Warning that the United States’ “hegemonic” style of leadership could fan the flames of war, an American statesman Wednesday asked the Philippine Supreme Court to strike down the US-Philippine Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (Edca) as unconstitutional, adding his voice to the debate just as a ruling is expected to come down soon.
In a petition in intervention filed through Philippine lawyers Wednesday morning, former US Sen. Mike Gravel told the Supreme Court that Edca could only aggravate tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly amid unresolved disputes in the South China Sea.
“The decision by the Philippine government to enter into an Edca with the United States government is neither in the best interest of the Philippine people nor in the best interest of the American people,” Gravel said in his 17-page petition.
“We are most critical of what we hold most dear. Petitioner-intervener loves his country but he cannot abide the concept ‘my country right or wrong.’ When it is wrong I hope to propound an effective critique to negate that wrong,” said Gravel, the former Democratic senator credited for the public release of the Pentagon papers, or top secret state documents on the Vietnam War.
‘Pivot’ to Asia
The Supreme Court opened deliberations on Tuesday on two petitions questioning the constitutionality of Edca, an executive agreement signed by the Philippines and the United States last year as part of Washington’s strategic “pivot” to the Asia-Pacific region and Manila’s external defense buildup amid tensions over a territorial dispute with China in the South China Sea.
Militant groups and former Senators Rene Saguisag and Wigberto Tañada, who voted to kick out American bases from the Philippines in 1991, filed separate petitions against Edca last year, asserting that the agreement needed Senate concurrence to take effect.
Gravel, who served in the US Senate from 1969 to 1981 and who has been following developments in Asia-Pacific geopolitics, was encouraged to intervene in the case by lawyer Harry Roque, a lawyer for Saguisag and Tañada.
Romel Bagares, another lawyer on the case, conceded that getting the Supreme Court to consider the intervention this late in the proceedings would be a long shot, but that they decided to go ahead with the pleading.
In his intervention, Gravel cited how the fruition of Edca—increased US military presence in the Philippines and its expected boost for the Philippine military—could turn fears of armed conflict in South China Sea a reality.
‘Thucydides trap’
He cited the “Thucydides trap,” where Athenian fear of a rising Sparta made the Peloponnesian War inevitable.
“Petitioner-intervener will argue … that the United States, whether intentionally or by accident, is skirting ever so close to the ‘Thucydides trap.’ America’s political leadership is unable to reverse that trajectory. Therefore, it is his hope that a foreign national interest will step forward to protect Americans from their own government’s military foreign policies,” Gravel said.
He cited the history of America’s dealings with the Philippines since its conquest after the Spanish occupation. He described US regard of the Philippines as one of “cruelty and atrocity equal to the worst in the annals of conquest and war.”
“This history must be remembered if the past and future relations with the United States are truly to be understood by the Philippine people. Add to this limited recitation of past facts the criminal complicity that the United States foisted on the Philippines with the prosecution of wars against fellow South[east] Asians,” said Gravel, a longtime critic of the United States’ projection of its military might.
He cited America’s involvement in conflicts across Southeast Asia, saying “it is not unfair to conclude that some Western elites placed little value on Asian lives.”
Launching pad
Gravel theorized that Edca was only meant to provide the United States a strategic launching pad in the Asia-Pacific region in its supposed campaign to contain rising China.
He made an example of previous tense brushes between the Philippines and China over territories in the disputed South China Sea.
“[W]hen push turns to shove, the US will not provoke a military showdown with China over Filipino fishing or mineral rights. It should drive home the fact that US militarization of the Philippines is not really designed to protect Philippine interests but rather to afford the US a geographic advantage to confront China over its ascendant superpower status, which the US finds offensive to its global hegemonic status,” Gravel said.