“Uniteam has formally been dissolved and she has just become the leader of the opposition…

Harry Roque, former spokesperson for Rodrigo Duterte, on Sara’s resignation from Marcos Cabinet.

Rifts in alliance

The break-up of the UniTeam alliance does not come as a shock as signs of tension were evident early in their term.

A major source of tension for these supposed “allies” is their differing stances towards global powers: the Duterte camp leans towards China, while the Marcoses align more closely with the United States. This historical rift extends beyond domestic politics. The Marcos family’s longstanding alliance with the US traces back to Ferdinand Marcos Sr., who as president facilitated American military presence and forged close ties with US leaders. In contrast, the Duterte administration, has pursued a cooperative relationship with China.

In 2023, the situation escalated when lawmakers stripped Sara Duterte of her confidential funds. Duterte responded by saying it was no time for politicking, but negative exchanges soon followed. Rodrigo Duterte accused Bongbong Marcos of drug use, to which Marcos retaliated by claiming Duterte was on fentanyl. Further deepening the divide, Rodrigo Duterte advocated for the secession of Mindanao, and members of the Duterte family participated in a prayer rally against Charter Change—a stance opposed by many of Marcos’s allies. Given these significant points of contention, the internal power struggle between the two camps proved too substantial to reconcile, ultimately leading to their fallout.

The UniTeam was a tandem during the 2022 elections. The elections are over, we won and we are grateful to those who supported us…We are not candidates anymore.

VP Sara Duterte on the status of the UniTeam during 126th Independence Day rites

Now that the Duterte-Marcos alliance has come to an end, what does this entail for Philippine democracy?

United we stand, divided we fall?

This rift creates an opportunity for the real opposition to consolidate and fight against the Marcoses and Dutertes. The divide creates a plurality in power, making it easier for a more democratic opposition to dismantle the reigning powers compared to the previous supermajority. 

The rift between the Marcos and Duterte camps creates an opportunity for the genuine opposition to consolidate and challenge their dominance. This division introduces a plurality in power, making it easier for a more democratic opposition to dismantle the previous supermajority. 

The conflict between the two camps can also lead to the exposure of each other’s corruption and malpractices, thereby engaging public discourse and encouraging citizens to scrutinize their leaders more closely. This could lead to increased political accountability and transparency. For instance, the Dutertes might attack the Marcoses’ historical revisionism, while the Marcoses could retaliate by highlighting human rights violations during Rodrigo Duterte’s War on Drugs and his pending case with the International Criminal Court (ICC). The recent exposé on Duterte’s “gentleman’s agreement” with China is already evidence of this dynamic

Democracy in peril

This divide poses a threat to democracy by fostering further polarization and eroding democratic institutions. The personalistic approach of both camps reduces the democratic process to a familial power struggle, prompting voters to align with personalities rather than making electoral decisions based on shared platforms and values.

This dynamic also leads to pernicious polarization. As defined by Jennifer McCoy (2022), “pernicious polarization arises when political entrepreneurs pursue their political objectives by using polarizing strategies, such as mobilizing voters with divisive, demonizing discourse and exploiting existing grievances, and opposing political elites then reciprocate with similarly polarizing tactics or fail to develop effective nonpolarizing responses.”  This polarization has already manifested in Philippine politics, with Duterte versus Drugs– as justification for his drug war, UniTeam versus Kakampink– during the 2022 elections, and now the Marcoses versus the Dutertes– with factions from the solid north supporting Marcos (BBMs) and Duterte supporters (DDS) from Mindanao.

As evinced by the 2022 and 2016 elections, the Marcoses and Dutertes are capable of mobilizing massive political machinery. With the upcoming midterm elections in 2025, this capability could lead to a chaotic electoral process marred by populist rhetoric, divisive narratives, and disinformation campaigns. This multipolar setting leaves the genuine opposition in a precarious situation, vulnerable to attacks from both camps and at risk of losing support and being branded as irrelevant.

More than the Duterte vs. Marcos vs. Opposition rhetoric, the breakdown of democratic institutions paves the way for autocratic leaders to rise, shaping the trajectory of Philippine politics towards further democratic erosion. The personalistic power struggle between the two families not only polarizes the electorate but also undermines the foundational structures of democracy. This erosion of democratic values and institutions creates a fertile ground for autocratic leaders to exploit the chaos and consolidate power. Consequently, the political landscape becomes increasingly authoritarian, with diminished checks and balances, weakening the overall democratic framework and threatening the future of democratic governance in the Philippines.