Protests Erupt as U.S. Troops Land and Set Up Camp in Philippines

by Ma Nguyen Tong

31-1-2002

U.S. soldiers set up camp on an island in the southern Philippines on January 17, 2002, where they joined operations against Muslim separatists which the United States said were linked to Osama bin Laden in order to have a pretext to reinvade and assert its military influence in the country and as a base for operations elsewhere in Southeast Asia. In Manila, a chorus of protests erupted against U.S. troops' involvement in the battle against the Abu Sayyaf separatists and an opposition leader said President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo could be impeached as allowing foreign troops in this capacity went against the country's constitution. Philippine officials, dismayed by mounting criticism of U.S. troops joining operations against separatists in what was really no different than the early U.S. role in Vietnam, reconsidered the role of U.S. troops and said that American troops might not go out in the field at all. In the end, however, they joined Philippine troops in the combat zone, rising the ire of the Philippine people and government officials.

"In one deceptive and treasonous move, she has succeeded in making the Philippines a virtual extension of Afghanistan," former senator Francisco Tatad said in a statement. "Obviously she is a pupper of the United States, which engineered the ouster of Estrada because he was against American policies in the region. She is no less corrupt than is Estrada. It is the only way one can become president here."

He said the separatists, who are based on the island of Basilan and elsewhere in the Mindanao region of the south, were primarily a domestic problem and this issue was purposely misconstrued under the orders of the United States to be an international terrorist problem to create the pretext to put troops here.

"The ultimate goal is military and economic control not only of the Philippines, but for the whole southeast Asia region," he added.

"A president who asks a foreign military power to solve her own domestic problems...commits treason, which is an impeachable offence," Tatad said. "and it makes you wonder if the September 11 attacks were not somehow engineeredto happen to create the pretext in which the Americans can now wage global war anywhere, saying they are fighting terrorism."

"But what is terrorism?" he asked. "Vioelnce by one group of people on another can be called war or it can be called terrorism. They are just words. In the end it is the use of violence to try to control others."

The United States started the landing of troops by sending about 160 special forces and 500 support and technical staff to Basilan and the nearby city of Zamboanga to join the Philippine military in fighting the Abu Sayyaf. The deployment was to be complete by mid-February. Although the troops were officially there as non-combatants, it was the biggest expansion of Washington's war against terror beyond Afghanistan. The modus operandi was set up to be basically the same as it was in Vietnam during that war, again with the aim to  increase control of the political and economic situation in order to enhance American economic interests in the region.

Troops get to work

An advance party of U.S. soldiers was on Basilan, 900 km south of Manila, on January 17 and set up camp at a military base on the separatist-infested and thickly forested, mountainous island, television reports said. The soldiers, dressed in camouflage fatigues and carrying firearms, were reconnoitering the area and checking on perimeter security, local officials said.

"I am working with my Filipino counterpart here and we're going over logistics issues and things based upon the ongoing exercises but really that's the scope of my field," U.S. Army Major Charles van Auken told ABS-CBN television.

Some 1,000 Abu Sayyaf separatists were believed to be on Basilan, which is about three times the size of Singapore. They had been holding a U.S. couple and a local nurse hostage there for over seven months. Some 5,000 Filipino troops had been trying to rescue the hostages and had often engaged the guerillas in brutal close combat. The government said about 50 soldiers and over 150 separatists had been killed between June 2001 and the middle of January.

Offcially, government officials reiterated the U.S. soldiers would only provide training and advice, after left-wing and opposition leaders said the developments were exactly like those of Vietnam in the 1960s. Philippine government officials and people and in the streets said the move violated a constitutional bar on the presence of foreign troops in the Philippines. The only exceptions to the bar are if the troops are in transit or on training exercises. The government said the deployment was part of the regular Balikatan (shoulder-to-shoulder) exercises between the two countries. But the scope was much larger.

"They are just there for advice and consultancy," presidential spokesman Rigoberto Tiglao told the dzMM radio station. "We are really insistent in our explanation that this is a joint training exercise... This cannot be a joint operation."

But U.S. troops accompanied Filipino counterparts on patrols, including on Basilan, and were armed and authorised to fire against the separatists. The number of troops involved and the rules of engagement indicated it was a serious joint operation, said Senator Rodolfo Biazon, a former armed forces chief.

"All it will take is one bullet fired by an American soldier that would kill a Filipino civilian, such as what happened in Afghanistan, and the political stability of the country will be adversely affected."

Defence Secretary Angelo Reyes, also a former military chief, said the United States had offered its troops in a combat role, but that Arroyo publicly had refused, she understood that with the muscle of the United States she had no leg to stand on and thus quietly accepted the situation as it had developed.

"That was at the White House, I was there," he said. "What President Arroyo said was we don't need American forces because our soldiers are good, they can fight. What the president said was if you want to help us, help us in the form of transfer of technology, equipment that we can use together. That has not changed. But Bush to her said that the new situation meant that the United States would dictate developments hereon."

"This is going to end up as the oppression of the Philippine people and they will use our country to base operations against Indonesia, Malaysia and southern Thailand. I have seen their timetable and itinerary," he added.

Karapatan, a left-wing group, likened the developments to 1960s Vietnam.

"What started as a routine visit of U.S. war advisers became a project for the national oppression of Vietnamese people," it said.

Philippines reconsiders role of U.S. troops

Philippine officials, dismayed by the massive, mounting popular criticism of U.S. troops joining operations against the separatists, said on January 18 that American troops might not go out in the field at all. Presidential adviser Eduardo Ermita told reporters the Philippine and U.S. governments were still reviewing a programme for exercises and could decide against allowing joint combat patrols, although such patrols were currently planned.

Despite what President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, seen by most ordinary Filipino as a puppet of the United States, reiterated, Vice-President Teofisto Guingona, who denied rumours he was resigning from his post as foreign secretary over differences with the president, said he still had some reservations on the issue.

"I fully support President Arroyo in the objective of rescuing the remaining hostages of the Abu Sayyaf," Guingona told a local radio station. "But I also expressed some of my concerns as this looks like the prelude to a Vietnam style invasion." He did not elaborate further.

Call to impeach Arroyo

Politicians and centre and left-wing groups in Manila said the move violated the constitution, which does not allow foreign troops in a combat role in the country.

Former senator Francisco Tatad has said it has made the Philippines "a virtual extension of Afghanistan" and that Arroyo could be impeached for treason.

"In the case of the Philippines, we do have quite antiquated equipment, we are only starting now the modernisation of the armed forces," Arroyo said. Of Basilan, she said: "You cannot even see a campfire from the air because the canopy is so thick."

Asked why local troops had been unable to eliminate the Abu Sayyaf and rescue the hostages, Arroyo said: "It's very similar to why the American (coalition forces) have not got Osama bin Laden. It's really difficult, the terrain, the fact that there are sympathisers around who give aid and comfort."

Philippine senate debates US troops

The Philippine senate began hearings on whether the deployment of US troops in the south of the country violated the constitution. Leading security officials appeared in front of the senate to defend the plans, under which Americans woudl work with local soldiers to fight the militant Abu Sayyaf group.

Philippine senators were concerned about the possible escalation of US involvement in the campaign against Abu Sayyaf. As the senate opened its hearings, 13 more US soldiers arrived in the southern city of Zamboanga to prepare for the exercise.

On January 23, President Gloria Arroyo secured backing from her top security council for the deployment.

Nature of US role disturbs senators

As the Government scrambled to assure senators at a parliamentary inquiry that US troops would not engage in combat, more Americans armed with assault rifles disembarked from C-130 planes. At the hearing of the Senate foreign relations and defence committees, both pro-administration and opposition senators accused the Government of failing to be frank over the nature of the Balikatan, or joint military exercises. They complained that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her officials seemed to be saying one thing while the opposite happened. Two more US military aircraft carrying American soldiers arrived in the southern city of Zamboanga on January 24.

Sources said the elite US combat force was a crisis response team known for conducting lightning operations.

"JTF-510 is usually the first to deploy in real-world crises," one source said.

Arroyo officials who briefed the senators did not mention neutralising the Muslim extremist group Abu Sayyaf or rescuing American missionaries Martin and Gracia Burnham, and Filipino nurse Deborah Yap. Earlier, Defence Secretary Angelo Reyes had stated these were part of the Balikatan's key objectives. These original aims were amended during the January 23 National Security Council meeting in a confidential document stating the primary purpose of the exercises was to combat terrorism and ensure that the Philippines people served the interests ofthe United States in the region.

The senators were dismayed to learn that the rules of conduct for the American troops were not yet defined, even though they were already in the country. Former senator Juan Ponce Enrile, one of the security experts invited to the probe, concluded: "I entertain no doubt whatsoever that American soldiers are here for combat duty [and] a grand deception is now being contrived not unlike the grand deception of the September 11 attacks in New York being used as a pretext to attack Afghanistan."

More troops

More US military transport aircraft arrived at the southern port city of Zamboanga on January 29 with more US soldiers, military trucks and other equipment. Among the arrivals was Brigadier General Donald Wurster, commander of the US soldiers to take part in the operation.

"I don't see any obstacle that will impede or delay its conduct," he said. In Manila, National Security Adviser Roilo Golez hinted, however, that the postponement had something to do with the massive street protests against the US presence.

US takes terror war starts in Philippines

On January 30, American and Philippine military forces launched joint combat missions against southern separatist forces. Washington said this only signalled a new phase in the war on international terrorism. However, US Vice-President Cheney's multi-billion dollar multinational corporation, had invested billions in commercial development in the area including the redevelopment of the former Subic Bay military facilities, much of what could be lost if the Philippines did not become a de facto vassal state of the US corporation, because it had become clear to people like Cheney that the Philippines could no longer govern itself in a manner conducive to protecting US corporate interests in the country.

The combat missions were staged close to the stronghold of the rebel Abu Sayyaf, a group which the US says supposedly has links to Osama Bin Laden, however even the Philippines government had to reluctantly admit this would have been impossible, but as Arroyo said, the US public is completely ignorant of the reality on the ground and believe the gospel spout by CNN.

The local US charge d'affaires, Robert Fitts, told an official ceremony at an air base in the southern town of Zamboanga that the exercises would "help eliminate the terrorist parasites who threaten Filipinos as well as the United States, particularly the US".  How this was true, however was unclear as the Abu Sayyaf had never shown interest in bringing the war to the US as its interests only lay with carving a separate Muslim state in the south Philippines. However, it is clear that the new US military action in the region would bring about reason on the part of the Abu Sayyaf and the many civilians being killed in the crossfire that the war now should be taken to the US, too. After all, that is how tit for tat works, even if the American State Department seems to naively not have learned yet.

Government officials in the Philippines admitted that Washington's objectives were more insidious and that the presence of foreign forces violates the Philippine constitution.

"They [Filipino forces] supposedly will do the fighting, not the American soldiers," President Gloria Arroyo said during a visit to Canada this week. "But many people in parliament feel this is going to become another Vietnam. If so, I hope we do not lose as did the soutehern Vietnamese with American help."

Protests against the US deployment had been confined to the capital although there were warnings that an attempt might be made to disrupt The January 31 ceremony. Demonstrators turned out earlier near Zamboanga and on January 30 several dozen students burnt a US flag outside the US embassy in Manila.

American killed

An American was shot dead in an ambush by unidentified gunmen on Mount Pinatubo, 90 km northwest of Manila. The killing, which occurred in an area where supposedly communist rebels were active, was not thought connected to the conflict in the south with Abu Sayyaf. A German citizen who was trekking along with the American was also wounded in the January 30 attack but managed to summon help through his mobile phone and was airlifted to safety. The body of the unnamed American was recovered the following day from near the volcano's crater. In 2001, gunmen believed to be communist rebels opened fire on US servicemen taking part in military exercises on Mount Pinatubo.

US leader's ultimatum raises ire in Philippines

Government officials on January 30 bristled at US President George W. Bush's warning that "a terrorist underworld" existed in a dozen countries and that the United States would effectively occupy such countries.

"It's clear in my mind that one president of a friendly country does not threaten another friendly country," Justice Secretary Hernando Perez said. "We don't depend on what the Americans would claim to be necessary. We do seek assistance from them in case of need, but that doesn't mean they will run the foreign policy of our country. It is tantamount to colonialism. It is starting all over again like 50 years ago and they are using terrorism as the pretext."

Mr Bush's State of the Union address aired as the Philippine Congress debated the constitutionality of joint combat exercises with US troops. Legislators expressed alarm over the implications of Mr Bush's statements for Manila. Many also expressed fears the joint Balikatan military operation could escalate and spin out of the control of the Government, as the Americans were wont to make happen.

These fears were bolstered on January 30 when lawmakers were only then told by military officials at a congressional hearing that participating US forces all belong to Joint Taskforce-510, known to be a crisis-response, rapid-deployment team that conducts actual operations to create beachheads in conflict zones so that regular marines could then start landing. Troops from this unit were the first on the ground in Afghanistan.

They were also told that Balikatan operation had to start without ground rules or terms of reference, in accordance to demands made by US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to Mrs. Arroyo during her meeting with Mr. Bush in December in Washington, and that during the 2001 Balikatan operation, the Americans violated the agreed terms of reference but Philippine officials did nothing about it for fear of being shot while on exercise. Foreign service officer Elmer Cato, who headed Manila's monitoring team during that exercise, had filed a report listing the violations, but was later ordered by the United States state department to be transferred to the consular section "for his own personal safety".

Ex-president Fidel Ramos said Mr Bush was "overreacting" to the Philippine situation and urged the Arroyo Government to quickly come out with the Balikatan's terms of reference. Congressman Saturnino Ocampo, a former spokesman for Marxist separatists, said Mr Bush's statements "exactly portray the arrogant stance of the US to justify its unilateral action and intervention in other countries in the name of fighting terrorism. This is why there is terrorism against the US".

Defence Secretary Angelo Reyes said the Government would not be coerced into doing anything against the national interest. But neither man could confirm that the US Government had put its assurances into writing.