"With consistent economic growth, we can now set aside more resources for military modernization that would allow us to maintain a credible defense posture."
"With consistent economic growth, we can now set aside more resources for military modernization that would allow us to maintain a credible defense posture."
We have one of the weakest armed forces right now among the 10 ASEAN countries in terms of combat capability and modern equipment. The reason behind this is our over-dependence on the United States to protect us from any external threat since the postwar era.
We concluded the Mutual Defense Treaty or MDT with the United States in the 1950s. Under this treaty, both sides agreed to come to the defense of the other in case of an attack by a third party.
We also signed the Military Bases Agreement with the US after the Second World War, which allowed us to go under its security mantle until its abrogation in 1991. This treaty was abrogated in 1991, with the two main bases, Clark Air Base and Subic Naval Base, converted to civilian use.
Apart from these, we were also the recipient of surplus American vessels and aircraft under the term of the RP-US Military Assistance Pact.
These three treaties allowed the Philippines to concentrate on socio-economic development from the 1950s up to around the 1990s, when we realized that we needed to modernize our military to keep up with current geo-political realities and to wean ourselves away from the US for our defense requirements. We contented ourselves with receiving second-hand jet fighters, helicopters and World War II-era naval vessels from the US as we simply could not afford to purchase state-of-the-art equipment.
The modernization of the Philippine military only began in earnest during the Ramos administration. To raise funds for AFP modernization, a big chunk of Fort Bonifacio was sold to the private sector.
With consistent economic growth from year 2000 to the present, the nation can now set aside more resources for military modernization that would allow us to maintain a credible defense posture.
We need to beef up our military in the years ahead in light of changed conditions in the region. There’s our territorial dispute with China in the South China Sea. This requires that we have enough jet aircraft and Coast Guard and Navy ships to conduct regular patrols in the West Philippine Sea that’s part of our Exclusive Economic Zone or EEZ under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS.
China has built artificial islands and military installations in the South China Sea as part of its so-called “nine-dash line” covering nearly all of the vital sealane through which billions of dollars of international trade passes on a regular basis.
This recent development has raised serious concern among Filipinos whether our government has already surrendered or ceded our sovereign rights over certain areas in the South China Sea, such as Reed Bank and Scarborough Shoal.
As of now, the policy of the Duterte administration is to take a two-track approach. One track is to discuss contentious issues in SCS through a bilateral consultation mechanism, or BCM. This body composed of an equal number of officials from either side meets regularly to discuss an agreed upon agenda, such as access by our fishermen to their traditional fishing grounds and presence of Chinese maritime vessels in areas that we consider part of our EEZ.
The other track is to enhance two-way trade with China, encourage investments by Chinese state-owned and private firms in such areas as infrastructure and renewable sources of energy, encourage more Chinese tourists to visit our country, and enhance cultural and people-to-people contacts.
As an archipelagic country, we need a strong navy and air force, apart from a standing army, to protect our territory from any external threat. And Congress should recognize this need to modernize our military so that we can adequately address both internal and external threats.
Senate goes to seed
When was the time the Senate was truly an august body in whose hallowed halls reverberated the commanding presence of such illustrious lawyer-statesmen as Claro M. Recto, Jose W. Diokno and Jovito Salonga?
Alas, those days have long gone. Today, we have a Senate some of whose members are less than qualified for the huge responsibility of guiding the nation towards a better and brighter future.
At its helm is a TV host-comedian—the third highest in the line of succession to the presidency, no less—whose comments on raging issues sometimes leave us wondering whether he really deserves to sit in such high office.
Another senator prefers to give priority to his boxing career rather than to lawmaking and has racked up the dubious distinction of having the most number of absences during session days.
The May elections saw an ex-actor jailed for several years on plunder charge reelected as senator. Another actor, whose record as senator in the past left much to be desired because of his meager lawmaking output and aversion to intelligent discourse, was also reelected.
Two others barged their way to the Senate mainly based on their closeness to the Palace occupant rather than on solid credentials and are expected to toe the official line on every issue.
We’re glad, however, that there are still sober and rational voices in the Senate who are independent-minded and can be counted upon to dissect issues with a keen and analytical mind.
But sad to say, as things now stand, the Senate’s reputation is in tatters because the majority of its members appear totally beholden to what Malacanañg says instead of what is good for the nation and in the public interest.
ernhil@yahoo.com
