N/A

This study examines the varying strategic positioning of the Philippines between the United States and China across the administrations of Arroyo, Aquino III, Duterte, and Marcos Jr. Existing literature emphasizes material interests or great-power dynamics as explanatory factors. However, this research employs a constructivist cultural framing approach, arguing that shifts in Philippine foreign policy are profoundly shaped by culturally embedded frames selectively activated by political leaders and constrained by public opinion. Through an inductive rhetorical and policy analysis, this study identifies five original cultural frames: (1) Nationalism and Sovereignty, (2) Colonial Legacy and Legalism, (3) Anti-Imperialism and Anti-Interventionism, (4) Short-Term Survivalism, and (5) Public Morality and National Honor. These frames serve as interpretative lenses that allow leaders to legitimize or recalibrate foreign policy narratives in response to domestic expectations or geopolitical pressures. Integrating Kuik Cheng-Chwee’s hedging framework, the study demonstrates that cultural legitimacy, rather than merely rationalist calculations, is a crucial factor shaping alignment. By analyzing how these frames interact dynamically with leadership strategies, historical memory, and public opinion, this research contributes a nuanced understanding of small and middle power behavior amidst great-power rivalry, particularly within postcolonial contexts.