Arguments in the Visiting Forces Agreement

The Visiting Forces Agreement or the VFA of the Philippines and the United States is supposed to be an agreement to benefit both countries but ever since it was established, there are a lot of issues that are to be addressed for the side of the Philippines. In the article "What's wrong with the Visiting Forces Agreements", there were several point mentioned saying that this agreement is not fair and is considered a burden for the Philippines. This paper will counter these arguments by the advantages that the agreement brings to the Philippines.

Argument # 1:
"It is an affront to our (Philippine) constitution"
This argument in the article is being supported by an article in the constitution that said "The Philippines is consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory". The article is saying that this part of the constitution was reduced in the agreement for there is a lack of inspection form the side of the Philippine government when it comes to the nuclear-capable aircraft and naval vessel of the U.S when entering the territory of the Philippines.

The VFA will not require the military vessels in the exercises to be conducted here to carry nuclear weapons. Most of the exercises are conventional in nature and do not all involve training in biological, chemical, or even nuclear warfare. Conducting war games with US forces is important in upgrading the capabilities of Filipino soldiers in land, sea and air operations, which the Americans have perfected. War games, in fact, constitute a transfer of technology; and the Armed Forces of the Philippines can only benefit from the infusion of sophisticated military know-how from the troops of a country that just happens to be the planet's sole, undisputed superpower.

Argument # 2:
"It grants extraterritorial rights to Americans"
This argument is strongly supported by saying that the Philippines, as a sovereign country must have full jurisdiction for its territory but due to this agreement, this right was being reduced because Americans were given lenient rules in entering the country.

Maybe we should see it as a necessity to grants rights for the Americans in entering the country with more lenient rules but this does not mean that we are actually granting extraterritorial rights to them. It is part of making things easier for both sides. It is just that, the Philippine authority should make sure that the ones entering the country are really for the military service and will not go beyond what is stated in the agreement. Besides, the VFA would provide the guidelines for determining the legal status of American soldiers in the Philippines during joint military exercises provided under the RP-US Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT). Also, Philippine military personnel can travel to the US in emergency cases without passports or visas. While in the US, they will be allowed to import articles and send these back to the Philippines free of duties and taxes.

Argument # 3:
"It can involve us in unnecessary international conflicts"
Due to the "vagueness" of the agreement, specifically in the parts of America's activity in the Philippine territory, there is a possibility that the country could be involved in the international conflicts just because the Americans are staying here.

During the 9/11 attack, the Arroyo administration strongly supported the United States and the fight against international terrorism and offered that the Clark Air Field and Subic Bay Naval Base for use by the International Coalition Against Terrorism as transit points or staging areas for troops fighting the war against terrorism in Afghanistan. And in return, the Bush Administration promised President Arroyo that the United States would give the Philippines US$92.3 million in military equipment to bolster not only its ability to counter terrorism but also to increase its wherewithal to fight local insurgents. This is a clear manifestation that even though the agreement is supposed to be "vague", the Philippines still gets benefit from it to strengthen our own military.

Also, if the agreement is considered to be vague, what the government could have done is strengthen our national authorities in implementing the specific articles of the agreement. After all, even if this agreements give the Philippines benefits, it will always have its flaws.

As a Filipino I am actually more concerned with the Filipino citizens who are not aware of what this agreement could bring. I am fortunate enough to have a knowledge about this agreement but in reality, even if I know things about this, will I be able to do anything to stop or amend this if I have strong arguments on why to abolish this? Also, before anything is to be done, we have to consider the things that we will lose in case we drop this agreement. It would be a challenge for a new and young administration to drop this agreement and be able to stand on our own but if not today, when will we learn to be truly sovereign? I am not saying that having relationships with other countries is a negative thing, in fact we need it to survive in this century but before having bilateral or multilateral agreements, I believe that our officials must always take the interest of our country as a priority.