Posted on 10/25/2016 3:24:40 PM PDT by Kaslin
Alliances are transmission belts of war.
So our Founding Fathers taught and the 20th century proved.
When Britain, allied to France, declared war on Germany in 1914, America sat out, until our own ships were being sunk in 1917.
When Britain, allied to France, declared war on Germany, Sept. 3, 1939, we stayed out until Hitler declared war on us, Dec. 11, 1941.
As the other Western powers bled and bankrupted themselves, we emerged relatively unscathed as the world's No. 1 power. The Brits and French lost their empires, and much else, and ceased to be great powers.
Stalin's annexation of Central Europe and acquisition of an atom bomb, and Mao's triumph in China in 1949, caused us to form alliances from Europe to Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines and Australia.
Yet, with the end of the Cold War, we did not dissolve a single alliance. NATO was expanded to embrace all the nations of the former Warsaw Pact and three former republics of the USSR.
This hubristic folly is at the heart of present tensions with Russia.
Now, Beltway hawks have begun to push the envelope to bring former Soviet republics Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, with some urging us to bring in the Cold War neutrals Sweden and Finland.
Given the resentment of the Russian people toward America, for exploiting their time of weakness after the breakup of the Soviet Union, to drive our alliance onto their front porch, such moves could trigger a conflict that could escalate to nuclear weapons.
Moscow has warned us pointedly and repeatedly about this.
Yet now that the election is almost over, neocons burrowed in their think tanks are emerging to talk up U.S. confrontations with Syria, Russia, Iran and China. Restraining America's War Party may be the first order of business of the next president.
Fortunately, after the Libyan debacle, President Obama has lost any enthusiasm for new wars.
Indeed, he has a narrow window of opportunity to begin to bring our alliances into conformity with our interests -- by serving notice that the United States is terminating its 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty with Manila.
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is proving himself to be an unstable anti-American autocrat, who should not be entrusted with the power to drag us into war over some rocks or reefs in the South China Sea.
Earlier this year, we got an idea of what a commitment to go to war for a NATO ally might mean when President Tayyip Recep Erdogan, another mercurial autocrat, shot down a Russian plane that strayed over Turkish territory for 17 seconds.
Had Vladimir Putin retaliated in kind, Erdogan could have invoked Article 5 of NATO, requiring us come to Turkey's defense against Russia.
Given how Erdogan has acted since this summer's attempted coup, purging Turkish democratic institutions and imprisoning tens of thousands, do the benefits of our NATO alliance with Ankara still outweigh the risks?
Duterte harbors a lifelong grudge against America for our war of 1899-1902 to crush the Philippine independence movement, after Admiral Dewey sank the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay. We liberated the Philippines, only to annex them.
A longtime mayor on Mindanao before being elected president, Duterte is reputedly the godfather of death squads that executed drug dealers and users. Now, the practice has apparently been introduced nationwide.
While campaigning, Duterte said he would Jet Ski 120 miles to Scarborough Shoal, which is occupied by China though it is in Manila's territorial waters. Since then, he has flipped and become outspokenly pro-China.
Before attending a summit in Laos, Duterte called President Obama "the son of a whore." He has insulted America and canceled joint military exercises. In Beijing he announced a "separation from the United States. ... No more American influence. No more American [military] exercises. It's time to say goodbye."
"I would rather go to Russia and to China," he added.
President Obama should email President Duterte: "Message received. Accept your decision. Good luck with the Russians and Chinese."
Would termination of our Mutual Defense Treaty mean severing ties with the Filipino people? By no means.
What it would do, though, is this: restore America's absolute freedom to act or not act militarily in the South China Sea, according to our interests, and not Duterte's whims.
Whether we intervene on Manila's behalf or not, the decision would be ours alone. Terminating the treaty would absolve us of any legal or moral obligation to fight for Scarborough Shoal, Mischief Reef or any of the other rocks in a South China Sea that are now in dispute between Beijing and half a dozen nations.
A U.S. decision to terminate the treaty would also send a wake-up call to every ally:
America's Cold War commitments are not forever. Your security is not more important to us than it is to you. As Donald Trump has been saying, we are starting to put America first again.
On this, maybe even President Obama could find common ground.
Buchanan doesn’t get it.
I’m not saying the US shouldn’t terminate the alliance, but that he misses that the point of the alliance, on the part of the US, wasn’t really some sort of altruism or charity.
The Philippines is one of those place that you don’t want an enemy to hold. Its a negative value, a critical location that is fine in the hands of a friend but very dangerous in the hands of an enemy.
And that the problem of the South China Sea is the very reason that Duterte and, note, most military analysts in Manila doubt Washingtons value as an ally. Or for that matter Korea or Japans value as allies.
I like Pat. And I like this article, mostly.
However, there are a LOT of circumstances not covered. The 2012 US-drone-strike on targets in the Philippines, condemned by the PH congress back then: that’s one.
Another is the fact that “innocent passage” through the S China Sea is still allowed. It is US warships that China objects to.
Fishing is another issue in the disputes. China is NOT building bases in the S China Sea. (I have read both sides and I am pretty sure of that. However, I am open to new info on this.)
Lastly, PH is a sovereign nation and who knows what BS has been proposed or attempted or achieved by BHO and the World Bank, that we have not heard about. I thank that could be a MAJOR contributing factor in Duterte’s disgust with America: BHO. (”Son of a whore” is an accurate translation of what Duterte said. It means that Obama’s mom was for sale, and that Obama has no birthright. Huh.)
So, I have speculation. Duterte is in a leadership position in a country that is complex, and ready to grow. Like Taiwan (an economic freezone with deep ties to China), the Philippines could become a place of peace, law and order, freedom from crime and terrorism, and prosperity for its people.
Obama (or hillary!) leading the “war on terrorism” in the southern portion of the Philippines is a recipe for DISASTER!!
And manipulation by globalists is a recipe for bankruptcy.
JMHO.
“China is NOT building bases in the S China Sea”
Yes it is. Big enough to build airfields on. This is common info from multiple sources, this is just one.
“Pictures taken in late July show the hangars constructed on Fiery Cross, Subi and Mischief Reefs in the Spratly islands have room for any fighter jet in the Chinese air force, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).”
These put the entire Philippines, plus Borneo and South Vietnam in range of all Chinese tactical aircraft. Thats besides whatever missiles are also present or deployable.
Mark
I like Duterte so far. I have been watching PI fairly closely. He is smart. He is using China as leverage to get significantly more assistance from the U.S. So far the U.S. had just operated U.S. assets out of the Philippines. He wants his own assets.
He is really pissing off the liberals, so he must be on the right track.
And yes China has multiple bases on the disputed islands (world court ruled for the Philippines). Lots of potential natural gas and possibly oil in those islands. PI needs a source of cheap energy. They have had some interruptions in the coal they import.
Asian countries can’t depend upon a stagnant, indebted country with a huge welfare state.
It’s just common sense.
Phil, Korea, Japan must bow to China or buy nukes and delivery systems.
>>China is NOT building bases in the S China Sea. <<
What do you think they are building? Girl Scout camps? No country would spend the effort and cost for anything but military bases.
ditto for China's grab of Korean and Japanese islands, or border area of India.
now that it is election year he wants a pivot to Asia for a photo op.
not to mention the SJW are pushing gay rights, which is not a problem here since gays are open...but they are doing this to destroy Christians so they can impose population control and abortion.
Duterte got into office through the same visceral loathing of the political elites that will elect Trump. And he is popular because he is doing exactly what he promised he would do. If Trump follows through on his promises (with the caveat that much of his agenda needs congress to cooperate) - he will be the most popular president since Reagan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.