The news broke on the 18th, that we had signed up for Pax Silica, a 4000-acre economic-security zone project of (with?) the U.S. along a Luzon economic corridor, ostensibly to reduce supply chain dependence on China for semiconductors and AI technology. My first reaction was wow! that’s a lot of land, on what terms kaya, do we share in the profits, may technology transfer ba, done deal na ba, at kung anoano pa. On second thought, I wondered if this is why PBBM seems so relaxed about this worsening economic crisis upon us, exacerbated by Trump’s war on Iran — because he knows na hindi tayo papabayaan ng Amerika, kailangan niya tayo for Pax Silica in this Pacific outpost? The Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas has already declared it a “massive sellout” of the country’s land, minerals, and sovereignty. Been waiting for the pundits to weigh in. Here’s a first from Philippine Star’s Cito Beltran who wonders if it’s just a PR story, a puff piece, meant only to distract.
‘TO SEE IS TO BELIEVE’
by Cito Beltran
April 20 2026All the rumors about the United States building economic zones, ship building facilities and now a 4,000-acre “Economic Security Zone” has started to get tongues wagging, with netizens sharing and reposting news articles about the subject.
Early this year, a Subic resident mentioned that there were “plans” by the US government to put up a ship building facility inside SBMA. But some locals suspect that it was a ploy to put up a military base instead.
And after just a few months, mainstream media and online news sources reported that the United States and the Philippines have gone beyond talking but are already in the early stages of putting together a proposed agreement.
Some of the details mentioned are that the land area involves 4,000 acres or 1,619 hectares, will be rent free, covered by diplomatic immunity, will operate under US Common law, covered by a two-year lease renewable for 99 years.
The area will be purposely built as an “Economic Security Zone” to be administered by the United States and available for US companies engaged in manufacturing defense and key industries who may hire US or local personnel as needed.
Another focus of these reports is that US investors are expected to level up the minerals extraction practices currently done in the region, particularly in the Philippines.
Instead of shipping raw materials, the US companies would process raw nickel, copper, chromite and cobalt and rare minerals, pass on the said materials to manufacturers inside the economic zone or export them to the mainland for use in defense and AI technology manufacturing.
At this point, it is important to be reminded that from the looks of it, the whole thing is still an idea or at the “conceptual stage” as mentioned in an online article of the Wall Street Journal.
There seems to be no mention of an exact location for the proposed US Economic Security Zone, which may be intentional in order to draw out local governments who are willing to embrace the proposed zone and to avoid political backlash if an area is pre-selected or mentioned.
As word gets out and the idea solidifies in people’s imagination, it would certainly create a competitive climate among local governments (provinces/towns) to become the site of a labor rich project, even if they collect no taxes.
Laborers need transportation, food, etc. Those needs play right into the businesses of local politicians and their families who often control local transport, stores and groceries and even fast-food chain outlets.
As you go through the alleged plan or provisions for the “US Economic Security Zone,” it is filled with highly controversial provisions, which from the looks of it may be “click bait” by design.
Since when do we start “giving away land” as in allowing foreign governments to occupy 4,000 acres of land rent free? Officials on both sides know that that would trigger an outcry from nationalists, leftists and politicians looking for two minutes of fame.
The idea of asking or giving diplomatic immunity for a 4,000-acre “Economic Security Zone” and agreeing that US common law applies within that zone is equivalent to giving the US sovereignty over Philippine land and a direct violation of the Constitution.
If US common law prevails within the Economic Security Zone, does it follow that it operates like a US military base or will Filipino workers, visitors or government officials be required to secure a US visa or a special purpose visa?
If officials or personnel of the zone commit a crime outside the zone, similar to the sex-related crimes committed by servicemen, etc., is there a provision that the suspects or accused will be surrendered to Philippine authorities “posthaste”?
Or will locals have to submit to the judicial process of a court within the zone or worse, travel to the nearest US territory like Guam or Hawaii? Does having US common law in effect mean the zone will have its own police and court of law?
In terms of mutually beneficial agreements, what is the benefit of putting up the zone to the Philippines? The US companies buy raw materials and pay cheap for them, yes, there will be employment but for how many, what type of jobs? Will they also get US salary rates?
This entire idea, concept or even “story” simply makes no sense, if not unbelievable. It is like leaving rotten fish in the open to attract all the flies. In journalism, it could be a political trial balloon to find out what the public or media reaction will be.
If the numerous articles now circulating in mass media does not “raise Cain,” it may signal to the governments and officials concerned to go right ahead.
In the world of politics and PR, it could be a win/win distraction story meant to distract the public from their difficulties and hardship that could push government into crisis.
On the other hand, the story could be a “puff piece” designed to create a positive impression or raise investor confidence by highlighting the willingness of the US government to create, operate and manage an export processing zone.
As a final point, this story is yet again an example of the government’s failure to communicate with its citizens. Why do we have to learn about the plan from a foreign media outlet and posts of the US embassy instead of the PCOO?
In the end: “To see is to believe.”
BEN KRITZ: “PH-US ’Pax Silica’ agreement offers words, and not much else”
A few moments of objective thought instead of wishful thinking inevitably leads to the conclusion that there is virtually no incentive for the US to do anything more than to perhaps put together a logistics hub for basic processing and export of raw minerals, and even that may be unnecessary. Costs are high, energy is insecure, and the existing logistical infrastructure is woefully undeveloped.
The US doesn’t need to invest in all of those things in order to access what it fundamentally wants, which is the raw materials, and so it won’t. But of course, even the gullible and pliant current administration of this country would have balked at a request (or a demand, as the case may be) expressed frankly, and so the “staging point for a purpose-built platform for allied manufacturing — an investment acceleration hub, where specific industrial activities can be shaped by market demand” had to be floated as a sales pitch.
https://www.manilatimes.net/2026/04/23/opinion/columns/ph-us-pax-silica-agreement-offers-words-and-not-much-else/2326267
CITO BELTRAN: ‘Never been done in history’
In relation to the article I wrote last Monday about the 4,000-acre US Economic Security Zone in the Philippines, I unintentionally came across a commentary by Jesse Watters on Fox News and I will simply quote it verbatim:
“Get this. We just did a deal with the Philippines that has never been done in the history of the world. It’s an AI manufacturing zone. Over 4,000 acres.
“It’s basically a big American colony inside a former American colony and it’s designed to CHINA PROOF our (US) supply chain. Manila gave it to us for 99 years and they even threw in diplomatic immunity. So, no parking tickets.”
… many of the younger generation who are familiar with AI farms and facilities are already raising concern.
One reader has expressed what many Gen Z kids have been telling me lately; “Hi Cito, I wonder if this zone will be used to build huge AI data centers that use up tremendous amounts of water and pollute the whole vicinity. I know these are extremely unpopular in the US, there is a lot of pushback against building them, so the Americans need to find other places to locate these data centers. Someone should look into this!”
Yes, someone should look into this concern, particularly the officials at the Department of Environment and Natural Resources as well as the Department of Energy, even the DILG.
As pointed out by the email sender, AI farms and facilities use up and dispose of large volumes of water to cool down their various equipment and facilities. All that will come from ground water, all of it.
https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2026/04/24/2523116/never-been-done-history
ORLY MERCADO: “Join, but do not sleepwalk” 5/5/2026
… The Philippines has entered this space in a position of potential. While electronics make up the bulk of our exports, we remain at the back end of the value chain: assembly, testing and packaging. The real value — chip design and wafer fabrication — still lies elsewhere. The promise of Pax Silica is a ladder to climb, but the danger is that we may simply become a more tightly integrated rung.
At home, the ambition is centered on a 4,000-acre hub in New Clark City known as the Golden Node. This “Economic Security Zone” is envisioned as a regional AI powerhouse where technology companies and government converge. It’s an attractive vision of high-value jobs and a long-awaited step up the industrial ladder.
To be fair, the upside is real because we are not entering this equation empty-handed. We are one of the most mineralized countries on earth, holding 4.8 million metric tons of nickel reserves alongside deposits of copper and cobalt. As of 2024, our viable reserves of gold, copper, nickel and chromite were valued at over P480 billion. In other words, we are not just joining a supply chain; we are sitting on it.
This changes the stakes. If Pax Silica is about securing inputs, then our minerals are not just commodities; they are strategic leverage. Properly used, they could allow us to move beyond the old “dig and ship” model and into processing and refining. The Clark hub could become a genuine pivot point, linking what we take from the ground to what we produce at the technological frontier.
But leverage cuts both ways. Handled poorly, this becomes a familiar story where raw materials are exported, value is created elsewhere, and environmental costs are absorbed locally. The hunger for nickel is already leaving scars through damaged ecosystems and strained communities that no amount of high-tech rhetoric can wash away. This is the uncomfortable truth: The “green” future is neither clean nor costless to build, and nature often ends up being the victim.
For decades, policy inconsistency has been our Achilles’ heel. One administration restricts while the next liberalizes, causing investors to hesitate. This is why the absence of a comprehensive National Land Use Act is a strategic liability. Without clear rules on where mining can occur and how it coexists with watersheds, any talk of an integrated minerals-to-manufacturing ecosystem remains aspirational. After all, you cannot build an advanced industrial base on uncertain ground.
… A comprehensive land use policy forces difficult choices: where mining is allowed, where it isn’t, and under what conditions it proceeds. It challenges entrenched interests. It demands coordination across agencies that are more accustomed to working in silos.
Without it, however, we are left with a patchwork approach. Mining projects overlap with watersheds, ancestral domains, agricultural land and urban expansion zones. Conflicts multiply. Decisions are made case by case, often under pressure, often without a coherent national strategy.
Without a clear land use framework, it is difficult, if not impossible, to move up the value chain. You cannot build an integrated minerals-to-manufacturing ecosystem if you cannot even decide, with certainty, where and how extraction should occur.
Pax Silica raises the stakes. If we are to be credible partners, the demand will not be for raw ore, but for value-added inputs like refined metals. This is our opening to insist on domestic processing and technology transfer. But none of this happens by default. It must be negotiated and sustained across political cycles.
The question, therefore, is not simply whether we should join Pax Silica, since we already have. The question is whether we can do so on our own terms.
That requires a level of discipline that has often eluded us. It requires clarity in land use, consistency in policy, and a willingness to confront the trade-offs inherent in resource development. It requires strengthening institutions so that environmental safeguards are real, not rhetorical; that communities are partners, not obstacles; and that the benefits of development are broadly shared, not kept in private.
It also requires a strategic mindset. We must see mining not as an isolated sector, but as part of a larger industrial and security architecture. The decisions we make about minerals today will shape our position in the technologies of tomorrow.
We must also resist the lazy framing that we must choose between a declining power and a rising one, as if national strategy were simply a matter of allegiance. That is not strategy; that is surrender. Our minerals are national assets that must outlast any single geopolitical arrangement.
In this new economy, sovereignty will not be tested by what we join. It will be tested by what we refuse to give away. We would do well to remember the vision of the late senator Jose W. Diokno: that we must strive to be a nation that “depends on itself, thinks for itself, and decides for itself what the common good is.”
Join, yes — but do not sleepwalk.
Because in the contest for technological and economic leadership, those who fail to define their place in the value chain will find that others have already defined it for them.
https://www.manilatimes.net/2026/05/05/opinion/columns/join-but-do-not-sleepwalk/2334986