Revisiting the VFA

In 1999, the Philippine Senate deliberated on the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), at which time President Estrada used his political capital to have it passed, getting his political allies in the Senate to push for its passage. President Estrada, who is a personal friend of mine, requested me to assist then US Ambassador Tom Hubbard with the media. 

While Erap voted against the retention of the US bases in 1991, he strongly felt that we needed the assistance of the United States in coping with external threats and modernize the armed forces. In a classic Erap joke, he used to say “our Air Force is all air, no force” because we lacked fighter jets.

Over the years, I witnessed the United States providing us with billions of pesos worth of assistance in terms of aircraft and military equipment, training as well as funding for various projects. Since 2016 the US has donated surveillance planes and unmanned aerial vehicles to help boost the AFP’s counter-terrorism efforts and internal security operations, and its humanitarian and disaster response capabilities. 

No doubt the AFP must develop a “credible defense posture” to defend our country from external threats and protect its national interests. Even President Trump himself would like to see US allies become strong and independent militarily and economically.

President Duterte is very passionate about our sovereignty and rightly so. This is where I see the bone of contention with the VFA is, and why a review of the agreement makes sense.

Senator Grace Poe pointed out during the Senate committee hearing on Foreign Relations that we must go beyond the “political noise” and evaluate the VFA according to its own merit. “In the more than two decades that the VFA has been in existence, have we benefitted from it?” the senator asked. 

During conversations with some of my friends in the military especially those in the second level of command, all of them find the VFA advantageous and would like it to continue. Some even say that as far as military-to-military relations is concerned, this is probably at its best ever. Surprisingly, some of the leadership in the Defense establishment are for the total abrogation of the VFA.

As Secretary Locsin pointed out during the meeting with the members of the Senate committee on foreign relations, US Forces through the VFA have been instrumental in assisting the Philippines in combatting non-traditional security threats like human trafficking, illegal drugs and terrorism through trainings, joint exercises and exchange visits. 

US assistance on counter-terrorism has been crucial in many instances like in the Battle of Marawi in May 2017. Support from the US Department of Defense also enabled the AFP to continue its operations against ISIS-East Asia-aligned militants in Mindanao, and in conducting successful operations to rescue British and Indonesian nationals who were taken hostage by the Abu Sayyaf Group.

An important component of the VFA that many people are not aware of is the humanitarian assistance and disaster response (HADR) element – something that is critical for a country like the Philippines which is very prone to natural calamities and disasters such as typhoons, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.  

I saw firsthand what the US Forces can do during the onslaught of Typhoon Yolanda in 2013. My cousin, Leyte Congressman Martin Romualdez, called to ask me to seek the assistance of our friend at the US embassy, Colonel Rick Matton, because Martin knew then that the damage to Tacloban City was so massive. He felt that only the United States had the kind of resources to conduct airlifts and airdrops to hard-to-reach villages. Response from the US Pacific Command was immediate, with the USS George Washington – docked at Hong Kong harbor at the time – arriving at the Gulf of Leyte on Nov. 12 with cargo jets, choppers and US troops to help with rescue and relief operations. 10,000 people perished, but many more were saved by the US forces.

While the DFA is not taking any position regarding the abrogation or retention of the VFA, it is clear that we need to revisit the agreement and update it so that the language is more explicit regarding contentious provisions on sovereignty, which in my view is what the President is concerned about.

Senate President Tito Sotto and Senator Ping Lacson have filed a Senate Resolution recommending to the president that he reconsider the plan to terminate the agreement while the Senate is still conducting its review.  

The issue of sovereignty was precipitated by the demand of some US Senators to release Senator de Lima who was properly charged and confirmed by two rulings of our Supreme Court. Clearly this kind of demand is undermining our justice system, which ironically is patterned after the US justice system. 

During the recent visit of Secretary Locsin in Washington, we have been able to address President Duterte’s concern on our sovereignty with the White House, the State Department and the US Senate Foreign Relations committee chairman, Senator Jim Risch. 

President Ronald Reagan once said that the basis of a free and principled foreign policy is not by “harangue, harassment or wishful thinking.” During his 1981 inaugural address, he reiterated that when it comes to its allies, the US “will not use our friendship to impose on their sovereignty, for our own sovereignty is not for sale.”  

Ultimately President Duterte, the commander-in-chief and chief architect of our foreign policy, has the prerogative to decide on the VFA. We are confident he will make his decision based on our national interest weighing both sides of the argument.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]