MAHABA LANG ANG TANIKALA: THE GEOPOLITICAL ROOTS OF PAX SILICAAND ITS ECONOMIC AND SOCIO-POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES

Introduction

Throughout history, every age had a dominant resource and innovation that converted the existing way of living into a modern, innovative world power. From timber in the Age of Sail to oil for factories in the industrialization era, up to microchips and minerals in the age of Artificial Intelligence in the 21st century.¹

The legacy of inventors’ creativity has continually driven society toward greater comfort and advancement via technological innovation. In the current digital era, technology, machinery, and computers have fundamentally transformed the way individuals access services and information.² These inventions have not solely enhanced daily life but have additionally revolutionized major fields, such as medicine, architecture, engineering, machine automation, and research. Furthermore, technological developments now play a crucial role in modern warfare, serving as essential tools and resources in defense systems.

As global technology supply chains become the primary arena for economic and geopolitical dominance, the Philippines has positioned itself at the center of this paradigm shift by joining the Pax Silica Initiative led by the U.S. Department of State.³ The said initiative is anchored by a 4,000-acre Economic Security Zone in New Clark City, Pampanga, with guarantees to transform the nation from an extractive exporter of raw minerals into a high-tech manufacturing power. Alongside a continuously developing country, this may be an opportunity for the Philippines to similarly align and adapt to developing countries that are also achieving their own maximum technological advancement.⁴ In contrast to its benefits, this economic ambition forces a complex constitutional reckoning. Although the current administration frames Pax Silica as an avenue to technological progress and industrial growth, the framework exposes a critical tension between the constitutional mandate of State control over natural resources under Article XII, Section 2, of the 1987 Philippine Constitution⁶, the statutory law, Republic Act. No. 8371,⁸ and the ample foreign ownership permitted in downstream industrial processing, which ultimately opening a fundamental question regarding national sovereignty, resource exploitation, and strategic independence of the country.

Legal Frameworks

State Mandate and Economic Legislation

The establishment of the 4,000‑acre Pax Silica hub in New Clark City is further executed through the exercise of the executive power of the President over foreign relations under Article VII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Through executive discretion, the Marcos Jr. administration has aligned the Philippines with a U.S.-led economic and security framework, thereby incorporating the country into allied technology supply chains. According to the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA), New Clark City is a state-owned property, originally classified as a military reservation land under Republic Act No. 7227, which affirms sovereign control over public lands and natural resources.¹⁰ Thus, it further reaffirms the land and zoning allocation to New Clark City, Tarlac, as the official Economic Security Zone embedded within the Luzon Economic Corridor. To further facilitate industrial development of the initiative, the President invokes Republic Act No. 7916, the Special Economic Zone Act of 1995, designating New Clark City as a special economic zone. This designation is reinforced by Republic Act No. 12066, or the CREATE MORE Act, which extends fiscal incentives such as tax incentives, reduced corporate income tax rates, and streamlined local tax procedures to foreign technology investors.⁷ Moreover, Republic Act No. 12252, amending the Investors’ Lease Act (RA 7652), authorizes foreign investors to lease domestic sites for up to ninety-nine years.⁹

Constitutional Mandates, Indigenous Rights, and Socio-Economic Rights

From the standpoint of indigenous groups and local agrarian communities currently residing near the designated area, the accelerated conversion of ancestral lands into industrial hubs and solar infrastructure projects raises profound legal and human rights concerns. The Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) reiterates that since the communities cannot produce a Certification Title for their claimed lands, the property is still deemed part of state property. The principal statutory law available to these communities is Republic Act No. 8371, otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA). Section 11 of IPRA affirms the doctrine of Native Title, recognizing communal rights over ancestral domains by virtue of continuous possession since time immemorial, regardless of whether a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) has been formally issued. In line with this, Section 12 provides for individual ancestral land titling under public land laws.⁸

In contrast, Section 59 imposes a strict requirement of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) before any state appropriation or reclassification of ancestral domains may lawfully proceed. The absence of sincere, genuine, non-coercive FPIC in the reclassification of indigenous domains into economic zones or military reservations makes this initiative unbalanced. It leads to substantial legal challenges under the framework of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights of the affected individuals. The initiative failed to have a consulted displacement, the decline of customary agricultural livelihoods, little to no compensation for land, and the ecological consequences of industrial activity directly undermine the cultural integrity and socio-economic welfare of affected populations residing in the designated area. These occurrences reveal an introductory tension between investment-driven statutory laws and the constitutional guarantees protecting indigenous peoples’ rights, thereby situating the issue at the intersection of development policy, human rights law, and constitutional jurisprudence.

III. Case Analysis

In Cruz v Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources G.R. No. 135385, 6 December 2000 (Philippines SC)²⁰, the petitioners questioned the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 8371, the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA), contending that the recognition of ancestral domain rights contradicts the Regalian Doctrine under Article XII, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution, which vests ownership of all lands of the public domain and natural resources in the State. The Supreme Court, however, dismissed the petition in a 7–7 tie vote, thereby sustaining the validity of IPRA. In line with the earlier precedent of this case, in Cariño v Insular Government, 212 US 449 (1909)²¹, the Court reaffirmed the doctrine of Native Title, which recognizes that lands continuously occupied by indigenous peoples since time immemorial are held and defined as private communal property and thus never formed part of the public domain. This doctrinal affirmation clarifies that while the State retains sovereign ownership over natural resources, ancestral domains are protected from arbitrary reclassification into industrial or military zones absent strict compliance with IPRA safeguards, particularly the requirement of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). In the jurisprudence, Cruz underscores the constitutional balance between the Regalian Doctrine and indigenous rights, situating Native Title as a doctrinal exception that validates pre‑conquest property rights rooted in custom and continuous possession.⁶ In effect, the case establishes Native Title as a critical rampart against displacement and cultural erosion, ensuring that development policies and investment laws remain harmonized with constitutional guarantees protecting indigenous peoples.

CRITICAL EVALUATION

In an age whereby technological innovation dictates global dominance, the line between strategic partnership and sovereign subordination becomes critically blurred. Through the dual lenses of World-Systems Theory and Marxist political economy, the United States’ ‘Pax Silica’ initiative and its embedded Luzon Economic Corridor must be critically scrutinized before the Philippines commits its sovereign territory and resources.

Historically, the Pax Silica is not merely about creating supply chain security through the use of different resources from countries in Southeast Asia, but specifically in the Philippines for the advancement of new economic security. It also reflects broader geopolitical dynamics. The initiative highlights the United States’ effort to strengthen its position in advanced technologies in the global market. This was explicitly stated by the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs Jacob Helberg, particularly in artificial intelligence and semiconductors, while navigating growing competition among global powers.³ Rather than being purely technical, it illustrates how supply chain security, innovation, and international cooperation are closely linked to questions of economic resilience and strategic influence. The Philippines, designated as a strategic site for this initiative, fits Wallerstein’s classic definition of a periphery nation.¹⁵ According to the Department of Science and Technology and 2025 Philippine Nickel Industry Association (PNIA) data, the country exports roughly 15 million wet metric tons of nickel ore annually, representing 95% of global nickel ore exports.¹⁹ Understandarding the core-periphery dynamics, the Philippines supplies raw, unrefined critical minerals to the core economies, engrossing environmental degradation and land displacement while remaining excluded from the high-value manufacturing of finished semiconductor and AI technologies.

Several legal risks might harm not only the rights of individuals who live or reside near the location, but also the genuine economic and long-term development goal of employment. This is not a new strategic plan to implicitly colonize or exploit the country’s dependence on foreign countries for its development and opportunities.¹³ Historically, foreign-led development promises in the Philippines have prioritized external corporate interests over constitutional mandates and local labor rights. From a Marxist perspective, Pax Silica operates as an instrument of spatial expansion for imperial capital, mediated by domestic comprador elites and oligarchs who profit from facilitating foreign extraction.¹¹ Rather than addressing systemic domestic issues, such as agrarian reform, underemployment, and industrial misalignment, the state risks resubordinating its constituents to foreign strategic demands.

The Philippines is naturally abundant in natural resources, and its constituents offer high-quality work, as well as the perseverance and resilience traits of every Filipino who deeply wishes for a sustainable and strong government that prioritizes in-depth and internal underlying problems and situations rather than seeking an unpromised artificial intelligence era. Economically, environmentally, politically, and mentally, the country is not ready to compete with other developing countries in this emerging era of the century. The U.S. Pax Silica will never be an instrument for the country to purposely develop poor countries to be globally and economically competitive if the underlying issues and weak government still prevail in controlling this system. It will remain a peripheral nation that absorbs and drains natural resources for the core nation to centralize power dynamics and deliver the global economy to dominant countries, creating a single capital system that is still divided by a three-tier hierarchy. Through the lens of Marxism, the dominant and exploitative class will remain in its overpowering position to further exploit and use the natural resources and even the major rights of the individual to offer them to foreign investors. The initiative will solely serve and prosper not the Filipinos but the oligarchs, and other countries that seek to fortify their technological and military stronghold here in the Philippines. Growth and development have always been a dream in the Philippines; the country and its constituents are never against it. Even through the years, it has been officially and formally declared an independent, sovereign state free from external restraints by foreign governments. However, the chains still find their way to exploit dependency and the blind hope of individuals for a hero who will save us from the prison of worsening hunger and poverty.

COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

ISRAEL

Israel became the first country to sign on to a bilateral partnership under the Pax Silica Initiative of the United States, joining on December 13, 2025, to further strengthen global supply chains in artificial intelligence and semiconductor technologies. This partnership was solidified on January 16, 2026, through a Joint Statement signed in Jerusalem for future strategic movements in high‑tech collaboration. Extending beyond its partnership with Washington, Israel has also engaged countries such as the Philippines by suggesting the converging its technological and AI expertise with access to critical mineral resources in the country.¹⁸ The initiative emphasizes securing supply chains for minerals, semiconductors, and energy by fostering joint ventures and strategic investments, which protect and secure sensitive technologies from hostile actors, and build a trusted ecosystem encompassing ICT networks, fiber‑optic infrastructure, data centers, and advanced AI applications.

SINGAPORE

Singapore officially joined the non-binding joint statement on December 14, 2025, fully approving the shared commitment and objectives of the Pax Silica Initiative alongside partner nations to secure and develop their own trusted AI infrastructure, information networks, advanced manufacturing, and global technology supply chains that further strengthen the emerging landscape of the digital economy. According to the Ministry of Digital and Development and Information, this initiative aligns with its national policy and interest in achieving international cooperation through mutual economic benefits, the initiative has promised.¹⁴

EUROPEAN UNION

On behalf of the European Union, the European Commission signed the Pax Silica Declaration to demonstrate the EU’s adherence to working with global partners to secure artificial intelligence and semiconductor supply chains. This initiative is important because as AI becomes more central to economies and societies, reliable access to silicon and chips is critical. By joining, the EU aims to strengthen cooperation with trusted allies, open new opportunities for European businesses, and support both technological and economic progress and economic security. The move also ties into the EU’s wider goal of achieving technological sovereignty, following the new adoption of the Technological Sovereignty Package, which includes the Chips Act 2.0 developed to make Europe’s semiconductor supply chains more resilient.¹⁶

CONCLUSION

The integration of the Philippines into the U.S.-led Pax Silica framework represents an asymmetrical trade-off that demands rigorous legal and strategic reassessment. While presented as a strategic gateway toward industrial modernization, the allocation of sovereign territory, manifested by the 4,000-acre economic security hub in New Clark City, threatens our national sovereignty. Recognizing this is a paramount factor in upholding our constitutional protections and fostering a sense of duty among policymakers to safeguard our independence.

 

Technological initiatives and artificial intelligence infrastructure can neither substitute nor replenish finite mineral wealth, ecological stability, and local labor. By prioritizing foreign corporate incentives through legislative instruments such as the CREATE MORE Act and extended land leases, the State risks compromising its primary duty as the guardian of its constituents, operating instead as a facilitator of external economic interest. Entering into foreign supply-chain alignments without establishing domestic mineral processing capabilities or unyielding constitutional protections fails to alleviate underlying socio-economic vulnerabilities like poverty, hunger, and agrarian misalignment. True national development requires prioritizing internal structural resilience, genuine legal protections, and absolute resource sovereignty over external strategic dependencies. To address the structural vulnerabilities, constitutional tensions, and peripheral exploitation highlighted by the U.S.-led Pax Silica framework, the Philippines must move from a passive exporter of critical raw materials toward an autonomous industrial strategy. Creating an anchor toward national development in constitutional resource protection, local value addition, and enforceable human rights safeguards entitles the state to participate in the global digital economy on its own terms and needs.

REFERENCE(S):

CASES

¹Melby P, ‘Insatiable Shipyards: The Impact of the Royal Navy on the World’s Forests, 1200-1850’ (Senior Seminar Paper, Western Oregon University 2012)

²Jemala M, ‘Long-Term Research on Technology Innovation in the Form of New Technology Patents’ (2021) 5 International Journal of Innovation Studies 148 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2021.09.002

⁴United States Department of State, ‘Pax Silica’ (31 July 2026)

³United States Department of State, ‘The United States and the Philippines Launch Plans for 4,000-Acre Economic Security Zone to Shore up Supply Chains: First AI-Native Industrial Acceleration Hub under PAX Silica’ (Press Release, 17 April 2026)

LEGISLATION

⁵1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, art VII

⁶1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, art XII

⁷Corporate Enterprise Development and Tax Incentives for Enterprises Act [CREATE MORE Act] (Republic Act No 12066)

⁸Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (Republic Act No 8371)

⁹Investors’ Lease Act (Republic Act No 7652)

¹⁰The Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 (Republic Act No. 7227)

SECONDARY SOURCES

Books

¹¹Heywood A, Political Ideologies: An Introduction (6th edn, Palgrave 2017)

Journal Articles & Book Chapters

¹²Bayot ABE, ‘Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the Philippines: A Fourth World Critique’ in Interdisciplinary Studies in Human Rights (Springer 2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11382-7_11

¹³San Juan E Jr, ‘Contemporary Global Capitalism and the Challenge of the Filipino Diaspora’ (2011) 25 Global Society 7 https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2010.522983

Theses & Academic Papers

Newspaper Articles

¹⁴Kai NW, ‘Singapore Signs US-Led Pax Silica Declaration on AI, Global Tech Supply Chain’ The Straits Times (14 December 2025) https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-signs-us-led-pax-silica-declaration-on-ai-global-tech-supply-chain

Official Documents, Press Releases & Secondary Resources

¹⁵EBSCO Research, ‘World Systems Theory’ (Research Starters, 2024) https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/world-systems-theory

¹⁶European Commission, ‘Commission Proposes Tech Sovereignty Package to Strengthen Europe’s Digital Autonomy and Resilience’ (Press Release IP/26/1187, 3 June 2026) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1187

¹⁷International Trade Administration, ‘Market Intelligence: Philippines Critical Minerals’ (US Department of Commerce, 23 September 2025) https://www.trade.gov/market-intelligence/philippines-critical-minerals

¹⁸Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Israel), ‘Israel Joins Pax Silica Initiative – An International Coalition to Fortify Supply Chains in the Age of Artificial Intelligence’ (Press Release, 8 December 2025) https://www.gov.il/en/pages/israel-joins-pax-silica-initiative-13-dec-2025

¹⁹Philippine Nickel Industry Association, ‘Philippines Positions as Stable Critical Minerals Partner as Indonesia Recalibrates Nickel Supply Policy’ (Press Release, 16 July 2026) https://www.philippinenickel.org/news-and-updates/press-release/philippines-positions-as-stable-critical-minerals-partner-as-indonesia-recalibrates-nickel-supply-policy/

²⁰Cruz v Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources (2000) GR No 135385 (Philippines SC)

²¹Cariño v Insular Government, 212 US 449 (1909)