POLITICAL and diplomatic observers are looking closely at their radar screens as Manila and Washington go through the crossroads of their 70-year friendship in trade and diplomacy.
Much has been said of and much has happened in the past weeks regarding the ties between the Philippines and the United States, with President Rodrigo Duterte calling US President Barack Obama names after the latter raised concerns over extrajudicial killings of drug addicts and drug pushers in the former’s territory.
Duterte has unleashed profanities against Obama and others who criticize his administration in the way it is handling the illegal drugs campaign, which has taken high gear since July 1 after Duterte had taken his oath.
Based on revised data from the Philippine National Police, of the 4,812 suspected drug personalities killed, 1,811 died in police operations while 3,001 were victims of extrajudicial or vigilante killings.
Earlier this month, US Secretary of State John Kerry, after swearing in Korean-American diplomat Sung Kim as the new ambassador to the Philippines, brushed aside “recent differences” with Manila.
Without referring to Duterte’s rhetoric, Kerry expressed confidence about the future of the countries’ bilateral relations, “notwithstanding a difference here or there about one thing or another.”
His words: “We continue to recognize our ironclad commitment to the independence and sovereignty of the Philippines.”
And the new designated ambassador, who is expected to present his credentials to Duterte before too long, has said he was “thrilled to have the honor of representing (the United States) in the Philippines, our oldest ally in Asia and one of our most special friends anywhere.”
Later this month, at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Economic Leaders’ Meeting on Nov 19-20 in Lima, Peru, Duterte, who has said he wants US troops out of the Philippines in two years, will likely meet Obama on the sidelines.
But going by past experience in Vientiane, Laos during the Asean summit last month, Obama might cancel any possible meeting with Duterte in Lima.
With a new President following the US elections this month, it is certain there will be clearer directions as far as ties between Manila and Washington are concerned.
Duterte has been elected to a six-year term in May and the new US President will be at the Capitol for four years, with a possibility of being reelected.
In the meanwhile, Duterte has been vocal about pivoting towards China and Russia, apparently to spite the United States which he said has always treated the Philippines as a colony since the restoration of independence in 1946.
During his visit to Beijing last month, Duterte announced it was “time to say goodbye” to the United States with whose troops Filipinos fought side by side in the name of freedom against Japan in World War II and against North Korea and the People’s Republic of China in the 1950s on the Korean peninsula.
There are some in the Philippines’ legislative branch, notably Senator Richard Gordon, who have rebuffed Duterte’s threat to cut ties with the United States, calling it “wrong.”
Duterte, before practically every audience that listens to him, has been vocal about what he considers lack of respect for him as leader of a sovereign nation by Washington.
But even as he talks of such lack, some analysts underscore that the Philippines’ victory in the West Philippine Sea (in the South China Sea) has not been respected nor recognized by China, whose “nine-dash line” has been ruled by the United Nations Arbitral Tribunal as invalid.
What actually is this “nine-dash line?” This is Beijing’s claim that encircles as much as 90 percent of the contested waters in the South China Sea.
The line runs as far as 2,000 kilometers from the Chinese mainland to within a few hundred kms of the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam. Beijing maintains it owns any land or features—contained within the line—which confers vaguely defined “historical maritime rights.”
Analysts underscore that China has grossly ignored the UN Arbitral Tribunal ruling.
To add superciliousness to the situation, China, with which the Philippines forged formal links in 1975, has not left Panatag or the Scarborough Shoal.
Interestingly, despite Duterte’s China visit, Chinese ships remain on the Shoal – contrary to Palace statements that Chinese vessels had left Panatag and Filipino fishermen can now have their basins filled to the brim with fish catch—in their own territory.
But observers ask: Why should the Filipinos be grateful to the Chinese when the Shoal, since time immemorial, has been Philippine territory?
Some analysts find the argument of National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon as off track when he said the Duterte administration will continue to assert Manila’s claim to the disputed Shoal.
They ask: How soon?