US bases banned? Call them by another name

CLARK FIELD (PLDT/WeRoam) — With key American lawmakers dropping in to have another look at this former United States colony, talk is again rife that the US is interested in setting up military bases here.

As to be expected, the US embassy denied the visiting legislative forces were casing the joint already.

There is actually no need to establish American bases here all over again. Manila and Washington can have mutually beneficial US military presence in the Philippines without putting up US bases and potentially violating the Constitution.

All that has to be done is review and refine by common consent the 13-year-old Phl-US Visiting Forces Agreement, whose constitutionality has been upheld by the Supreme Court, to justify the continued presence of American forces.

*      *      *

VISITORS NOT BANNED: The constitutional ban (Section 25, Article XVIII) on foreign bases and troops refers only to permanent bases and permanently-based military personnel, according to the SC.

For reference, Section 25 reads: “After the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America concerning military bases, foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and, when the Congress so requires, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national referendum held for that purpose, and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State.”

Going by the SC decision, “visiting” foreign forces are not covered by the ban. Any plan to continue temporary American military presence can revolve around this interpretation and be legally safe.

We have done a similar play on semantics before and there is no reason now why we cannot or should not do it again.

We have tolerated and benefited from American presence despite the ban in Section 25 and the non-extension of the 1947 Phl-US military bases agreement when it lapsed in 1991.

*      *      *

RENAME THEM: In 1979, as then President Ferdinand Marcos pressed the US for upgraded compensation for the bases, the Philippine and the US governments agreed to amend the MBA to convert the US bases into Philippine bases.

With the adroit use of terminologies, the bases suddenly became Philippine bases. The Philippine flag was flown over them, Philippine bases commanders installed, perimeter security assigned to Filipino soldiers, and several internal rules Filipinized.

The American personnel and materiel on base were simply re-labeled as constituting a “facility,” not a base. It was neat, and legal, although critics continued to denounce the play on words.

We can do the same thing this time around — if President Noynoy Aquino and President Barack Obama both want it for their countries’ common interests.

*      *      *

STUNTED MILITARY: Under the tutelage of the Joint United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG), the Philippine armed forces never matured.

We grew accustomed to leaning on the US, and never bothered about developing our own military capability, especially for national defense.

With the mighty 13th US Air Force based on Clark, we never organized a real air force. The joke was that we had a lot of air but no force. The most we could show was the famous PAF Blue Diamonds, which was spectacular when it came to aerial shows.

Nor do we feel secure now with our few remaining rickety planes, outnumbered one-to-six by our pilots, often losing out to gravity out of fatigue, poor maintenance, or bad flying, or all of the above.

*      *      *

THREATS: With the US 7th Fleet lurking in nearby waters, there was no felt need to duplicate its protective presence. We were content with a few refurnished vessels passed off as a navy.

Our navy boats are now outrun by the faster seacraft of Muslim brigands and smugglers, if tales from our fabled seas are to be believed.

If a malevolent neighbor tries a trick and attacked a Philippine target down South, can our air force or navy or whatever we have left repel it? Or even detect it on time?

If one of several claimants of our islets in the Spratlys area embarks on an adventurous landing and occupation, what can we do aside from firing off a diplomatic protest?

Upgraded military capability is urgent in view of the relocation of the US forces from disaster-hit Japan, the increasingly overbearing presence of the Chinese dragon, and the growing importance of the busy sealanes near the islands, among other reasons.

*      *      *

USE VFA: In short, we might be in need — while we are talking of scarce resources and missing road maps — of some real help from our friends of long standing who are bound to us by a mutual defense pact.

While our leaders are preoccupied with running after the big crooks of the previous administration, maybe somebody competent should be assigned to asking around in Washington what they could do to help in the name of mutual security.

Every day that passes, the security gap grows wider.

The VFA seems to be most convenient vehicle for improving our security situation. But the VFA itself is under stack in Manila, especially because its onerous provisions were highlighted by the case of a GI who allegedly raped a Filipina in Subic some time back.

*      *      *

REWRITE CONTRACT: To ease the possible objection to the VFA, we can suggest to our American friends that we reopen and amend the more contentious provisions of the agreement.

The most critical is Article V on Criminal Jurisdiction, which is clearly (to us) one-sided. How did this get through our negotiators in the first place?

To summarize what to many of us would want written into the VFA, we mention two points:

1. Our VFA should not be inferior, but must be comparable, to similar agreements that the US has with its partners in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

2. Philippine authorities, including Philippines courts, should have original and exclusive jurisdiction when an American, serviceman or otherwise, commits on Philippine soil an act that is criminal under Philippines laws against a Filipino.

*      *      *

FOLLOWUP: Access past POSTSCRIPTs at www.manilamail.com. Like POSTSCRIPT on www.facebook.com/manilamail. Or follow @FDPascual on Twitter. E-mail feedback to [email protected]