Follow us on social

ISIS attack in the Philippines could upset US regional strategy

ISIS attack in the Philippines could upset US regional strategy

Manila may have to reposition its forces to deal with domestic threat

Asia-Pacific

The Islamic State in the Philippines is back — and it could have dire consequences for the United States’ calculus when it comes to great power competition.

With much of the world focused on the Israel-Hamas war, an early December attack in the Philippines claimed by the Islamic State (ISIS) garnered little international attention. But ignoring the threat of the world’s most dangerous terrorist group in the Philippines is short-sighted.

The attack on December 2 targeted a Catholic mass service in the gymnasium at Mindanao State University, killing four and injuring dozens. The bombing, which was timed for the beginning of the annual Mindanao Week of Peace celebrations, targeted parishioners gathered for morning mass. The university is located in Marawi, the same city where ISIS-affiliated groups led a five-month siege back in 2017 that killed around 1,000 people.

And while an ISIS attack in a Catholic-majority Asian country seems to be a low priority at a time when Israel has launched an invasion in Gaza, Iran-backed Houthi forces are attacking maritime interests, and Western forces have withdrawn from a slew of jihadist-hit African countries, not to mention the ongoing war in Ukraine, the assault on Marawi is highly concerning.

The attack is not a one-off. In fact, the bombing was preceded by several other ISIS-claimed operations in the wider Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao area since August. Moreover, ISIS published an editorial in its weekly Al-Naba newsletter shortly after the attack, portraying the Philippines as a “field of jihad” deserving greater support from Muslims worldwide and urging Muslims to travel to the country to participate in jihad.

ISIS maintains operations in the island country through its connections with several local jihadist groups like Maute, Abu Sayyaf, Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters, and Ansar Khalifa Philippines. All of these groups pledged allegiance to the group in 2014 and 2015 and were recognized by ISIS as one affiliate in 2016. Although the number of ISIS-affiliated fighters is estimated at no more than a few hundred, the militants are able to leverage their connections with local clans, politicians, and criminal elements to sustain themselves.

Underscoring their resilience, the latest string of attacks actually came after local security forces killed Abu Zacharia — the leader of Maute who was rumored to be ISIS’s emir in the country — back in June. And while intensified military operations have prevented the ISIS affiliates from holding territory for now, they could easily take advantage of a repositioning of local forces to establish a more lasting presence.

Not only did the Philippines receive the rare recognition of being named a major non-NATO ally more than 20 years ago, Washington and Manila recently revived their Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, which was first signed in 2014 and gives the U.S. access to a total of 13 Philippine military bases. Most of these bases are in close proximity to Taiwan and the South China Sea, making them valuable assets for U.S. operations designed to militarily contain or combat China in the Indo-Pacific region. More broadly, Manila has also signed or begun negotiations with Australia, Japan, the European Union, and India for new defense agreements since early 2023.

If ISIS continues its string of attacks targeting Marawi and the larger Bangsamoro area, it could derail the already imperiled peace process there ahead of the region’s first elections next year. And if war returns to that region, the Filipino government will likely have to rethink any plans to reposition its armed forces for territorial defense as well as its contributions to joint security arrangements with the U.S. and its allies, which are more important now — with Washington shifting its focus back to the Middle East amid heightened threats there — than ever.


Government forces display 11kg of high grade Methamphetamine Hydrochloride "Shabu", worth 110 to 250 million pesos ($2.2 to 5 million USD), and the ISIS flag recovered by troops from the Maute group in a conflict area in Marawi City, Philippines June 19, 2017. REUTERS/Romeo Ranoco

Asia-Pacific
Rand Paul Donald Trump
Top photo credit: Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (Shutterstock/Mark Reinstein) and President Trump (White House/Molly Riley)

Rand Paul to Trump: Don't 'abandon' MAGA over Maduro regime change

Washington Politics

Sen. Rand Paul said on Friday that “all hell could break loose” within Donald Trump’s MAGA coalition if the president involves the U.S. further in Ukraine, and added that his supporters who voted for him after 20 years of regime change wars would "feel abandoned" if he went to war and tried to topple Nicolas Maduro, too.

President Trump has been getting criticism from some of his supporters for vowing to release the files of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and then reneging on that promise. Paul said that the Epstein heat Trump is getting from MAGA will be nothing compared to if he refuses to live up to his “America First” foreign policy promises.

keep readingShow less
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.