The reassertion of the "America First" policy under the renewed Trump administration in 2025 has reshaped global trade, energy, and strategic relations. At the heart of this shift is a clear prioritization of US economic sovereignty, energy independence, and critical mineral security. Under Trump 2.0, this approach prioritizes fossil fuel expansion, domestic mineral security, and skepticism toward multilateralism—pressuring allies to align more closely with US interests.
In particular, the US is doubling down on fossil fuel production and restricting support for renewable energy initiatives—rolling back incentives, freezing federal land leases for green energy, and canceling clean energy grants. At the same time, it is aggressively pursuing secure and “friendly” supply chains for critical minerals, incentivizing companies to source from allies like the Philippines.
Trump's policies challenge international cooperation through trade barriers and environmental deregulation. Global frameworks like the Paris Agreement and World Trade Organization have been sidelined, leaving developing countries like the Philippines exposed to policy vacuums. Trump’s approach often sidelines global institutions like the WTO and regional trade blocs.
These changes carry profound implications for developing nations, especially the Philippines, a country rich in nickel, copper, and other strategic resources. As a long-time US ally and a significant Chinese trade partner, the Philippines now finds itself delicately balancing economic opportunity and geopolitical alignment.
A Strategic Resource Battleground
Central to the Trump administration’s “America First” economic and national security strategy is the reduction of US dependence on foreign sources—particularly China—for critical minerals. These materials, including nickel, lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elements, are essential to high-tech manufacturing, electric vehicles, renewable energy systems, and defense equipment. The Trump administration has ramped up efforts to bolster US domestic exploration and mining and forge bilateral agreements with friendly nations for resource access.
While the US has limited reserves of certain minerals, it is using its diplomatic and economic influence to reconfigure the global flow of critical materials. Strategic partnerships and investments are increasingly directed toward countries seen as stable and aligned with US geopolitical interests. Export restrictions and trade barriers targeting Chinese-sourced materials are encouraging companies to seek new suppliers in Southeast Asia, Latin America, and Africa.
In particular, the Philippines, rich in mineral resources and situated in a geopolitically pivotal zone, finds itself at the intersection of shifting US trade, energy, and security policies. For the mining sector, the heightened demand by the US for critical minerals — especially nickel, copper, and cobalt — has elevated the Philippines’ profile as a potential strategic partner and alternative source for those commodities. American and Western-aligned companies have begun reassessing the Philippines as an investment destination. There is rising interest in investing in downstream facilities—such as mineral processing plants or battery component manufacturing—which the Philippines currently lacks at scale.
Energy Security in a Divided World
In the energy sector, the Trump administration’s renewed emphasis on fossil fuel dominance and skepticism toward international climate accords may undermine the Philippines’ transition toward renewable energy. US firms may promote liquefied natural gas projects or coal-based energy partnerships over green alternatives. Simultaneously, waning US leadership in climate diplomacy could stall global funding and technology transfers that are vital for developing countries to adopt clean energy solutions.
The Philippines' reliance on imported fossil fuels makes it vulnerable to global market fluctuations. As a nation with ambitious renewable energy targets—aiming for 35% renewable energy in its power mix by 2030 and 50% by 2040—the Philippines faces challenges due to these US policy shifts. A global resurgence in fossil fuel dependency could exacerbate energy security issues and hinder efforts to transition to more sustainable energy sources. The Philippines may see funding and interest in renewable projects decline, reinforcing reliance on LNG and coal.
The US withdrawal from global climate commitments and reduction in renewable energy funding may also lead to decreased international support for the Philippines' clean energy initiatives, potentially slowing down the development of solar, wind, and other clean energy infrastructures. The Philippine renewable energy sector has historically relied on foreign investments, technology transfers, and development aid—much of which has been bolstered by US leadership in climate finance. With US institutions (e.g., the Export-Import Bank, US Agency for International Development or International Development Finance Corporation) potentially deprioritizing green energy, major projects may face delays or cancellation.
Geopolitical Tensions and Maneuvering
Southeast Asia sits astride critical sea lanes, such as the South China Sea, through which one-third of global trade passes. The region’s proximity to Taiwan, its access to maritime resources, and its growing markets make it strategically vital. China asserts expansive claims in the South China Sea, backed by military installations and aggressive patrols. On the other hand, the US continues freedom of navigation operations and military exercises.
China’s growing military footprint in the South China Sea directly challenges Philippine territorial claims. In response, the US has strengthened defense ties with treaty allies like the Philippines and expanded access to bases under the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. The Philippines' proximity to key sea lanes and Taiwan makes it a military asset. However, over-reliance on US defense might provoke Chinese economic retaliation. As a strategic ally, the Philippines may receive increased military and economic support from the US However, this could pressure the Philippines to choose sides in the US-China rivalry, complicating its domestic policy on natural resource administration, environmental safeguards, and foreign investments. As geopolitical tensions deepen, the Philippines must navigate an increasingly polarized world.
Strategic Moves by Philippine Regulators
Philippines resources regulators—particularly those overseeing energy and strategic minerals—must move decisively to take advantage of emerging geopolitical and economic opportunities. Policy makers must seek inclusion in US strategic minerals initiatives. The government can also create a bilateral working group on resource security, linking the Philippine Department of Energy, Department of Environment and Natural Resources/Mines and Geosciences Bureau with the US Departments of Energy, State, and Commerce.
Trump’s hardline stance on China can also be used by the government to negotiate better terms with both US and China, especially in downstream mineral processing and energy infrastructure investments (e.g., grid development, offshore wind). To fast-track resource policy and institutional reforms, the government should also enact a National Critical Minerals Policy and a Philippine Mineral Security Strategy, which will set a development roadmap and look into offering fiscal and regulatory incentives for investments in critical minerals. Finally, the government should strengthen the nationwide geological survey, mineral, and energy data transparency, and ESG monitoring capacity to meet international compliance and due diligence standards.
Establishing a Philippine Department of Mines and Energy can be another strategic move. Currently, mining and energy are under the DENR and DOE respectively, leading to jurisdictional overlaps, especially in environmental vs. economic goals. A dedicated department could align policies, licensing, and enforcement under one roof, improving bureaucratic efficiency. Creating a dedicated department would also send a strong signal to international investors that the government is serious about developing the sector and ensuring stable governance. The unified department could integrate mining, mineral processing, energy production, and even green industrial development, creating synergies across sectors.
There is a risk, however, that creating a new department could lead to bureaucratic duplication or weak oversight, especially if it lacks experienced technical bureaucrats or a clear mandate. Setting up a new department requires legislative action, funding, and strong executive leadership. A premature launch could result in tokenism rather than transformation and the timing would depend on both the urgency of national priorities and the readiness of institutions.
The Philippines should move toward creating a Department of Mines and Energy—but only if a clear national mining and energy roadmap is in place and institutional capacity-building programs are underway with legislative and executive backing with adequate funding. If those conditions are not yet met, a transition phase—such as creating an inter-agency commission or task force—might be a better near-term step.
Political Realignment and Policy Implications
The 2025 elections resulted in the fracturing of the once-unified "UniTeam" alliance between President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Vice President Sara Duterte, into opposing factions. The resources industry stands at a crossroads with the new political configuration influencing its trajectory. The retention of key economic officials suggests a degree of policy continuity, which may reassure investors in the resources sector. In response to the electoral outcomes, President Marcos also initiated a cabinet reshuffle.
Notably, Raphael Lotilla transitioned from Secretary of Energy to Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources. The appointment of Lotilla has elicited a spectrum of reactions, reflecting both optimism and concern. Lotilla, who was my professor at the University of the Philippines College of Law, brings a wealth of experience from his previous government roles, including serving as Secretary of Energy under President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, as well as holding a position in the National Economic and Development Authority. His involvement in the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 underscores his deep understanding of the energy sector and public policy.
However, environmental organizations have voiced concerns over Lotilla's past support for fossil fuels and nuclear energy during his tenure at the DOE. They urge him to shift towards more sustainable and climate-resilient policies in his new DENR role. Lotilla's previous affiliations with energy companies have also raised questions about potential conflicts of interest, especially given the DENR's role in regulating environmental compliance for energy projects.
Lotilla is walking on a tightrope. While his reputation for integrity and policy expertise is an asset, administering the DENR requires deep political acumen, grassroots coordination, and internal institutional reform—not just technical know-how. Success will depend on his ability to streamline decision-making and accountability across the bureaucracy, forge genuine consensus among competing interests, and professionalize DENR operations without getting mired in political interference. There’s constant tension between the push for resource exploitation (to drive economic growth and foreign investment) and obligations under environmental laws, climate goals, and protected area frameworks. Lotilla's ability to balance economic development with environmental protection will be pivotal. Stakeholders will be closely monitoring his policies and actions to ensure they align with the country's environmental and sustainability goals.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court's recent decision to nullify local government units' (LGUs) blanket bans on mining activities—specifically overturning Mindoro Occidental's 25-year moratorium—has significant implications for the industry. The Supreme Court ruled that while LGUs have the authority to evaluate and approve or deny individual mining applications, they cannot impose blanket bans on mining activities. This decision reinforces the primacy of national laws, particularly the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, over local ordinances in regulating mineral resource development. The decision is seen as a step toward harmonizing local and national policies, thereby fostering a more conducive environment for sustainable mining operations.
The ruling is expected to boost investor confidence by providing a more predictable legal framework for mining operations. LGUs retain the power to assess and decide on individual mining projects, ensuring that local concerns and environmental considerations are addressed on a case-by-case basis. The decision underscores the need for coherent policies between national and local governments to balance economic development with environmental stewardship. The Supreme Court's decision delineates the boundaries of local and national authority in mining regulation, aiming to create a more stable environment for investment while still preserving the role of LGUs in environmental oversight. The long-term impact will depend on how effectively national and local policies are harmonized to promote sustainable and responsible mining practices.
Conclusion
Trump 2.0's return signals a renewed opportunity for the Philippines to strengthen bilateral ties with the US around critical minerals, energy security, and resource independence. Philippine regulators must proactively craft policy and commercial frameworks that de-risk investments in resources, accelerate project implementation, and align with evolving national strategic priorities. In addition, they must act decisively to align the country’s regulatory, diplomatic, and industrial strategies with the geopolitical reorientation of a second Trump presidency. Proactivity, policy readiness, and credible regulatory reforms will be essential to securing our place in the future of US-led critical mineral and energy supply chains. Finally, the Philippines must engage global powers with strategic confidence—welcoming investments and cooperation, but on terms that align with national development, uphold environmental integrity, and preserve its sovereign decision-making.
Fernando “Ronnie” S. Penarroyo specializes in Energy and Resources Law, Project Finance and Business Development. He is also currently the Chair of the Professional Regulatory Board of Geology, the government agency mandated under law to regulate and develop the geology profession. For any matters or inquiries in relation to the Philippine resources industry and suggested topics for commentaries, he may be contacted at fspenarroyo@penpalaw.com. Atty. Penarroyo’s commentaries are also archived at his professional blogsite at www.penarroyo.com
