"The three US senators cannot treat the Philippines as a banana republic"
"The three US senators cannot treat the Philippines as a banana republic"
Three US senators issued a statement reiterating their demand for the release of Senator Leila de Lima. This misplaced demand came on the heels of her acquittal of one of the three charges for drug trafficking. The three senators namely, Edward Markey, Richard Durbin and Patrick Leahy branded the case as “illegitimate”; that she has been “wrongfully imprisoned”, and she stands as the country’s “prisoner of conscience.” The three said the charges are a political vendetta filed by the Duterte administration.
For whatever reason, the least they can do is take into account the circumstances why she landed up in jail. Most important, their ranting of the case has no bearing because it gives plausibility, not probability, of the charges filed against her. Duterte cannot just file tramped-up charges because such could trigger political backlash even if his intention is to make her a “political martyr” of some sort.
Alas, nothing of that has been pointed to by the detained senator and her foreign brokers that she was wrongfully arrested, and her arrest is the result of political vendetta. But as it is, the opposition and her supporters are the ones who refuse to talk about the case, aware that discussing the evidence could pin her down. They instead resort to political monologue to harangue the administration. The judge would not have issued an arrest order had she not taken into account the prima facie evidence against De Lima.
Moreover, what the three US senators did is interfere in our country’s internal affairs. No sovereign and independent state will lightly take such interference without jeopardizing its diplomatic relations with this country. The action taken by Durbin was not pursuant to a bi-partisan Senate Resolution No. 145, otherwise known as the Magnistky Act, enacted to authorize the US to sanction countries for human rights violation, freeze their assets, and ban them from entering the U.S., like what they did to cancel the visa of Senator Dela Rosa. The three senators cannot collaterally apply the Magnitsky Act, notwithstanding that US jurisdiction cannot be made to apply here.
It is not for the US to judge the policy of a country, that it made a wrongful decision, or to question the Duterte policy. Rather, the US should cultivate friendship with countries to supplement its dwindling financial resources against the increasing economic and political influence of China.
Even assuming that the Duterte administration is wrong in ordering the filing of criminal charges against De Lima, the case has yet to be proven in court. To pre-empt the case could put the President in a bad light because releasing her without judgment would result in an admission that she was unjustly persecuted.
The three US senators cannot treat the Philippines as a banana republic at their beck and call like their errand boy.
Earlier this month, the French navy sailed through the South China Sea passing the contested waters separating China and Taiwan. The passing through the narrow strait prompted protests from China. What is rather perplexing is the arrogant claim by France that it has “an exclusive economic zones in the Pacific around its overseas territories,” second, “stressed the importance of freedom of navigation in the region,” and third “taking as example the passage of the Australian, American and Japanese navies being its strategic partners.”
Beyond the show that France still has the capacity to deploy its navy to faraway places for a long period of time, the seeming interest of France is to sell to the Philippine navy a Scorpion class submarine. This came following the visit by Defense Secretary Delfin F. Lorenzana, which the Philippines and France signed a letter of intent on maritime cooperation. Anne Clausard, Country Head of Naval Group, in the Indo-Pacific region, listed as priority the following considerations: defence and to ensure the integrity of its sovereignty, the protection of its nationals, territories and EEZ; to contribute to the security of regional environment through military and security cooperation; to maintain a free and open access to the commons, in cooperation with France’s partners, in the context of global strategic competition and challenging military environments; and to assist in maintaining strategic stability and balances through comprehensive and multilateral action.
The claim of France of having an exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea is awkward, not to say provocative. The right of an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) can only give rise if a state that has sovereign right over an island or territory is within the EEZ. The last of the French colonies in the contested waters of the South China Sea was on May 7, 1954 when the Vietnamese Liberation Forces defeated the French enclave in Dien Bien Phu. France can only have the right of freedom of navigation for its navy or submarine but not violate the territorial waters of the coastal states in the SCS, or navigate in the contested area of the Strait of Taiwan or convert SCS as their private lake to regularly patrol.
France can never invoke its strategic partnership with NATO. That alliance is their defense against Russia, and NATO cannot include China as France’s extended enemy in the South China Sea. Neither can it invoke its strategic partnership with the US, Japan and Australia to freely navigate the area or arbitrarily invoke its alliance to come to their defense unless their alliance has equally identified to affect their interest.
The Philippines has not even identified which county is our potential enemy to give us a valid reason to acquire this class of weapon. To have a submarine to counter the growing strength of China is somewhat ridiculous because there is no way we can stop its strength in the SCS. There are between 60 to 65 Chinese submarines of various types that prowl in the SCS. Having a submarine will only alienate China as our important economic partner for development, and that is what these American hirelings would want us to do.
The French-built Scorpion class submarine has armaments consisting of 6x 533mm (211in) torpedo tubes for 18 whitehead Alenia Sistemi Subacquei Black Shark heavyweight torpedoes, SM-39 Exocet anti-ship missiles, and A3SM (MICA) anti-air missiles and 30 mines in place of torpedoes. It would be difficult for the Philippines to reach a strategic alliance or partnership with France taking into account that it has more economic interest to protect its relations with China than in wanting to purchase a third class submarine that could never offset the balance of power in the region.
Lorenzana never took into account that our ties with China are deeply rooted in our objective to achieve economic development and not to engage in an arms race. Any attempt to purchase an extravagantly expensive armament like the acquisition of a diesel-electric submarine costing us about $450 million could spoil our economic program and sour our relations with a country that is trying its best to help our people exhume from poverty.
rpkapunan@gmail.com
