Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
This is a very interesting column written by Jaime J. Yambao
...
With time moving fast, it shows more convincingly that the actions of China are directed at more than the considerable resources lying beneath the South China Sea. The magnitude of these resources has remained highly, even wildly, speculative. The falling price of oil as a result of the development and discovery of alternative sources of energy could make exploitation of these resources economically and ecologically unsound. Those actions have more to do with the ambition of its new leader to draw his country into the same league as the United States. The US for its part makes clear that reinvigorating its alliances in Asia has more to do with containing China’s ability to control freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. So far, the refurbished mutual defense arrangement between the Philippines and the US has produced only brave words but has not stopped Chinese reclamation projects in the South China Sea.
Given these indications, we can but fear that we are involving ourselves in a rumble between elephants, and as humble ants we may be bound to be crushed under their heavy paws. Thus goes the classic fable explaining the adherence of members to the Non-Aligned Movement. The superpowers can settle issues between them and leave their lackeys fending for themselves.
The freedom of navigation in the South China Sea can be subject to negotiation and assurances from China that it would be observed. The mutual defense arrangement between the Philippines and the United States may just then prove to be no more than a paper tiger. After the misadventure in Iraq and in Libya, the US reluctance to be involved in new wars could be seen in the situation in Syria and if involved, the tendency to limit that involvement to a miniminum could be seen in the fight against ISIS or Islamic State group.
The problem of the Philippines is that it is involved in a dispute with a close neighbor, not some country as far away as Russia. And the problem is blown up by the fact that the Philippines’ independent and non-aligned posture has not been backed by deterrent military capabilities. Being non-aligned does not mean being a naïve pacifist. Our defense strategists in the past might have made a mistake with far-reaching effect in assuming the country faced no external threats, only internal ones. The strategic geographical location and possession of rich strategic mineral and energy resources make the country ip so facto vulnerable to the ambitions of expansionist powers. While less strategically located and less endowed with natural resources, our neighbors have through the years developed superior military defenses. Farther afield, leading countries in the non-aligned movement, India and Pakistan, to strengthen their defenses against threats on each other, prepared themselves to eat grass to be able to belong to the world’s exclusive Nuclear Bomb Club.
Non-alignment and the US-China rivalry - The Manila Times OnlineThe Manila Times Online
...
With time moving fast, it shows more convincingly that the actions of China are directed at more than the considerable resources lying beneath the South China Sea. The magnitude of these resources has remained highly, even wildly, speculative. The falling price of oil as a result of the development and discovery of alternative sources of energy could make exploitation of these resources economically and ecologically unsound. Those actions have more to do with the ambition of its new leader to draw his country into the same league as the United States. The US for its part makes clear that reinvigorating its alliances in Asia has more to do with containing China’s ability to control freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. So far, the refurbished mutual defense arrangement between the Philippines and the US has produced only brave words but has not stopped Chinese reclamation projects in the South China Sea.
Given these indications, we can but fear that we are involving ourselves in a rumble between elephants, and as humble ants we may be bound to be crushed under their heavy paws. Thus goes the classic fable explaining the adherence of members to the Non-Aligned Movement. The superpowers can settle issues between them and leave their lackeys fending for themselves.
The freedom of navigation in the South China Sea can be subject to negotiation and assurances from China that it would be observed. The mutual defense arrangement between the Philippines and the United States may just then prove to be no more than a paper tiger. After the misadventure in Iraq and in Libya, the US reluctance to be involved in new wars could be seen in the situation in Syria and if involved, the tendency to limit that involvement to a miniminum could be seen in the fight against ISIS or Islamic State group.
The problem of the Philippines is that it is involved in a dispute with a close neighbor, not some country as far away as Russia. And the problem is blown up by the fact that the Philippines’ independent and non-aligned posture has not been backed by deterrent military capabilities. Being non-aligned does not mean being a naïve pacifist. Our defense strategists in the past might have made a mistake with far-reaching effect in assuming the country faced no external threats, only internal ones. The strategic geographical location and possession of rich strategic mineral and energy resources make the country ip so facto vulnerable to the ambitions of expansionist powers. While less strategically located and less endowed with natural resources, our neighbors have through the years developed superior military defenses. Farther afield, leading countries in the non-aligned movement, India and Pakistan, to strengthen their defenses against threats on each other, prepared themselves to eat grass to be able to belong to the world’s exclusive Nuclear Bomb Club.
Non-alignment and the US-China rivalry - The Manila Times OnlineThe Manila Times Online
