The negotiations for the possible signing of the Philippine-United States Access Agreement are ongoing, and both countries have prepared their own negotiation tips to get the best deal for their own nation.
Related to this, American Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel visited the Philippines a little over two weeks ago and simply has the right words for the right moment.
He declared that the United States is not seeking “permanent bases†in the Philippines, striking a responsive chord among government officials and Civil Society who have apprehensions about American military facilities which would be permanent fixtures once again in the Philippines’ socio-political and economic life.
Secretary Hagel really did his homework, knowing quite well that military bases that would be located in the country for good will violate the Philippine Constitution, which explicitly forbids the presence of foreign military bases in the country. Aside from that, permanent facilities will revive sensitive sentiments about another country lording it over the Philippines.
Instead, Hagel cited the agreement as one that will serve the “interest†of the Philippines, especially now that the nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are being challenged by the Asian giant, China.
The revived interest to have access to the once American bases and even to Philippine military facilities hews pretty well with the geo-political strategy of the United States to “rebalance†its presence in the Asia Pacific. After all, the Aspac region is crucial to America’s strategic and security objectives, not to mention its economic interests.
As the negotiations progress, our negotiators should be well-advised of one central fact: The United States needs us as we need the United States at this time. This is one truism that should be uppermost in our negotiators’ minds: A short-term problem requires only a short-term solution. A short-term concern with a neighboring country’s bullying tactics should be dealt with a temporary arrangement for American troops and military hardware in the country.
In this context, we find it ill-advised for Philippine Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin to be too forthright about his willingness to open Clark and Subic once again for the visiting American ships and forces, even offering our own Philippine military facilities.
I know where Secretary Gazmin is coming, as he looks forward to the day — and soon — when the country can show a modicum of military strength and capability that would discourage China and other countries from being “too adventurous†as far as the West Philippine Sea is concerned.
But his eagerness somehow weakens the negotiating strengths of our Philippine Panel. In negotiations, telegraphing one’s moves is certainly a no-no.
Our panel must bring to the negotiation table our grave apprehensions that the American soldiers who would come visiting this country would figure once again in crimes against our very own people, and then when found guilty, would go scot-free because the then military bases agreement was ambiguous about detaining an erring enlisted man in our jails. In the past, American offenders were whisked hurriedly away to their homeland, leaving aggrieved Filipino parties unable to prosecute an offense done against them.
Useful lessons have been learned from such a historical experience, and the drivers – and negotiators -- of this accord, especially from the Philippine side, must firmly invoke principles that uphold the national integrity of our country, assure mutual respect between two equal nations, and obtain terms that advance the Philippines’ interest and that of the U.S.
Many months ago, President Aquino declared that “we will defend our country to death†against the prospective attack of China. When the President boldly announced that, his bravado was quite good in lifting our sinking morale, but he didn’t sound credible because our military defense capability – and even our military hardware --leave much to be desired. He just succeeded in making an empty boast.
With American ships, military hardware and troops in the most strategic places in the country, countries like China or Taiwan would have second thoughts before even entertaining the idea of challenging, if not provoking the Philippines. This assumes that the United States would come to our aid or serve as a shield against any military adventurism.
Let’s make a clean breast out of this: This access agreement is consistent with the objective of the country’s defense establishment to truly strengthen our military capability in the wake of the belligerence of a neighboring nation. The presence of a U.S. fleet of ships and an array of fighter jets is enough to present a deterrent to any other country which might be tempted to test the Philippines’ military preparedness.
We can say that there is a confluence of goals between the Philippines and the United States. With its “rebalance†policy, the United States really wants a strong military and political presence in the Asia Pacific. The U.S. is moving forward with its recent “rebalance†strategy, while the Philippines must deter aggression by whatever honorable and acceptable means.
It’s now the time to get serious about acquiring military strength by whatever means consistent with our sovereignty. The bullying of China makes this bid to be militarily strong urgently necessary.
I would like to believe that the Philippines is wiser now, and will not sacrifice its sovereignty and territorial integrity at the altar of desired military strength.
As always, we must achieve the desired goals of reciprocity, mutuality, and mutual respect in this access agreement. Build our defense strength with honor — we must .
My email:dominitorrevillas@gmail.com