Pentagon in the Philippines
What's Washington up to?
By Lydia Bayoneta
A year-long pursuit by the Philippine government of Abu
Sayyaf guerrillas and their Filipino and U.S. hostages ended
June 7 in the deaths of Filipina nurse Ediborah Yap and U.S.
missionary Martin Burnham and the wounding of Gracia Burnham. A
great deal of speculation has ensued in Washington as to
whether the hostage rescue attempt would have ended differently
if U.S. troops had been directly involved in the ground combat
effort.
Some analysts blamed the tragic outcome--they mostly talked
about the death of Burnham--on the reluctance of the Philippine
government to allow open combat operations by foreign troops on
its soil. This is "a common problem in hostage rescue when the
host countries assert their sovereignty," said Michael Vickes,
a former U.S. Army Special Forces soldier quoted in the San
Francisco Chronicle of June 8.
Soon after U.S. troops arrived in the Philippines six months
ago, Pentagon officials questioned the Philippine forces'
ability to mount a successful rescue operation. They cited the
troops' "lack of experience and suspected ties between some
soldiers and the guerilla group." U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt
(R-Kansas) said he had asked the Pentagon to investigate the
Philippine Scout Rangers' training.
This kind of talk reflects more than anything the arrogant,
paternalistic attitude of the U.S. towards its former colony
after more than 100 years of intervention. No mention was made
of the fact that 10 experienced U.S. instructors died earlier
this year in an accidental crash in the Southern
Philippines.
The deployment of U.S. troops in the Philippines, as in
Afghanistan and other parts of the world, is portrayed as part
of the U.S. war on terrorism. In reality, this is part of the
Pentagon's plan to achieve greater hegemony across the globe.
In the Philippines, U.S. imperialism would like to reestablish
its military and nuclear presence.
A decade ago, the U.S. lost its two largest military bases
outside North America: the Subic Bay Naval Base, encompassing
37,000 acres, and Clark Air Base, whose 132,000 acres made it
larger than the District of Columbia. These two bases in the
Philippines had been used as a springboard for U.S.
intervention and aggression throughout Asia and the Western
Pacific.
U.S. Under-Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz has described
the new U.S. presence in the Philippines as "a strike against
the extended Al Qaeda network." In reality there is not much
connection between the Abu Sayyaf guerrillas and Al Qaeda,
according to the San Francisco Examiner of May 25.
Big money for a bigger objective
What is undeniable, however, is that the U.S. is pouring
massive amounts of money into the Philippines. Following the
visit of Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to the
U.S. last November, the Philippine government received $100
million in military aid plus a pledge of $4.5 billion in
economic aid. This will be used to fight Muslim insurgent
groups in Mindanao--not just Abu Sayyaf--and the New Peoples
Army, which has been waging a struggle for socialism and real
independence for the Philippines.
The deployment of U.S. troops has already sparked a growing
opposition movement and charges that Arroyo has violated the
1987 constitution, which forbids the stationing of foreign
troops on Filipino soil.
The real U.S. motives could be seen in a statement by
Arroyo's chief foreign policy advisor, Roberto Romulo. "A
strong U.S.-Philippine relationship," he argued, "would balance
any hegemonic tendencies from China, to discourage them from
ambitions in our part of the world." (San Francisco Examiner,
May 25)
Who really has "hegemonic" intentions? China is much closer
to the Philippines than the U.S., yet it has never controlled
the Western Pacific, while U.S. imperialism has had a
dominating presence there for over 100 years.
Nevertheless, the reference to China is interesting, to say
the least. While the U.S. media has focused on U.S. combat
troops and Abu Sayyaf, the U.S. has been quietly seeking an
agreement to store military equipment throughout the
Philippines and secure the rights for military overflights. It
is also negotiating a return to the Subic Bay Naval Base, as
well as securing "temporary" basing rights for U.S. troops.
The ultimate goal of all this maneuvering is twofold: One is
to dominate and crush the national liberation struggles in
Southeast Asia and use the Philippines as a launching pad for
operations against struggling socialist countries such as
Vietnam and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Another
is to encircle the People's Republic of China with hostile
bases, much as the U.S. did with the Soviet Union during the
Cold War.
The Bush administration has already said that it is willing
to use nuclear weapons against China. The new anti-ballistic
missile system being built in Alaska is also directed at China.
Once again it appears that the U.S. is intending to use the
Philippines as its "unsinkable aircraft carrier" in the
Pacific.
Mass intervention of the Filipino people got rid of the
bases last time. That, reinforced by the solidarity of
progressive people around the world, is the only way to stop
U.S. terror in Asia and the Pacific.
Reprinted from the June 20, 2002, issue of
Workers World newspaper
This article is copyright under a Creative
Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)
HOME
:: U.S. NEWS ::
WORLD NEWS ::
EDITORIALS ::
SUBSCRIBE ::
DONATE
Email
this article
Printable
page