Pitz Defense Analysis

@ChinaDaily depicts Filipinos as monkeys. Totally not racist at all ...

South Korean sources provided information about another batch of frigates that has orders that will likely take place on the latter part of the year. Apparently, this points to another repeat order of the Miguel Malvar-class guided missile frigate, which correlates to the hypothetical scenario provided in the Frigate Acquisition Full Complement Article that points out on the idea of getting at least six (6) HDF-3200/Miguel Malvar frigate design, following the rule of three. More on that here -> pitzdefanalysis.net/2026/03/frigat… Should the South Korean reports, which points to an information that apparently originated from HD Hyundai Heavy Industries itself (see first image), then the Philippine Navy will see getting all six (6) Miguel Malvar-class guided missile frigates serving in the fleet, with the total of eight (8) FFGs serving the service branch's Offshore Combat Force (the other being the two (2) Jose Rizal-class guided missile frigates). Also, this will increase the number of warships made by HD Hyundai Heavy Industries to fourteen (14) vessels, with the other six (6) being the Rajah Sulayman-class OPVs on order. While the Philippine Navy likely wants to get more corvettes from the South Korean shipbuilder, there is a likely chance that they will secure more Miguel Malvar-class guided missile frigates first, before getting into more corvettes and OPVs, along with getting more anti-air warfare frigates in the future. #PDA #PitzDefAnalysis #HDHyundaiHeavyIndustries #PhilippineNavy #MiguelMalvarClassFrigate m.news.nate.com/view/20260715n…

The Secretary of National Defense Gilbert Teodoro presented a proposal that will help increase the overall defense budget, which is to set it to at least 4% of Gross Domestic Product, in a gradual increase implementation in order for the country to deter threats from its overseas adversaries. As part of this food for thought, the table below presented the figures of what the 4% of the Gross Domestic Product would look like on the basis of the defense budget as comparative to the economic performance of the country based on the data provided by the World Bank. Based on the data below, a 4% Gross Domestic Product defense budget costs at around US$ 20.488 Billion or Php 1.263 Trillion Pesos, which means sufficient space for bulk purchasing needed military hardware and munitions required for the country's deterrence. In comparison, the budget of the defense department under the 2026 General Appropriations Act tops at Php 305 Billion, plus Php 151 Billion if it includes the graduity and pension benefits for the military and uniformed personnel already retired from service. While the amount presented might give an opportunity for the Department of National Defense to provide a more credible increase of its overall capabilities that aligns deterrence and government policy relative to its assurance for territorial integrity, this will present problems for the likes of the Department of Budget and Management and the Department of Economy, Planning, and Development (DEPDev) to realize this proposal, as it will strain the limited financial resources that the government has to operate and provide its services to the public. Still, the presentation gives the advantages and disadvantages of this proposal, although it will be for the best interest of the government to find ways for this proposal to realize, or in providing alternatives for alleviation such as the amendments for the Presidential Decree 415 or the reforms needed for the funding of pensions intended for the retired military and uniform personnel. #PDA #PitzDefAnalysis #PhilippineDefenseBudget #RevisedAFPModernization References: 1. inquirer.net/480171/teodoro… 2. imf.org/external/datam… 3. pitzdefanalysis.net/2026/04/philip…

🫥GONE! Jinan University has quietly ❌deleted❌ its report claiming the 🇵🇭#Philippines' Batanes Islands belong to 🇨🇳#China. No retraction, correction or explanation...but of course that doesn't mean the offending report itself has permanently left the scene. It just got harder to find. In fact, the identical text is still live on at least three state channels: Global Times, GDToday & the National Institute for South China Sea Studies (NISCSS). The scholars' call is still there in black and white: China should "claim sovereignty" over Batanes & step up coast guard patrols & military countermeasures "at opportune moments." So here's what we think happened: Beijing wanted a legal justification for the sovereignty patrols it began running east of Batanes on June 1st. The Jinan symposium dutifully supplied it by providing the land claim to justify the sea claim & NISCSS and the state media apparatus amplified it. But Beijing likely did not expect the reaction. 🤯 The report was probably meant to draw little public notice. Instead it drew an outraged Philippine public & stern rebukes from senior government officials. So someone ordered the 🚨CODE RED🚨 on Jinan's posted report and ... poof, it was gone! Except the toothpaste is out of the tube. Beijing can't repudiate the claim, because it still wants the legal cover for its intrusive patrols within the Philippine exclusive economic zone (and well outside its dash-line claim). On the other hand it won't endorse it either, because the government isn't quite ready to officially claim land inhabited by *actual* Filipinos. They were hoping to leave that one to their "academics". This one got away from Beijing (oops). It can't memory-hole this clear overstep, so it's just going to lie low for a while until the excitement blows over ... but don't be surprised if the patrols east of Batanes (suspended for the typhoon) resume in the coming days. We'll be watching.👀

#Opinion: 10 years after the release of the so-called "South China Sea arbitration award," which violates fundamental principles of international law, contravenes the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and runs counter to the basic facts of the #SouthChinaSea, certain countries are once again recycling the same slogans about "peace," "stability," and a "rules-based order" in a statement. The contradiction could hardly be more striking. Those who preach "peace" are the ones sending more warships and military jets into the region. The joint statement, like the unlawful "award" before it, changes nothing -- not the facts, and certainly not China's resolve to defend its legitimate rights.