When Manuel V. Pangilinan says, “we should engage China,” in the context of reviving the stalled Malampaya project, the statement lands with the weight of both pragmatism and history. The Philippines has long navigated a world where major powers — whether China, the United States, or others — approach Manila with strategic interests that far exceed its own bargaining capacity. Engagement, in itself, is not the problem. The problem is entering these engagements without the discipline of sovereign partnership.

Malampaya is not just an energy field. It is one of the few strategic assets that has given the Philippines a measure of energy security since 2001. Its decline, and the delays in expanding extraction, expose a familiar national vulnerability: the country’s resources are finite, but its dependence on external actors is not.

This is why the question is not whether the Philippines should work with China, or with any other major power. The real question is whether the Philippines can negotiate from a position that protects its national security and ensures that Filipinos benefit more from their own resources than the foreign entities extracting them.

Other resource-rich nations have learned this discipline. Norway built a sovereign wealth fund that now shapes its future. Qatar leveraged its gas reserves into geopolitical influence. Malaysia has consistently structured deals that keep national interest at the center. The Philippines, by contrast, often negotiates as though grateful to be invited — even when it holds the very resource that makes the partnership possible.

A mature foreign policy begins with a simple premise: if the resource is Filipino, the primary beneficiary must be the Filipino people. This is not nationalism; it is governance. It is the difference between partnership and dependency, between strategic engagement and strategic surrender.

Engaging China is not inherently risky. Engaging the United States is not inherently safe. What is risky — and historically costly — is entering any partnership without guardrails, leverage, or a clear articulation of what must not be compromised. National security is not a geopolitical preference; it is a boundary.

Malampaya is a test case. If the Philippines cannot negotiate from strength when it holds the resource, it will not negotiate from strength anywhere else. The country does not need to choose between China and America. It needs to choose itself.