What a way to break up the Philippines

I do not pretend to speak for other Filipinos much less claim so. The thoughts I raise here are personal to me. They are humbly mine and mine alone, in my most insignificant self, such that should this article be sanctionable or should it offend anyone, I am prepared to meet whatever dire consequence comes forth.

It is unwise for President Rodrigo Duterte to move for the abrogation of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). I say “move for the abrogation” because I believe he is without power to do so. The VFA, having hurdled a challenge to its constitutionality in the case of Bayan vs Executive Secretary, is a treaty. It was ratified by the Senate on June 1, 1999. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all members of the senate. So, says the constitution. The process of negotiating a treaty may be an executive function but making it valid and effective is a power that belongs to the Senate. It is thus logical that the president may initiate the move to invalidate a treaty but he needs the concurrence of a qualified majority of the upper chamber of Philippine Legislature to achieve his desired end.

To remember, soon after July 4, 1946, when the Philippines gained its cherished independence from the United States of America, the two countries entered a treaty commonly referred to as the Mutual Defense Act. It was like the Americans babying the Filipinos, actually. Its supposed essence of mutuality though was such that any act of military aggression by any state against, say, the US was to be considered as against our country, for which reason we were to come to aid America. Wow! Conversely, a military attack on the Philippine was to be viewed by USA as an assault against it and Americans were to throw their military might defending their little brown brothers.

I viewed the mutual defense pact as unrealistic and inoperable. The assurances to our territorial integrity that the treaty provides are theoretically overwhelming, but they would miserably fail in application had such occasion taken place. Thank God, we had no incident to put to a test those glowing mutual defense provisions.

The VFA, as a replacement to the mutual defense pact, is a more realistic treaty. We have witnessed the joint exercises done on consistent frequency participated by the elements of the two armies. The training alone provided by visiting forces (read that as American) is incalculable. There is technology transfer that, if accounts are true, has benefited immensely our armed forces. Above all, the VFA is more than just a symbolic mantle of protection against any such foreign power with aggressive military intention as China.

Our president aims to abrogate the VFA. He has reportedly set in motion the process and he is likely to succeed because he has the number of allied lawmakers in the Senate enough to get the required 2/3 votes. One main incident that is given as the president’s reason for this major international policy formulation was the cancellation by the US government of the visa to Sen. Ronald “Bato” de la Rosa. I am sure, this administration will deny this Bato angle as Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III expressed in a televised interview that the president may have other reasons.

Whatever the president’s reason, he is entitled to craft new policies in international relations. But, he is heading in the wrong direction. His policy will only make it easy for China to grab the Islands in the West Philippine Sea. Oh my goodness, what a way to permit the breakup of our territorial domains.