“2+2″ equals more secret US bases in PH

The 2+2 meeting in Washington could lead to the establishment of more covert US “military bases” in the country such as the bases being maintained by the JSOTF-P (Photo from jsotf-p.blogspot.com)

The 28^th Balikatan exercises ended with the “usual thank yous”, said an Inquirer report. “As the curtain closes down on this year’s Balikatan, I would like to express my gratitude to the American soldiers… who gave their invaluable time to share their experiences…” General Jessie Dellosa, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), said during the closing ceremony.

First of its kind

But the curtain never truly closes for the US troops in the Philippines. Because while the Balikatan has already been concluded, the supposedly visiting American soldiers will not leave. About 600 of them – perhaps even more – will continue to stay in the country as part of the Joint Special Operations Task Force – Philippines (JSOTF-P), established under the 1999 PH-US Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).

And when the so-called 2+2 meeting on April 30 is over, we could be seeing more US troops – maybe thousands – deployed, on so-called “rotational” basis, on our shores soon. The 2+2 meeting, which will be held in Washington, is described as “the first of its kind” in Philippine-US relations. To underscore its significance for the country, the Department of National Defense (DND) said that the US has had similar meetings only with Japan and South Korea, America’s most reliable allies in East Asia.

And while the meeting that will be attended by DND Secretary Voltaire Gazmin, Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Sec. Albert del Rosario, US Defense Sec. Leon Panetta and State Sec. Hillary Clinton will also discuss economic and political cooperation, what everyone is anticipating are details of how Manila and Washington will strengthen military relations.

Chinese assertiveness

The military aspect of the upcoming talks has generated increased public interest due to the ongoing Scarborough Shoal standoff between the Philippines and China. Filipino and American officials, abetted by the local mainstream media, have used the perceived Chinese bullying to highlight the supposed potential benefits for the Philippines of deepened military relations with the US.

China’s assertive stance in its dispute with the country over the Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands is being used to justify increased US military presence and intervention in the Philippines and in the region. While this serves US’s agenda in Asia Pacific, it also raises further risks to peace and development in the region and to the national sovereignty of the Philippines. (Read more on this here)

Sustaining global presence

Meanwhile, one of the expected results of the 2+2 meeting is the conduct of more frequent and bigger joint military exercises and the deployment of more US troops here like those under the JSOFT-P. This is consistent with the latest defense strategy of the Obama administration. As I have written in a previous post:

Updating existing military alliances and forging new ones, however, have to be pursued in the midst of the harsh economic realities facing the US. Amid its raging public debt crisis that has been caused in part by costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration released this month its latest defense strategy document Sustaining US global leadership: Priorities for 21^st century defense. The document was the result of “an assessment of US defense strategy in the light of the changing geopolitical environment and changing fiscal circumstances”.

Consequently, the latest US defense strategy calls for developing “innovative, low-cost and small-footprint approaches” to achieve US security objectives, relying on bilateral and multilateral training exercises, rotational deployments and advisory capabilities. This will allow US forces to “conduct a sustainable pace of presence operations abroad” and at the same time let it commit to a large-scale operation in one region while still having the capability to impose “unacceptable costs” on an aggressor in a second region.

New types of bases

To house the additional troops, the 2+2 meeting could lead to the establishment of more covert US “military bases” in the country such as Forward Operating Sites (FOSs) and Cooperative Security Locations (CSLs). These types of bases are much smaller than traditional US foreign military bases.

The US Overseas Basing Commission, the official body tasked to review US military basing in other countries, describes FOSs as “expandable ‘warm facilities’ maintained with a limited US military support presence and possibly prepositioned equipment; it supports rotational rather than permanently stationed forces and be a focus for bilateral and regional training.” CSLs, on the other hand, are “facilities with little or no permanent US presence. Instead they will be maintained with periodic service, contractor, or host-nation support. CSLs will provide contingency access and be a focal point for security cooperation activities.” For US strategic planners, the expansion of FOSs and CSLs in key locations worldwide “adds to operational flexibility, preserves a presence abroad, and serves to strengthen alliance relationships.”

Essential for US operations

In the Philippines, the headquarters of the JSOTF-P inside Camp Navarro in Zamboanga City where it has based since 2002 is considered an example of an FOS or sometimes referred to as forward operating base (FOB) in some US military papers. Read, for instance, a 2004 monograph on Army special operations forces, which used Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF-P) in Mindanao as a case study. The OEF-P was pushed by then President George W. Bush supposedly to combat the Abu Sayyaf and covers Mindanao as its area of operation (AO).

As narrated in the monograph, the Joint Task Force (JTF)-510 – JSOTF-P’s predecessor – “set up an FOB on the southern tip of the Mindanao Island near Zamboanga City”, specifically the Edwin Andrews Air Base (EAAB) because “basing was essential for OEF-P”. It also described the role of an FOB in US military operations: “The FOB at EAAB was the logistical hub within the AO for all operations. All US forces flowed in the FOB before conducting operations… From Okinawa, all assets and personnel flew into the JTF’s AO via the FOB at EABB on Mindanao. FOB EAAB served as a transloading point, logistical hub for the forces on Mindanao and Basilan, and housed air assets.”

Covert bases

The location of these bases is not willingly disclosed to the public by authorities in an effort not to attract too much attention to the presence of US troops as well as to undercut criticisms against US military basing in the Philippines which is a violation of the Constitution. Even so, US military documents such as the monograph cited earlier would confirm the existence of US bases in the Philippines.

Another such document is the 2005 report of the US Overseas Basing Commission, which disclosed that: “A series of CSLs are being developed in India, Thailand, Philippines, and Australia that will be able to provide logistics arrangements for support throughout the region. Many of these will simply be fueling arrangements and perhaps some pre-positioned stocks.” The Philippine government, however, has not confirmed the existence of these CSLs, much less disclose their locations.

But in an August 2009 affidavit, former Philippine Navy Lt. Sr. Grade Nancy Gadian revealed that since 2002, the US has established “permanent and continuous presence” in southern Mindanao as she identified possible CSLs in Zamboanga City, Sulu, and Tawi-Tawi. The table below summarizes her testimony describing the location and features of US presence/basing in Mindanao.

It was also Gadian who exposed the anomalous use of P46 million in Balikatan funds by high ranking AFP officials. She was the officer in charge of the Civil Military Operations (CMO) Fusion Cell for Balikatan 2007. In 2001, Gadian was one of the planners of the Balikatan 2002 (held in Pampanga) and of Balikatan 2002-1 (held in Mindanao).

Violates sovereignty

Aside from those identified by Gadian, another possible CSL is located inside Camp Ranao in Marawi City, Lanao del Sur which was unknown to the public until the reported death of Gregan Cardeño, an interpreter hired by the Americans for an elite unit of US Special Forces called the Liaison Coordination Elements (LCE). Cardeño died on Feb. 2, 2010 under dubious circumstances, telling relatives before his death that his job “was hard and not what he expected”. Less than two months later, Capt. Javier Ignacio of the Philippine Army – a friend of the Cardeños helping to shed light on his death – was shot dead by still  unidentified gun men.

Certainly, there are many other military facilities set up and being used by US troops in the Philippines, including in Luzon and Visayas, which the public does not know. But their number could further increase as Philippine-US military relations further deepen in the coming years. This blatantly violates Philippine sovereignty and an infringement of the Constitution which does not allow the basing of foreign troops in the country.

Consequently, more atrocities involving American soldiers such as the case of Cardeño could arise. Just recently, another Filipino died – fisherman Ahbam Juhurin – in what was a supposedly “sea mishap” involving US troops conducting “routine maritime activity” in Basilan. While some may argue that this latest incident was just an accident, Juhurin’s death still raises a fundamental question – why do we allow US troops to base in our country and patrol our seas, lands, and air? (end)

Imperialist war for oil in Libya and the MENA region

Imperialist intervention in the name of oil has caused unspeakable harm to civilian lives and property

(This article was first published by the Philippine Online Chronicles)

The conflict in Libya has taken on a new dimension with the so-called “no-fly zone” resolution of the United Nations (UN) Security Council. The said body’s Resolution 1973 has given members the green light to “take all necessary measures… to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack” by Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi and “to take all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban on flights” over the beleaguered country.

Immediately, France has deployed fighter jets over Libya and bombed a number of pro-Qaddafi tanks as French President Nicolas Sarkozy declare that “we are intervening to allow the Libyan people to themselves choose their destiny” and “to protect the civilian population from the murderous folly” of the Qaddafi regime. American and British ships followed, firing cruise missiles at Qaddafi’s radar systems, communications centers, and surface-to-air missile sites as US President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron echo the statement by Sarkozy.

Behind the pretext of preventing more civilian casualties, the ultimate political objective of the military intervention in Libya is to unseat Qaddafi at all costs. As British Foreign Affairs Secretary William Hague has proclaimed, “Gadhafi must go”. France has earlier declared that it recognizes the rebel Libyan National Council as the “sole legitimate representative of the Libyan people”. The National Council has been set up by the rebels as the political body that will oversee the transition period in a post-Qaddafi Libya.

MENA’s oil riches

But the control of oil has always been the overarching context in the long and bloody history of imperialist intervention in the Middle East and North Africa or the MENA region where majority of the planet’s oil resources can be found. The industrial world consumes much of the planet’s oil resources – the US alone accounts for almost 23 percent of global oil consumption while the European Union (EU) comprises almost 17 percent. But they do not have enough oil in their own territories to satisfy the ever growing needs of their factories, militaries, and populations. Proved US oil reserves are just about over 1 percent of the world total and the EU, just less than 0.4 percent. Imperialism knows very well that who controls the world’s oil resources rules the world.

Thus, from orchestrating coup d’état to unseat Iran’s Prime Minister in 1953 to outright war of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq to install puppet regimes under the guise of post-9/11 war on terror, the US, Britain, and company have repeatedly intruded in the region to keep control of its oil. Countries in the MENA region together account for more than 39 percent of oil traded internationally and 35 percent of global production, according to the US Congressional Research Service (CRS). More importantly, the MENA region holds almost 59 percent of the world’s proved oil reserves.

Libya is the second largest oil producer and exporter in North Africa behind Algeria. At 1.8 million barrels per day (MBD), Libya’s production is 2.1% of world production, while its exports of 1.5 MBD account for 2.9 percent of global exports. More than 90 percent of Libyan oil exports are shipped to Europe where more than 40 percent go to Italy, more than 20 percent to Germany, more than 7 percent to France, and smaller shipments to Spain and Greece. But its oil resources are greatly under-utilized considering that Libya has some 47 billion barrels of proved oil reserves – the largest in North Africa and 3.5 times the size of Algeria’s oil reserves. Libya’s oil reserves are also the sixth biggest in the whole MENA region behind Middle Eastern giants Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the ninth largest in the world. Moreover, only a quarter of Libya’s surface territory has been explored so far, making industry experts believe that new discoveries will dwarf the size of its current proved oil reserves.

Oil TNCs in Libya

It is not as though the West does not have access to Libyan oil. Even after Qaddafi has nationalized the oil industry, some transnational corporations (TNCs) continued their exploitation of oil in Libya through production sharing arrangements with the National Oil Corporation (NOC), a set up that Qaddafi had to enter into because of these TNCs’ monopoly over production and exploration technology, not to mention their overwhelming control over marketing networks worldwide.

At present, the biggest and most active foreign oil company in Libya is Italy’s ENI through its affiliate Agip North Africa BV that has been operating in the country since 1960 and produces about 16 percent of Libyan oil output. American oil companies Conoco Phillips, Amerada Hess, and Marathon, meanwhile, have a joint venture deal with the NOC to form the Waha Oil Co. This company controls four oil fields in Libya, including the Gialo oil field which contains the largest know onshore reserves in the country with 4 billion barrels. After the lifting in 2004 of the economic sanctions imposed by the US against Libya for allegations of terrorist activities, more foreign oil companies have entered the country including Royal Dutch Shell and American TNCs Chevron Texaco and Occidental Petroleum. Even the overseas retailing and marketing arm of Libyan petroleum products – the Tamoil – has been taken over by the Americans through a 65 percent stake by US-based investment group Colony Capital. All in all, more than 50 international oil companies are reportedly operating in Libya today where the government plans to expand oilfield investment to $10 billion by 2014 to increase potential production.

Consolidating control

So what can be the plausible explanation behind the imperialist powers’ adamant campaign to topple the Qaddafi regime? Note that Qaddafi has been from the onset an unreliable or unpredictable leader as far as the imperialists are concerned. The concessions he has given to the West notwithstanding, Qaddafi for the most part of his 42-year rule has been at odds with Western powers, i.e. he challenged the oil cartel by nationalizing Libya’s oil in the 1970s, sided with the Soviet Union during the Cold War, supported liberation movements, etc.

The wave of uprisings – which apparently is being fuelled by the economic crisis (MENA historically has the highest unemployment rate among all regions in the world) and calls for political reforms – that challenge mostly decades-old regimes in MENA is being hijacked by the US, Britain, and France to install a more reliable regime in Libya to consolidate Western control not only in the said country but in the entire oil-rich region. The imperialist powers have already lost two of their most trusted allies with the ouster of the 23-year old Ben Ali regime in Tunisia and the 30-year old Mubarak regime in Egypt.

They have thus decided to take a more decisive and direct role in managing the unrest, not to protect the civilians as they claimed – there are no no-fly zones in Yemen and Bahrain, two long-time strategic US allies where the dictators have been violently repressing anti-government protests including killing 50 protesters in a Yemeni university – but to ensure that Western interest in the region’s oil resources will not be undermined. As explained by a retired US military official who helped impose a no-fly zone in Iraq, the Americans pick their fights “based on where resources are and where it most affects” them.

Imperialist intervention in the name of oil has caused unspeakable harm to civilian lives and property. The US war of aggression in Iraq has so far claimed more than 92,000 civilian lives (according to US Army documents leaked by the WikiLeaks), orphaned 35 percent of Iraqi children, and created 4.7 million Iraqi refugees. The world should not allow the US and other Western powers to make Libya another Iraq. The sovereign right of the Libyan people to resolve their internal conflict must be respected. (end)