Different speculations came out as to why US President Barack Obama did not attend the important summits together with his Asian tour particularly in the ASEAN nations. Some pundits believe that the so-called partial US government shutdown was not the real reason. And the situation became more suspicious when even US Secretary of State John Kerry also cancelled his visit to the Philippines ‘due to bad weather.’(kuno)
The mere fact that this visit of President Obama and/or Sec. Kerry to the region particularly to its allies is very crucial to US pivot to Asia, one will wonder – was the sudden change of travel plans of both Obama and Kerry has something to do with China? Is the Chinese pressure so strong that such important plan had to be cancelled? Just asking because both alibis seemed quite shallow.
As what Manong Ernie Maceda said in his column at the Philippine Star last week– “the cancellation of US Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Manila because of storm “Santi” shows the low priority that the Philippines has with US officials. Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) was open. No flights were cancelled. The storm was coming in from Catanduanes, while the flight path from Brunei is through Mindanao. Kerry’s visit was supposed to substitute for President Obama’s state visit. It should have gone through at all costs.”
Yes, at all costs, that is why the excuse he gave was not valid at all.
We have to consider also the statement of President BS Aquino at the APEC about the Philippines-US Framework Agreement on Increased Rotational Presence. It was reported that PNoy said the United States (US) should be clear with the words they use concerning the said agreement.
“During negotiations, we always get entangled with all the semantics. Those words that are actually used to convey the thoughts.”
He said the words to be used in the agreement on increased rotational presence should “satisfy both parties needs and wants; and satisfy all or addresses all concerns and anxieties.”
“Their language is geared to support the request for budget when they go to Congress,” the President pointed out. “Their language might be perfect in an American manner of speaking English but might be construed differently through a Filipino.” (Source: Aquino presses careful crafting of US rotational presence deal by Roy Mabasa mb.com 10.9.13)
If PNoy felt this urgency to discuss this executive agreement that entails another pact that will make the country beholden to a perceived master in the offing, it is very clear that our relationship with Uncle Sam is one way. So Manong Ernie is right, we are being given low priority by these US officials.
This is the sad reality I have been saying for so many times now, these so-called agreements/treaties we entered into with Uncle Sam are always for the benefit of their country than ours and in the process we are always shortchanged. When are we going to learn to assert our rights as a sovereign nation?
This is not a simple matter that we just have to ignore and let Washington craft the agreement on their own liking. This is about national security and most of all our sovereignty (what was left of it) is at stake here.
In the four rounds of talks that transpired regarding the access agreement, there are "gaps" in the "critical provisions" that need "more work," according to Defense Undersecretary Pio Lorenzo Batino, who heads the Philippine panel.
The military-to-military agreement is expected to boost the defense capability of the AFP amid growing territorial threats, increase the training of its troops, and improve disaster response.
Batino said they have narrowed down the framework agreement to 5 key provisions namely: scope, agreed installations/AFP Facilities, prepositioning of defense equipment, supplies, and materiel, ownership and security. (Source: Bases access: PH, US disagree on 'critical provisions' by Carmela Fonbuena, rappler.com)
Now that the chance for our President and other government officials to tackle the crucial decisions covering the new access agreement was postponed (to who knows when), methinks that this pact is already a done deal on Washington’s side for their Congress to release the budget, and will left us (again) to just accept it with open legs, as usual. So, what else is new? And don’t forget (as Reuters reported last October 3), also on the cards is the development of Oyster Bay, which lies about 550 km (340 miles) southwest of Manila.
"It will be a mini-Subic," Commodore Joseph Rostum O. Peña, the commander of the Philippines' western navy, said in the first public comments about converting Oyster Bay into a major naval base.
"A future port here would extend the reach of the navy's two frigates, both former U.S. Coast Guard cutters, over the disputed Spratly Islands, in the southern part of the South China Sea." he said in an interview from his office overlooking the mouth of the bay.
Oyster Bay is about 160 km (100 miles) from the Spratlys.
"In Manila, the leaders must move behind rhetorical blandishments about a new spirit of partnership and start to detail specific actions that will strengthen Philippine defense capabilities," said Patrick Cronin, an Asia-Pacific
security expert at the Center for a New American Security in Washington DC. That includes building a permanent home for the Philippines' two big warships. It also means finding strategic areas where the United States could rotate troops, ships and naval aircraft — all within easy reach of territory claimed by Beijing. Oyster Bay may be the best choice," said Cronin.
After reading this, the access agreement is already a done deal, to hell with the other critical provisions that we wanted to further discuss with Washington.
Need we say more?
The mere fact that this visit of President Obama and/or Sec. Kerry to the region particularly to its allies is very crucial to US pivot to Asia, one will wonder – was the sudden change of travel plans of both Obama and Kerry has something to do with China? Is the Chinese pressure so strong that such important plan had to be cancelled? Just asking because both alibis seemed quite shallow.
As what Manong Ernie Maceda said in his column at the Philippine Star last week– “the cancellation of US Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Manila because of storm “Santi” shows the low priority that the Philippines has with US officials. Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) was open. No flights were cancelled. The storm was coming in from Catanduanes, while the flight path from Brunei is through Mindanao. Kerry’s visit was supposed to substitute for President Obama’s state visit. It should have gone through at all costs.”
Yes, at all costs, that is why the excuse he gave was not valid at all.
We have to consider also the statement of President BS Aquino at the APEC about the Philippines-US Framework Agreement on Increased Rotational Presence. It was reported that PNoy said the United States (US) should be clear with the words they use concerning the said agreement.
“During negotiations, we always get entangled with all the semantics. Those words that are actually used to convey the thoughts.”
He said the words to be used in the agreement on increased rotational presence should “satisfy both parties needs and wants; and satisfy all or addresses all concerns and anxieties.”
“Their language is geared to support the request for budget when they go to Congress,” the President pointed out. “Their language might be perfect in an American manner of speaking English but might be construed differently through a Filipino.” (Source: Aquino presses careful crafting of US rotational presence deal by Roy Mabasa mb.com 10.9.13)
If PNoy felt this urgency to discuss this executive agreement that entails another pact that will make the country beholden to a perceived master in the offing, it is very clear that our relationship with Uncle Sam is one way. So Manong Ernie is right, we are being given low priority by these US officials.
This is the sad reality I have been saying for so many times now, these so-called agreements/treaties we entered into with Uncle Sam are always for the benefit of their country than ours and in the process we are always shortchanged. When are we going to learn to assert our rights as a sovereign nation?
This is not a simple matter that we just have to ignore and let Washington craft the agreement on their own liking. This is about national security and most of all our sovereignty (what was left of it) is at stake here.
In the four rounds of talks that transpired regarding the access agreement, there are "gaps" in the "critical provisions" that need "more work," according to Defense Undersecretary Pio Lorenzo Batino, who heads the Philippine panel.
The military-to-military agreement is expected to boost the defense capability of the AFP amid growing territorial threats, increase the training of its troops, and improve disaster response.
Batino said they have narrowed down the framework agreement to 5 key provisions namely: scope, agreed installations/AFP Facilities, prepositioning of defense equipment, supplies, and materiel, ownership and security. (Source: Bases access: PH, US disagree on 'critical provisions' by Carmela Fonbuena, rappler.com)
Now that the chance for our President and other government officials to tackle the crucial decisions covering the new access agreement was postponed (to who knows when), methinks that this pact is already a done deal on Washington’s side for their Congress to release the budget, and will left us (again) to just accept it with open legs, as usual. So, what else is new? And don’t forget (as Reuters reported last October 3), also on the cards is the development of Oyster Bay, which lies about 550 km (340 miles) southwest of Manila.
"It will be a mini-Subic," Commodore Joseph Rostum O. Peña, the commander of the Philippines' western navy, said in the first public comments about converting Oyster Bay into a major naval base.
"A future port here would extend the reach of the navy's two frigates, both former U.S. Coast Guard cutters, over the disputed Spratly Islands, in the southern part of the South China Sea." he said in an interview from his office overlooking the mouth of the bay.
Oyster Bay is about 160 km (100 miles) from the Spratlys.
"In Manila, the leaders must move behind rhetorical blandishments about a new spirit of partnership and start to detail specific actions that will strengthen Philippine defense capabilities," said Patrick Cronin, an Asia-Pacific
security expert at the Center for a New American Security in Washington DC. That includes building a permanent home for the Philippines' two big warships. It also means finding strategic areas where the United States could rotate troops, ships and naval aircraft — all within easy reach of territory claimed by Beijing. Oyster Bay may be the best choice," said Cronin.
After reading this, the access agreement is already a done deal, to hell with the other critical provisions that we wanted to further discuss with Washington.
Need we say more?
No comments:
Post a Comment