Philippines to offer US military use of 8 bases.

[anon45]

Philippines to offer US military use of eight bases
Announcement comes after the country’s supreme court upheld a security agreement with Washington forged in the face of rising tensions with China

Wednesday 13 January 2016 22.57 ESTLast modified on Wednesday 13 January 201622.59 EST

• Share on Pinterest
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Google+

Shares
68
Comments
110
Save for later
The Philippines is set to offer the US military use of eight bases, a military spokesman has said, after the country’s supreme court upheld a security agreement with Washington forged in the face of rising tensions with China.

The facilities include the former US Clark airbase and air and naval facilities on the southwestern island of Palawan which faces the South China Sea, the focus of territorial disputes with China.

Military spokesman Colonel Restituto Padilla said the facilities would be used to store equipment and supplies.

He added that the offer had still to be finalised after the Philippine Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a 10-year security accord.

The decision allows for the full implementation of the Enhanced Defense Co-operation Agreement (EDCA), signed in 2014 but not implemented due to legal challenges from groups opposed to US military involvement in the Philippines, a US colony from 1898 to 1946.

It will see more US troops rotate through the Philippines for war games and help Manila build military facilities.

“We have resumed talks now that there is a go-signal that EDCA is constitutional,” Padilla said on Wednesday.

“We are continuing talks and we will finalise the agreement on the locations,” he said without giving a timetable when the decision would be reached.

The Philippines hosted two of the largest overseas US military bases until 1992, when the senate voted to end their leases, a decision influenced by anti-US sentiment.

The new pact does not authorise a return of US bases.

China and the Philippines – as well as Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan – have conflicting claims to the South China Sea which is a major shipping lane, rich fishing ground and potential source of mineral resources.

The Philippines has been seeking closer defence ties with the United States,accusing China of increased aggressiveness in the South China Sea.

In April 2012, after a tense stand-off with Philippine ships, Chinese vessels took control of a shoal just 220km (135m) off the main Philippine island of Luzon.

Philippine president Benigno Aquino negotiated the EDCA to help the Philippines improve its military capabilities and draw the United States closer, partly to counter China’s increasing presence.

Philippines to offer US military use of eight bases | World news | The Guardian

On the face of it this sounds like pretty huge news. A sign of increasing US investment in the SCS.

 

[JayMandan]

Duterte will spoil them as curfews will take effect when he takes office. The Chinese drug lords will have no place to hide other than in some rocks in the Pacific where they are protected by their investors.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Funny, even though the Philippines has a "mutual defence treaty" with America, China still seized the Scarborough shoal from the Philippines in 2012, and is continuing to build islands and militarize them in the SCS right next door to them.

So the Philippines basically sold their sovereignty, and got NOTHING in return.

Great deal man. I cannot disapprove.

 

[JayMandan]

We have nothing but gain here lol. It's a good deal. Plus we still have your ancestors' islands LOL. Try taking em again lol.

 

[Pinoy]

Well the 8 bases will definitely be a boost to the Philippines' security. I would propose that we should also make Pag-Asa (Thitu) island to be officially converted into a military NAVAL base and offer it as one of the stations for use by the US forces.

 

[Zsari]

Philippines to offer US military use of eight bases | World news | The Guardian

On the face of it this sounds like pretty huge news. A sign of increasing US investment in the SCS.

An investment with zero return. China spent 2 billion building 5 islands in protecting its resource and its sealanes, while US will spend 10 times if not 100 times more just in Philippine that serves little of its own interest. I said sometimes ago, that the fall of empire came in most case due to its own excess and over-extension rather than anything else. The more oversea committment US make around the world, the less likely it is to sustain them, and that in the long run is great for China.

 

[anon45]

An investment with zero return. China spent 2 billion building 5 islands in protecting its resource and its sealanes, while US will spend 10 times if not 100 times more just in Philippine that serves little of its own interest. I said sometimes ago, that the fall of empire came in most case due to its own excess and over-extension rather than anything else. The more oversea committment US make around the world, the less likely it is to sustain them, and that in the long run is great for China.

You haven't offered a coherent explanation for why US basing in the Philippines would not serve the US interest of increasing its presence in the SCS.

Your relation to money was misplaced, I was referring to an increase in our presence, it was a figure of speech, and you shouldn't be worrying about our economy at this time, look to yours.

 

[Zsari]

You haven't offered a coherent explanation for why US basing in the Philippines would not serve the US interest of increasing its presence in the SCS.

Your relation to money was misplaced, I was referring to an increase in our presence, it was a figure of speech, and you shouldn't be worrying about our economy at this time, look to yours.

What national interest does US have in the SCS that can be served with bases in Philippines? Everything comes down to cost, increase presence come at a cost, such is over-extension. Economy at any single point isn't worth worrying over. From 1800 to the 1940's, US has gone through dozens of recessions and a great depression, but still these would not stop it from becoming the dominant economy in the world. Such is the forece of long term development, and China today still is not even in a recession.

 

[anon45]

What national interest does US have in the SCS that can be served with bases in Philippines? Everything comes down to cost, increase presence come at a cost, such is over-extension. Economy at any single point isn't worth worrying over. From 1800 to the 1940's, US has gone through dozens of recessions and a great depression, but still these would not stop it from becoming the dominant economy in the world. Such is the forece of long term development, and China today still is not even in a recession.

an Increased presence in the philippines means additional presence and the ability to support more assets in the region.

The national interest is to support our allies in the region and preserve the SCS as an area of navigation according to international maritime law.

Additional basing makes that task easier. The US will have no trouble paying for basing for the next 20 years though.

 

[Aepsilons]

Philippines to offer US military use of eight bases | World news | The Guardian

On the face of it this sounds like pretty huge news. A sign of increasing US investment in the SCS.

This isn't news, this has been the official paradigm of the VFA since 1997. Just for public consumption. As if it will change the Chinese' position , or put fear to the South Sea Fleet PLAN, lol.

There is only one thing they fear , and that is direct engagement , and even then , I doubt the US has the capability nor the political will to pursue that.

No , my friend, what you are posting or fail to understand is what strategists refer to as The Assymetry of Design. I fear the Americans have fallen for the bait.

 

[Zsari]

an Increased presence in the philippines means additional presence and the ability to support more assets in the region.

The national interest is to support our allies in the region and preserve the SCS as an area of navigation according to international maritime law.

Additional basing makes that task easier. The US will have no trouble paying for basing for the next 20 years though.

Freedom of navigation was never in danger. The stability of trade route in SCS is far more important to China than to the US. To support the interests of satellite states around the globe is the very essence of an over-extended empire, not at all serving the national interest of the state itself. That's the difference between a rising power and a declining power with too much global committment that brings back little return.

US is not just paying for these 8 bases, but that it has to for the nearly 100 bases around the world, for another 20 years? What about another 50 years? 100 years? Would it be able to sustain all these indefinitely? During the warring period of China, the ultimate winner Qin had a strategy of attacking neighboring states while befriend far away states, as waging war against far away states is a complete waste of resources with nothing to gain. This is the situtation today, that Chinese presence in SCS actually gave it control and resource in the area, while regardless how much bases US have in the region, as an outside party, it cannot go around and sieze resource or territories. Even with 100 bases, it can still just watch China building up the islands there for China is the state with a claim not the US.

 

[anon45]

Freedom of navigation was never in danger. The stability of trade route in SCS is far more important to China than to the US. To support the interests of satellite states around the globe is the very essence of an over-extended empire, not at all serving the national interest of the state itself. That's the difference between a rising power and a declining power with too much global committment that brings back little return.

Freedom of navigation includes all ships, including naval vessels, which China takes issue to.

US is not just paying for these 8 bases, but that it has to for the nearly 100 bases around the world, for another 20 years? What about another 50 years? 100 years? Would it be able to sustain all these indefinitely? During the warring period of China, the ultimate winner Qin had a strategy of attacking neighboring states while befriend far away states, as waging war against far away states is a complete waste of resources with nothing to gain. This is the situtation today, that Chinese presence in SCS actually gave it control and resource in the area, while regardless how much bases US have in the region, as an outside party, it cannot go around and sieze resource or territories. Even with 100 bases, it can still just watch China building up the islands there for China is the state with a claim not the US.

The US isn't even interested in seizing territories or resources in Asia, and China's doing so are alienating the other countries in the region, precisely causing them to be more supportive of a US presence.

when do you predict the US military will retreat from Asia? any hard date or just a conviction?

This isn't news, this has been the official paradigm of the VFA since 1997. Just for public consumption. As if it will change the Chinese' position , or put fear to the South Sea Fleet PLAN, lol.

There is only one thing they fear , and that is direct engagement , and even then , I doubt the US has the capability nor the political will to pursue that.

No , my friend, what you are posting or fail to understand is what strategists refer to as The Assymetry of Design. I fear the Americans have fallen for the bait.

Who said anything about fear? it does solidify US presence in the region though and makes it easier to operate.

Nihonjin, are you seriously doubting the USN's capability vs the PLAN? I'd expect that from other's, but I always thought you were more knowledgeable than that. please tell me I misunderstood.

As for will, that changes quickly and can be misread.

If you feel we have taken bait, that is unfortunate, but I feel you are mistaken and that we are seeing an increasing welcome by SCS countries for the US' presence. This has given us a diplomatic coup in certain countries reversing bad relations and strengthening our bonds with traditional allies. Rather I see it as this... If China continues on its current course we will see a self fulfilling prophecy of a 'noose' of containing countries who through China's claims and unilateral actions have come to view it with suspicion.

 

[Aepsilons]

Nihonjin, are you seriously doubting the USN's capability vs the PLAN? I'd expect that from other's, but I always thought you were more knowledgeable than that. please tell me I misunderstood.

My friend, please differentiate power projection kinetic ability from the political will to use it. The SCS is , clearly, a containment mechanism. If you want to talk about specifics, engage me in the Japanese Self Defense Thread Section, not here.