Moving forward or back? Marcos breaks from Duterte-era policies.

Rosette Sandoval, whose father was killed in Rodrigo Duterte’s bloody war on drugs, campaigned against Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in the 2022 election. She wanted an end to the “unceasing climate of fear” in the Philippines, and had doubts that the son and namesake of the former dictator would lead the country any better than Mr. Duterte, especially since he chose the strongman’s daughter, Sara Duterte, as his running mate. 

Mr. Marcos has since surprised her. Ms. Sandoval was devastated when her candidate lost last spring, but she says that the Marcos administration’s recent decision to go after high-ranking police officers involved in the country’s drug trade gave her hope that justice for her parents and other drug war victims is possible. 

“I am banking on real changes in our society,” she says. “If President Marcos [Jr.] can provide those changes and bring justice to the victims of extrajudicial killings, then I am ready to support his policies that are beneficial to Filipinos.”

The police purge is one in a series of high-profile breaks from Duterte-era policies over the past several months. From recent press freedom wins to renewed ties with the United States, caveats abound, but most politics watchers agree that Mr. Marcos is distancing himself from his predecessor’s legacy.

Few believe these changes are motivated by an honest commitment to justice, freedom, and cooperation. Armand Dean Nocum, a political campaign and public relations strategist, says the president is “obsessed with clearing the Marcos name” and “winning the trust of other world leaders.” While some argue that superficial motives keep the Philippines’ transformation surface-level, others say that even small, incremental victories can eventually amount to progress. 

“Marcos Jr. has two burdens. First, to clean the mess that Duterte made, and second, to rectify the errors that his father had made,” says Mr. Nocum, adding that, at least for now, what’s good for the country and what’s good for the Marcos family image seem to align.

A 90-degree turn on foreign policy

The United States’ relationship with the Philippines, one of the oldest U.S. allies in Asia, became strained under Mr. Duterte, who threatened to cut ties with the American government and attempted to revoke a major defense treaty between the two countries. The former president refused to visit countries that criticized his war on drugs, including the U.S. and members of the European Union. Political analyst Edmund Tayao says that Mr. Duterte instead used his presidency to open diplomatic doors to nontraditional partners, such as Israel and Bulgaria, and foster relations with Beijing.

“What happened during the administration of Duterte was we showed to the world that we are not just a U.S. lackey,” says Mr. Tayao, a San Beda University Graduate School of Law professor.

Now Mr. Marcos is seeking to maintain cooperation with Beijing while repairing the country’s fractured ties with the U.S.

Early this month, during a visit by U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, the Marcos administration granted the U.S. access to four additional military bases to stitch the gap in the arc of U.S. alliances in Asia and the Pacific.

Mr. Marcos also advanced military ties with Japan this month during his ninth international trip as president – putting him well on track to exceed the 21 trips Mr. Duterte took during his six years in office.

Mr. Tayao says the Marcos administration’s outreach efforts do not necessarily reflect “a transformation or an abandonment” of Mr. Duterte’s international relations agenda – after all, the U.S. never stopped supplying military aid to the Philippines, and Mr. Marcos is not turning his back on Beijing now – but they do signal “a significant redefinition” of the country’s foreign policy. 

“It is not a 180-degree turn,” he says. “It is a 90-degree turn.”

Carl Marc Ramota, political scientist and faculty regent at the University of the Philippines, agrees that Mr. Marcos’ “friend to all, enemy to none” approach isn’t particularly new or radical, though it may have serious consequences. He says the “big difference between the Marcos and Duterte governments is that indicators point to Marcos getting closer with the U.S. military authorities, which might cause ripples in the political and military scene in the South China Sea.”

Indeed, maintaining relations with China while expanding ties with the U.S. and other Pacific allies could prove difficult. China has already criticized the recent deal with the U.S. as undermining regional stability, and Filipino observers are concerned that the renewed cooperation with American authorities might lead to further militarization of the South China Sea, where the Philippines and China have repeatedly butted heads. Just last week, the U.S. announced that it would defend the Philippines after a Chinese coast guard ship allegedly blinded its Filipino counterparts with a military-grade laser and blocked their way to a critical naval outpost. Mr. Marcos said Saturday that the incident was not enough to trigger the mutual defense treaty. 

Domestic progress – and limitations

In another attention-grabbing quarter pivot, the Marcos administration has promised to rein in police misconduct and impunity as it continues to implement the war on drugs. Mr. Duterte gave the national police massive latitude in carrying out the anti-drug campaign, which from the start was beset by violence and controversies, but last month some 900 police generals and colonels were forced to submit courtesy resignations in an attempt to reset trust in the program.

Critics say the move sidesteps justice for thousands killed under the Duterte administration, and in late January, Manila decried the International Criminal Court for resuming its probe into drug war deaths. Still, the move reflects a departure from the existing culture of total impunity, and for some survivors such as Ms. Sandoval, that’s a win. 

Press freedom defenders also scored a victory in January after the tax court acquitted Nobel laureate Maria Ressa and her news organization, Rappler, of the tax evasion charges filed by the Duterte administration.

“Today, facts win. Truth wins,” a teary-eyed and defiant Ms. Ressa told reporters outside the Manila courtroom on Jan. 18. 

Jonathan de Santos, chairperson of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), says that while press freedom advocates and media organizations celebrate Ms. Ressa’s acquittal, “it is too early to tell whether this would lead to a transformation of government policies on handling dissent.” 

He stressed that many journalists – particularly those outside Manila and who lack an international following – are still under attack for their work. NUJP reports that at least two journalists have been killed during the Marcos administration, and at least one – the Tacloban-based Frenchie Mae Cumpio – remains in prison. 

Some experts say the administration is simply falling back on old initiatives not of the last regime, but of earlier administrations – the same administrations that allowed a strongman like Mr. Duterte to flourish in the first place. 

Raymond Palatino, spokesperson of the left-wing Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (New Patriotic Alliance), says Mr. Marcos is “posturing as good, just, and cooperative.” 

“The Marcos administration is trying to distance itself from the damaging image of its immediate predecessor by showing the world that it has different approaches to many domestic and international issues,” says Mr. Palatino. “But in reality, they are the same.”

Mr. Palatino says that “all forms of institutionalization of impunity, corruption, and injustice are still in place,” adding that “if this administration really wants to perform better than the previous regime, it has to abandon policies and programs that plunge Filipinos into poverty, oppression, and social injustices.” 

Mr. de Santos echoes this attitude when discussing press freedom, arguing that if the Marcos administration is serious about “moving away from a Duterte brand of attacking dissenters, he must abandon all anti-people and anti-press freedom policies and programs.” 

Until then, he adds, “the only thing that has improved is that we do not hear a president cursing journalists in televised speeches anymore.”

Still, even that can be considered a victory.