Posted on 01/15/2002 5:29:24 AM PST by truthandlife
Hundreds of American soldiers were due to arrive in the Philippines Tuesday to help local troops in their campaign to smash an Islamic terrorist group, which is holding a U.S. missionary couple and a Filipina nurse hostage.
Although the government in Manila has appeared wary of saying so, it appears increasingly likely that the Americans will be present during actual frontline operations, including attempts to rescue the hostages.
Some 660 U.S. troops will participate in what Defense Secretary Angelo Reyes called the first "realistic" joint military exercise in the battle against the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) on the southern island of Basilan.
About 160 of the Americans would be Special Forces troops taking part in field operations. The remainder would provide support and maintenance functions.
The Americans, who will be equipped with modern helicopters and sophisticated surveillance gear, will team up with Philippines soldiers engaged in the campaign against the ASG, a group both Manila and Washington has linked to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terror network.
Reyes said the Americans would "observe and make joint assessments on the [Philippine Army forces] as the latter go out in operations."
The military would try to prevent situations in which U.S. troops would be involved in actual fighting, he said, but the visitors would be armed for self-defense in the event of an attack by the ASG.
U.S. and Philippines forces have been involved in training exercises before under the code-name "Balikatan" (shoulder-to-shoulder). But those war-games have been held in the north of the country, waged against a hypothetical enemy, and lasted for a month or less.
By contrast the "Balikatan 02-1" exercise will take place on and near the island stronghold of the ASG, use live ammunition, and last anywhere from five months to the rest of the year, "depending on the situation," Reyes said.
"In the course of this joint effort, we expect the Abu Sayyaf [to be] neutralized and the hostages recovered," he added, making it clear those were the key objectives of the exercise.
Martin and Gracia Burnham, missionaries from Kansas, were kidnapped from a beach resort last May. A third American taken at the same time was later found murdered, as were some Filipinos taken from the resort. Nurse Deborah Yap was seized from a hospital several days after the original raid.
President Bush late last year promised President Gloria Arroyo support in her government's fight against the ASG. Arroyo has been an outspoken supporter of the U.S.-led campaign against terrorism since the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. She has also spearheaded initiatives to improve regional cooperation against Islamic militancy.
Criticism expected
Arroyo spokesman Rigoberto Tiglao at a press briefing repeated assurances that the Americans would not be engaged in combat and would be housed in Philippine Army bases.
No separate U.S. facilities would be established he said, as the country's constitution prohibits the setting up of temporary or permanent foreign military bases in the Philippines.
Tiglao's comments reflected a sensitivity in Manila to potential domestic criticism of the reliance on the U.S., which had a long history of military involvement in the former American colony until a final troop evacuation in the early 1990s.
Arroyo's political opponents, leftist groups, and Islamic organizations are among those expected to question the decision.
"We cannot be playing politics here," Tiglao said. "It would be for the good of the country if this move would result in wiping out the Abu Sayyaf."
He expressed optimism that the government would get the necessary support.
"The U.S. has obviously extensive experience in going after terrorists and it would be good for the country if we get such help," he said. "We are confident that the majority of Filipinos would accept the U.S. help, within the boundaries of the constitution."
The type of criticism that can be expected already reared its head Tuesday, when commentator Paul Rodrigo, writing in Today, said he felt uneasy about the U.S. deployment.
"The spectacle of bringing in foreign troops to hunt down and kill Filipino outlaws is not one that does credit to a free country. If there is any fighting to be done on our soil, then it had better be done by Filipinos ..." he said.
"I have no quarrel with building better ties with the U.S., but this U.S. troop contingent is taking close ties a little too far. I think it would behoove this nation to be a little more circumspect at a time of an increasingly interventionist U.S. foreign policy."
Despite such sentiments, relations between Manila and Washington are the warmest they have been since the last U.S. troops pulled out of the highly-strategic Clark Airbase and the Subic Bay Naval Station in 1992.
Their departure had been the result of a decision by the Philippine Senate not to renew the leases on the bases, and led to a cooling of bilateral ties.
Only in 1999 did the Philippine Senate ratify an agreement which allowed for large-scale joint military training to resume.
See also:
Congressman Wants Philippines To Let US Troops Rescue Hostages (Dec. 31, 2001)
You mean, like exit visas? Like Vietnam, Indonesia, Bosnia, Syria, and Mongolia?
That certainly would be a departure from the freedoms which Americans enjoy.
The kidnappers may be evil, but they're not stupid or crazy.
Also, by simply acting as a true Christian one attract others to the Faith. My interpreter/Physician's Assistant in Cambodia had been converted to Christianity by simply seeing Christians come to the refugee camps to do service (health, education, etc.) This impressed him and made him want to learn what made these people such wonderful people. He is now one of the most saintly people I have ever met -- working in a hospital by day, visiting the imprisoned in the evenings. Even though he is nearly blind in one eye and deaf in one ear because of injuries during "Pol Pot Time."
By using this story, at least I got the missionary sister (subject of my previous post) to get a copy of "Where There is No Doctor" to take to the Philippines with her to do preventive health education, so perhaps she wound up being of service to the people after all. (Many deadly tropical diseases are preventable by using simple hygiene.)
It is my dream to someday endow an ambulance boat for the people in the district where I lived in Cambodia. Unlike your friend, I haven't succeeded yet. But neither have I given up!
A very good point, one I meant to make as well. I don't think permission from State should be required. At the same time, I don't think we should risk our soldiers' lives to rescue people who choose to go into dangerous situations.
Two quick points, which you miss with your screed:
1.) Actually, there are thousands of Christians being kidnapped, bludgeoned, tortured and killed in the Phillipine and area islands by militant Islamic terrorists, and I'm sure that part of the objective is to stop all of these horrors.
2.) These Islamic killer scum are trained by Bin Laden and Al Q'aeda, and our country has vowed to wipe them out wherever their vile, rancid heads pop up. Including in the Phillipines, which we never should have abandoned militarily in the first place. It is vital to our strategic national security as a forward base in the Pacific Theatre.
Many will use this sort of situation to advance their Liberal Hate Speak against missionaries and Christians... but do so to their ultimate shame. Assuming, that is, that they still have any.
Please document your claim with a source and, preferably, a link. (BTW, Indonesia doesn't count.) And even if true, is this not a matter for the Philippine government?
2.) These Islamic killer scum are trained by Bin Laden and Al Q'aeda, and our country has vowed to wipe them out wherever their vile, rancid heads pop up.
If true, then it might be a legitimate national security reason to send our guys in. But not to rescue some missionaries. The missionaries decided to risk their lives to convert Catholics to Baptists, and they knew the danger and accepted that risk. Converting Catholics to Baptists is not in our national interest, has nothing to do with the defense of our country.
Including in the Phillipines, which we never should have abandoned militarily in the first place. It is vital to our strategic national security as a forward base in the Pacific Theatre.
So long as we want to play empire, yes, this is true.
Many will use this sort of situation to advance their Liberal Hate Speak against missionaries and Christians... but do so to their ultimate shame. Assuming, that is, that they still have any.
I'm Christian. I don't see it as liberal hate speak. (Doesn't the phrase "hate speak" sound borrowed from the liberal PC propaganda book, anyway?) If these people want to be martyrs for Christ (or the Baptist Fellowship or whatever), then let them. It's their right.
If you found yourself in a difficult situation overseas, you might think differently.
Yes, some folks make extremely stupid and naive choices about their overseas activities, but that should not reflect on others who either (a) willingly accept risk with zero expectation of USG support, or (b) simply run into a reasonably unforseen situation (e.g., hijacking or kidnapping, terrorist attack while on vacation).
To be realistic about it, 75 percent of the world can be classified as "dangerous." Us Americans don't understand that much of the world operates on different rules than America.
Many Filipinos have emigrated to the U.S., where they generally make really good citizens, btw. They learn English, work hard and are really integrated into American life.
In other words, they are people who are potentially and even in fact supporters of our way of life and its foundations, and it's important not to let them be devoured by the mad dog of Islam, the way everything else in that part of the world is being devoured.
I have already. Twice, State wanted to send in guys to get me (Cambodia and Croatia). I refused both times. The second time, State even called my mother in the US to try to get her to want the guys to come and rescue me. They were very insistent, but she also refused, saying she trusted her daughter. And I'm still here to tell the tale. So I stand by what I said earlier. And I've earned the right to say it.
Yes, some folks make extremely stupid and naive choices about their overseas activities, but that should not reflect on others who either (a) willingly accept risk with zero expectation of USG support, or (b) simply run into a reasonably unforseen situation (e.g., hijacking or kidnapping, terrorist attack while on vacation).
I agree there should be a difference. The missionaries in question are in category A. If this were say, a hijacked cruise ship with Americans on board, I'd say "send in the Marines!"
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.