by Senator Antonio F. Trillanes IV
Last August 2007, this author filed Senate Bill No. 1467 entitled “An Act Defining the Archipelagic Baselines of the Philippine Archipelago, Amending for the Purpose Republic Act No. 3046, as Amended by Republic Act No. 5446.” or otherwise known as the “Archipelagic Baselines Law of the Philippines.” The bill was the result of a series of consultations primarily with former Senator Leticia Ramos-Shahani, who first pushed for the Baselines bill way back in 1993. It basically defines the archipelagic baselines to include the Scarborough Shoal and designates the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) as a “regime of islands.” To further facilitate the passing of the bill, the technical details provided by the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) as enumerated in House Bill No. 1202 filed by Congressman Antonio V. Cuenco as well as its other provisions were adopted in toto. Congress, however, filed HB 3216 that substituted for HB 1202.
Recently, controversies arose with the discovery of the particulars of the Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking (JMSU) being conducted by RP, China and Vietnam within the waters off Palawan. Thereafter, Malacanang pressured Congress to revert HB 3216 back to the Committee on Foreign Relations ostensibly to push for certain amendments. These two seemingly unrelated events inevitably pushed the baselines issue at the top of the national policy agenda. Given this context, now is the best time for us to finally resolve this issue.
This paper intends to explain and justify the position adopted in SB 1467 and differentiate it with the other options, as well as to clarify other closely related subjects surrounding the baseline issue.
PD 1599, TREATY OF PARIS and UNCLOS
The first time the author studied the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) agreement was in 1994 as part of a course in International Law given to graduating cadets of the Philippine Military Academy who intend to join the Philippine Navy. The course focused on the UNCLOS provisions particularly: the archipelagic doctrine; the coastal state’s rights and duties within the territorial sea, contiguous zone and the exclusive economic zone (EEZ); the right of innocent passage; the doctrine of hot pursuit; and other provisions concerning enforcement of maritime laws.
After graduating, however, the new Navy officers were surprised to find out that the NAMRIA-supplied nautical charts used aboard Philippine Navy ships defined the territorial limits of the country as those stated in the Treaty of Paris plus the attached KIG borders defined by PD 1596, and not the UNCLOS definitions as taught to them at PMA. To be fair, NAMRIA has no other basis than the Treaty of Paris because our country, precisely, has yet to pass a new baselines law that would amend the pre-UNCLOS baseline law, the RA 5446, which is not compliant with the UNCLOS criteria. To complicate matters, the Navy uses PD 1599, a pre-UNCLOS unilateral declaration of our country’s EEZ, as a mandate to enforce maritime laws in these areas. As a consequence, the author remembers that when their ship patrolled as far east as the Anson Shoal in the Pacific, they used the Treaty of Paris as reference. And when they patrolled as far west as the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea, they used PD 1599. In short, as of the moment, we have two sets of boundaries (PD 1599 and Treaty of Paris with PD 1596) and we will yet define another one (UNCLOS).
1. PD 1599, as mentioned above, is a unilateral declaration by the Philippines of its EEZ as measured from the baselines as defined by RA 5446. It was signed by then Pres. Ferdinand Marcos on 11 June 1978.
2. The Treaty of Paris is a peace treaty forged between the US and Spain in 10 December 1898. It detailed, among others, the territorial limits of the Philippine archipelago as being ceded by Spain to the US. These same limits were then used to define our national territory when we eventually gained indepedence from the US in 1946.
3. The UNCLOS, formally known as the Third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS III and also called the Law of the Sea Convention, refers to the international agreement that came out of the UN conferences from 1973 to 1982. The agreement consists of 320 articles and 9 annexes. To date, 155 countries have already ratified the UNCLOS and it officially came into force in 16 November 1994. The Philippines became the 11th country to ratify UNCLOS on 08 May 1984. It defines, among others, the limits of the territorial sea, contiguous zone and the EEZ of a coastal or archipelagic State.
Each of the above reference options has its own strengths and weaknesses, but if we are to consider both the validity in International Law and the area covered, the UNCLOS option is superior to the other two.
PD 1599, while almost as vast as the UNCLOS option in terms of area, has practically no binding effect in International Law by virtue of its being a unilateral declaration in the pre-UNCLOS era. Moreover, since we have ratified UNCLOS and, therefore, agreed to its provisions, we are obliged to rescind PD 1599.
The Treaty of Paris, meanwhile, may still have a binding effect in International Law, notwithstanding the UNCLOS ratification. However, its total area covered is significantly smaller because it cannot avail of the EEZ provisions of the UNCLOS.
As to the legal alternative of retaining the Treaty of Paris while availing of the UNCLOS option, we, as a self-respecting people living within a community of nations, should not have two sets of boundaries that we can use for our own convenience. It is simply not fair; it is simply not right. Therefore, it is in our country’s best interest to adopt solely the UNCLOS option.
THE BASELINE METHODS
Baselines are reference lines drawn by a coastal or archipelagic State using different methods as discussed below. They are used to measure the breadth of the territorial sea (12nm), contiguous zone (24 nm), EEZ (200nm) and continental shelf (up to 350nm). Also, the waters enclosed by the baselines are called archipelagic waters over which an archipelagic State exercises sovereignty.
According to the UNCLOS, there are three methods that can be employed in determining a State’s baselines, namely:
1. Normal Baseline, according to Art. 5, “is the low-water line along the coast as marked on large-scale charts officially recognized by the coastal State.”
2. Straight Baseline, according to Art. 7, can be employed if ever “the coastlines are indented and cut into or there is a fringe of islands along the coast in its immediate vicinity.”
3. Archipelagic Baseline, according to Art. 47, is a method of “joining the outermost points of the outermost islands and drying reefs of an archipelago provided that within such baselines are included the main island and an area in which the ratio of the area of the water to the area of the land, including atolls, is between 1:1 and 9:1.”
Of the three methods, the archipelagic baselines method is most applicable and advantageous to an archipelago such as ours. Otherwise, to use either the Normal or Straight baseline methods, which are primarily designed for coastal States, would effectively waive our status as an archipelagic State and lose much of the archipelagic waters as defined above.
THE BASELINE OPTIONS
NAMRIA has prepared the following baseline options to cater to the varying political persuasions of the policymakers:
1. OPTION 1: The main archipelago and Scarborough Shoal are enclosed by the baselines while KIG is classified as regime of islands. This is the option adopted by SB 1467.
2. OPTION 2: Only the main archipelago is enclosed by the baselines while KIG and Scarborough Shoal are classified as regime of islands. This is the official position of Malacanang through recent pronouncements and the DFA position paper written on 02 Aug 2005.
3. OPTION 3: The main archipelago and KIG are enclosed by the baselines while Scarborough Shoal is classified as regime of islands.
4. OPTION 4: The main archipelago, KIG and Scarborough Shoal are enclosed by the baselines. This is the option adopted by HB 3216.
To have a better view of the differences between the baseline options, the table below (which includes RA 5446) was lifted from the briefing documents prepared by NAMRIA.
RA 5446: There are a few weaknesses in RA 5446. One, it violates para 2 of Art. 47 of UNCLOS where it states: “The length of such baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles except that up to 3 percent of the total number of baselines enclosing the archipelago may exceed that length, up to a maximum of 125 nautical miles.” As we can see from the table, RA 5446 has one baseline that exceeds the 125nm limit for long baselines.
Another weakness of RA 5446 is: it does not optimize the area of the EEZ since it excluded both Scaborough Shoal and KIG from the baselines and both were not designated as regime of islands.
OPTION 1/ SB 1467: The main strength of this option is that it maximized the area by including Scarborough Shoal without violating the archipelagic baselines provisions by classifying KIG as regime of islands. It is, therefore, UNCLOS compliant.
However, there are some misconceptions regarding the label “regime of islands” that it supposedly weakens our claim or reduces our sovereignty over the areas labeled as such. On the contrary, “regime of islands” is defined in Art. 121 as: 1) island/s that is naturally formed, surrounded by water and is above water at high tide; and 2) it shall have its own 12nm territorial sea, 24nm contiguous zone, 200nm EEZ and continental shelf. In other words, islands classified as regime of islands are treated the exact same way as other land territory. The only possible reason that coastal States would be forced to classify their territory as a regime of islands is because such territory is impossible to enclose within the baselines without violating other UNCLOS provisions. The Falkland island group is one example. Since the UK is at the other end of the Atlantic which made it impossible to include Falkland in its own baseline, it has no choice but to classify Falkland as a regime of islands. The US (if ever it ratifies UNCLOS) would probably classify Hawaii as a regime of islands by virtue of its distance from the mainland.
The Scarborough Shoal was included in the baselines primarily because its distance from Luzon is less than the 125nm limit. With this, our country stands to gain approximately 14,500sq nm of EEZ and continental shelf. Another reason for its inclusion is that Scarborough Shoal is basically a rock and according to para 3 of Art. 121, the regime of islands definition has an exception and that is: “Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.” Therefore, while it is advantageous for us to designate KIG as a regime of islands, we would be depriving ourselves of the EEZ and continental shelf of Scarborough Shoal if it would be designated as a regime of islands.
Of course, China is expected to protest the inclusion of Scarborough Shoal within our baselines. Probably, it may even be the reason why Malacanang pressured Congress to freeze legislative action on HB 3216. But if we truly believe that our claim over Scarborough Shoal is legitimate then we have every right to enclose it within our baselines. This does not mean, though, that we are provoking China into a war because, according to Art. 279, State Parties to the UNCLOS are obliged to settle any dispute by peaceful means.
OPTION 2/MALACANANG OPTION: The main weakness of this option is, while it is UNCLOS compliant, it failed to protect the interest of our country by not including Scarborough Shoal in the baselines when there is no hindrance to do so. True, this option designates Scarborough as a regime of islands but, as discussed above, a rock formation is not entitled to an EEZ and continental shelf when labeled as such. Even if it will still have its own territorial sea and contiguous zone, these would have no effect in terms of additional area since the EEZ measured from west coast of Luzon will extend over these zones.
OPTION 3: There are several weaknesses with this option. Aside from those mentioned in Option 2 with the designation of Scarborough Shoal as regime of islands, this option is also not UNCLOS compliant for including KIG in the baselines. This will be discussed extensively below since Option 4 also included KIG in the baselines.
OPTION 4/HB 3216: At first glance, this may seem to be the best option. However, it violated para 4 of Art. 47 which states: “Such baselines shall not be drawn to and from low-tide elevations, unless a lighthouse or similar installations which are permanently above sea level have been built on them or where a low-tide elevation is situated wholly or partly at a distance not exceeding the breadth of the territorial sea from the nearest island.” Based on the table above and HB 3216 itself, Sabina Shoal and Iroquois Reef are low-tide elevations. A low-tide elevation, according to Art. 13, “is a naturally formed area of land which is surrounded by and above water at low-tide but submerged at high tide.” Hence, we still need to construct a lighthouse each on these areas so that they can qualify as basepoints. Even this measure, however, is no longer possible because of the “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea” which was signed by the ASEAN members and China in 2002. In the declaration, we agreed “to exercise self-restraint in the conduct of activities that would complicate or escalate disputes and affect peace and stability including, among others, refraining from action of inhabiting on the presently uninhabited islands, reefs, shoals, cays, and other features and to handle their differences in a constructive manner.” Both Sabina Shoal and Iroquois Reef are presently uninhabited but are being claimed by RP, China and Vietnam.
Another major defect of Option 4/HB3216 is, as we can see from the table, seven of the designated basepoints are islands presently occupied by other countries. According to the Digital Gazetteer of the Spratly Isands, these are: Kalantiaw Cay (Vietnam); Paredes Reef (Vietnam); Kagitingan Reef (China); Mariveles Reef (Malaysia); Pugad Is. (Vietnam); Kanluran Reef (Vietnam) and Investigator Reef (being claimed by China). To insist on using these islands/reefs as basepoints is in contravention of the 2002 ASEAN-China Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and may cause outrage among affected States. Designating basepoints on uninhabited, though contested areas such as Scarborough Shoal can be defended legally and politically. But to place basepoints on foreign-occupied territory, no matter how strong our claim, is an act of aggression.
If the proponents of Option 4/HB 3216 have not yet realized this, then the information provided by this paper, hopefully, will make them reconsider.
In view of the discussions above, the best option to adopt is Option 1 as stated in SB 1467.
The SPRATLY ISSUE
As explained above, the passing of SB 1467 will not weaken our claim over the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) or what is internationally known as the Spratlys. Still, the fact remains that, we are only one of many claimants in that group of islands. Of these, only Brunei has not physically occupied its claimed territory. According to the Digital Gazetteer of the Spratly Islands (it admits the reports are varying), Vietnam has occupied 25 islands; China, 13; RP, 8; Malaysia, 5; and Taiwan, 1.
With this situation, it is impossible to expect a scenario where all these countries will just suddenly pack up and go home. On the contrary, we should even expect some of these claimants to assert their presence more in the coming years to explore potential oil deposits amidst the increasing demand and diminishing oil reserves elsewhere. In such a scenario, skirmishes are not unlikely as our Navy ships and fishing boats are regularly navigating these waters. In the meantime, nobody gets to benefit from whatever rich natural resources the area has to offer.
There are several avenues enumerated in the UNCLOS as regards conflict settlement, foremost of which is the mutual agreement of all claimant States. But after factoring in the unpleasant experiences (including our own) of countries conducting joint development agreements with China (Wain 2008), it may be best to strengthen ties within the ASEAN first. This way, our collective position would be at parity with China in any future agreement. This is the only peaceful way to resolve this issue.
The JMSU ISSUE
The Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking (JMSU) was initially entered into by RP and China on 01 Sept 2004. Vietnam initially voiced concern as it was a violation of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (Wain 2008). But at some point, Vietnam was won over when it was included in the project. Because of this, it is now officially called a Tripartite Agreement for Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking in The Agreement Area in the South China Sea.
The JMSU agreement is highly flawed for the following reasons:
1. It smacks of bad faith on our part as it was forged without consulting with the other members of the ASEAN while there was an existing status quo agreement among them. (Wain 2008).
2. It excluded other claimant States like Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan.
3. It was grossly disadvantageous on our part because it included areas that were not disputed.
4. Because some subject areas are solely ours, it violated certain provisions of Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution relating to the exclusive use of our own marine wealth or, if it is a joint exploration, the President’s obligation to submit such agreement to Congress within 30 days.
5. We are not at parity with China in terms of the actual conduct of the exploration since we are relegated to mere observers aboard their research vessels. Hence, there can be no guarantees about the integrity of the research results.
The CONTINENTAL SHELF
According to para 1 of Art. 76 of the UNCLOS, “the continental shelf of a coastal State comprises the sea-bed and subsoil of the submarine areas that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural prolongation of its land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200nm from the baselines from which the territorial sea is measured where the outer edge of the continental margin does not extend up to that distance.”
According to para 6 to 8 of Art. 76, a coastal State is allowed to claim the outer limits of a continental shelf beyond the 200nm but not exceeding 350nm from the baselines as long as the information on the said limits are submitted to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS). The CLCS would then make the recommendations to the coastal State regarding the outer limits and the adoption of which would make it final and binding.
Art. 4 of Annex II, on the other hand, states: “Where a coastal State intends to establish, in accordance with Art. 76, the outer limits of its continental shelf beyond 200nm, it shall submit particulars of such limits to the Commission along with supporting scientific and technical data as soon as possible but in any case within 10 years of the entry into force of this Convention for that State.”
Since the UNCLOS officially entered into force 16 November 1994, supposedly, the ten-year deadline would have expired on 15 November 2004. However, because of the difficulties encountered by developing countries in coming up with technical requirements of Art. 4 of Annex II, a decision was made during the May 2001 Meeting of State Parties to UNCLOS to extend the deadline to 12 May 2009. (Sands 2005: 5).
With this, our country has a little over a year to submit the particulars of our continental shelf beyond the 200nm to the CLCS. Thus, it is imperative that all pertinent institutions of government provide and extend all the necessary support to NAMRIA to make sure that it accomplishes its mission on time.
To compound this deadline problem, we still do not have a new baselines law from which to measure the outer limits of our continental shelf. While there is no deadline in the submission of particulars for a State’s baselines, it is, however, the basis for measuring all maritime regimes including the extended continental shelf (VERA Files 2008). Therefore, we should pass the new baselines bill even way before the 12 May 2009 deadline to give NAMRIA ample time to adjust their data on our continental shelf, assuming that it would have the necessary data by then.
The SABAH CLAIM
The approval of SB 1467 is without prejudice to our existing claim on Sabah. Although the bill is not as explicit as Sec. 2 of RA 5446 where it mentioned that RP has dominion and sovereignty over Sabah, still Sec. 5 of SB 1467 states that the baselines law shall be without prejudice to other claims. To be sure, Article I of the 1987 Constitution has already covered our claim over Sabah and other similarly situated territories and no law can possibly override this Constitutional provision.
Having said that, the Sabah claim will always be a lingering issue for as long as we will not be brave enough to confront it. Sadly, all the administrations since 1986 refused or lacked the political will to resolve it.
As things stand, our country has a strong existing legitimate claim over Sabah, on behalf of the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu. On the other hand, Malaysia had been in actual possession and control over the island for more than a century now and, worse, the inhabitants of Sabah have expressed their desire to remain under Malaysian rule. Hence, it is very unlikely that Malaysia would give up its claim even with extreme pressure from the international community.
Maintaining status quo may be the preferred option of our past and present National leaders so as to avoid either being accused of selling-out our interests, or creating tension in diplomatic ties with Malaysia. However, maintaining status quo is favorable to Malaysia as they continue to possess, control and exploit Sabah. Moreover, as time passes by that the issue is not resolved, the farther removed are we from the actual circumstances on how Malaysia got to possess Sabah in the first place, which is essential to proving our claim. And, of course, the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu are continuously deprived of their inheritance.
War is definitely not an option not only because our armed forces are ill-equipped for such an endeavor but, more importantly, because we, as a people, have not reached and is nowhere near the level of nationalism and patriotism necessary for launching a politically, socially and economically costly undertaking such as a full-scale war with another country.
Pragmatically, therefore, the only option to resolve the Sabah issue is a compromise settlement between RP, Malaysia and the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu. The author concedes, however, that even this option would not be easily accomplished but then again, reasonable men will always reach a point of agreement.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Push for the passing of SB 1467 and its counterpart in Congress before May 2009 so that there will be a basis for measuring the outer limits of the territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. More importantly, so that our country can now officially claim the limits of our National Territory that is consistent with the international covenant of UNCLOS.
2. Push for the submission of particulars of the outer limits of the continental shelf to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf before the 12 May 2009 deadline by supporting NAMRIA and other concerned agencies in their data gathering.
3. On the assumption that recommendations 1 and 2 as stated above are achieved, we should do the following:
A. Modernize our fishing methods and technologies;
B. Invest heavily on marine scientific research and exploration of the EEZ and continental shelf;
C. Reach out to other claimant States of the contested territories in order to settle disputes and come up with an agreement for joint exploration and development so that all these States can finally benefit from the abundant natural resources in these areas.
D. Comply with the other UNCLOS obligations of an archipelagic State.
4. Modernize the Navy and Coast Guard. Logically, the next step after having firmly and clearly established our territory is to protect it. Aside from the basic demands of naval defense, we should increase our capability for maritime law enforcement operations.
5. Conduct a legislative inquiry on the Tripartite Agreement for Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking.
CONCLUSION
As shown in the discussions above, the baseline issue is quite technical and highly complex because of the interplay with other equally important national security, economy and foreign policy issues. But after carefully analyzing these issues separately, this paper tried its best to come up with reasonable and feasible courses of action which, hopefully, would be given due consideration. Still, everything starts when we finally make a stand, as a Nation, by defining the limits of what is truly ours and what will be good for our country now and in the generations to come.
Article III of the Treaty of Paris dated December 10, 1898 where the Philippines was sold to US for $20 million:
Spain cedes to the United States the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands, and comprehending the islands lying within the following line:
A line running from west to east along or near the twentieth parallel of north latitude, and through the middle of the navigable channel of Bachi, from the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) to the one hundred and twenty-seventh (127th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence along the one hundred and twenty seventh (127th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the parallel of four degrees and forty five minutes (4 [degree symbol] 45′]) north latitude, thence along the parallel of four degrees and forty five minutes (4 [degree symbol] 45′) north latitude to its intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred and nineteen degrees and thirty five minutes (119 [degree symbol] 35′) east of Greenwich, thence along the meridian of longitude one hundred and nineteen degrees and thirty five minutes (119 [degree symbol] 35′) east of Greenwich to the parallel of latitude seven degrees and forty minutes (7 [degree symbol] 40′) north, thence along the parallel of latitude of seven degrees and forty minutes (7 [degree symbol] 40′) north to its intersection with the one hundred and sixteenth (116th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence by a direct line to the intersection of the tenth (10th) degree parallel of north latitude with the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, and thence along the one hundred and eighteenth (118th) degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the point of beginning.
The United States will pay to Spain the sum of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) within three months after the exchange of the ratifications of the present treaty.
Very technical indeed! But in toto, these are issues we have to resolve. I agree too that instead of directly dealing with the countries who would possibly be claiming ownership of any of these islands, that we should involve the ASEAN. It is the region’s utmost duty to keep peace in the region in its entirety.
Our claims to these islands should definitely be passed in congress asap to establish our boundaries particularly so that unlike Sabah(now inhabited by Malaysia), these islands in question are not yet inhabited.
Turningpoint, it is interesting that the US, although it had given us our independence, had not actually cut the umbilical cord to this date!
in this issue, i agree with the above article.
I was lost in the numbers and technicality of the Trillanes paper but went on reading several times for the issues at hand that will determine the future of Pinas’ generations to come.
Wow! ‘Yan ang senador, he knows where he’s coming from. Trillanes proved that a caring Pinoy can ‘climb’ or ‘go through’ the prison walls for the love of country.
Keep up the good work, Sen. Sonny. Way to go!
“…everything starts when we finally make a stand, as a Nation, by defining the limits of what is truly ours and what will be good for our country now and in the generations to come.” – Senator Antonio Trillanes 1V
Indeed!
Ellen,
Thanks very much for the mucho-guapo photo of Sen. Sonny, as if he’s not in detention.
siguro mason iyan chi kaya ganyan.
trillanes really deserved to be a senator and not prison.it seems to me he has a grasped on the technical, legal as well as the political which is quite seldom.pinas need this guy.
Thanks, Norpil. Siguro nga. 🙂
Hindi nasayang ang nag-iisang boto ko para sa kanya.
Anyways, thanks for the article, I now understand the rational behind, what my uncle who served under Marcos in the Army Corps of Engineers says, why they had to destroy several makeshift lighthouses constructed by the Vietnamese because if left standing, it could have legitimized Vietnam’s claim to more islands as explained in par. 4 Art. 47. I guess lesser vigilance on our AFP would have caused our surrendering many of our claims. I also think the Vietnamese were able to build some of these and have become permanent when we became more focused in handling Viet refugees in Palawan than guarding the islands.
Those are very good recommendations Senator Trillanes!!
Off topic:
Ellen, I just heard over at DZMM that the panel hearing the court martial of Gens. Miranda and Lim have allowed the defense to formalize its question regarding the Feb. 26 rebellion case. Atty Trixie Angeles was even quoted that the arraingment was flawed because the accused were not able to enter their plea. Details?
…arraignment…
Anyone here knows what’s happened to the Daily Tribune of Ninez C. Olivares? The online version is inaccessible. I forgot the other URL.
Off topic but I hope when Gloria Dorobo visits Palau, she will be treated as shabbily as the President of Palau, wheo was on a state visit to the Philippines, was shamelessly treated. Sobra naman ang arte! Nakakahiya ang ginawa sa Palau prexy and his wife. Discrimination pa ang labas for I doubt if Bush for instance would be treated that way! Bastos!
Grizzy
Can access Daily Tribune here:
http://www.tribuneonline.org
Wow. Senator Trillanes confirmed what I have been thinking ever since this issue exploded: that there’s a need to stick with the ASEAN and restore political solidarity with the ASEAN to ensure parity with the Chinese, and that it is a must for us to make serious the filing of our claim to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.
Trillanes is more than just a coup plotter. He sure is a statesman with the same calibre of Laurel, Salonga, Tolentino, and Recto.
Proud of him. We came from the same high school! Hahaha.
Thanks, TP.
Why Brenda Santiago is not acting on Senate Bill 1467? She might offend People’s Republic of China and Comrade Gloria.
For sure Gloria can’t hold a candle to Senator Trillanes. Now there’s a man that deserve our adulation and admiration. I think Antonio is anointed by God to be the Filipino leader thru his Jail cell as a way to the cross. The abuse of Gloria, Esperon and her minions will come to a boiling point as all abuses got to stop somehow and that is my opinion.
To Grizzy, Pres. Bush does not have a single discriminating blood or bone in his body. It is the Liberal media that wants to destroy his image. My in-laws know the Bushes for 64 years.
They are the kindest, most charitable families in America. Pres. Bush is a no-none sense human being. The U.S. can not act every time your corrupt politicians shi…. Pres. Bush knows what is going on with your corrupt President. I doubt very much if Pres. Bush will ever go back to the Philippines on the invitation of your corrupt GMA. America have no intention of conquering the Philippines, imagine to conquer a welfare state? We have enough of Puerto Rico. That again is my opinion.
grizzy, i was also shocked when i opened daily tribune and i got a different site.
try http://www.tribuneonline.org
talaga naman, pinag-iinitan ang diyaryo ni ninez, kasi they do not want truth to come out, least of all, read by everyone.
yan, nasa kulungan pa si trillanes! how much more can he achieve if he is out of detention.
makikita na he deserves to be a senator. hindi gaya ng iba na nandiyan sa senado, na kung hindi pa mapagbiro (joker), ulyanin (enrile), brenda (you know who i mean!), papogi lang (lapid, revilla, etc), at lalo na yung isa, na senador lang from mindanao (zubiri).
gising juan de la cruz!!!
We may have the best option, we may have the best people,we may have the most sacred bishops, we may have the best of the best simpaticos but it so happens there is yet another side of the fence like those hordes in the lower house and a leader who just hates the guts at the opposite side. Kung ano ang deal, yun na. How I wished Trillanes plan on a better scheme viz a vis that of his primary detractor once and for all.
Myrna:
Sinabi mo pa. I was tryinig to access Tribune, but was led to a suspicious site.
BTW, paanong napasok si Bush sa usapan dito? Anyway, I believe what I see, and as far as this idiotic Dubya is concerned, ano ba ang pinagkaiba ng mga Bush sa mga Bin Laden?
Charity of the Bush family? My ass—all done for political gains more than the real act of charity itself as defined by the Lord above. The Bin Ladens in fact are doing the same thing.
In fact, Bin Laden (Osama that is) was doing a lot of charities for his fellow Moslems before the Americans, especially the Bushes, tagged him as a terrorist. In fact, I remember he started merely as a financier for the Moslem Fundamentalists in Pakistans until the Americans started tagging him as their mastermind, and the Al Qaeda was born.
I’ve been to the Afghan refugee camps along the borders of Pakistan and Iran with Afghanistan on some charity mission. Nakakaawa and one wonders how these so-called Christians could do the same things they accuse the Moslems of committing against their fellow human beings.
I get goose bumps in fact every time Dubya utters the Name of God even when he orders the attack on people who have not done the Americans any wrong as if he alone has the right to propagate terrorism in the world. Now we see the wrath of heaven on America and the world!
BTW, Dandaw, Gloria is not my president. I consider her in fact as a criminal, for one who violates a law is a criminal and a felon.
I don’t vote in the Philippines. I cannot. Dual citizenship is not allowed in Japan after one reaches the age of maturity. Children with multiple nationalities are required by law to make a choice when they reach 20.
Palau is not Puerto Rico. It is an island near the Philippines along the Micronesia that is now an independent state. Iyong mga mangmang who knows only the USA, binalewala iyong president ng Palau at binastos.
Nakakahiya! Buti sana kung katulad naman ng tour ni Drilon noon nang bastusin siya sa US of A.
The President of Palay was on a state visit. Bakit walang courtesy na ibinigay sa kaniya ng mga inutil?
Yuko, alam mo naman na ang nirerespeto lang ni evil bitch ay ang mga first world leaders. Di ba kandarapa pa siyang pumunta kung saan saang parte ng mundo para lang makakamay kay Bush, sa hari at reyna ng Britain at Spain? Social climber ang bansot na yan! Palibhasa may kasabihan na ang mga taong nagpapakita ng superioty are actually inferior! Baka ganun nga si evil bitch!
Sinabi mo pa, PSB. Gusto pa nga ng ungas na ituring siyang royalty din kahit na alam naman natin ang talagang pinanggalingan niya. Kinu-condition pa nga ang utak ng mga pilipino na dugong bughaw sila, santo pa raw kahit na alam naman nating kampon sila ni Satanas. Ang pinagrabe iyong claim ng ama niyan na descendant sila ni Alexander the Great, pero iyong claim ni Mike Mandurugas na apo sila sa tuhod noong santa na walang asawa, mahirap paniwalaan! Hindi ko kahit kailanman narinig iyan doon sa isang pinsan na kakilala ko. But for sure, mahilig ang mga iyan na magmura ng P—inamo!
Kumusta nga pala si Drilon? Mula nang mawala sa Senate Presidency, biglang tahimik siya. Ngayon siya dapat magpasikat sa totoo lang.
Yuko, is that your education? to compare Bush to Ben Laden. I am only saying that the Bush family were decent people because our great uncle knew them even long before George was born. That was even before the depression I was told. In your other posting you say bad things about Bush. I get alarmed when people say bad about Pres. Bush that is not true. My father was killed by the Japanese during world war 2 and I know about Japan. My brother used to occupy 2 stories of a building in Marunuchi as his office. Since we are on the same page about what is going on in our country, trying to get rid of corruption, I think we should pull our knowledge together and find ways and means to stop this corruption and that is my only purpose in getting in this blog. If the truth is known America was the one that helped dethrone Marcos.
correction: Dethroned Marcos.
Dandaw and the US possibly dethroned Erap as well.
But I think the US is very unhappy with the evil bitch because of her dealings with China. It wont be long until the US will boot her out too.
PSB:
Sinabi mo pa. Hindi lang makapiyak ang US ngayon sa pagkakamali ng pag-patronize sa Tsina after its initial policy against it. Iyong Peace treaties noong 50’s in fact were geared to strengthen US hold in Asia with the help of the Philippines, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Tignan natin kung papaano lilinlangin ni Midget ang mga kano on her dealings with the Chinese. Hindi naman siguro bobo ang lahat ng kano kahit na bobo iyong presidente ngayon na bababa na.
Pag nagsalita ang ungas parang nasa first stage ng dementia ang dating. Buti na lang election na naman. My Mom is voting for McCain kasi die-hard Republican siya, pero iyong mga kapatid ko at bayaw, iboboto kung sino ang ilalaban ng Democrat.
…geared to strengthen US hold in Asia with the help of the Philippines, Japan, Australia and New Zealand versus China and the former USSR…..
Truth is I never had the chance to vote in the Philippines. By the time I was to make my choice of my nationality, wala na kami sa Pilipinas. I opted to become Japanese instead of following the nationality of my father, a US citizen.
My mother remained a Philippine citizen until the late 80’s because she loved the Philippines—actually trying to live up to the tradition of her family…kamag-anak kasi ng mga Luna brothers, et al. Iyong tatay din niya who was exiled in the Marianas and transferred to Hawaii when pardoned by the Americans never took US citizenship.
After the war, he opted to return to the Philippines, died there and was buried in his KKK uniform, his casket draped with a Philippine flag for service to the land that he loved.
It seems that the US, like most Pinas Senators and politicians and CBCP, are just pretty waiting for 2010. The’re all waiting for the date…samantalang tirik na ang mga mata ng mahihirap! Bwisit!!!
Chi,
Can’t blame the US. Ang dami kasi nilang problema ngayon, tapos mas mahalaga sa kanila ngayon kung sinong papalit kay Bush. Most of my American friends are voting Democrat kahit na mga dating Republican. Kailangan daw na mabalik ang dating glory ng US of A. Sabi nga nila bakit daw sila ang aasahan ng mga pinoy e kung sila nga daw hindi nila ma-solve ang sarili nilang problema ngayon lalo na balik sa roaring 20 ang economy nila.
Grizzy: That is alright if a lot of your relatives are voting Democrat as long as your mother is a Republican. That shows she is the only one with common sense and 3 million Phil-Ams are Republican. Really we should not wish that the U.S. economy will go down because a lot of the OFW’s send money back home and the Domino effect will also affect globally. Do you have any imagination if the Americans will stop buying Toyota, what effect that will be in Japans economy. What we should concentrate on doing is to expose the corruption of the Dorobo and her minions, to get those honorable soldiers out of jail and restore decency and order in the Philippines. If we accomplish this Filipinos will be liberated from the tyranny of the Dorobo. In another context the Dorobo sent 47 representatives to the U.N. to solve her Human Rights violation. Knowing the U.N. the Dorobo will distribute bags and bags of money. From what we know about the UN is just as corrupt as the Philippine government, and that is my opinion.
Tongue, re option 1 and 4, it was a typographical error.Sen.Trillanes has corrected it.
I erased that portion of your comment to avoid confusion.
thanks.
dandaw, the US decided to cut Marcos and cut it clean because they saw that the filipino nation at that time and the military had turned against Marcos and there was no way that he will survive it so US had to act quickly to replace Marcos with their own chosen puppet, the yellow, I am just a housewife, Cory Aquino.
Since the time Marcos proclaimed Martial Law the US never did anything to oust him. Why? Marcos supported the US military bases in pinas. It served their interest. US never cared about human right violations of Marcos and other abuses as were already reported by US media, at that time in US, like Jack Anderson, a well known columnist at that time, and other media outlets.
During the time of Clinton presidency Saddam Hussein hired people to assasinate the father of the current president of US. President Clinton was very angry and was reported by media all over the world.
About a year ago it was reported by NPR (National Public Radio) and other US media that even before the current President of US took an oath as President there was already a plan to attack Iraq by the current president.
Why do you think that the current president of US had a plan already to attack Iraq even before he took an oath as President of US? In my opinion the current president attacked Iraq because of his personal vendetta against Saddam. The 911 attack on US gave the current president the excuse to attack Iraq.
Saddam Hussein tried to assasinate the father of the current president that’s why even before Pres. George W. Bush took an oath in his office he had a plan already to attack Iraq.
xman: I don’t know if it is good or bad that Clark Field and Subic Bay are now back in the hands of the Pinoys. I have news that GMA now controls all the businesses of Clark and Subic and she owns all those cargo airplanes that come and go in Subic and Clark or the Tongs. If the whole airfield are in the name of the Filipinos and the earnings of those lands are all shared equally by the people, then that is good but if it goes to the first family then I have a problem with that.
dandaw, first and foremost that first family you are referring to is the illegitimate dwarf pokpok family of RP. For sure the tongpats of Clark Field and Subic Bay will go to arroyo la cosa nostra or swine pokpok la cosa nostra.
Maybe it will be better if the governance of RP will be outsource to the outsider because filipinos could not govern itself. THAT’S THE TRUTH. Let the British handle the governance of RP. Look what they did to Hong Kong.
All colonies of America became stupid because all the yankees did was give money or bribe people. I could not think of any colony or former colonies of America that achieved the economic success of Hong Kong.
Agree ako sa iyo Xman. Almost all the colonies of Britain made it good. Do not forget Australi and Singapore too! But almost all countries that the US have their hands on, slaves lang palagi ang kahihinatnan. The countries were given independence but in reality they gave them “dependence” to foreign aids etc.
The towering condo projects of Hanjin( Koreans) in our forest reservations eh pabor daw si evil bitch! Talaga naman! This evil bitch has her hand in all projects as long as she gets some “dough”! I can see her finger prints, footprints etc in this project. Magaling lang siyang magtago! But the truth will all come out later. Baka nga part owner pa siya ng development na ito under “dummies”! I will not be surprised.