DFA says it will initiate VFA review

MANILA - Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, in an impassioned speech on Wednesday, called on the Senate to ask President Arroyo to renegotiate or terminate the controversial Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) between the Philippines and the United States.

Santiago’s statement was contained in her sponsorship speech of her proposed Senate Resolution No. 1356, which seeks to express the sense of the Senate “that the Department of Foreign Affairs should seek to renegotiate the Visiting Forces Agreement with the United States, and in case of denial, should give notice of termination of the VFA.”

“We have tried the VFA for ten years and found it wanting. It is not for this Senate to determine the life expectancy of the VFA. That power belongs to the Philippine President. Therefore, at the very least, this Senate should ask the executive branch of government either to renegotiate or to terminate the VFA,” she said.

Unconstitutional

Santiago said the VFA violates the Philippine Constitution, which “requires that foreign military bases, foreign military troops, or foreign military facilities shall not be allowed in the Philippines, except under a treaty recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State.”

She said the US government only recognizes the VFA as an executive agreement.

Santiago said that unlike the Philippine government, which sought and got the concurrence of the Senate for the VFA, the US executive department has not submitted the VFA for concurrence by the US Senate. Instead, it “was submitted for information purposes” to the US Senate.

She said this was in compliance with the Case-Zablocki Act in the US, which “requires the US President, through the Secretary of State, to transmit to the US Congress, the international agreements entered into by the US government, or by its officials or agencies, which are not characterized as treaties. “

She said that since the US government does not recognize the VFA as a treaty, it “does not comply with the requirement of the RP Constitution….Thus, US courts are not necessarily bound by it, because the US government considers the VFA as a mere executive agreement.”

She said that the US government also does not recognize the VFA as a “self-executing treaty.”

Vague

Santiago said the VFA is “void for vagueness” since it does not properly define the terms “visit”, “temporary”, and “military activities” that were used in the wording of the agreement.

She said that previous pronouncements by former Presidents Fidel Ramos and Joseph Estrada gave “false or even deceptive impression of the VFA,” when they said that the VFA was intended for military exercises of the US and the Philippine military.

“Sampung taon na ang mga Amerikano nandidito simula mula 1999 hanggang 2009, temporary pa rin iyon, visit pa rin iyon?” asked Santiago.

She alleged that “when the VFA failed to define these terms, then the failure to do so was done willfully and in bad faith. These undefined terms are each a lacuna, a blank space. These lacunae in substantive information are purposely devious, in order to allow the US forces to stay indefinitely in our country.”

Santiago said the VFA effectively “blurred, if not erased” one of the Senate’s defining moment when it rejected in 1991 the extension of the stay of the US military bases in the Philippines.

“Wala palang katapusan itong stay nilang ito, tawag nila ‘visiting forces’ pero puwede palang maging permanente,” quipped Santiago.

She reiterated that the VFA never used the term “military exercise” to describe the term “activities” which was used but “without defining it or setting its limits.”

“Walang nagtanong ano ibig sabihin ng activities, Ilang sundalo ang puwede dito? Gaano sila tatagal dito? Anong mga klase ang pwede pumunta galing sa Amerika dito, mga eroplano, mga barko maliban sa mga sundalo mga military hardware, mga baril at iba pang kasangkapan ng giyera. Wala, walang ganoon ang VFA. Kaya libreng-libre pala ang mga Amerikano dito sa pagkasulat ng VFA na ito,” said Santiago.

The vagueness of the “approved activities” of US forces in the Philippines in relation to the VFA “opens the way to all forms of military activities of the US forces in Philippine territory, short of establishing a permanent military base,” said Santiago.

Forward operating bases

She said that the VFA favors US military strategy, which has shifted from maintaining permanent military bases in other countries to just establishing “forward operating bases”.

“Pinalitan na nila ang strategy nila na permanent military base. Ibig sabihin, maliit lang para konting panahon lang pero pwede na silang mag-giyera ulit,” said Santiago.

She said that with the VFA, US forces “in effect, operates these mobile and flexible forward operating bases.”

“Instead of the Clark military air base or Subic Naval Base, meron na silang forward operating base, pinalitan lang nila ang salita,” said Santiago.

“Combat operations”

If uniformed US soldiers riding with Filipino military transport are fired upon, US troops would fire back in self-defense. “O, di ba they are engaging in combat?” she said. "When they do that, when they embed themselves with Filipino troops, for example, in Mindanao, they are actually baiting the rebels to fire at them so that they can fire back."

She said the US military says that it only provides “logistical and intelligence support.” This term, Santiago said, “is so broad that under US interpretation, it allows actual immersion in combat operations.”

She also cited the existence of the Joint Special Operations Task Force Philippines (JSOTF-P)

“By its nature, the Task Forces, such as the JSOTF-P, normally operate in war zones as US instruments in its 'global war against terror',” said Santiago, adding that the US military officer who commanded the unit, Col. David Maxwell had written that he once led an operation “under the guise of an exercise”.

She said that the RP-US Mutual Defense Board, which operates under the RP-US Mutual-Defense Treaty (MDT), was also “re-tooled into an anti-terrorism instrument, presumably on the basis of the agreement between President Bush and President Arroyo.” She said this is being used to cover the activities of US forces in the Philippines.

“Akala ko military exercises lang sila, bakit counter-terrorism na sila? Meron ba tayong kasunduan na kasama sila sa counter-terrorism effort sa ating teritoryo? Dapat meron din tayong treaty.… Di naman sila nagkonsulta sa atin kung payag tayo o hindi,” said Santiago.

MDT irrelevant to US stay

She said they are using MDT as a reference so that there would be no need for Senate approval as required under the Constitution.

“Thus, the MDT is irrelevant to the VFA. There is no armed attack against the Philippines; what we have in Mindanao is an insurgency,” said Santiago.

She said also that US, even with the MDT, would not even automatically defend the Philippines should hostilities with China erupt over conflicting claims over the Spratly islands.

“…the US, at this time, cannot afford to antagonize the US. China has bought US treasury bonds worth US$1 trillion. These so-called treasuries are documents of loans borrowed by the US. Hence, the US owes US$1 trillion to China,” said Santiago, citing statements made by US Defense Secretary Robert Gates in a visit to the Philippines in 2009.

“Kung ganyan pala ang utang niya, aasahan mo ba ang US na lalabanin niya ang may utang siya?” said.

Military junk

Santiago also deplored that the benefits from the VFA, which, at the time when it was negotiated, was going to bring in substantial US aid.

“Wala man tayo sa top ten nila,” she said. The top recipient of US military aid in 2004 was Israel, which received $9 billion, while the tenth on the list was Poland, which got $313 million.

Citing data from the VFA Commission, Santiago said the Philippines received from the US $250 million in Foreign Military Financing since 1999; $76.5 million in Foreign Military Sales from 2001-07; and, $76.7 million in Excess Defense Articles from 1999- 2007.

“The US calls the Philippines as a major non-NATO ally, but treats us like a shabby country cousin. In return for the VFA, what we receive is paltry, mostly in the form of Excess Defense Articles, in other words, US military junk,” said Santiago.

She also lamented that the Philippine military remains the most poorly equipped in Asia.

“Paano, akala natin bibigyan tayo ng Amerikano ng pampagara, ‘yon pala, ukay-ukay ang inabot natin!” said Santiago.

She also slammed reported comments of Gates which said that the US “has decided to keep an elite 600-troop counter-insurgency operation deployed in the Philippines.” She said the statement, made with the "usual American military hubris, without consultation and without the consent of the proper Philippine authorities, is no less than an act of provocation against our sovereign country.”

She also said that VFA-2 was not approved by the Senate, and is not publicly well-known.

Santiago’s impassioned plea to the Senate to seek the renegotiation of the VFA started with a complaint on the successive postponement of her sponsorship of the proposed resolution.

“Tatlong beses na na–re-postpone, kaya tatlong linggo na kong nag-aantay. Porke ba di na ko tatakbong pagka-presidente, di na ako tatawagin? Malamang tumakbo akong presidente, ah. After all I’m qualified by age,” said Santiago.

Santiago’s plea to the Senate, however, drew an immediate reaction from Sen. Joker Arroyo, who stood immediately after her sponsorship speech.

“Long, long overdue,” said Sen. Arroyo.

Santiago said she hopes the Senate would approve her resolution by Monday next week.

VFA review

Santiago’s proposed resolution also drew immediate reactions from the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the US embassy.

“The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) respects the views of the Senate and will consider the comments and concerns they have expressed on the Visiting Forces Agreement. It is in response to the concerns raised that the Presidential Commission on the VFA (VFACOM), which is co-chaired by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and the Secretary of National Defense, will initiate a review of the VFA. The VFACOM shall present in due time appropriate recommendations based on the results of the review,” the DFA said.

The statement also defended the MDT and the VFA as “important, useful and relevant, not only for Philippine national interest but also for regional peace, security and prosperity.”

It then enumerated benefits from the VFA: modernization of the Philippine military, counter-terrorism, and the civil-military and humanitarian actions of US forces in the Philippines.

Meanwhile the US embassy also gave a reaction to Santiago’s speech.

"The VFA is an important element in our relationship; it is important that our two countries have an open dialogue to make sure it continues to work well," said US embassy spokesperson Rebecca Thompson, in a text message to ABS-CBN News.