Teodoro: Countering China aggression requires defense budget of up to 4% of GDP

MANILA, Philippines — Countering Chinese aggression and protecting the country's maritime rights will require the defense budget to be raised as much as 4% of GDP, a move that will force trade-offs in other government sectors, Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. said Friday, July 10.
"We definitely need to realign," Teodoro told reporters on the sidelines of a Stratbase Institute forum marking the 10th anniversary of Manila's arbitral win over Beijing. "It’s not 'might.' We need to."
The Philippines currently spends about 1.3 to 1.4% of its GDP on defense, based on estimates that include pensions and other military items. The Department of National Defense's (DND) own budget this year stands at P305.87 billion.
"We need to ramp up to at least 2 to 3 to 4 percent of GDP," Teodoro told reporters.
At 2% of the country's roughly P31-trillion economy, based on the government's latest fiscal program, defense spending would reach about P620 billion a year. At 4%, it would spike to P1.2 trillion.
Raising the defense budget to Teodoro's target would force cuts in other government sectors, a reality the defense chief acknowledged.
Because "the budget is a finite item," Teodoro said, "more for one means less for another."
Asked where the additional funds could be sourced, the defense chief demurred: "That is up to somebody else. All I'm saying is we need to increase. And there are several ways."
Teodoro's call for bigger funding comes at a tight fiscal moment for the government. The Philippines is already facing a P1.66-trillion budget deficit this year, with economic growth targets for 2026 recently downgraded to 3.5% to 4.5%.
Speaking at the same event, Teodoro warned that the cost of resisting Beijing goes beyond military funding and cautioned how China-linked entities have already "captured" key industries.
'Free rider problem'
The defense chief argued that deterrence "needs more than commitment."
"It needs actual spending, and it means lessening an entitlement to the public and putting these entitlements into building a credible and resilient force," Teodoro said.
Teodoro argued a public unwilling to shoulder that cost — what he calls a "free-rider problem" — could doom the country's defense transition. Taken to an extreme, Teodoro said, resistance to increased spending is "probably the worst enemy that we have in our journey to building a credible deterrent posture."
The defense chief said Manila's neighbors are already raising defense spending toward 5% of GDP. He pointed to Indonesia — which does not have active maritime claims — recently acquiring 47 advanced Rafale fighter jets.
The Philippines has long leaned on alliances to offset its modest military. This year's Balikatan exercises drew more than 17,000 troops from seven countries — the largest in the drills' history, and proof, Teodoro told the forum, of the arbitral ruling's "potency."
The exercises followed a string of new Visiting Forces Agreements: an access agreement with Japan that took effect last September, and similar pacts with New Zealand, Canada and France, all on top of Manila's decades-long mutual defense treaty with the United States.
Japan is also transferring five Abukuma-class destroyer escorts to the Philippine Navy, under a deal confirmed this week.
Japan is handing over the ships at no purchase cost, but Teodoro said Friday the Philippines will shoulder the expenses of sailing them home, training crews, integrating systems and building berthing facilities he described as over three or four decades overdue.
'Capture' at home
Teodoro argued in his keynote that the threat from China is not confined to the sea.
"Agents or entities or nationals identified with the People's Republic of China" have captured parts of the country's critical infrastructure and retail trade, he said.
"In the most granular of levels, cartelization has occurred in certain commodities, not in rice, by them," Teodoro said.
The capture, he said, has become "a barrier to entry" for legitimate businesses trying to raise capital for the major industries the country needs to industrialize.
"And this we are at the forefront of combating," Teodoro said.
This is also why the military's shift to external defense cannot be total, he said, since internal security remains a principal responsibility of the Armed Forces of the Philippines under the law.
"If we are not resilient internally on a peace and order or a national security level, then our external defense initiatives necessarily are compromised," he said.
Asked if the 2016 arbitral ruling could be abandoned after the 2028 elections, Teodoro said: "Definitely the concern is there. The likelihood, I doubt, given the fact that the Filipinos already embrace the arbitral ruling."
"I do not think that any leader who goes against the arbitral award will have the mandate of the people," he added.
The award, Teodoro said, is "already beyond debate" as "part and parcel of our legal arsenal."
The ruling, handed down in The Hague on July 12, 2016, invalidated China's sweeping nine-dash line and affirmed the Philippines' sovereign rights over its exclusive economic zone.
Beijing has rejected it and continues to press its claims.
- Latest
- Trending

Facts Only

* Defense budget needs to be raised up to 4% of GDP to counter Chinese aggression and protect maritime rights.
* The Philippines currently spends about 1.3 to 1.4% of its GDP on defense, including pensions and other military items.
* The Department of National Defense's (DND) budget for this year stands at P305.87 billion.
* Raising spending to 2% of the economy would result in annual defense spending of about P620 billion.
* Raising spending to 4% of the economy would result in annual defense spending of P1.2 trillion.
* Teodoro stated that more funding for one area means less for another due to the budget being a finite item.
* Deterrence requires actual spending to build a credible and resilient force, addressing a "free-rider problem."
* China-linked entities have captured parts of critical infrastructure and retail trade within the country.
* The shift to external defense is compromised if internal security and peace and order are not resilient.
* Manila's neighbors are raising defense spending toward 5% of GDP, citing Indonesia's acquisition of fighter jets.

Executive Summary

Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. stated that countering Chinese aggression and protecting maritime rights requires raising the defense budget to at least 4% of GDP, necessitating trade-offs in other government sectors because the budget is finite. The Philippines currently spends approximately 1.3 to 1.4% of GDP on defense, with the Department of National Defense's budget for the current year estimated at P305.87 billion. Reaching a 2% GDP allocation would equate to about P620 billion annually, and a 4% allocation would be P1.2 trillion. Teodoro indicated that resistance to increased spending is an enemy in building a credible deterrent posture, citing a "free-rider problem" where public unwillingness to shoulder costs can undermine defense transition. Furthermore, the threat from China extends beyond military funding to include the capture of critical infrastructure and trade by linked entities, which acts as a barrier to legitimate industrialization efforts. The context involves recent multilateral defense exercises with allies and transfers of military equipment from nations like Japan.

Full Take

The argument pivots on the tension between necessary strategic investment and immediate fiscal constraints, framed by a perceived internal resistance to defense expenditure. The core dynamic reveals a struggle over public commitment; Teodoro posits that resistance to increased funding acts as an impediment to building deterrence, suggesting that the 'free-rider problem' is as dangerous as external pressure from Beijing. This places the issue not merely in budgetary terms but in cognitive sovereignty—the ability of a state to allocate resources according to its perceived security needs rather than internal political friction. The reference to neighboring states raising their defense spending and the successful coalition of international alliances underscores that security posture operates on a continuum, where external success is intertwined with domestic fiscal capacity and public buy-in. The narrative concerning the "capture" of economic sectors by China highlights how geopolitical pressure translates directly into constraints on internal development goals, suggesting that addressing sovereignty requires simultaneous economic restructuring alongside military rearmament. The implicit challenge for leaders is managing this trade-off without sacrificing perceived legitimacy or ignoring the domestic political reality that funding decisions invariably carry domestic costs.

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

The text reads like a factual report heavily reliant on direct quotes and contextual layering, characteristic of human journalistic reporting focused on policy and geopolitical developments.

Signals Detected

Sentence length variance shows natural variation; use of direct quotes and informal phrasing ('might,' 'it's worth noting') typical of spoken/reported speech.

Text maintains a clear focus (defense spending) while seamlessly weaving in related geopolitical context and internal economic pressures, suggesting cohesive human narrative building.

Attribution is tied to specific statements from a named official (Teodoro) and references concrete events (Balikatan exercises, specific treaty details), avoiding vague 'expert consensus' framing.

The core argument flows logically from stated positions and economic context; the juxtaposition of military needs against economic constraints is a typical journalistic analytical structure.

Human Indicators

Presence of specific, layered details regarding fiscal deficits (P1.66-trillion deficit), specific defense figures (P305.87 billion budget), and named international agreements/dealings (Japan ship transfer, 2016 arbitral ruling).

The inclusion of a nuanced internal argument ('free-rider problem') framed by the official's rationale demonstrates an attempt at articulating complex policy trade-offs, not just stating facts.