US Missile Deployment And $500M Military Aid To PH: Defensive Or Offensive Posturing?

Full video

LAST July 30, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin III dropped by Manila for the Philippines-US 2+2 ministerial dialogue, the fourth such talks since it began in 2012. This is unprecedented because it’s the first time that talks have been held in Manila. Indeed, the PH-US 2+2 dialogue has set the stage for continued and expanded military cooperation, reflecting a strengthened military and defense alliance between the two sides. Before visiting Manila, the two US officials also held talks in Tokyo with their counterpart top Japanese defense and diplomatic officials on July 28 to bolster military and defense cooperation.

US Missile Deployment And $500M Military Aid To PH: Defensive Or Offensive Posturing?

Related:

US missile system may stay in PH after military drill – Army

THE Philippine Army yesterday said a medium-range missile system [Typhon] of United States military may remain in the country beyond September this year, depending on the training needs of Filipino troops.

China-Philippines ties may improve, as long as US stops interfering

Why Are There Fears of War in the South China Sea?

Australian-based Marines ready to support Manila in sea-territory skirmish

Australian-based Marines ready to support Manila in sea-territory skirmish

“We were given a warning order to support the Philippines defense forces in resupplying of the Second Thomas Shoal,” Marine Rotational Force — Darwin commander Col. Brian Mulvihill told Stars and Stripes on Wednesday at an Outback training camp in the Northern Territory.

The Marines have been monitoring events at the shoal over a drone feed, Mulvihill said.

“We were ready to support the Philippine defense forces,” he said, noting that Marines across the Pacific are also ready to back the U.S. ally.

The rotational force can airlift food and water by pushing pallets out of helicopters, he added.

“We can control airspace and aircraft from many nations,” he said. “We provide a range of options if a host nation, through the embassy, requires assistance.”

Darwin is an excellent platform for launching forces into Southeast Asia, according to Grant Newsham, a retired Marine colonel and senior researcher with the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies in Tokyo. 

“It’s good to see Darwin and Northern Territory being used this way … rather than just as a training area for Marines, Air Force, and Australian and other forces,” he said by email Thursday.

The Marines can offer the Philippines fire support coordination. They can help with logistics and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and guard locations that support Philippine forces operating towards the disputed shoal, he said.

“Of course, Marines can deploy aboard Philippine resupply boats alongside [Philippine] personnel,” he said.

Marine engineers could repair the Sierra Madre at the shoal and Marine helicopters could resupply it, Newsham added.

“A U.S. amphibious ship or two with Marines and their aircraft and other hardware aboard deployed to Second Thomas Shoal would be a serious force — and also sending a clear message,” he said. “Deploying Marines in the Philippines with their aviation, long-range rockets, and other hardware has a political significance in itself.”

Related:

Japan Forum for Strategic Studies

South China Sea: Philippines says to solely run Second Thomas Shoal resupply missions

SeaLight, formerly Project Myoushu

ON THE PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC DICTATORSHIP

ON THE PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC DICTATORSHIP

In 1924 a famous manifesto was adopted at the Kuomintang’s First National Congress, which Sun Yat-sen himself led and in which Communists participated. The manifesto stated

The so-called democratic system in modern states is usually monopolized by the bourgeoisie and has become simply an instrument for oppressing the common people. On the other hand, the Kuomintang’s Principle of Democracy means a democratic system shared by all the common people and not privately owned by the few.

What they didn’t show you at the CSIS SCS conference, online

Sources

Welcoming Remarks & Morning Keynote | Fourteenth Annual South China Sea Conference

Twitter

Instagram 

Who is Rep. Darrell Issa and what does he have to do with war crimes in the Philippines?

Rep. Issa (CA-48) is one of the richest people in congress and some of his investments are in Black Rock and other war profiteers. He also pushed to send $500 million of our tax dollars to fund war crimes and human rights violations in the Philippines. He stands to benefit personally in the US’ war against China.

At the CancelRIMPACCampaign summit and mobilization, we asked attendees to mobilize with us in front of Rep. Issa’s Escondido office to denounce his support for more military funding to the Philippines. Over a hundred people came out to expose the real conditions of human rights in the Philippines and called for the passing of the Philippine Human Rights Act!

Learn more about the Philippine Human Rights Act

Pass the PHRA Coalition Confronts Rep. Darrell Issa at South China Sea Conference

About the International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines

2018: Darrell Issa, $283.3 million minimum net worth

CSIS’ donors

The Postwar Vision That Sees Gaza Sliced Into Concentration Camps

The Postwar Vision That Sees Gaza Sliced Into Security Zones

A plan that is gaining currency in the government and military envisions creating geographical “islands” or “bubbles” where Palestinians who are unconnected to Hamas can live in temporary shelter while the Israeli military mops up remaining insurgents. 

Other members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party are backing another, security-focused plan that seeks to slice up Gaza with two corridors running across its width and a fortified perimeter that would allow Israel’s military to mount raids when it deems them necessary. 

The ideas come from informal groups of retired army and intelligence officers, think tanks, academics and politicians, as well as internal discussions inside the military. While Israel’s political leadership has said almost nothing about how the Gaza Strip will look and be governed after the heaviest fighting ends, these groups have been working on detailed plans that offer a glimpse of how Israel is thinking about what it calls the Day After. 

The plans—whether or not they get adopted in full—reveal hard realities about the aftermath that rarely get voiced. Among them, that Palestinian civilians could be confined indefinitely to smaller areas of the Gaza Strip while fighting continues outside, and that Israel’s army could be forced to remain deeply involved in the enclave for years until Hamas is marginalized.

According to people familiar with the effort, it aims to work with local Palestinians who are unaffiliated with Hamas to set up isolated zones in northern Gaza. Palestinians in areas where Israel believes Hamas no longer holds sway would distribute aid and take on civic duties. Eventually, a coalition of U.S. and Arab states would manage the process, these people said. 

Ziv, who oversaw Israel’s exit from Gaza in 2005, proposes that Palestinians who are ready to denounce Hamas could register to live in fenced-off geographic islands located next to their neighborhoods and guarded by the Israeli military. This would entitle them to reconstruction of their homes. 

The process would be gradual, and in the longer term, Ziv envisages bringing the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority back to Gaza as a political solution, with the whole process taking roughly five years as the military fights Hamas insurgents. Under his plan, Hamas could be part of Gaza’s administration, if it frees all the hostages held there and disarms, becoming purely a political movement.

Northern Gaza, under the plan, would remain without reconstruction, and Palestinians there wouldn’t be allowed back to their homes until Hamas’s miles-long tunnel network was destroyed. Like the bubbles plan, it promotes the notion of de-escalation zones where aid can be delivered by the Israeli military or by international forces, but stops short of articulating an idea for governance. 

Another plan published by the Washington-based Wilson Center* also advocates a coalition-style approach to the conflict but refrains from calling for Israel to consider the adoption of a Palestinian state. It says the U.S. should establish an international police force to manage security in Gaza and over time hand the job to a yet-to-be-defined Palestinian administration. 

Robert Silverman**, a former U.S. diplomat in Iraq who is a co-author, said his team discussed the plan with Israeli officials for months, even changing parts of the proposal to make it more agreeable to Israel’s war objectives and political dynamics, but it stalled with the prime minister’s office.

“He believes we finish the war first and then plan the postwar,” Silverman said of Netanyahu. “All the people who have done this before say that’s a huge mistake.”

Another document, drafted by Israeli academics, that has made its way to the prime minister’s desk draws on historical precedents in rebuilding the war zones in Germany and Japan after World War II, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. It considers how to tackle Hamas’s Islamist doctrine by learning from the defeat of ideologies such as Nazism and that of Islamic State. 

Related:

Strategic Hamlet Program

The Strategic Hamlet Program (SHP; Vietnamese: Ấp Chiến lược) was a plan by the government of South Vietnam in conjunction with the US government and ARPA during the Vietnam War to combat the communist insurgency by pacifying the countryside and reducing the influence of the communists among the rural population through the creation of concentration camps.

The Strategic Hamlet Program was unsuccessful, failing to stop the insurgency or gain support for the government from rural Vietnamese, it alienated many and helped contribute to the growth in influence of the Viet Cong. After President Ngo Dinh Diem was overthrown in a coup in November 1963, the program was cancelled. Peasants moved back into their old homes or sought refuge from the war in the cities. The failure of the Strategic Hamlet and other counterinsurgency and pacification programs were causes that led the United States to decide to intervene in South Vietnam with air strikes and ground troops.

The *Wilson Center plan isn’t much better. 👇🏻

Related:

Read More »