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.
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.
