By Duc DuClos
"No matter how long it takes, no matter how long it may be, the Filipino will prevail."
-General Douglas MacArthur, on Filipino resistance during WWII
"Ang diwa ng Pilipino ay mas malakas pa sa anumang bagyo. The Filipino spirit is stronger than any typhoon."
-Traditional Filipino proverb
Introduction
The evolving security dynamics in the Indo-Pacific region present unprecedented challenges to Philippine sovereignty. China's systematic expansion in the West Philippine Sea—through artificial island construction, militarization of disputed features, and sophisticated gray-zone operations—represents more than mere territorial encroachment. These developments demand a fundamental reassessment of the Philippine defense strategy when coupled with the potential for a cross-strait conflict between China and Taiwan that could quickly engulf Philippine territory, particularly the strategic northern regions of Batanes and Babuyan Islands.
Despite the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling under UNCLOS favoring the Philippines, Beijing's continued pressure through integrated military, paramilitary, and diplomatic means demonstrates the limitations of traditional diplomatic and legal approaches. This persistent challenge to Philippine sovereignty requires a comprehensive response that transcends conventional military solutions and engages the full spectrum of national power and societal resilience.
The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and its Special Operations Command, historically focused on counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations, must now adapt their capabilities and doctrines to address these external threats. This adaptation must occur while maintaining internal security capabilities, creating a complex balancing act that demands innovative approaches to national defense.
The Philippines' historical experience with resistance, particularly during World War II, provides valuable insights for contemporary defense planning. However, modern challenges require more than historical lessons—they demand a sophisticated integration of traditional Philippine strengths with contemporary resistance theories and practices. The Philippine Home Defense Program, with its deep roots in national history, offers a foundation for this integration but requires significant modernization to address current and emerging threats.
Examining how the Philippine Home Defense Program can be enhanced through the theoretical lens of the Resistance Operating Concept reveals a path to strengthening national defense while maintaining essential connections to Philippine cultural values and operational realities. Historical precedents, contemporary defense frameworks, and emerging security challenges inform a comprehensive approach to resistance that strengthens both conventional deterrence and irregular capabilities.
The evolution of Philippine Home Defense provides a historical and institutional context for current reforms, while contemporary resistance theory, particularly the Resistance Operating Concept and NATO's Comprehensive Defense frameworks, offers modern approaches for adaptation. Understanding critical implementation challenges allows for developing specific recommendations that enhance Philippine resistance capabilities while maintaining cultural authenticity. Ultimately, this approach to national defense has broader implications for Philippine security and regional stability, demonstrating how smaller nations can develop effective resistance strategies that complement conventional military capabilities while maintaining sovereignty in an increasingly complex security environment.
The Evolution of Philippine Home Defense
The Philippine approach to national defense emerges from a complex history of resistance against foreign occupation, shaping not only military doctrine but fundamental concepts of sovereignty and national identity. The effectiveness of Filipino guerrilla forces during World War II against Japanese occupation established more than historical precedent—it demonstrated the potential of locally organized resistance networks when integrated with broader defensive strategies. This experience provided crucial lessons about the relationship between local population support, operational effectiveness, and strategic resilience.
The transition to a structured home defense program began in the 1970s with the establishment of the Integrated Civilian Home Defense Forces (ICHDF) under President Ferdinand Marcos. This initial attempt at institutionalizing civilian participation in national defense evolved into the Civilian Armed Force Geographical Unit (CAFGU) under Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile. While the early program faced significant challenges, including concerns about human rights and operational oversight, it established fundamental principles about civilian-military integration in national defense that continue to influence current approaches.
The contemporary Philippine Home Defense Program represents a sophisticated evolution of these earlier efforts, encompassing multiple interconnected elements that extend beyond traditional military structures. The CAFGU, operating under Executive Order No. 264, serves as the program's foundation, providing a formal framework for civilian auxiliary forces that support AFP operations. These units leverage intimate local knowledge and community connections, particularly in rural areas where traditional military presence may be limited.
Complementing the CAFGU, Civilian Volunteer Organizations (CVOs) operate under the Local Government Code of 1991, providing crucial intelligence and security support at the community level. This legal framework ensures local government participation in security efforts while maintaining civilian oversight. The Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) program, mandated under Republic Act No. 7077, develops future military leadership while fostering a broader understanding of national defense throughout civil society.
At the most granular level, Barangay Tanod units represent the basic building blocks of community security. These village-level organizations, operating under local government authority, provide essential monitoring and early warning capabilities while maintaining strong connections to their communities. This multi-tiered approach to civilian participation in national defense creates overlapping layers of security awareness and response capabilities.
The program's effectiveness relies heavily on supporting initiatives that address broader societal needs. Civilian welfare programs, often implemented through the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), demonstrate a recognition that effective national defense requires addressing underlying social and economic conditions. Public information campaigns enhance awareness and encourage cooperation between security forces and local communities, creating a more comprehensive approach to national security.
The continued development of the Philippine Home Defense Program reflects the growing sophistication of understanding the requirements for effective national defense and resistance. The program has moved beyond simple military-civilian cooperation to embrace a more nuanced approach that recognizes the importance of societal resilience, local leadership development, and adaptive security networks. While these existing structures provide a strong foundation, they must evolve to address contemporary challenges that differ significantly from their original design parameters.
While these historical experiences and existing structures provide valuable precedent, contemporary resistance theories offer additional frameworks for modern adaptation. The evolution of resistance thought in post-World War II Europe, particularly regarding total defense concepts, presents opportunities to enhance the Philippines' proven approaches while preserving essential connections to local communities and values
Contemporary Resistance Theory and Practice
The theoretical underpinnings of modern resistance doctrine trace their origins to post-World War II European military thought. Swiss military theorist Hans von Dach's seminal work, Total Defense, revolutionized thinking about national resistance by integrating armed resistance, guerrilla warfare, and civilian participation into a comprehensive approach to defending against foreign occupation. Von Dach's emphasis on societal resilience and civilian participation particularly resonates with the Filipino experience during World War II, providing theoretical validation for historical Philippine approaches while offering modern refinements for today's asymmetric security challenges.
A significant evolution in resistance theory occurred in 2014 when the United States Special Operations Command Europe initiated collaboration with European partners to reexamine resistance in the context of modern security challenges. This effort culminated in the 2019 Resistance Operating Concept (ROC) publication, which transcends traditional military planning by integrating civil disobedience, information operations, and governance preservation under occupation.
NATO's approach to comprehensive defense, developed under LTG Eric Wendt's leadership at NATO SOF Command, complements the ROC and provides additional theoretical frameworks for consideration. While the ROC focuses primarily on resistance operations, NATO's framework emphasizes the integration of military and non-military capabilities at the national level. This whole-of-society approach to enhancing deterrence, defense, and building societal resilience offers valuable insights for Philippine defense planning, particularly in coordinating responses across multiple domains of national power and the population at large.
The Philippine security environment demands a sophisticated synthesis of these approaches tailored to the nation's unique characteristics. The ROC's emphasis on pre-conflict network development aligns with Philippine traditions of community organization and Bayanihan spirit, while NATO's focus on comprehensive governmental integration provides valuable models for institutional development. The archipelagic geography and diverse population of the Philippines create distinct opportunities and challenges for resistance operations that must be considered in adopting these frameworks.
The development of a uniquely Philippine approach that draws from these modern frameworks while remaining true to national values and traditions represents a complex but essential task. This approach must build upon existing structures while incorporating new capabilities to address emerging threats.
While these international frameworks provide valuable theoretical foundations for resistance planning, their practical application in the Philippine context presents unique challenges. The translation of European resistance concepts to an archipelagic environment, the adaptation of NATO frameworks to Southeast Asian political realities, and the integration of modern resistance theory with traditional Philippine social structures all require careful consideration. Moving from theoretical understanding to practical implementation demands attention to specific cultural, institutional, and operational challenges that shape the Philippine security environment. Understanding and addressing these challenges is critical to successful program development and forms the foundation for effective modernization of the Philippine Home Defense Program.
Implementation Challenges and Strategic Considerations
The development of a comprehensive resistance capability within the Philippine Home Defense Program faces three primary challenges: cultural, programmatic, and operational. Each requires distinct approaches while maintaining synchronization with overall program objectives.
The fundamental challenge lies in transforming how resistance is perceived within Philippine society. Many view resistance planning as an admission that conventional defenses will fail—a mindset that can hinder program development and implementation. This perspective must shift to understand resistance as a vital component of a layered defense strategy. Just as a warrior carries multiple weapons—a rifle, pistol, and knife—each serving different purposes and providing options when primary weapons fail, resistance capabilities offer critical options for continuing the fight despite enemy occupation. This cultural transformation requires sustained education and engagement efforts to help both military and civilian leaders understand that preparing for resistance strengthens rather than undermines conventional deterrence.
The second major challenge involves securing necessary governmental support and establishing required legal frameworks. Developing a national resistance capability requires significant resource and political capital investment. Key stakeholders must be convinced of the program's strategic importance within the broader national defense construct. This includes passing appropriate legislation, establishing necessary policies, and allocating adequate resources. The challenge extends beyond simple funding authorization to creating comprehensive legal frameworks that protect and enable resistance activities while ensuring appropriate oversight and control mechanisms.
The third challenge—practical implementation—requires careful consideration of the Philippines' unique geographic and cultural landscape. The country's archipelagic nature presents both opportunities and challenges for network development, particularly regarding command-and-control relationships and communication infrastructure. The program requires sophisticated management of operational security while building broad-based support and participation across the nation's diverse communities and regions.
Long-term success requires careful attention to critical operational factors. The program must balance transparency with security requirements, establish appropriate effectiveness metrics, and ensure continuity across political transitions. The development of resilient communication systems and the cultivation of international partnerships must occur while maintaining operational security and program independence, all while preserving focus amid competing national security priorities.
Addressing these implementation barriers requires a coordinated approach that combines strategic patience with sustained commitment. Success depends on overcoming challenges and managing their complex interactions while maintaining progress toward overall program objectives. Successful solutions will require specific, actionable approaches that balance immediate practical concerns with long-term strategic objectives.
Modernizing the Philippine Home Defense Program
The modernization of the Philippine Home Defense Program requires a sophisticated balance between preserving effective existing structures and incorporating new capabilities to address emerging threats. AFP Special Operations Forces, particularly Special Forces, are ideally suited to lead this transformation. Their expertise in Unconventional Warfare and deep connections to local communities position them to develop a Philippine-specific Resistance Operating Concept focused on pre-conflict preparation while maintaining the flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing security situations.
The maritime domain presents a critical opportunity for enhancing resistance operations. Drawing inspiration from successful historical models like the Australian Coast Watcher program of World War II, the Philippines can expand CAFGU and CVO capabilities into maritime resistance networks. Local fisherfolk communities represent an invaluable resource for intelligence gathering and potential operational support. Their intimate knowledge of coastal waters and established networks provide natural cover for resistance activities. This maritime emphasis acknowledges the critical importance of maintaining awareness and presence in contested waters while leveraging existing civilian maritime activities.
Regional alignment of reservists and retired AFP SOF personnel represents another key modernization element, particularly in areas with a higher probability of adversary occupation, such as Palawan, Northern Luzon, and the Batanes Islands. Their professional military expertise and deep local connections create natural bridges between active-duty forces and civilian networks. This "SOF-for-life" mentality ensures continuity of expertise while maintaining strong community bonds.
Resistance networks must serve dual purposes to ensure their sustainability and acceptance. By designing these networks to support disaster relief operations and other legitimate community needs, local governments can justify and support their development without explicitly identifying them as resistance structures. This approach builds upon the Filipino tradition of Bayanihan while creating capabilities that can be adapted for resistance if needed. These networks provide regular opportunities for testing and refining communication procedures and command relationships while delivering immediate community benefits that enhance their legitimacy and sustainability. A well-prepared resistance framework has significant operational advantages beyond its immediate security benefits. Historical examples of failed occupations due to inadequate force ratios demonstrate that well-prepared resistance significantly increases potential adversaries' costs of occupation. By forcing adversaries to factor in these additional requirements, a credible resistance capability can delay or deter aggressive actions while providing time for conventional defensive preparations.
This modernization effort yields broader strategic benefits that extend beyond immediate security considerations. It demonstrates to international partners, particularly the United States, that the Philippines maintains a sovereign mindset while avoiding overdependence on foreign support. This approach, coupled with the constitutional prohibition on foreign military bases, positions the Philippines favorably with U.S. policymakers across the political spectrum while maintaining national independence.
Success in this modernization effort requires sustained commitment and careful attention to capability development. Through this balanced approach, the Philippines can develop a truly comprehensive defense capability that serves both immediate security needs and long-term strategic interests while maintaining essential connections to Philippine values and traditions.
Conclusion: The Path Forward
The modernization of the Philippine Home Defense Program through the integration of resistance capabilities represents more than a tactical evolution—it embodies a strategic reimagining of national defense appropriate to 21st-century challenges. This transformation addresses both conventional and irregular threats while acknowledging the unique characteristics of Philippine geography, culture, and society.
Philippine Special Operations Forces serve as the vanguard of this transformation, leveraging their expertise in unconventional warfare to build and maintain resistance networks across the archipelago. Their role extends beyond tactical implementation to include strategic advisory functions, helping civilian and military leadership understand and embrace comprehensive resistance concepts. AFP SOF bridges the gap between military and non-military capabilities while ensuring programs remain culturally authentic and operationally viable through close collaboration with civilian partners and international allies.
The success of this enhanced Home Defense Program depends fundamentally on whole-of-society commitment and participation. The Philippines possesses unique advantages in this regard—a strong tradition of resistance, deeply rooted community structures, and a culture of resilience. By leveraging these inherent strengths while incorporating modern defense concepts, the Philippines can create a formidable deterrent that extends beyond conventional military capabilities.
Perhaps most significantly, this modernization effort demonstrates that smaller nations can develop effective strategies to maintain independence and territorial integrity even when faced with larger, more powerful potential adversaries. Through careful preparation, societal resilience, and demonstrated resolve, the Philippines can ensure its security while contributing to regional stability. This approach may serve as a model for other nations facing similar asymmetric challenges in the Indo-Pacific region.
The path forward requires sustained commitment, careful implementation, and continuous adaptation to evolving threats. Building upon centuries of Filipino resilience and resistance tradition while incorporating modern defense concepts creates a strong foundation for future security. In this way, the Philippines can chart a course toward a more secure and sovereign future, ensuring that the Filipino spirit—which has proven stronger than any adversity—continues to prevail.
References
Batongbacal, Jay L. "The West Philippine Sea: The Territorial and Maritime Jurisdiction Disputes from a Filipino Perspective." The Journal of Territorial and Maritime Studies 2, no. 1 (2015): 85-113.
Cruz De Castro, Renato. "The Philippines and the Maritime Security Order in Southeast Asia: The Risks and Rewards of the US Alliance Under Marcos Jr." Asian Affairs 53, no. 4 (2022): 855-878.
Fiala, Otto C. "Resistance Operating Concept: Assisting Partner Nations to Develop Organized Resistance." Special Operations Journal 6, no. 2 (2020): 141-151.
Fridell, Malin, and Marcus Mohlin. "Total Defense 2.0: A New Approach to Civil-Military Relations in an Era of Gray Zone Conflict." Defense & Security Analysis 38, no. 1 (2022): 102-119.
Kilcullen, David. The Dragons and the Snakes: How the Rest Learned to Fight the West. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
Lamb, Christopher J., and David Tucker. "Special Operations Forces: A Strategic Perspective." Joint Force Quarterly 100 (2021): 46-53.
Poling, Gregory B. On Dangerous Ground: America's Century in the South China Sea. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022.
Stringer, Kevin D. "Building a Stay-Behind Resistance Organization: The Case of Cold War Switzerland Against the Soviet Union." Joint Force Quarterly 86 (2017): 109-114.
Terami-Wada, Motoe. "The Filipino Volunteer Armies." In The Philippines Under Japan: Occupation Policy and Reaction, edited by Ikehata Setsuho and Ricardo Trota Jose, 59-98. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1999.
Wendt, Eric P. "Strategic Competition and Resistance in the 21st Century: Irregular Warfare, SOF, and the Implications for American Defense Policy." Joint Force Quarterly 96 (2020): 40-49.
Acknowledgments
The development of this article and its concepts was supported by the dedicated efforts of the AFP SOCOM Comprehensive Defense Working Group, which convened in November 2023 and March 2024. The working group hosted by AFP SOCOM included participation from SOF planners across the AFP SOF community and received assistance from the Philippine Pacific Assistance Team, the U.S. Special Operations Task Force, and academics from the U.S. Naval Post Graduate School and Joint Special Operations University at USSOCOM. Their ongoing efforts and contributions proved invaluable in shaping the ideas and recommendations presented herein.
The AFP SOCOM's initiative to draft a Resistance Operating Concept specifically tailored to the Philippine context represents a crucial step in modernizing the nation's existing Home Defense Program. This endeavor demonstrates AFP SOCOM's commitment to strengthening the Philippines' defense capabilities and ensuring national resilience in the face of emerging challenges.
Additional Credits
The following experts contributed to this article and the development of the concept. In no particular order, Dr. Douglas Boer, Mr. Michael “Grizz” Mollohan, and CW5(R) Chad Machiela from the Naval Post Graduate School, Mr. Serge French from U.S. Special Operations Command, LTC Blake Safeco from Special Operations Command Pacific and LTC Jimmie Jimenez from the Armed Forces of the Philippines Special Operations Command.
About the Author
CW5 Maurice "Duc" DuClos currently serves as a Guest Lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) in Monterey, California. His professional background includes various positions at the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) Joint Special Operations University (JSOU), the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USAJFKSWCS), 1st Special Forces Group (Airborne) and 2/75th Ranger Battalion.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the United States Special Operations Command, Joint Special Operations University, or the Naval Postgraduate School.
Comments