Anti-americanism In World Politics: The Philippines
Introduction
During the 70 years of independence of the Philippines, there were various stages of domestic political development, but always the nature of the foreign policy orientation of this country was determined by a certain level of cooperation with the United States of America. But is there a friendship between the Philippines and the United States? I do not address this issue to politicians. They with an enviable regularity express their point of view in the media. All the more guided by the diplomatic etiquette, it is unlikely that they will express a real point of view. I want to reflect the opinion of ordinary citizens. It's worth seeing only the news that was recorded, for example, in 2017, on the eve of the visit of D. Trump to the Philippines at the ASEAN summit, the Philippines organized large-scale anti-American protests in which they chanted 'On Trump, no USA!' And burned a fabric stylized under the American flag. A clearer proof of anti-American sentiment in the Philippines is difficult to find. In this context, the answer to the question is interesting: why are we witnessing so reactionary anti-American sentiment in the Philippines today, first of all by the people of this country?
Similar protests from the country's population are not accidental. Dislike of the United States is laid down by the Philippine people at the genetic level. The aging of the anti- American sentiment among the population of the Philippines is largely due to the rude methods used by the United States in defending its goals and that country. For a long time, this region was subjected to significant economic, military, political and social influence from the side of a mighty neighbor - the United States. Therefore, throughout its history and to date, anti-American movements and moods have been periodically emerging on the territory of these countries, aimed at reducing the influence of the United States in the region. Having come into power thanks to the broad support of the common people, Duttert made his main foreign policy objective to enhance the international prestige of the Republic of the Philippines, as well as the adoption on the world stage of the idea of absolute sovereignty of the country and unconditional independence. 'We have long ceased to be a colony', - quoted the DuTert The New York Times. 'I do not have any host except the Philippine people ... no one else, no one!'
The President is supported by the head of the Philippine Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Perfect Yassay. 'The United States grappled with the invisible chains that drag us into dependence and subjection as younger brothers unprepared for genuine independence and freedom. In order to effectively confront threats to internal and external security, the Philippines needs to be released from enslavement, to put an end to national slavery towards the United States. '
According to Yassay, from now on, the Philippines intends to pursue an independent US foreign policy, since the patronage of the American government negatively affected the national interests of Manila. According to the Philippine Research Institute of Social Weather Stations (SWS), the confidence rating for Doutert within the country during the three months of his stay in power exceeded the figures of previous presidents. The new Filipino president has shown himself not only as a tough national leader who has declared a war on drug trafficking in the country, but also as a supporter of an independent foreign policy that is unacceptable to outside criticism. Being Mayor, Davao Duttert declined the plan of accommodation on. Mindanao, an American base for drone militia. He also carried out an active endeavor to sign an agreement with Washington, which gives US troops the right to land on the territory of the country. Messert Doutert at the White House contained not only the reluctance of his country to be America's 'little brother', but also the doubts that the United States was prepared to provide assistance to the Philippines in the event of a country's involvement in a military conflict with a deliberately stronger opponent.
The origins of the anti-Americanism of the Filipino people lie in the history of the country's development. From the point of view of the people of the Philippines, Americans masked their military invasion of the Philippines under the slogan of helping the Philippine people in the liberation struggle against Spain. The Philippine intelligentsia, which took on its own the struggle for greater rights and freedoms from the metropolis, and in the future, and for independence from it, by that moment already two years (since 1896) fought with weapons in their hands for their ideals, leading for Filipino masses. The Americans, in the opinion of the Filipinos, in turn, took advantage of the political destabilization and revolutionary sentiment on the islands, in order to carry out the colonization of the country itself.
Colonization of the Philippines was the military subordination of the Philippine Archipelago, which caused much more complexity than was expected by the United States leadership. Expanding a military operation to capture the Philippines, the US rulers did not take into account the reaction to this fact by the people who rose to revolution against the colonial regime in the format of the guerrilla warfare. Losses of American troops began to increase, and this forced Washington to increase its military contingent in the Philippines. Violent raids were launched against local people, during which torture and torture were used for intimidation.
The Philippines gained independence after the end of the Second World War. By providing the Philippines with independence, the United States tightly tied this country to its policy, imposed bonded treaties on it, retained its military bases (Subic Bay, etc.), dragged the Philippines into the military unit of the SEATO. Of key importance was the bilateral agreement on mutual defense of 1951 birth, aimed primarily at the USSR and China. Philippine soldiers fought in Korea, and Filipino non-combatants and civilians were sent to Vietnam to support the Saigon regime and US troops.
Decolonization envisaged the creation of a system of 'special relations' with the United States, but in essence such relations resembled the scheme of interaction 'cartridge- client'. The foundation of these relations lay in two vectors:
- Firstly, the legal and contractual base of economic, political and military cooperation was created, which allowed the United States to obtain 'major' advantages in the economy of the country on 'legitimate' grounds.
- Second, a massive ideological treatment of the Philippine population was carried out to control the political situation in the country and to provide a dependent character of its foreign policy.
Clear and open growth of anti-American sentiment from the leadership of the Philippines can only be noted recently. With the election of the President of the Philippines Rodrigo Roa Dutter, we can observe the withdrawal of the Philippine leadership from the permanent loyalty to Washington's actions on the international scene. Having come into power thanks to the broad support of the common people, Duttert made his main foreign policy aim to enhance the international prestige of the Republic of the Philippines, as well as the adoption on the world stage of the idea of absolute sovereignty of the country and unconditional independence, primarily from the United States of America. A similar anti- American vector of country development, elected by the current President of the Philippines, has raised its level of support among the population of this country.
'To break the chains of dependence to allow the Philippines to effectively reflect both internal and external threats to security has become the main goal necessary to put an end to our people's dependence on the interests of the United States,' the Foreign Minister said, adding that this goal requires President Dutter 'forced regrouping' of foreign policy priorities.
It should be noted that the basis of US dominance in relations with the Philippines, was the agreement on military cooperation. An agreement on mutual defense between the United States and the Philippines was signed on August 30, 1951, and obliged the countries to provide mutual support in the event of a threat from third countries. Based on this document, United States military assets were created in the Philippines. In 1999, and then in 2014, the military cooperation agreement was extended, the US military presence in the Philippines expanded. The new document provided the US military with the possibility of deploying in special camps, and also provided for the deployment of aviation and naval forces in the Philippines. All this presents a serious problem, since this agreement violates the sovereignty of the country
For a long time, Filipino leaders have not been complaining about the presence of US military bases. Perhaps they simply did not dare to lose support from the United States, because they were afraid of the communist revolution. The Communist partisan movement, which was born in the years of the Second World War, enjoyed great influence in the Philippines and greeted the sincere sympathies of the peasant masses. This was due to the specifics of the socio-economic situation of Filipino workers - on the islands dominated by American capital and local latifundists. Naturally, a significant part of the population, primarily the social lower classes, referred to this situation very negatively. Not less negative attitude on their part aroused and the authorities, in words demonstrated the desire for political independence of the state, but in practice remained in the role of American satellite. In this regard, the grounds for maintaining US military bases at the then Filipino leadership was more than enough. In addition, they also brought good financial resources, including work for the local population. True, on the other hand, not everything is measured by money. The presence of a large number of free young men who are far away from families and at home has contributed to the prosperity of alcohol, drugs, and prostitution in the Philippines. On the other hand, there were no rarities and crimes committed by foreign military men against the Filipinos, which incited anti-American sentiment among the ordinary population of the Philippines.
In the post-colonial period, although the United States retained its old ally with its old ally, their participation in the country's life was minimal, and in the Philippines, in turn, anti- American sentiment grew, especially against the US military bases Clark and Subic. The feeling of 'colonial dependency' as well as fears for the integrity of the Philippine borders and the preservation of independence led to a rise in the sense of national self-awareness and the desire for independence in addressing important issues - from the Philippines, as well as some external factors, and it became a factor that ultimately in 1991 the bases were closed and their reopening was possible only with the consent of the Senate.
In the modern era, Rodrigo Doetter's statement on the eve of the ASEAN Summit (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) was one of the factors behind the incitement of anti- American sentiment in the US-Philippine relations. In his speech, Dutter called Obama an outrageous statement, announcing at the same time that he was ready to use other epithets during his personal meeting with the American president during the summit in Laos. The new president of the Philippines views any US manifestation of the Philippines in the context of the aggressive loss of the independence of the country he represents. So, becoming president, Duttert became famous for calling for the police and the army to kill drug traffickers without trial and investigation. These words of the Philippine president caused a negative reaction from the American representatives who accused Doertte of violating human rights. As you know, for the US side, such allegations are often linked not to the real facts of human rights violations, but with the emphasis on the disloyalty of a political figure to the American authorities. However, Doertet reacted to these allegations from the US State Department very worthy. On August 21, 2016, he stated that the Philippines might have to leave the United Nations because this structure is not capable of coping with the global problems of modern mankind - for example, with international terrorism, famine in Third World countries, and the war in the Middle East. In this case, the United States allows itself to interfere in the internal affairs of the Philippines, forgetting that the Philippines - an independent state and is able to determine its own law-enforcement policy itself. The aggravated anti-American sentiment and the growth of nationalism among the population are also due to the further convergence of the Philippines with the ASEAN countries and the East Asian countries (China, Japan, South Korea), the improvement of relations with China, as well as non-traditional partners of the Philippines - Russia, Japan, and India. In the 1990s, deep differences between the interests of the United States, which became the will of historical development in a single superpower, and the ASEAN countries, which are on their own development, including the Philippines, have intensified. In the long term, it is to be expected that the Philippines, based on the potential of ASEAN, will more actively defend its own economic and military-political interests in regional organizations, and in its regional policy will seek to form a powerful East Asian group able to protect their interests from the dictates of the United States.
The discrepancy between the interests of the United States and Manila is becoming an increasingly important factor in the foreign policy of the Philippines, a serious limiter in the relations between the two countries. It should be added that the closer convergence is hampered by the existence of serious differences in the social and ethical values, the dissimilarity of historical experience, and, finally, the differences of psychological attitudes and stereotypes of thinking. Attempts by the United States to connect the Philippines to the realization of their foreign policy strategy in Asia only reinforce the contradictions between them.
Conclusion
Undoubtedly, in the Philippines and the United States, there are areas of productive interaction: countering terrorist threats, smuggling drugs and weapons. The issues of ecology and finance will never disappear, as during the stay of the US colony, in the metropolis and the colony, strong ties have been established in many directions - political, economic, strategic, and cultural. The mechanism of exchange of resources for money continues to maintain its relevance among these countries. Moreover, throughout the history of the sovereign Philippine state, the United States uses the territory of that country for its military bases. The Philippines is of rather great interest to them, as they allow the control of a strategically important part of the Asia-Pacific region. In this regard, the complete breakdown of relations between these countries is disadvantageous for both countries, along with the existence of vivid anti-American sentiment in the Philippines.
I believe that anti-Americanism is a subjective feeling that any person has the right to have in the presence of a well-grounded basis for this feeling. The anti-Americanism of the Philippine population is due to the US colonial policy towards the Philippines, which took place in previous centuries, which was often accompanied by violence and cruelty against the population, which did not perceive the domination of the United States in its relations with their country. The Philippine population is inclined to perceive the United States as a significant threat to its independence and security. The new Philippine leadership has started to demonstrate that it is pursuing a completely independent course and adopting a multi- vector of its foreign policy, which affects the strengthening of anti-Americanism among the Philippine population.
References
- Will Duterte End the US-Philippines Military Alliance? : http://thediplomat.com/2016/10/will-duterte-end-the-us-philippine-military-alliance
- http://www.legisworks.org/congress/73/publaw-127.pdf
- Philippines Turning Away From US to 'Diversified Contacts' With China, Russia: https://sputniknews.com/politics/201610201046548768-philippines-us-russia/
- Zolotukhin I.N. The Philippines on the path to 'independent foreign policy' through the prism of relations with the great powers of Pacifiki / I.N. Zolotukhin // Oikumen. - 2017. - No. 3. - P.156 - 171. : http://ojkum.ru/images/articles/2017-3/_2017_3_0042-13.pdf
- Levtonov Yu.O. The history of the Philippines. Brief essay / Yu.O. Levtonov - M .: Nauka,. - 2017. - 296 pp. http://thediplomat.com/2016/10/will-duterte-end-the-us-philippine-military-alliance
