Friday, July 1, 2011

The VFA, Staying In or Going Out?

"The VFA is a failure, because after 10 years, the AFP has not modernized sufficiently to keep up with our Asian neighbors and the terrorist groups are still active… because treaties are considered as part of the laws of the land, congress can unilaterally abrogate the treaty on its own,” so said a senator. But is it, and can they, really?

More importantly, what impacts will the VFA, or the absence of it, play in the current posturing of China in the Spratlys?

This issue is not inconsequential to us here at the Subic Freeport since we are literally facing the Spratlys and even China with just an expanse of water in between. We can, theoretically, swim on a straight line northwest and make landfall at the shores of China, or swim straight southwest and hit the Spratlys. Let’s see if we can make some sense out of this. Here’s a chronological brief:

  • 14 Mar 1947 – The RP-US Military Bases Agreement (MBA) was signed granting the United States lease for bases including Subic Bay.
  • 30 Aug 1951 – The Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) was signed between the Philippines and the United States. It declares that both nations would support each other if either were to be attacked by an external party.
  • 7 Jan 1979 – the RP-US Military Bases Agreement was revised, turning over the sovereignty of the bases to the Philippine government.
  • 15 Oct 1986 – The 1987 Philippine Constitution (Section 25, Article XVIII, Transitory Provisions) declared that after expiration of the MBA in 1991, foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty...
  • 13 Sep 1991 – The Philippine Senate rejected the ratification/extension of the treaty.
  • 24 Nov 1992 – The American Flag was lowered in Subic Bay for the last time.
  • 27 May 1999 – The RP–US Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) became effective after ratification by the Philippine Senate.
  • 11 Feb 2009 – the Supreme Court of the Philippines sitting en banc decided that the VFA is constitutional.

So, the VFA is constitutional. But what is it about anyway? The VFA is directly about the treatment of visiting armed forces between the Philippines and the US, that’s all. Indirectly, it paved the way for bilateral military exercises and defense cooperation between the RP and US and is construed to be an implementing instrument to the RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty.

Is it a failure then because it has not modernized the Armed Forces of the Philippines? I have to respectfully digress. The VFA document does not mention, not even in passing, that it was created to modernize the Philippine Armed Forces or to neutralize terrorist groups. How can it fail in something it is not primarily devised to do?

Of course there could be other confidential documents relevant to the VFA such as the 2002 Mutual Logistic Support Agreement (MLSA). But these are just secondary documents that can be changed almost at whim as long as these do not contradict the VFA.

But is the VFA a lopsided agreement? I think not. VFA-1 (Regarding the Treatment of United States Armed Forces Visiting the Philippines) and its complementary VFA-2 (Regarding the Treatment of Republic of the Philippines Personnel Visiting the United States of America) are very similar. How can a mirrored document be lopsided compared to the other?

Sure, we all know that bilateral military exercises and other activities are conducted in the Philippines often. Those activities are either beneficial or harmful to the Philippines depending on what side you are listening to. And there’s no shortage of it from both sides, too.

But this is beside the point, the Philippines can say no to any bilateral military exercises at any time. The VFA does not automatically approve a military exercise.

Can congress unilaterally abrogate the treaty on its own? Here, I have to agree. But, President Aquino is for the “fine-tuning” of the VFA, not its abrogation. With a congress whose majority belongs to his political party, would it happen? Not.

It could be costly but the best way to settle the impasse (if you’d call it that) is to call a national referendum. So how do you think the citizens of the Philippines would vote? The VFA will pass, I’d have to predict. Two reasons: 1) In 1991 polls conducted regarding the stay of US bases indicated that 80% of Filipinos wanted the bases to stay; 2) The present and potentially explosive Spratlys issue with China.

This issue with China actually gives the VFA a huge boost. Without the US on our side, China will simply treat us as an annoying bug that, militarily, may not be even worth the effort of a swat. We have no cover to defend ourselves—except the RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty of which the VFA is part of.

According to the late Senator Blas Ople, who sponsored the VFA in 1999, our military alliance with the US “remains a major anchor of our national safety, security, and freedom.” How prophetic and spot-on even 12 years after.

Will the VFA stay or go? I’d say the former. But that’s just me.

No comments:

Post a Comment