By Ellen Tordesillas, VERA Files
The briefing to be conducted by Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario and Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin will be held tomorrow at 9:30 a.m at the Patio Room of AFPCOC in Camp Aguinaldo.
Members of the panel will be composed of both foreign affairs and defense security experts. Head of the Philippine panel is Ambassador Carlos Sorreta.
The increase in US presence in the country is part of the US’ rebalancing security strategy termed “Pivot to Asia” which involves increasing military presence in Asia Pacific as it reduces its presence in Afghanistan and the Middle East.
The US expects to have 60 percent of their naval assets in the Pacific by 2020. The U.S. Air Force has also allocated 60 percent of its overseas-based forces to the Asia-Pacific – including tactical aircraft and bomber forces from the continental United States.
Last week Del Rosario and Gazmin informed the Senate and the House of Representatives of the start of the negotiations.
A report by the Associated Press quoted the two secretaries as saying that allowing American troops to have an “increased rotational presence” would help the country attain a “minimum credible defense” to guard its territory while it struggles to modernize its own military.
Foreign military bases, troops and facilities are prohibited by the Philippine Constitution after the expiration of the PH-US Bases agreement in 1991 unless under a treaty concurred in by thet Senate. Troops of both countries, however, continue military cooperation and exercises covered by the 1998 Visiting Forces Agreement under the 1951 PH-US Mutual Defense Treaty.
One of the issues to be resolved in the increased military presence in the country is whether it will need a separate treaty or not.
(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issues. Vera is Latin for “true.”)
Mere advise to Congress by Secs. Del Rosario and Gazmin to negotiate US increase in military presence may indicate imprudence as a process not allowed by the 1987 Constitution. To bypass what is required by law as clearly defined in the constitution in any situation may result to a disaster to our people’s welfare and interest. Therefore, both secretaries are taking bites that they can’t swallow. I