ROLANDO R. CRUZADA, JR. MARINETTE G.

RAMOS, DPA
DPA STUDENT PROFESSORIAL LECTURER
URSP PA 503

Critic of Philippine Defense Policy

Foreign Military Financing (FMF) provides grants for the acquisition of U.S. defense

equipment, services, and training. It is intended to promote U.S. national security by contributing

to regional and global stability, strengthening military support for democratically-elected

governments and containing transnational threats, including terrorism and trafficking in

narcotics, weapons, and persons. These grants enable allies and friends to improve their

defense capabilities and foster closer military relationships between the U.S. and recipient

nations.

The United States will nearly triple its military funding for the Philippines this year, the

Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs said on Thursday, as tensions rise with China over

disputed islands and Washington bolsters its alliance with Manila. However, the Philippines

expressed concern over what it said was a sharp decline in its share of US foreign military

financing (FMF) despite Manila's central role in the US's military "pivot" back to Asia.

Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario said the Philippines accounted for over 70 percent

of total FMF allocation for East Asia in 2006, compared to 35 percent this year.

"We hope this is not indicative of the priority placed on the Philippines as a regional partner, as

even non-treaty allies appear to be getting a bigger share of the FMF allocation," del Rosario

said in a speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.

Washington agreed to provide $30 million in FMF this year, up from an initial 2012

allocation of $15 million and from $11.9 million last year.

 The enduring question is, ”would this additional “pie” of Uncle Sam make the AFP rise

from the group of the “cheapest armies in the world?” Is FMF always given with conditions

which recipient countries must follow? Recipient countries, like the Philippines, should adhere to

democratic principles and the rule of law before any FMF is released. But how could the

Government of the Philippines suppress lawlessness if its military is underequipped. Firepower

is a very essential element so that military personnel would not resort to unconventional means

in order to subdue the enemies of the state because they will surely be intimidated by just the

presence of superior military equipments.

Despite the additional $15 M FMF this year still the allocation is low. What could be the

reason? What causes US seeming reluctance? Is it the “wait and see policy” about China’s

military build up which if countered squarely would affect US economic interest in East Asia

especially China’s giant economy?

Philippine Public Fiscal Policy on defense spending must be enhanced because it is not

feasible that the PH rely to any nation for the latter will not really be concerned of the former’s

safety and defense if it conflicts with the latter’s domestic and foreign policies. It is a truth that a

country’s foreign policy should serve its domestic concerns. But the PH is always servant to

powerful countries’ policies even to the detriment of its domestic welfare. Is the US really

concerned with the PH’s safety or with theirs that translates to economic advantage?

Our legislators (Senators and Congressmen) if they are really patriotic based on their

pledge should give up for at least two years of CDF (Pork Barrel Funds) which would amount to

48 Billion Pesos (1.2 Billion USD) to purchase new 24 Nos of F16/D Fighter Jets at 20 M USD

each which will amount to 480 Million USD + 10 M USD for pilot training. Excess funds can be

used by our navy to procure new fast fully armed navy ships to give our country the necessary

defense posture/ capabilities to protect our country from Chinese bullying.

 If not then the budget of the military should be given an increase by 50 Billion pesos next

year to enable our military the time to procure the fighter jets and fast crafts. The Aquino

administration has spent Php16.85 B in the past 17 months to modernize the military. That

compares with the Php33.59B that the government spent in the last 15 years for the same

purpose.

Despite these advances in reform and modernization, the Armed Forces of the

Philippines (AFP) still faced significant budget challenges in their efforts to overcome decades

of inadequate funding. The Philippines allocates less than one percent of national budget to

defense spending, and in an archipelagic nation of more than 7,000 islands, airlift and maritime

logistical transport stand out as two of the most significant deficits in the Philippine military

inventory. U.S. assistance has augmented the Philippine efforts, particularly in border security

initiatives and counterterrorism operations, but the AFP still lacks an array of modern

capabilities, including sufficient logistical support, intelligence platforms, and consistent casualty

evacuation capability.

Defense spending as a proportion of national government expenditures should be really

essential item in the GAA under continuing appropriations.