Forum on the US "War on Terror":

An affront to sovereignty and fundamental rights

 

UP College of Law theater

 

September 22, 2010

 

 

■  Cotabato City: Media conference on US intervention

 

 

Speakers at the forum, l-r: Rey Casambre,  Roland Weyl, Jan Fermon,  Benjie Oliveros, Gail Davidson
   
/p

/p
 
           
           

 

US Aggression and Military Intervention in Asia Pacific
(Impact on Policy by Obama’s Presidency)
by Rey Claro Casambre
Chairperson, ILPS-Philippines Chapter
 

Forum on US “War of Terror”
UP College of Law Malcolm Theater
September22, 2010

Brief Historical Background

 

The 20th century is beyond doubt the bloodiest and most violent century that mankind has ever seen.  Much of that blood is on the hands of US imperialism.

 

From the beginning and up to the present, it has been US monopoly capital that dictates its global imperial  thrust and policy, including  or especially that in the Asia-Pacific region.  It is thus the incessant drive for profit by exporting capital, exploiting cheap labor, and plundering the resources of weaker countries it subjugates and dominates that dictates the US’ global policies from trade to diplomacy to war.  Also from the beginning, up to the present, this very same imperial thrust to oppress and exploit other peoples,  has been carried out under the glossy mantle  of altruism and benevolence, in the name of democracy, world peace, universal freedom and  prosperity.  Thus, human rights violations, genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, have been committed over and over again not just in the name of world peace but even in God’s name.  

 

Ø      US aggression and military intervention in Asia-Pacific began at the turn of the 20th century, along with the rise of modern imperialism.

 

Using the blowing up of the US battleship Maine at the Havana harbor in Cuba as a pretext, the US declared war on Spain in 1898 and sent its  invasion and occupation forces across the Pacific  to seize the Philippine Islands from Spain and turn it into its colony and strategic military outpost and springboard in Asia,  

 

By the accounts of its own generals, 1/6  of the  population of Luzon or  600,000 Filipinos have been killed or died of disease after three years of the Fiipino-American War.  This figure would  rise to up to a million or around 1/6  of the Filipino population by the end of the pacification campaigns in 1916.  The Filipino-American war was a virtual laboratory for US imperialism’s counter-guerrilla and counter-insurgency tactics that it would use and develop further in many more interventions and aggression especially in third world countries.

 

The emergence of the US from the Second World War in 1945 as the preeminent, most prosperous and most powerful, if most unscathed imperialist power on the globe allowed and thereafter used its military superiority  to engage in aggression and intervention to preserve its supremacy  and expand and consolidate its global hegemony. 

 

In Asia it ruled over the Philippines and controlled Japan and had the biggest and most powerful military bases in the region.   It set up the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), a military or security alliance to prevent socialism from spreading from Russia, China, Mongolia, North Korea and North Vietnam and deter  the growth and spread of national liberation movements in the region. The US intervened in Korea to install its own puppet government in the South and prevent unification of North and South by subverting elections which Kim Il Sung of the DPRK would have won handily. In 1954 the US was poised to take over South Vietnam from the French when the latter left after the defeat at Dien Bien Phu.

 

The second half of the 20th century was marked by the US’ strong military presence in the region with large military bases and stationed troops in Korea, Japan and the Philippines and complete naval supremacy in the whole Pacific and Pacific coasts except the Russian coast on the Pacific. This strong presence was justified by the US and accepted by most countries in the region as a necessary counterfoil to the expansionist designs of  China and the USSR.  The Cold War was a handy excuse to maintain forces and conduct a host of military activities in the region.  Nonetheless, US aggression and intervention in Indochina resulted in their defeat and the victory of national liberation forces in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.  Wherever there were US military bases,

 

The US lost its excuse for  maintaining a large military force in Asia-Pacific, as elsewhere in the world, with the collapse of the USSR and Eastern European regimes in the early 90s, and with China’s opening up to the world capitalist system with the ascension of Deng Hsiao Peng to power in the late 1970s.   

 

US Presence, Geopolitical Interest and Objectives in Asia-Pacific

 

The US Pacific Command stands as a symbol and expression of US power and its geopolitical interest in the Asia Pacific.  It is the biggest of the US armed forces’ regional or theater commands, with 325,000 troops or 1/5 of the US armed forces.  The diagram below, taken from its website, sums it up:

 

- (covers) 36 nations encompassing about half of the earth's surface (another US PACOM document counts 48 countries within its area of responsibility)

- home to more than 50% of the world's population (the population of East Asia is 1/3 of the world population)

- world's six largest armed forces (China, US, Russia, India, North Korea, South Korea)

- Source of about 1/3 of US trade (USD 1.3 trillion worth or ½ of world trade passes through the waters of Southeast Asia)

- World's three largest economies (US, China, Japan)

- Five nations allied with the US through mutual defense treaties (Australia, Japan, Philippines, South Korea, Japan)

US PACOM has 325,000 troops, 1/5 of the total US armed forces. One hundred thousand (100,000) of these are based in Japan and Korea alone.

 

These troops, specially the US Special Forces are also some of the most engaged in actual war or committed to "hot spots"  such as in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Long before 9-11, the think tank Rand Corporation, came up with a study stressing the need for a permanent US military base in the Philippines especially for its long-range bombers. (see illustration)

 

 US Aggression and Militarism under the Bush-led “War on Terror”

          The 9/11 attacks on the US  became a new and effective pretext for the US to once again employ its military superiority to the hilt  to expand and consolidate global hegemony , seize and control strategic resources, prevent the rise of a peer rival and ensure its preeminent position as sole superpower.   It employed the combination of deception and force, with coercion and force as the main and decisive instrument.

 

The Bush regime conjured  all sorts of lies (eg WMDs in Iraq), stirred intense fear and terror in the population, and invoked the name of God  to justify or get away with wanton human rights violations and violations of international law such as violations of national sovereignty, disregard for UN Charter and General Assembly resoluitions,  The USA PATRIOT ACT, practice of rendition and detention in secret locations, ttargeted assassinations, degrading and inhumane treatment of detained suspected terrorists such as in Guantanamo and Abu Graib, etc are only some of the most notorious crimes of terror perpetrated by the US under the Bush regime in the name of “counter terrorism”. 

 

Everyone knows now that the US invaded and occupied Afghanistan  in order to install a friendly regime that would allow UNOCAL to lay out oil and natural gas pipelines from the Caspian region to the Indian Ocean.  Further, occupying  and having US military bases in Afghanistan would tighten US control over the region flanking China to the west. The military plans for invasion and occupation were complete long before 9/11.  The US special forces and other troops used in the invasion had been training for years in the nearby Central Asian republics to familiarize with the terrain.

 

In January 2002, a few months after the invasion of Afghanistan, Bush declared Southeast Asia as the “second front in the war against  terror” and promptly  increased its forward presence and activities in the Philippines. The pretext was to crush the Abu Sayyaf, a small bandit group of Islamic militants whose leaders had trained and fought with the Al Qaeda in Afghanistan under the US CIA. In the same month, then US Secretary of State Colin Powell visited Nepal, offered the King and Prime Minister of Nepal US military assistance in going after the Nepalese  revolutionaries led by the CPN-M, declaring that, “You have a Maoist insurgency that’s trying to overthrow the government, and this is really the kind of thing we are fighting all over the world.”

 

Numerous documents described the  vision and design of the neoconservatives in preserving US supremacy through unilateralism and sheer military might backed by heavy spending for the military, at the same time feeding the military-industrial complex with fat contracts and government funding.  But the neoconservatives’ design for global domination through the “war on terror” could not be fully implemented because of  financial constraints arising from the global economic crisis, and political difficulties arising from prosecuting a basically unjust war.

 

US Aggression and Militarism in Asia-Pacific under Obama

 

The financial elite who decide and dictate US policy and global affairs – those in the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and/or the Council on Foreign Relations --  saw in Obama  an effective instrument for   “changing the face” of US imperial designs, with Bush’s ‘war on terror”  already discredited and having difficulties even in maintaining, much less leading, its alliances.  

 

Candidate Barack Obama campaigned –and won the Presidency – largely on a promise of reversing the Bush policies in pursuing what he called a “dumb war”, as well as allowing the bankers to screw the economy.   But President Obama early on conceded that the “war on terror” was necessary to protect the USA and preserve world peace, stability and progress. He had since reversed not Bush’ policies and thrusts in relation to the War on Terror, nor on the US and global economy. but his own word and most of his promises.

 

In Asia-Pacific, the Obama regime has escalated tension in Northeast Asia with its year-long joint military exercises with South Korea.  Using the sinking of a South Korean boat allegedly by the North Korean navy, the US and South Korea have embarked on the biggest military exercises involving 20,000 US and 56,000 US troops, 200

China – and for that matter any thinking person -- has every reason to believe that these military exercises are directed more against China than against North Korea, especially with the US’ insistence that they would hold naval exercises on the Yellow Sea, within striking distance of Beijing and other major Chinese cities.  China has long been identified by US policymakers as the most likely peer competitor of the US within 10-20 years.

Obama has not rescinded the US’ assertion that never again will it allow a competitor to even come close to challenging its supremacy.  Obama has not taken back the US’ assertion of its “right to preemptive strike”— including or especially a nuclear attack – against any threat to its supremacy, and that includes even its allies.  In this connection, the Obama regime has stepped up  the US anti-ballistic missile program

 

Neither has Obama made good his promise of closing down the Guantanamo prison and stopping the practice of extraordinary rendition – using Special Forces operatives to grab suspected terrorists wherever they are and secretly whisking them off to secret “terrorist” prisons for interrogation and detention.  Worse, the practice of “targeted killings” – a euphemism for assassinations – has increased under the Obama regime, nearly always accompanied by civilian “collateral damage”  and destruction of civilian properties and infrastructure.

 

One of the campaign promises Obama has kept, though, was to increase US military presence and activity in Southeast Asia. Just recently, one of its mightiest war machines, the USS George Washington Carrier Group, docked in Manila ostensibly for rest and recreation. In the US field manual on Stability Operations, this is properly called a “show of force”. 

 

 Doubtless, all of these are dictated not so much by what US official documents and even military manuals call “US national interest” but the interest of a small group of financiers – the same parasites who have created the global financial and economic crisis and then used the regimes they control to siphon off trillions of public funds into their pockets.  The US government under Bush and Obama have made possible the unprecedented reconcentration of immense wealth into the hands of a few finance capitalists while causing widespread hardship and  suffering of billions of people all over the world

Obama continues to use deceit to cover up the real intentions and action of the US.  He claims to have kept his promise of  ending  the combat role of the US and withdrawing  US troops from Iraq.  But in fact more than 50,000 US troops remain in Iraq, not counting mercenaries or “outsourced” troops under the US command. Obama proudly announces that the only mission of the remaining troops are (1) to train, advise and assist Iraqi security forces, (2) conduct  counter-terrorist actions, and (3) protect US personnel and installations.  What Obama does not say is that by current US military doctrine, all three missions (which belong to a wide range of military operations euphemistically called “stability operations”) inevitably involve combat operations.       

 

The Obama regime has of late attempted to give a new and more benign face to its wars of aggression by  ‘civilianizing”  it and stressing the “primacy of non-military means”, even avoiding the use of the phrase “war against terrorism” and preferring to use “war of counter-insurgency” instead.  But on the ground, the reality is that coercion and force, not deception, are the main instruments for suppressing resistance and protext, and for perpetuating the status quo.     

 

Conclusion:  Impact on Human Rights and Conflict

 

Peace and Human Rights have been two of the first casualties in the US-led “war on terror”. The sovereignty of nations have been flagrantly trampled upon.   US troops are being given free reign to commit gross human rights violations with impunity. However, this is not without resistance.

 

(In the Philippines,  leaders and activists of progressive organizations were systematically assassinated, arrested and tortured, involuntarily disappeared. Many more became victims of gross human rights violations committed with impunity by state security forces.

From the beginning, the intolerable hardships and suffering brought about on the people by the plunder of weaker economies  and  wars of aggression and intervention have pushed more and more people to protest and fight for their rights.  Deception, pretexts, promises and excuses invariably work only at the start.  The reality on the ground – the suffering and hardships, injustice, increasing poverty and death,  etc. – inevitably reveal the truth.  The more the people perceive the truth about the root causes of their misery and hardship. and find that strength is gained  through colledtive  action, the more that deception fails and  force is increasingly resorted to by those who wish to retain the status quo.

 

Corrollarily, the less the people perceive the truth about the roots of their hardship and miseries, about the role of state terrorism and imperialist aggression and intervention in suppressing their striggles in the name of “peace and security”, the less organized the people are in struggling for their rights, for juistic and freedom, then the more that deception can succeed in perpetuating the ruling system that oppresses and exploits them.

The current global financial and economic crisis has wrought further hardships and misery on the peoples of the world.  But it also allows more and more people worldwide to see and understand the roots of their suffering and pushes them to unite in common struggles to bring about genuine change.  

 

This underscores the role which progressives – including you, progressive lawyers – can and must play.  You can play a unique role  in raising the awareness of your clients  and  strengthening their unity and resolve as you support their legal struggles.  Laws, like wars, are basically intended to preserve and perpetuate the ruling system;  and the harshness and anti-people bias of  law is moderated only by the rights won through hard struggle by the people.  Lawyers can serve the people well by defending, standing with and speaking for them in the courts of law. But no amount of arguments in the courts, even by the best and most courageous people’s lawyers,  can liberate the people from the oppressive and exploitative system that those courts are designed to preserve. Peace and human rights cannot flourish where there is systemic oppression and exploitation by imperialism and its local reactionary partners.  People’s lawyers need to combine their efforts inside the courtroom with the people’s struggles, as well as their own, outside.

 

Not being a lawyer, it is best that I leave the elaboration on this point, and acting upon it,   to you.   

 

 

▲ Slides used in the lecture  ▼
     

 

Click here for page on the Philippine-American War

 

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
           
     
     
     
Video of the lecture
     
   
   
   
   
   

US Role in Philippine Counterinsurgency Operations

 

By BENJIE OLIVEROS
In a speech during a Peace and Security forum held at the Mandarin Hotel last April 22, 2010, then presidential candidate Benigno Aquino III outlined his National Security Policy, which he said focuses on four key elements

 

International Lawyers Hit US Military Aggression in Asia-Pacific, Pin Hopes on Peoples of the World

 

By RONALYN V. OLEA


“Governments are only instruments. The peoples must exercise their power. The peoples are masters of international society. Law is a struggle of the peoples.” — Roland Weyl, IADL first vice president and dean of the Paris Bar Association

 

'
   
=          
==          
     

 

Media conference on US intervention
Press Release
September 15, 2010

Cotabato City - The US government and its excessive global war on terror is impetus to the uproar surrounding the planned construction of an Islamic centre near ‘Ground Zero’ in New York City, according to Moro group Suara.

Suara spokesperson, Michael Dumamba, says the disproportionate and indiscriminate US military campaign in mainly Muslim countries has done more than just wreak havocs in those countries; it promotes animosity and intolerance between Muslims and the West.

He said the war has further reinforced the negative view of some non-Muslims about Islam and the Arab world in particular.

Most opposition to anything Islamic in the West these days have nothing to do with disagreement in religious tenets, he adds, but have largely been due to the irrational dislike to the culture of the people who happen to be Muslims.

The proposed community centre close to the site of the infamous 9/11 attack in New York has set off a chain of heated arguments in recent weeks not only in the US but in much of the globe as more and more persona attempts to take part in the fray for varied reasons.

“While we condemn all the parties who have fanned unnecessary controversy over the proposed Muslim community centre and those who have used the issue to draw attention to themselves, we call on the US government to stop its unwelcome and treacherous interventions in countries around the world including the Philippines,” Dumamba said.

Suara is one of the convenors of the OUT NOW! Mindanao Coalition – a group rallying for an end in US intervention in the country particularly the presence of US troops who are here under the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).

OUT NOW! and other allied progressive groups will be commemorating the 1991 scrapping of the US basing rights in the country come September 16.

In a statement, OUT NOW! urged Filipinos to rally behind the junking of the VFA in the same manner as they have supported the abolition of American bases in 1991.

“Filipinos can’t afford to serve as pawn in advancing and securing US interests and allow the nation and our resources to be exploited in the process,” says Dumamba.###
 

     
           
           

 

Press Statement
September 13, 2010

PASAKA CONDEMNS STATE SPONSORED PARA-MILITARY RECRUITMENT
Opposes 1003rd brigade dubious ‘peace and development’ military operations in Paquibato

We are saddened that the 1003rd brigade of the Philippine Army has found a fresh mandate and sanction by the local government of Davao City to militarize Paquibato in the guise of peace and development. We oppose this tacit license for the military to operate as a sort of peacekeeper when, in the first place, it is the very establishment responsible for the highly divisive paramilitary recruitment of Lumads and the bastardization of our culture through the use of pangayaw or tribal vendetta for counter-insurgency purposes.

We would like to reiterate the grounds of our opposition and the basic tenets by which we continue to be united in our quest for genuine peace, genuine justice.

As indigenous peoples and farmers of Paquibato District continue the quest for just and lasting peace, the council of leaders representing the 203-member peoples organizations of the PASAKA Confederation of Indigenous Peoples in Southern Mindanao express our unity and solidarity with their plight and just demands.

Peoples’ testimonies clearly reflect the sorrow and clamor to end the militarism and culture of impunity in Paquibato. Our calls are guided by the peoples’ demand to end the politically and morally unacceptable practices of the military and the state in their wanton violation of human rights, peace and democracy.

To date, two members of the farmer-lumad organization Paquibato District farmers Association (PADIFA) have been slain in the midst of a ‘pangayaw’ declared by a military–backed organization led by Datu Ruben Labawan. In the killing of Reynaldo Labrador, one of the perpetrators has been identified as a CAFGU member whose name is found in the roster of CAFGUs recruited by the ATADI chaired by military agent Datu Ruben Labawan.

Lamentably, on top of these killings, other violations of human rights have prevailed in Paquibato all through the years since the 1980’s when the military’s counter-insurgency plan gave birth then to the Alsa Lumad, the arming of lumads or their recruitment as CAFGUs and into the Barangay Defense System (BDS), the use of the traditional pangayaw as part of the military’s antics and hamletting strategies, and the military encampment in lumad communities in order to use communities as shields from their enemies and other abuses.

At this point, we reiterate the United Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) forged by more than 40 nations belonging to the United Nations in 2007 which upheld the rights, welfare and equal treatment of indigenous peoples.

The UN Declaration categorically states in the principles of the United Nations General Assembly: “Emphasizing the contribution of the demilitarization of lands and territories of indigenous peoples to peace, economic, and social progress and development, understanding and friendly relations among nations and peoples of the world.” (Par. 12, UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples)

“Demilitarization” in this provision clearly refers to state actors which are found in violation of the civilians’ democratic rights. Demilitarization here means that there is no moral or political justification for the armed forces to be present in civilian communities as their presence further poses threats on safety of the people.

This declaration upholds the correctness of the our demands that state actors, such as the 1003rd Brigade and the 10th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army, should be condemned for their anti-people practices and be held liable for the violation of the human rights of the people of Paquibato.

Indeed, the burden of ensuring and establishing peace and justice rests on the state while the people who are marginalized, pushed to hunger, deep poverty and whose dignity are trampled upon have the option but to seek redress for their grievances in the streets, in the parliament, while others choose the radical option of waging arms in the quest for justice. Then again, this falls as the state’s burden and liability for its own lack of moral ascendancy and political will that has given way for people to wage arms.

We are saddened that the misconception of the real essence of justice and human rights is being used by the military to escape their crimes against the people and sow division among the people on the basic question of peace and justice.

On the larger perspective, we should look at the deterioration of peace and human rights situation in Paquibato District as part of the deterioration of social justice and the absence of genuine peace in the country.

The UN declaration is significant in understanding what is just and politically right in light of the raging war in Paquibato or in the whole country for that matter. We carry no other interest, but to uphold our rights as indigenous peoples. #

FOR REFERENCE

DIOLITO DIAROG

SPOKESPERSON
0930-3035126
 

     
     
           
           
**          

 

 
 

Google