---

Why the Philippines Must Build a Unified Maritime and Humanitarian Strategy Now
By Karl M. Garcia

The Philippines is an archipelago. Its security, economy, food supply, energy, and international standing are inseparable from the sea. Yet despite acquiring new ships, passing stronger laws, and raising its maritime rhetoric, the country remains fragmented. Ships alone do not make maritime power. Laws alone do not make resilience. What the Philippines lacks is an integrated system that turns policy into action.

Climate change and geopolitics make this a pressing problem. Across the globe, Arctic sea lanes are opening as polar ice retreats, while Antarctic melting drives sea-level rise. Some predict these shifts will reduce the importance of traditional maritime chokepoints. In reality, the opposite is true: straits, canals, and narrow passageways—including the Luzon and Balabac Straits—are becoming ever more strategically critical. For a low-lying archipelago like the Philippines, rising seas are not just an environmental issue—they are a national security issue, threatening ports, urban centers, and millions of coastal residents.

Yet our ability to respond is hampered by poorly designed and corrupt flood-control infrastructure. Silted rivers, mismanaged drainage, and politically motivated construction projects favor short-term gains over long-term resilience. Storm surges and typhoons—from Cagayan to Eastern Mindanao—turn these failures into disasters. Flooding is no longer just a coastal problem; it is a watershed problem. Reforestation can stabilize slopes and slow runoff—but it is not enough. Likewise, intelligently repurposing disaster debris—concrete, soil, rock, timber—can rebuild eroded hills, roads, terraces, and other critical infrastructure. Landfill mining and debris reuse are opportunities to convert destruction into adaptation, cutting costs and preventing further environmental damage.

Geography also thrusts the Philippines into regional crises. If conflict erupts in the Taiwan Strait, the country could become Asia’s primary humanitarian corridor. Northern Luzon facilities, now capable of handling 10,000–15,000 arrivals per day, could face 50,000–100,000 evacuees daily—potentially up to a million within weeks. Existing EDCA sites provide important logistics support, but they cannot substitute for national capacity. Proximity, infrastructure, and partnerships make this scenario inevitable. The only question is whether we prepare—or improvise at unacceptable human and strategic cost.

At the heart of these intertwined climate, security, and humanitarian challenges lies a systemic problem: fragmented maritime governance. The Philippine Navy, Coast Guard, BFAR, PNP Maritime Group, DENR, DOE, DFA, LGUs, and economic agencies operate under overlapping mandates, non-interoperable systems, fragmented budgets, and unclear authority. Executive Order 57 (2024) created the National Maritime Council to coordinate policy. But coordination alone cannot break entrenched silos. Without enforcement authority, budget control, and integrated staffing, the Council risks being a policy clearinghouse without operational teeth.

This is why a National Strategy Integration Office (NSIO) and a Maritime Fusion Center are essential. The NSIO, under the Office of the President, would align strategy, budgets, and execution across agencies—ensuring continuity across administrations. The Fusion Center would integrate Navy, Coast Guard, BFAR, NAMRIA, and port data into a Maritime Common Operating Picture (M-COP), enabling rapid, coordinated, and legally defensible decision-making. Together, they turn fragmented governance into operational sovereignty.

Ships without sustainment, bases without logistics, and policies without execution cannot protect territory, enforce fisheries law, or respond to disasters. Workforce development—naval architects, marine engineers, and indigenous shipbuilding—is critical. Ports, staging centers, and dual-use facilities along the eastern seaboard must be rebuilt for climate resilience and humanitarian surge capacity. Disaster debris and landfill materials should be engineered into hills, roads, and infrastructure—turning destruction into long-term adaptation.

Geography is fixed. Climate change is accelerating. Regional crises are inevitable. Sea-level rise is a national security threat; typhoons and flood-control corruption amplify the risk; disaster debris offers a solution if intelligently used. The Philippines’ choice is clear: continue fragmented governance and improvise after each disaster—or build an integrated maritime, climate, and humanitarian system now. Preparedness is not militarization; it is national responsibility, humanitarian discipline, and strategic foresight.

When the next typhoon strikes—or the first evacuees arrive from Taiwan—history will ask: did the Philippines have the vision to act before it was too late?

Mantra: Geography is fixed. Governance is a choice.

---