Our wayward defense strategy

BACKBENCHER
Rod P. Kapunan
2/4-5/2012



There is no dispute that every state has the right to strengthen its defenses for its own protection. Maybe one could also give it to Secretary of Foreign Affairs Alberto del Rosario and Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin that the Philippines, like any independent state, is free to enter into a military alliance for purposes of repelling possible aggression. There could be no debate on that. After all, it was through that mode which contributed to peace and security to countries like the Philippines, and on a wider scope stability for the region having in mind that the military entente we seek to renew with much vigor now with our former colonizer is to seek a balance of power in the region, vis-à-vis check the alleged growing military influence of China.

The problem however with our redefined policy is we are adopting a policy not in consonance to those postulates, but one that is abeyance to the renewed desire of the US to be present in the Asia-Pacific region to counter China’s alleged military buildup. From that standpoint, one could clearly see that the country has redefined its strategy to supplement that of the US, and not the US augmenting our defense requirements based on what essentially constitute our national and strategic interests. According to Secretary del Rosario, part of that new strategy is to augment the number of US troops participating in the military exercise that will be conducted with increased frequency on what he termed “rotating basis”, if only to skirt the constitutional ban allowing the presence of foreign military bases in this country.

Many political analysts are apprehensive at our defense posturing. They visibly see it as designed to accommodate the overall strategic plans of the US for the region. Some say the regular holding of joint military exercise, which has been going on since the American soldiers were allowed to return in 1998 under the guise of Visiting Forces Agreement by ousted President Joseph Estrada, could be treated as normal in the conduct of relations of countries having existing military alliances. But to hold war games in the disputed Spratly islands is a different story altogether. They could heighten the tension in our relations with China. Other countries, not keen in towing to that vexing US plan, fear it could equally jeopardize their relations with China.

Some contend that since the Spratly islands, specifically those islets occupied and renamed by us as Kalayaan group of islands, cover a disputed area and claimed by us as part of our territory, there is equally nothing that could prevent China from claiming that as part of its territory. While China, at the moment, accepts our presence not really in the context of status quo ante bellum, but of the necessity in keeping a modus vivendi to maintain peace and stability in the region, the entry of foreign forces, not a claimant to the disputed area, could altogether alter the situation. China could not just interpret the presence of US troops in the area as intrusion, but could treat our act of accommodating them as provocation. Unlike those territories that have been internationally accepted as part of our national territory, those disputed islands in the South China Sea hastily called by us, upon Washington’s instigation, as “West Philippine Seas” form a disputed territory that could easily lead to armed clash.

It is for this that our decision to hold a joint military exercise with the US in the area is pushing our relations with China to a dangerous threshold. That has now created a deep wedge with China, a situation many believe was premeditatedly sought by the US. Should that eventuality happen, the US would have succeeded in inducing China to classify us as a hostile state with us, having no choice but to serve as its advance defense perimeter in Pacific rim. Even if no actual shooting war erupts, the Philippines is bound to lose whatever bargaining leverage it has in seeking to negotiate for a peaceful settlement with China on a wide range of issues, all because of our reckless decision to invite the US forces to join us in holding a military exercise in the disputed area. Our conduct spells out a message there is nothing for us to negotiate as we now consider ourselves part of that demarcated forces stretched by the US to resurrect its xenophobic campaign to contain China.

Of course, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Brunei are also laying their respective claim on some of the disputed islands in the South China Sea. However, nobody appears to be eager in inviting the US to join them in their dispute with China. In fact, it is not even one of their options. On the contrary, such warmongering approach could only trigger an arms race with those lackey states picking up the tab for their bloated defense expenditures, a double-edged strategy that could stave off the US economy from finally falling deep into the gutter.

It is realpolitik that underscores their necessity in having to maintain close economic ties with China. They are more concerned in taking the pragmatic approach in dealing with the situation. While not one is willing to abandon the process of peaceful dialogue to settle their dispute with China, they are equally not willing to take action that would antagonize their giant neighbor, and lose altogether the bigger stakes they enjoy in their current dealings with that prosperous country.

Nobody is willing to confront that country knowing it would only serve to satisfy Washington’s desperate attempt to round up its lackeys in the Asia-Pacific region and to block China’s exorable emergence as a superpower. Unfortunately, only this fanatically blind country swallowed hook, line and sinker the outmoded gambit of provoking another war in Asia to derail the economic miracle it gained after the US debacle in Vietnam.

(rodkap@yahoo.com.ph)