Obviously piqued by the way China has been employing its military clout in bullying the Philippines in the South China Sea (SCS) conflict, so called maritime experts, always quick to the draw, have pushed the government to use the ‘United Nations card’ in stopping Chinese harassments in territories that legally belong to the country.

While the UN trump card idea is viable, the move is not entirely to the country’s advantage even if experts argue that the Philippines can always enlist the support of France, Britain, and the United States to back our position in the global organization. It can even spell disaster.

The UN Security Council, however, is not about just the five permanent members with veto power; it is also about the ten other non-permanent members that include Japan, United Arab Emirates, Albania, Brazil, Ecuador, Gabon, Ghana, Malta, Mozambique, and Switzerland.

Granting the UN, after voting, takes the side of the Philippines by a majority vote, does that encouraging development translate to the resolution of the conflict of issues hounding the SCS scene? The predictable answer is not simply because, then and now, Beijing has always flexed its military muscle short of invading the country’s littoral regions.

The impact of any favorable UN decision, if executed and if China eventually concedes favorably and honestly to the ruling of the council, is the ghastly impact China may impose on the fledgling Philippine economy, which means the reduction of exports from China to a minimum from the 2021 value of $48.9 billion. In contrast, the Philippines exports only $15.1B to China.

The disparity in commerce, which is roughly $33.8 billion in favor of China, can create an enormous dint in the Philippine economy. Even if the friendly western nations pledge to increase their trade quota to the country as a way of filling up the vacuum, the structures needed to absorb the new investments will take years before these can be considered productive.

In brief, in the short term the domestic economy has to impose drastic cost-cutting measures and devise new ways of earning more revenues to mitigate the import of any UN-supported ruling against China. Worse, if the inevitably happens as a result of seeking help from the entire UN body, the Beijing leadership, even if it is economically collapsing on its own, can always introduce new policies that will proscribe or ban the entry of Philippine products to China.

Neutralizing China’s oppression without UN’s help can be addressed in many but less aggressive alternatives. By first improving its domestic policies and export regulations, the Philippines can always increase its exports to friendly countries. Instead of heavily relying on China for integrated circuits for use in computers and other knowhows, the national leadership can always enlist the support of the US, Taiwan, and Japan, which are also giants in those fields.

In terms of investment, these three countries and the European Union, which has always been supportive of the Philippines, can be drafted to cushion any future China-induced economic manipulation. Perhaps the weightier contributions they can underwrite or subsidize is by outsourcing some of their industries to us with an intent to serve the Asian hemisphere.

But for the transfer of technology and industries to happen, the government must first lead the effort to revisit the 1987 Constitution where foreign ownership is restrictive.

That might sound like a tall order but where the economic security of a nation is involved, the move to amend certain constitutional provisions to fit the ever-changing global landscape of trade is an option.

By holding a Constitutional Convention to reframe some of the provisions of the Charter, the people can expect a more reasonable appreciation on what best suits the country’s direction towards becoming a first-world economy. In contrast, we must not leave the amending of the Constitution to the politicians in whatever manipulative manner, including a constituent assembly. (AVF)