Under Aquino III: Promoting Ties of Dependency with the U.S.?

Under Aquino III: Promoting Ties of Dependency with the U.S.?
By the Policy Study, Publication, and Advocacy
Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)
August 14, 2010

Those who are watching the first 100 days of the new administration can now start focusing their lens on President Benigno S. Aquino III’s coming visit to the United States in September - his first major official foreign trip. The decision to make the U.S. as his maiden foreign destination is not only symbolic but will have far-reaching implications not only on foreign policy but also on the so-called special relationship between a former colony and a superpower. In the long run, it will have broad implications on the Filipino people.



Of course, the presidential spokesperson says Aquino III, together with other heads of state, is going to address the United Nations General Assembly when it convenes next month. The more important agenda, however, pertains to the event that will happen at the White House and other meetings with high U.S. officials. The new president will make a courtesy call to the world’s most powerful leader – a traditional ritual performed by the Philippines’ past presidents from Manuel Quezon to Ferdinand Marcos and until recently, Gloria M. Arroyo who made several visits to Washington, DC.

A meeting with the U.S. president will underscore the importance given by the Philippine government to “special ties” with a former colonial master. But these “special ties” have nothing to do with people-to-people friendly relations. These ties have been shaped largely by economic and military considerations that were proven to be inimical to the Filipino people’s sovereign and territorial rights even if being friendly with Uncle Sam guaranteed support for any sitting Philippine president.

In the post-World War II era official visits by Philippine presidents to the U.S. embodied the country’s commitments to onerous economic and defense agreements that laid the foundations of an unequal neo-colonial relationship between the two countries. Time was when the Philippines had to undergo economic reconstruction as a result of the destruction wrought by the war between the U.S. and Japan yet American rehabilitation funds were tied to extending parity rights to Americans, allowing the stay of U.S. military bases and supporting wars of aggression in Korea, Indochina, and elsewhere. Ferdinand E. Marcos was propped up by the U.S. as America’s spokesman in Southeast Asia when the U.S. needed a coalition of forces from the region to support its wars of aggression in Indochina. Marcos played the role of America’s mouthpiece so well that his dictatorship lasted long enough thanks to continued U.S. support. The Americans dumped him when he became a liability and built up Corazon C. Aquino as the “third force” for succession. As a president, Aquino backed the renewal of the U.S. military bases and unleashed a U.S.-inspired “total war” policy against rebels leading to more human rights violations.

Bush regime

During the Bush regime, Mrs. Arroyo paid several visits to Washington, DC where she also met Pentagon and Congress leaders. The numerous agreements that she forged – most of them confidential – led to the Philippines playing the role as America’s “second front” against terrorism thus paving the entry of U.S. forces and military installations in the guise of war exercises and special trainings. Since 2001 the increase of U.S. military aid and intervention led to the escalation of extra-judicial killings and other war crimes amid the intensification of Arroyo’s counter-insurgency campaign against the Left, whether armed or unarmed. Yet, despite the financial commitments made by the U.S. government Arroyo’s nine-year presidency saw the highest unemployment rate in 50 years, widening income disparities, corruption, election fraud, plunder, and political repression.

In late May this year when the results of the presidential race had yet to be completed the U.S. ambassador to Manila, Harry Thomas, Jr., was the first foreign envoy to congratulate Aquino III. Their talks at Times Street touched on continued U.S. support, special ties between the two countries, and an invitation for an early state visit by the president-apparent. The Times Street talks have been followed by high-level meetings with U.S. state department officials led by Secretary Hillary Clinton, a new military assistance package, an offer of a missiles and war aircraft sale, and port calls by warships from the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM). This week, the U.S. Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) announced the release of $434 million to fund three projects in the Philippines for five years. The MCC board is chaired also by Clinton.

In reciprocity, Aquino III said he is looking forward to the U.S. visit with an upbeat expectation of bringing “gifts” back to the country.

America’s current interest

Begging an immediate answer is what America’s current interest is in the Aquino III presidency and what possible “commitments” are on the table to emphasize the two countries’ “historic ties.” The lingering economic recession, increasing unemployment, and budget cuts or streamlining in the U.S. raise questions how much economic or military assistance is left that can be given to the Philippines and other countries - and in exchange for what.

The recent visits of high U.S. officials in the Philippines signal a continuing interest in the country in the context of America’s geo-strategic interests in the region and the rest of the world. The underlying framework of these objectives is chiseled in U.S. President Barack Obama’s National Security Strategy (NSS, May 2010) and the U.S. military’s new counter-insurgency (COIN) guide of January 2009. Although both doctrines reiterate the need to maintain the superpower’s access to world resources especially oil and other energy materials, they also stress America’s right to pre-emptive and unilateral strikes against “terrorism,” rogue regimes, and emerging powers, such as China, seeking to challenge the U.S.’ global power.

Recently, Obama secretly deployed new special operations forces (SOFs) to the Philippines and 69 other countries. The deployment is in line with the NSS and the new COIN which essentially continues U.S. counter-insurgency programs in as many countries especially in “failed (or weak) states” and in partnership with host governments and their armies. COIN, however, gives equal emphasis on the use of civilian components such as humanitarian missions; engaging NGOs, civil society, and diaspora communities; and an increasing role of the USAID and other agencies to promote “governance, transparency, the rule of law, and anti-corruption”. Not that both papers believe in democracy per se but they see the imperative of maintaining political stability and the elimination of “rogue enemies” as vital to U.S. imperial global interests.

Under Arroyo, the U.S. succeeded in inserting its forces and military outposts in the Philippines particularly in Basilan, Sulu, Tawi-Tawi, and Zamboanga. The U.S. claims that the Philippines, particularly Mindanao, is part of the “arch of instability” in Southeast Asia and the rest of East Asia where America’s strategic oil and other commodities pass through the South China Sea. China’s irredentist claim over the sea is now being contested by the U.S. which considers it as an “open territory”.

Consistent

There is no question that Aquino III will remain consistent with the traditional support for U.S. military presence in the country and the whole region. Likewise, he has made it clear that he supports the controversial Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) and has continued the Mrs. Arroyo’s U.S.-backed counter-insurgency campaign despite the fact that it has led to the killing of activists and other atrocities.

Influential rightist think tanks in the U.S., particularly the Heritage Foundation, are pressing Obama to continue supporting the AFP’s modernization program with bigger funds. The modernization assistance is being geared toward upgrading the Philippines’ territorial defense especially over the Spratly islands which are claimed by China and other countries.

An increased defense alliance with the U.S. leading to a quiet escalation of its military presence will make the Philippines a pawn in the Pentagon’s plan of containment and encirclement of China. If Aquino III makes the mistake of succumbing to this pressure, he runs the risk of antagonizing Beijing’s trade ties with Manila and its growing investments in mining, electronics, and other industries. It could provoke retaliation from China in the disputed Spratly islands.

The U.S. government’s strategic military operations in the Philippines in the guise of fighting terrorism are driven by America’s war industries that are supported by big defense spending in the midst of recession. In the U.S. recession the only prospects of recovery and employment are provided by Boeing, and other corporations involved in the war industry. The presence of U.S. forces in the Philippines and elsewhere in the world has been profitable to engineering, construction, electronics, aircraft, shipping, and other war manufacturing corporations in the U.S. Globally, U.S. forces and installations along with wars of intervention that are raging in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other flashpoints help sustain the powerful military-industrial complex in the U.S.

When Aquino III goes to Washington, DC his commitment of support for continued U.S. military operations in the Philippines will also be a tacit promotion of the war industries that market weapons of mass destruction and wars of intervention in the world. Such pledge of support is expected to reap financial and military assistance for the new administration but it will also bind Aquino III – like past Philippine presidents - to a master-slave relationship.

The Philippine government’s exclusivist ties with America have continually jeopardized not only potentially productive ties with other countries but also deepened the country’s neo-colonial, superior-subordinate bondage to its former colonial master. In fact, the continued U.S. influence in the Philippine presidency has deprived the Filipino people of their sovereign right to self-determination, to non-intervention by a foreign country, while bitter economic pills are imposed by U.S.-influenced multilateral agencies. This relationship also helps sustain U.S. meddling in counter-insurgency operations turning the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) into a surrogate army of the Pentagon and a power broker of sorts insofar as the Philippine presidency is concerned.

Aquino III the presidential contender had promised change in the system of governance. What is unfolding as far as dealing with the U.S. is concerned may exactly be the opposite.

There is thus a compelling reason for patriotic forces in the Philippines, including progressive elements in Congress, to call for the abrogation of the VFA and other onerous agreements with the U.S. and an end to U.S. military presence. The overarching imperative is to work for an independent Philippine foreign policy as an important element of governance.

UN Recognizes RP as “Serious Ally and Partner” in Integrating Gender Perspective in Peacekeeping Work

At the launching of the Guidelines in Integrating the a Gender Perspective into the Work of the United Nations Military in Peacekeeping on August 9, the United Nations recognized the Philippines as a "serious ally and partner," with the Undersecretary General for Peacekeeping Operations noting the presence and contributions of Filipina peacekeepers deployed around the world.

Undersecretary General for Peacekeeping Operations Alain Le Roy praised the Philippines for "taking its role seriously in peace consolidation and for recognizing the importance of women as valuable partners in peacekeeping."

Speaking after the launch of the guidelines and a roundtable discussion on integrating gender perspective into the work of the United Nations military in peacekeeping operations here, Undersecretary General Le Roy said "The Philippines does not need to be convinced of its (integrating gender perspective) value.  We are thankful to the Philippines for its contributions to peacekeeping and in the efforts to integrate gender perspective in our peacekeeping work," added Roy.

Philippine Permanent Representative to the United Nations Libran N. Cabactulan welcomed USG Le Roy's statement and stressed anew the Philippines' commitment to integrating gender perspective in peacekeeping operations.

"Women have played an important role in peacekeeping around the world and we take pride in our female peacekeepers' contributions.  The guidelines issued by the UN will certainly help us move forward in our own gender integration efforts with our peacekeepers," Permanent Representative Cabactulan said.

The Guidelines issued by the UN's Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the Department of Field Support (DFS) seeks to support practical translation of existing mandates on women, peace and security among UN military peacekeeping personnel.

The Guidelines are intended to inform force generation goals in line with specific operational requirements for the selection and deployment of male and female military personnel, pre-deployment preparations and training of military personnel.

The Philippines sends peacekeeping troops and police to eight of 19 UN Missions.  68 Filipino women peacekeepers are present in Philippine troops serving in UN Missions in Haiti, Darfur, Golan Heights, Liberia, Sudan and Timor Leste.

Reposted from:

UN Recognizes RP as “Serious Ally and Partner” in Integrating Gender Perspective in Peacekeeping Work

Pagbabalik ng ROTC haharangin ng kabataan

Pagbabalik ng ROTC haharangin ng kabataan
Darius Galang, Pinoy Weekly

Tinututulan ng iba’t ibang grupo ng kabataan, maging ng kabataang kinatawan sa Kamara, ang panukala sa Kamara na ibalik ang Reserved Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) sa mga estudyante sa kolehiyo.

“Tinuturuan ng ROTC na magbulag-bulagan at walang-imik ang mga estudyante. Ginagamit pa ng AFP ang programa sa red-baiting laban sa progresibong mga grupong pang-estudyante, sa pamamagitan ng mga lektura nila sa ROTC na ang mga aktibistang grupo na ito ay may-ugnay sa rebeldeng New People’s Army,” ayon kay Kabataan Party-list Rep. Raymond Palatino.

Iminungkahi ni Cebu Rep. Eduardo Gullas sa Kamara na ibalik ang mandatory na (ROTC) at lusawin ang National Service Training Program (NSTP) para sa mga mag-aaral ng mga kolehiyo at unibersidad. Bahagi raw kasi ng programa ng ROTC, na pinamumunuan ng Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) ang pagtuturo ng patriyotismo sa mga kabataan.



Sinusugan ni Sek. Voltair Gazmin ng Department of National Defense ang panukala sa Kamara, dahil maibabalik daw ang disiplino at pagmamahal sa bayan ng mga kabataang Pilipino kung ibabalik ang ROTC.

Ngunit sinabi ni Palatino na maliban sa mapanupil na kulturang itinatanim ng ROTC sa mga estudyante, nagsisilbi rin ito para sa paniniktik sa kabataang mga aktibista sa iba’t ibang unibersidad. Sinabi ni Palatino na dati nilang naidokumento ang paniniktik ng mga estudyanteng opisyal ng ROTC sa militanteng mga organisasyon, at pagtatag ng mga student intelligence network sa mga kampus.

Noon pang 2006, nagpalaganap ang mga ito ng mga polyeto na pinipigilan ang mga estudyante na tutulan ang noo’y isinusulong na 300% tuition hike sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at inaakusahan ang mga lider ng mga protesta na “tagarekluta ng NPA.”

Napaulat na nangyari rin ang kahalintulad na insidente noong 2007 sa Politeknikong Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at, nitong taon lang, sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas-Los Baños nang nanawagan ang walkout ang mga lider-estudyante.

Ayon naman kay Anton Dulce, pangalawang tagapangulo ng Anakbayan, “Sa pagbabalik ng mga protesta sa kampus laban sa pagtaas ng matrikula at iba pang bayarin, kasama pa ang di-makatarungang polisiya ng administrasyon ng mga paaralan, natatakot kami na ang mandatory ROTC ay gagamitin bilang kasangkapan laban sa mga mag-aaral na lumalaban para sa kanilang mga karapatan.”

Kasama sa isinususog na dagdag sa programa ng ROTC ang pagtutuon ng pansin sa serbisyong pangkomunidad at pagtugon sa mga kalamidad at sakuna.

Ngunit para kay Terry Ridon, tagapangulo ng League of Filipino Students (LFS), “Ang mga diumano’y mabubuting intensiyon na ito ng AFP ay isinasagawa na ngayon ng citizen-driven na mga komponent ng NSTP tulad ng Literacy Training Service at Community Welfare Training Service, at epektibo naman ang pagsasagawa nito sa implementasyon ng batas ulok sa NSTP. Ang balakin ng AFP ay nauuwi lamang sa pagpapaulit ng programa. (program redundancy).”

Dagdag pa niya na sa halos isang dekadang pagsasagawa ng NSTP ay binigyan nito ng laya ang mga mag-aaral na pumili para sa kanilang sarili ng programang maghahasa sa kanila at magbigay ng serbisyong pampubliko. “If it ain’t broke, why fix it?” sambit pa ni Dulce.

Mariin na tinututulan ni Palatino ang programang pagbabalik ng ROTC sa mga paaralan, at isinasaad niya na walang puwang ang puwersang-militar sa mga paaralan.

“Dahil sa madugo at malagim na rekord nila sa karapatang-pantao, walang karapatan ang AFP sa pang-akademikong pakikisali ng ating kabataan. Ang isang warmongering at mersenaryong institusyon ay hindi dapat hayaang makapasok sa mga paaralan at magturo sa mga mag-aaral,” ani Palatino, na nangakong lalabanan ang pagpapasa ng panukalang-batas sa Kamara.

Sa ulat ng alyansang pangkarapatang pantaong Karapatan, umabot sa 23 biktima sa mahigit 1,000 kaso ng ekstrahudisyal na pamamaslang sa ilalim ng pamahalaang Arroyo ay mula sa mga grupong kabataan tulad ng Anakbayan, ang League of Filipino Students, at Kabataan Partylist.

Tatlong miyembro pa ng Anakbayan ang kasama sa mahigit 300 kaso ng enforced disappearances sa ilalim ni Arroyo.

“Ang isang institusyong nabahiran ng dugo ng maraming kabataan ay hindi dapat na palapitin lomampung metro sa kahit anong kampus. Hindi pa ba sila kuntento sa kanilang pagpaslang at pagdukot sa karamihan ng ating kasamang lider-kabataan?”dugtong ni Dulce.

Nawala sa kurikulum ang ROTC noong 2001 bunsod ng malawakang protesta ng mga kabataan at mga biktima ng panggigipit at napaulat na pangingikil sa mga paaralan. Ang pagkamatay ni ROTC cadet at mag-aaral ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas na si Mark Chua bunsod sa ROTC “hazing” ang lalo pang nagpatingkad sa isyu ng ROTC sa kabataan.

[update Agosto 7, 2010]

Naglunsad na ng petition signing campaign ang mga grupong pangkabataan upang humiling sa mga estudyante, magulang at mga guro na tutulan ang panunumbalik ng ROTC sa mga pamantasan.

Samantala, nananawagan ang Kabataan Party-list kay Pang. Benigno Aquino III na basagin ang kanyang pananahimik ukol sa isyu ng panunumbalik ng nasabing programa.

Nakapagsalita na ang kabataan ngunit ang tindig ni Aquino sa isyu ng mandatory ROTC ay hindi marinig saan man. “Talagang nakakabingi ang kanyang pananahimik,” dugtong ni Palatino.

Ayon kay DND Spokesperson Eduardo Batac, ang naturang panunumbalik ng programa ay tutugon sa suliranin ng AFP’s sa kakulangan ng tauhan bukod sa kanilang “kakarampot na badyet.”

Bagay na ikinadismaya ng nakababatang kongresista. “Una, ang pagmomodernisa ng AFP sa pamamagitan ng public-private partnerships. Ngayon ito naman. Maguumpisa silang bumuhay ng batalyones ng laruang sundalo mula sa abo para sa ikabubuhay ng isang insitusyong militar,” pagtatapos ni Palatino.

She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-in-the-Plenary

She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-in-the-Plenary
Privilege Speech of Kabataan Partylist Rep. Raymond Palatino
August 4, 2010

Mr. Speaker, distinguished colleagues.
I wish to speak about the events this week which I think might affect my duties as a member of this House. We are all adjusting to the new situation: a former president is now a member of Congress.
Sabi ng marami, we are now at the crossroad of history. In the President’s own words, narito tayo ngayon sa isang punto kung saan pipili tayo kung alin ang tatahakin nating landas—ang daang baluktot o ang daang matuwid.

Cliché as it may sound, it is imperative that we assess the previous roads we have taken in order to properly determine the best route towards national progress. It is required that we deliver a post mortem to the previous administration. We should not entirely abandon this duty to the Truth Commission. As the representatives of the people, we have to articulate the sentiments of our constituents. It may not be good news for some, but there are people in this country who do not echo the sentiments of the previous government, who do not equate infrastructure with performance, GDP growth with genuine progress, people who do not live in delusion.
Sa proseso ng paglalagom sa nakaraang administrasyon, it is inevitable that something unpleasant will be delivered on the floor about the previous government. Because the truth Mr. Speaker and fellow representatives, outside this confined space of bright lights and grandeur is a world of darkness, of glaring poverty, of suppressed freedoms.
This is the dilemma, and this is I ask to all of you: How do we perform our duty without offending “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named” in the plenary? Which should we value more: the sensibilities of House members or the right of the people to hear the truth about the past government?
I fear that 50 years from now, when historians will review our journals, they will only find glowing remarks about You-Know-Who or She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-the-Plenary? Why? Because all the remarks that deal with the unpleasant, the ugly realities of the past government have been removed from the records under the guise of upholding decency and decorum. Sadly, this was backed by the House leadership which is affiliated with the new government that promises an era of change. The same government which proclaims, “there can no reconciliation without justice.”
This week, Representatives Walden Bello and Teddy Casino were accused of disrespecting a fellow member by delivering allegedly “unparliamentary” remarks in their speeches. Parts of their speeches were removed from the records particularly those referring to the corruption and human rights violations of the past administration. Your honor, this sets a bad precedent.
I have been here only for one year, 16 months to be exact, but long enough for me to hear speeches of fellow members criticizing fellow members.
Let me cite a few examples:
June 1, 2009: Former ANAD partylist Representative Jun Alcover blatantly and without basis named progressive partylist representatives as a “scourge of deceit and brutality.” He accused Representatives Maza and Ocampo as adherents of an inhuman ideology.
December 4, 2009: Former Bantay Partylist Representative Jovito Palparan accused Samar Representative Reynaldo Uy of having a private army.
Last day of session of the 14th Congress. Former A Teacher Partylist Representative Piamonte accused Representative Sarmiento of the same partylist of corruption and told him to “resign and shut up.”
In these instances, no one objected. No one moved to strike from the record such accusations that reek of malice and fallacy. The leadership allowed the speech to be included in the records.
My point is this: striking off the perceived unparliamentary remarks is not the only option. The body, the leadership, can tolerate to hear negative remarks. It is not encouraged but we have a practice of allowing members to stand on the floor and criticize, sometimes viciously criticize, a fellow member.
Today, there seems to be this worrisome obsession to find “unparliamentary” words in our speeches. It might send a bad signal to other members, especially to new members, that privilege speeches about the past government is ok, as long as they are not unpleasant in the ears of the supporters of “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.”
I listened to the speeches of Bello and Casino, and I didn’t find any shocking expose, no new revelation. To use the words of Minority Representative Lagman, “bitin nga ako.” What they merely delivered was the sentiment of the people. Believe it or not, we have fellow Filipinos who believe that the previous government is guilty of spectacular crimes against the people. And maybe Representatives Bello and Casino think that the use of strong words to drive a point is needed. And the political situation today is such that colorful language must be used to remind us that “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” must be held accountable.
I understnd where Bello and Casino are coming from, especially Representative Casino who was holed up here in Batasan for several months in 2005. They are both part of the movement which attempted year after year to force the Congress to probe the alleged wrongdoings of the past government. The problem is wala kasi tayong closure. Now that the “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” is part of congress, would you expect the two to sing praises for her?
Lahat na lang ba ng negative remarks about “She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” ay dapat tanggalin? Should I expect to hear only pro-You-Know-Who speeches in the next 3 years? What if a supporter of She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named stand on the floor and begin to enumerate the so-called achievements of the previous government? What if I also stand on the floor and move for the removal for what is to me offensive words? Would that be allowed by the leadership?
I hope the recent mania to scrutinize the speeches of anti-“She-Who-Cannot-Be-Named-In-The-Plenary.” solons is not a symptom of the reflection of our unwillingness to accept the truth about what happened in the past government.
It is tragic that we are more offended by the use of words that speak to truth, words that refer to acts of crime, rather than with the crimes itself.
My proposal is to give House members, especially members of the former opposition the freedom to speak and speak without fear of being censured about the past government. If it is founded on lies, it will not hold water. No one will believe them. Trust fellow members that they are capable of substantiating these allegations. Do not censor our speeches. Let the people judge. Let history be the judge. Do not purify and cleanse the records in the name of decorum.