contexts.

Indeed, what has been presented in this “message/document” is an exemplification of an Unequal Trade Relationship between the Philippines and the U.S. Obviously, the document is rich in Philippine concessions but vague on U.S. reciprocation (e.g., no mention of tariff elimination or market access for Philippine exports to the US).

On Food and Agricultural Sovereignty being at risk, particularly the potential increase in imports of U.S. soy, wheat, and chicken, which may undermine domestic agriculture, especially for local poultry, corn, and grain farmers, affecting their livelihoods and food security. This could exacerbate rural poverty and dependence on foreign food supply chains.

Moreover, the potential facilitation of U.S. exploration in the contested waters of the South China Sea (SCS) raises concerns about energy sovereignty and geopolitical risk, inviting a geopolitical backlash from China and other claimant states, and risks entanglement in the U.S.-China rivalry.

Also, allowing U.S. companies to dominate critical energy infrastructure (e.g., LNG in Subic) could reduce strategic autonomy.

Regarding environmental and Resource Exploitation, the preferential access to critical minerals by foreign entities may speed up resource extraction with limited benefits to local communities unless strictly regulated. This raises concerns about neo-extractivism and ecological degradation. Whereas, on National Security Concerns, the importation of raw materials for firearms, and the weakening of pre-border verification could potentially pose security and customs enforcement risks. Exempting U.S. goods from AO No. 23 might compromise regulatory sovereignty.

⚠️ Final Food for Thought and Key Warning:

The Marcos Jr. administration’s trade posture under the ART Framework, as outlined in the document, appears more like a strategic surrender than a reciprocal agreement. By packaging dependency as diplomacy and concession as cooperation, this document lays bare a troubling pattern: a country willingly turning itself into a client state, trading its future for momentary favor.

At a time when other nations are asserting sovereignty and diversifying partnerships, the Philippines seems to be doubling down on dependence, auctioning off key sectors for promises that may never materialize. One must ask, what exactly is being reciprocated here, aside from submission or capitulation?

Indeed, the said document-message, whatever you call it, as it stands, leans heavily toward appeasement of U.S. strategic and commercial interests, especially under a Trump 2.0-led administration. It reflects a neocolonial trade posture, one that sacrifices economic sovereignty and developmental independence in the hope of vague reciprocal benefits.

Unless the Philippines secures clear, enforceable concessions from the U.S., such as preferential access for PH agricultural and industrial exports, investment in domestic value-adding industries, and technology transfers, and sunset provisions to avoid long-term dependency, such deals/ agreements risk becoming a raw deal for the Filipino people, trading away resources and markets for questionable geopolitical returns.

My dear fellow Filipinos, what was outlined in the said document risk turning the Philippines into a raw-material accessory for US supply chains while undermining domestic industries (agriculture, energy, mining). The asymmetry in concessions suggests geopolitical pressure over economic logic.

So, in the advent of Marcos Jr.’s visit to the US from July 20-22, 2025, hopefully before he signs on the dotted line, someone ought to remind him and the government officials, trade negotiators with him, especially Babes R,: the Constitution begins with “We, the Filipino people”, not “We, the U.S. strategic ally.”

Let’s hope, even amid a glimmer of hope or a glimmer of light, that Marcos Jr still remembers whose interests he is supposed to serve and uphold before it’s too late.