By Vince Hermosura
Recognizing that cyberattacks offer malevolent forces a low-cost means to disrupt critical infrastructure without triggering the legal implications of war, the opening of the Pilipinas Conference 2025 placed renewed attention on the urgency of strengthening the Philippines’ cybersecurity posture. Organized by the Stratbase Institute in partnership with the Embassy of Japan, the forum brought together government officials, diplomats, and regional experts at The Peninsula Manila to examine the country’s vulnerabilities amid intensifying digital threats across the Indo-Pacific.
DICT Secretary Henry Aguda framed the situation bluntly, warning that the Philippines’ digital competitiveness is slipping at a pivotal moment. For Aguda, digital disruption has already evolved from a technological shift into a survival issue that shapes the country’s economic trajectory and national stability. He cited the decline of the digital economy to 8.4 percent of GDP in 2024—a metric he described as unacceptable not because of its numerical value alone, but because it reflects consequences that ultimately affect people’s livelihoods.
Aguda outlined the government’s accelerated agenda centered on rapid infrastructure deployment, wider digital adoption, and stronger governance mechanisms. Yet he acknowledged that government action alone will not be enough. The scale and speed of cyber threats demand broad-based collaboration across industries and sectors. His push for what he termed “hyper-exponential growth” was both a challenge and a declaration of intent, signaling that incremental progress is no longer sufficient to reverse stagnation.
Stratbase Institute President Victor Andres “Dindo” Manhit expanded the discussion by focusing on the strategic implications of modern cyber threats. He noted that risks emerging from the digital domain are now borderless, asymmetrical, and increasingly difficult to detect. The spread of deepfakes, coordinated disinformation efforts, and advanced cyber intrusions illustrate how traditional lines between military, political, and civic spheres have blurred. Manhit stressed that cybersecurity is fundamentally an issue of trust—trust in digital systems, institutions, and information flows—and that securing this digital environment must be a shared responsibility among government, the private sector, and international partners.
The international dimension was reinforced by Japanese Ambassador Endo Kazuya, who pointed to the global spike in cyberattacks as evidence that no country can address these threats alone. Japan’s monitoring data, which showed cyberattack-related communications growing from 63 billion packets in 2015 to 686 billion in 2024, underscores how rapidly the threat landscape is expanding. For Kazuya, cooperation is not merely beneficial but indispensable. He highlighted Japan’s continued engagement with ASEAN, including the ASEAN-Japan Cybersecurity Capacity Building Center that has already trained 4,400 cybersecurity professionals, with Filipinos among the most active participants. This, he emphasized, reflects Japan’s long-term commitment to fostering a free, fair, and secure cyberspace.
Diplomats from Australia, Canada, and the European Union who joined the panel discussions stressed similar themes: cyber risks are evolving faster than the mechanisms designed to contain them. The need for deeper intelligence-sharing, more coordinated incident response systems, and stronger public-private partnerships emerged as critical points. Their insights collectively pointed to a regional environment where threat actors are becoming more sophisticated, faster, and more emboldened.
Against this backdrop, the conference’s first day underscored a decisive shift: cybersecurity is no longer a technical niche but a central pillar of national preparedness. For the Philippines, the challenge lies not only in defending against emerging threats but in ensuring that its digital transformation progresses rapidly enough to remain competitive and resilient. The question is no longer whether to prepare for these risks, but whether the country can afford any delay in doing so.