A Vision That Leaves Mindanao Looking In
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s fifth State of the Nation Address (SONA) was a confident presentation of an administration determined to project stability amid global uncertainty, economic pressures, and domestic challenges. It showcased achievements in governance, anti-corruption, disaster response, infrastructure, education, health care, energy security, and foreign relations. It painted the picture of a government that is moving the country forward.
But for the more than 28 million people of Mindanao, the speech raises an uncomfortable but unavoidable question: Is Mindanao truly moving forward at the same pace as the rest of the country—or is it once again being asked to wait?
The President did mention Mindanao several times. He spoke about earthquake recovery, flood mitigation, BARMM’s first parliamentary elections, hydrogen energy projects, petroleum service contracts, an ecozone in Misamis Oriental, electric buses in Davao City, and disaster preparedness initiatives. These are important undertakings that deserve recognition. They demonstrate that Mindanao has not been ignored.
However, recognition alone is not the issue.
The real question is whether these initiatives reflect the same level of ambition, strategic investment, and long-term vision that the administration outlined for Luzon. Judging solely from the SONA itself, the answer appears difficult to affirm.
Relief for Mindanao, Transformation for Luzon
One of the President’s strongest references to Mindanao focused on the government’s response to the recent earthquake that struck parts of the island. More than 600,000 affected families received assistance. Billions of pesos were allocated for food, shelter, financial aid, medical services, and the restoration of roads, electricity, communications, and water systems. The administration also announced the establishment of a primary disaster resource center in Mindanao and the construction of disaster-resilient Ligtas Pinoy Centers in Bukidnon and Davao de Oro.
These interventions are necessary. They save lives, restore communities, and strengthen disaster preparedness.
Yet they are fundamentally reactive. They respond to tragedies that have already occurred rather than fundamentally changing the economic future of the island.
Disaster response, no matter how efficient, cannot be mistaken for regional development. Rebuilding after destruction is not the same as building lasting prosperity.
The same pattern emerges elsewhere in the speech. Flood mitigation efforts, cash-for-work cleanup programs in several Mindanao provinces, rehabilitation of the Panul-iran Bridge in Iligan, and emergency assistance all address existing problems. They are responses to vulnerabilities, not strategies to eliminate them.
The Geography of National Priorities
The contrast becomes even more striking when the SONA turns to the administration’s flagship development agenda.
The President devoted significant attention to projects that are clearly transformational in nature: the North-South Commuter Railway, MRT-7, the continued expansion of Luzon’s railway system, expressways, transport terminals, the Luzon Economic Corridor, advanced manufacturing hubs, artificial intelligence industries, logistics centers, and even preparations for the country’s first spaceport in Cagayan.
These are not simply infrastructure projects. They are long-term investments intended to reshape the country’s economy for decades. They are designed to attract billions in investments, generate high-value employment, stimulate innovation, and position the Philippines more competitively in the global economy.
Mindanao received no equivalent roadmap.
Instead, the island’s major announcements consisted of electric buses for Davao City, hydrogen power projects still in their pre-development stages, petroleum service contracts, a new ecozone in Misamis Oriental, and continued support for BARMM’s political transition.
These projects have undeniable value. Some, particularly the historic co-management of petroleum service contracts with the BARMM Government, represent meaningful progress. Yet collectively they do not approach the scale, maturity, or transformative potential of the flagship projects highlighted for Luzon.
The imbalance is difficult to overlook.
Mindanao Deserves More Than Recovery
Mindanao has long been called the country’s food basket. It supplies much of the nation’s bananas, pineapples, coconuts, cacao, coffee, rice, corn, fisheries, livestock, and other agricultural products. It possesses vast renewable energy resources, rich mineral reserves, globally competitive export industries, and strategic access to Southeast Asia.
Despite these strengths, the island continues to be discussed primarily through the lenses of disaster recovery, conflict transformation, and social assistance.
The nationwide agricultural programs highlighted in the SONA—including mechanization, irrigation, crop insurance, cold storage facilities, farm machinery, and financial assistance—will undoubtedly benefit Mindanao. However, these are national interventions rather than a comprehensive strategy specifically designed to unlock the island’s enormous economic potential.
Where is the long-term logistics master plan that connects Mindanao’s agricultural heartlands to international markets?
Where are the large-scale investments in agro-industrial corridors that can process raw products into higher-value exports?
Where is the commitment to modern ports, integrated cold-chain systems, research centers, digital innovation hubs, manufacturing clusters, or a Mindanao-wide transportation network capable of reducing logistics costs and attracting industries?
If Mindanao is expected to continue feeding the nation, then it deserves more than production support. It deserves the infrastructure, industries, and investments that allow it to become one of the country’s primary engines of economic growth.
Reactive Governance Cannot Replace Strategic Development
A recurring theme throughout the SONA was government’s ability to respond rapidly to crises. The administration highlighted swift interventions during the Middle East conflict, measures to cushion rising fuel prices, expanded social protection, and prompt responses to natural disasters.
Those actions merit recognition.
But governance cannot remain defined primarily by how effectively it reacts after problems emerge.
True national development is measured by a government’s ability to anticipate challenges, reduce vulnerabilities, and build systems that permanently improve people’s lives. It requires sustained investments in infrastructure, industrialization, innovation, education, logistics, and regional competitiveness that extend well beyond electoral cycles.
Mindanao continues to grapple with high transportation costs, uneven infrastructure, periodic energy concerns, climate-related disasters, and investment gaps. These structural challenges cannot be solved through emergency appropriations alone. They require a deliberate and sustained development agenda spanning the next ten to twenty years.
The SONA offered glimpses of such long-term planning.
Most of those glimpses, however, pointed north.
BARMM Is Progress, But It Cannot Be the Entire Mindanao Story
One of the most encouraging portions of the President’s speech concerned the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. Preparations for BARMM’s first regular parliamentary elections and the unprecedented co-management of petroleum service contracts between the national government and the Bangsamoro Government are historic milestones that deserve broad public support.
These developments strengthen regional autonomy, reinforce the gains of the peace process, and create opportunities for greater energy security within the Bangsamoro.
But BARMM cannot represent the entirety of Mindanao’s development narrative.
Mindanao is a vast and diverse island composed of six administrative regions, major metropolitan centers, globally competitive agricultural industries, emerging manufacturing hubs, internationally significant biodiversity, and millions of Filipinos whose aspirations extend far beyond post-conflict recovery.
Its future must be defined not only by peacebuilding, but also by industrialization, technological innovation, higher education, renewable energy, advanced agriculture, world-class logistics, tourism, and globally competitive investments.
Equal Citizenship Requires Equal Ambition
Mindanao is not asking for special treatment.
It is asking for equal ambition.
Equal ambition means that national development should not consistently be measured by railways built in Luzon, industrial corridors established in the north, or advanced technology hubs concentrated around the capital while Mindanao continues to celebrate bridges repaired after disasters and relief delivered after emergencies.
Equal ambition means recognizing that one of the country’s richest regions should no longer be viewed primarily as a recipient of assistance, but as a strategic partner in driving national economic growth.
For generations, Mindanao has supplied food, energy, exports, and natural resources that have fueled the Philippine economy. Its people have demonstrated resilience through conflict, disasters, and decades of underinvestment.
Resilience, however, should never become an excuse for accepting unequal development.
The Remaining Two Years Will Define the Administration’s Legacy
President Marcos concluded his SONA by promising to finish what his administration has started during its remaining two years.
That promise now presents both an opportunity and a challenge.
If the administration genuinely seeks inclusive national progress, then the remaining years must be remembered not only for railways completed in Luzon or technology hubs established in the north, but also for finally giving Mindanao the scale of investment, strategic planning, and economic imagination that its people have long deserved.
The Philippines cannot claim balanced national development if one of its most resource-rich, strategically located, and economically vital islands continues to receive greater attention after disasters than before opportunities.
Mindanao has never lacked potential.
It has only lacked proportional priority.
The next two years should not simply be about helping Mindanao recover from the last crisis.
They should be about ensuring that Mindanao finally stands—not at the periphery of the national agenda—but at the very heart of the country’s future.