American Militarism, the Philippines, and the Media

https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/in-manila-u-s-defense-secretary-commits-to-protecting-philippines

Marcos has committed his country to the path of war, and yet is this really what the people of the Philippines want? Do they understand what it will mean when the US has bases there - when it stages missiles batteries there?

Hegseth lies when he claims that the US is committed to Manila's sovereignty. Given America's history with the Philippines that's quite a statement. The US stole the country from Spain, brutally crushed the resistance and exploited its resources and its labour. It eventually handed the nation over to a dictator (Marcos' father) who ruled for decades only to be ousted in the 1980's. The end of the Cold War, a volcanic eruption, and a lot of bad blood created a scenario in which the US pulled up its stakes and left. Only when Washington decided it needed Manila, did they bother to return.

The Maritime Executive article makes a rather stunning claim - Washington had a hand in its defense even during the colonial era. Is this a reference to the US conquest? The US picked a fight with Spain and stole the archipelago nation. When Aguinaldo (head of the resistance) realized the US has misled him, he took up arms against the American invaders - the Conquistadores from Washington. After a brutal campaign characterized by atrocities, the mass killing of civilians, concentration camps and torture, the Filipinos were defeated. It was like Vietnam but without aerial bombs, helicopters, Agent Orange, and napalm - or a media willing to report on what was happening. Only a twisted way of thinking and by means of tortured justification can such a statement be made.

The Chinese officials are right - the US does have a long track record of abandoning allies or stabbing them in the back. The US can protest this claim, but one need only look to Europe and watch what's taking place at this very moment. The Philippine ambassador knows this as his comments make clear:

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3300890/philippine-ambassador-warns-defence-treaty-us-may-not-be-ironclad

The Maritime Executive failed to mention that the US has planned to deploy more weapons such as naval drones as well as the possibility of a second Typhon missile system - the intermediate range launcher which presents a direct nuclear threat to the Chinese mainland. The Asia Times article was far more balanced in its coverage:

https://asiatimes.com/2025/04/hegseth-dangles-second-typhon-missile-system-for-philippines/#

And yet I'm sorry to admit, it is the WSWS's coverage that is actually the most comprehensive, reporting on the tensions between the Duterte and Marcos families, the lifting of the US funding freeze, as well as the potential effects of the shut-down of USAID, as well as Hegseth's open talk of war plans and other examples of his militaristic rhetoric. It's also noteworthy that the Philippines played a key logistical role in the US campaigns in Indochina during the Cold War.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/03/29/lnwe-m29.html

How sad that that of all the extant English language news sources, the Marxist WSWS provided the best and most candid coverage of this story. It's a condemnation not only of mainstream Western media, but the plethora of so-called Christian news outlets.