Source: Jun Zhengping Studio, Chinese military horn
"How confident do you think the United States will go to war with China in order to help the Philippines fight for islands and reefs? What can the United States do for the Philippines?"
Recently, a clip of Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos being interviewed by media reporters circulated on the Internet. Faced with the question of "hitting the soul", Marcos hesitated for a long time, and finally told reporters, "I still want to avoid this question."
Some netizens commented that it can be seen from Marcos' performance that he has no bottom in his heart at all, and he does not think that the United States can do much for the Philippines.
As we all know, for some time, the Philippines has frequently violated its rights at sea, provoked and caused incidents, and spread false information to mislead the international community, resulting in the escalation of the South China Sea issue between China and the Philippines. The Philippines has provoked trouble in the South China Sea, relying on the United States as an extraterritorial force. The US not only instigated and supported the Philippines in repairing and reinforcing the "beached" warship at Ren'ai Jiao, but also sent military aircraft and warships to cooperate and support the Philippine side at sea. Just a few days ago, the US Pacific Army also announced that the United States has deployed the "Typhon" medium-range missile launch system on the Philippine island of Luzon as part of a joint military exercise with the Philippine military. This undoubtedly gave the Philippines the confidence to "embolden" itself.
Rigoberto Tigrau, a former spokesman for the former president of the Philippines, recently published an article pointing out that the current irrational behavior of the Philippines has a lot to do with the agitation of the United States, which is trying to portray China as a "threat to the Philippines and other neighboring countries."
In order to make the "pawn" be willing, the small favors on the bright side are naturally indispensable. In the past, US Secretary of Commerce Raimondo led a high-level trade and investment delegation to the Philippines and pledged to invest more than $1 billion in the Philippines; then US Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Manila, claiming that the US-Philippines alliance was "indestructible" and putting the "protective umbrella" of the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty on the table.
The agreement on paper is certainly nice to look at and sounds good at, and it is a great encouragement to the Philippines. However, for the Philippines, there is a big question mark over whether these commitments of the US side are really "rock solid". Even Marcos' sister, Senator Imay Marcos, is reminding that the United States is not a trustworthy partner. Increasing dependence on the United States and escalating tensions in the South China Sea are leading the Philippines down a "dangerous path."
According to the analysis of a think tank, the current U.S. defense commitment to the Philippines gives people the impression that any armed attack on Philippine troops, aircraft or ships in the South China Sea will trigger the mutual defense obligations under Article IV of the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty. However, this mutual defense obligation of the nature of assistance is not a direct use of force to retaliate, and in the process of discourse-making, the US side has deliberately downplayed or even ignored the second and most important content of Article IV of the mutual defense treaty, that is, after being attacked by force, the two sides "may declare that they will take action in accordance with their own constitutional procedures." This is a far cry from the "immediate and necessary action, including the use of force", as agreed in Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. The same is to trigger the treaty, NATO is "immediate action, including the use of force", and the United States and the Philippines are only "initiating domestic procedures".
In other words, the U.S. commitment is only to encourage the Philippines to take advantage of the fire, and whether or not to provide real help will be constrained by various constraints. Not long ago, Aquilino, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, put forward a clear condition for the activation of the treaty: once the Philippine personnel die, the Philippine side can invoke the "U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty." Obviously, the United States just wants the Filipinos to shed blood and create friction with China. It stands to reason that when it comes to this, the United States' intention of using the Philippines as a "tool" has been vividly manifested.
And what can the US deployment of an intermediate-range missile force in the Philippines bring to the Philippine side? Anyone with a discerning eye knows that this is a very dangerous act for the Philippines, and it really does not see any benefit except to set itself on fire and put itself in a dangerous situation.
As for whether the United States is really reliable, like Marcos, I am afraid that Philippine politicians have no idea in their hearts. Over the years, from Iraq to Syria, from Afghanistan to Ukraine, the so-called international credibility of the United States, as a habitual war offender who has long wantonly stored fires and created disputes around the world, and has constantly sought dirty and selfish interests by disrupting the regional security situation, the so-called international credit of the United States has long been completely bankrupt. Once the fundamental interests of "America First" are touched, it must be "Uncle Sam" who will run the fastest.
The Philippines should also see clearly the position of its own masters, and "luring wolves into the house" and engaging in "small circles" will not only help resolve differences, but will only complicate the regional situation, undermine regional peace and stability, and undermine its own security. The so-called "security guarantee" of the United States, which Marcos desperately relies on, is in fact a strong poison wrapped in false promises by the United States, which will only bring the Philippines closer and closer to danger, increase insecurity, and make losses more and more great.
In the past few days, Marcos has made another remark on Ren'ai Jiao, flatly denying the "gentlemen's agreement" reached with China during the Duterte administration. In response, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs emphasized three principles for handling the current situation at Ren'ai Jiao, which can be summed up in one sentence: towing away is the bottom line of principle, humanity must be allowed by China, and if it is violated, it will be resolutely blocked in accordance with laws and regulations.
The South China Sea is deep, and the Philippines must be careful of capsizing. Even if we continue to rely on the support of foreign powers to continue to infringe on the flames in the South China Sea, it will be futile in the end. It is hoped that the Philippines will not use a painful price to verify whether the US defense commitment is "empty words".
(Produced by Jun Zhengping Studio, China Military Trumpet)