"Peddling Influence" in the Philippines

Sensing that the U.S. government is seeking to influence the presidency of Ninoy Aquino, the newly-elect President of the Philippines, Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago of the Philippine Senate last week reminded Aquino of a resolution they both passed before, recommending the abrogation of the “Visiting Forces Agreement” between the Philippines and the United States so that “its lopsided provisions against Filipinos could be reviewed.” In this Philippine Star article, Santiago was quoted as saying, “I’m very concerned that America is showing its hand too early – giving him the big build-up. So that it is going to provoke the suspicion in the minds of many that America is intending to manipulate the Aquino presidency.”

This is baffling to me. Given that the Philippine government has been dealing with insurgencies being waged by communist groups, Muslim secessionist movements, and international terrorists for decades, VFA has provided much-needed technical and logistics assistance to the Philippine military. If there are lopsided provisions in the agreement, those indeed must be reviewed. But they must also be weighed against the national security interests of both countries. It seems though that anti-American sentiment is what is driving Philippine foreign policy to adopt a hard stance against U.S. military training and exercises in the country. All in the name of nationalism!

Nationalism can be dangerous if and when it slides into irrational sentiments such as close-mindedness and xenophobia. When a people judge other peoples on the basis of their ethno-linguistic identities, such a people will develop a myopic view of the world and of themselves. Other Asian countries, the likes of Japan, South Korea, and Singapore, understand the strategic importance of how to couple national security interests with international military alliances. And so they cling to U.S. military protection without in the least becoming insecure or unpatriotic about the national interests of their respective countries. Patriotism, which is a better version of nationalism, does not mean close-mindedness the way Burma defines it (which explains why Burma remains the poorest country in Asia). It doesn’t mean being anti-U.S. or anti-foreign the way the communists define it. It means positioning one’s country from a position of strength, taking what it can to promote its national interests while giving what it can towards building a more stable, secure, and peaceful world.

The newly-installed Philippine presidency must think long-terms when it comes to its security needs and problems. Such policy concerns must be thought through with objectivity and reason. For sure, the question of whether the country needs military protection from its allies is something that cannot be answered by the narrow-minded prejudices of its lawmakers.