The Impact of US Military Assistance on the Communist and Secessionist Conundrum in the Philippines

Transcription

1 International Journal of Arts and Sciences 3(15): (2010) CD-ROM. ISSN: InternationalJournal.org The Impact of US Military Assistance on the Communist and Secessionist Conundrum in the Philippines Sharon Advincula Caringal, University of the Philippines Abstract: The communist and secessionist conundrum have already brought tremendous strains on the Philippines and its people. The Philippine government has to contend with two groups whose long standing struggles are both significantly affecting the political and economic landscape in the country. The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) which is considered as one of the most active of the communist parties of Southeast Asia that are not in power aims to establish a socialist state through armed struggle. For its part, the secessionist movement initially demanded complete independence from the Philippine Republic. Internal restiveness caused the breakaway of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) from the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and the downgrading of independence to full autonomy. A third faction, the Abu Sayyaf, a group linked with the Jemaah Islamiyah came into being in the advent of Islamic fundamentalism in SEA in the 1990 s. All these years, the United States military have not only maintained its strong presence in the country but have also poured in much aid and assistance to the Armed Forces of the Philippines. Is US military assistance inextricably linked to the secessionist and communist problems in the Philippines? What drives the US to allocate a sizable percentage of its military assistance budget to the Philippines? Is it borne out of altruism or is it a grand design to push its geo political interests in the region? The research is an evaluation of the nature and rationale of the US military assistance to the Philippines and its corresponding effect on the Philippine government s efforts to address the intrastate problems posed by both the secessionist and communist groups. Keywords: counter insurgency, cross training, intrastate conflict, military assistance, Introduction Any armed conflict is worth studying because it exacts tremendous toll on human society and it has far reaching implications having global, regional and even global implications. This is a real issue, a crisis that has caused our people grief, hunger, oppression and marginalization. A multi-faceted problem like this needs to be examined in-depth to achieve a systematic and structural solution that is leveraged for the long term. The problem is both relevant and pragmatic, a good a venue to inquire, to critique, to propose, to frame, to articulate and to analyze.

2 In the Philippines, armed conflicts have taken the center stage for more than 40 years now. All throughout these years, the government has to contend with two major groups posing serious threat to the overall peace and order situation in the country: the communists and the secessionists. The communist and secessionist conundrum have already brought strains on the Philippines and its people, including the enormous costs (political, economic and social) among the communities not only in conflict areas but also in the other parts of the country. It transcends military and conflict issues. It spills over into economics and politics involving not only risk management, humanitarian law, community relations, power structure, social structures and even gender issues. It cannot be evaluated quantitatively. It should be analyzed qualitatively with a historical, systemic, cultural or structural view. Aside from the tremendous loss of lives and properties, the long standing conflict has also created a climate of fear and intimidation among the people particularly in areas fraught with conflicts. Millions of Filipinos who were caught in the crossfire or displaced were forced to relocate elsewhere in the country. During the high points in the communist and secessionist struggle, more than 50 % of the military was pinned down in the conflict areas. Instead of focusing on nation building, the military have been distracted and was forced to shift to a more aggressive conduct of military operations in dealing with the communist and secessionist groups. At present, the Philippine military devotes most of its logistics, resources, materiel and equipment to keep watch of the developments in the affected areas. The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) which was established in 1968 leads the peasant-based rebellion through an armed struggle to advance a mass based revolution. It is an ideological party which continuously recruits members as a mass party, carries out its defined programs and projects and builds bailiwicks and spheres of influence in different parts of the country (Simbulan, 2008). The struggle of the CPP reached its peak in the 1990s where it was able to establish a strong presence in the various parts of the archipelago even to the point of controlling several barangays and collecting revolutionary taxes in the hinterland and mountainous areas in Sierra Madre, Caraga and Bicol Regions in Luzon; Samar and Leyte provinces in the Visayas; and Davao and Campostela Valley in Mindanao. The CPP, through its armed component, the New People s Army (NPA) also employed urban guerilla tactics and deployed liquidation units in urban areas resulting in the number of target personalities killed by Sparrow Units including Colonel James Rowe of the Joint US Military Advisory Group. He was believed to be the man behind the implementation of the infamous Low Intensity Conflict (LIC) in the Philippines. The LIC provided the venue for the adoption of psy ops which included among others, the branding of progressives as subversives and tagging members of left leaning groups as communists. Because of the volatile situation and the serious threat coming from the CPP/NPA, the Philippine military implemented security adjustments to minimize the damage that may be incurred from the conduct of urban guerilla warfare by the NPA. For its part, the American authorities in the country thought it wise to pull out the Peace Corps volunteers and at the same time brief the diplomats, troops and federal employees assigned in the Philippines about the CPP/NPA threat

3 stressing how hazardous the situation was at that time. Today, the CPP is still considered as one of the most active of the communist parties of Southeast Asia that are not in power. It holds the perspective that once the victory of the revolution is attained, it should become possible and necessary to carry out a socialist revolution and reconstruction. On the other hand, the secessionist movement which was born in the early 1970s through the creation of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) initially demanded for complete independence or secession from the Philippine Republic. Internal restiveness ensued within the group and the final straw came when a sizable number of members acceded to the wish of the Philippine government to down grade the MNLF demand to autonomy. The final agreement was contained in the 1976 Tripoli Agreement which provided for the autonomy of thirteen provinces in the southern part of the Philippines. Meanwhile, the breakaway group called the Moro Islamic Liberation Front pursued secession activities and was able to establish foothold in southern Philippines by establishing a number of camps in areas where there are many Muslims. The MILF boasts that it was able to develop itself into a well structured organization. Inside their two biggest camps, Camp Bushra in Lanao del Sur and Camp Al Siddique in Maguindanao (before it was taken over by the military in 1998) can be found self reliant and self sustaining communities complete with social, economic, military and religious structures like schools, mosques, shariah courts and multi purpose cooperatives. A third faction, the Abu Sayyaf came into existence in the 1990s with the resurgence of Muslim extremism in Southeast Asia. The Abu Sayyaf which is a militant organization seeks to create a separate Islamic state for Muslims. It had been involved in a spate of bombings, abductions, assassinations, kidnappings and extortions and its links with Osama Bin Laden s Al Qaeda and Indonesia s Jemaah Islamiyah have already been established. All the aforementioned groups have one thing in common. All of them have been linked and have been alleged to be involved with various terroristic activities. However, a deeper study of Philippine history will show that they have legitimate grievances and justifiable grounds for their struggle. The areas where the communists and the secessionists are concentrated are the poorest, the most underprivileged and under represented areas in the country. While poverty alone does not automatically result in social unrest, international experiences have shown that an explosive political situation is created when poverty is combined with deprivation and injustice (Collier, 2003).The areas where the communists and the secessionists thrive receive the lowest government expenditure and have the worst human development index. They have been marginalized and taken for granted for a long time. If the Philippine government is really serious in pursuing genuine peace, the civil rights of these groups should not be extinguished nor denied. There is a need to redress the imbalance and correct the infractions committed against them like deprivation of their rights to life, security, food, shelter, health and culture. All these years, while the Philippine government is tying to address the problems of communism and secession, the United States military have not only maintained its strong

4 presence in the Philippines but have also poured in much aid and assistance to the Armed Forces of the Philippines. What are the underlying factors and motivators for this? The Philippines is a former US colony and much had been said about the so-called special relations between the two countries. But is there really a special tie that binds the US and the Philippines? Politicians and government officials from both countries are often quoted using the term special relations whenever they talk about the nature and state of relationship between the US and its former colony, the Philippines. Filipino nationalists on the other hand, argued that there really is no special relations, what exists is a myth which is continually invoked to camouflage the continuing inequities in the Filipino- American relations. This paper discusses the impact of the US military assistance on the communist and secessionist conundrum in the Philippines with the end in view of identifying important lessons from it. It is relevant to assess and evaluate the dynamics and intricacies attached to the military assistance to be able to come up with a clearer and more concrete policy with regards the US military assistance and the communist/secessionist issue. The Philippine case can be used to benchmark other countries receiving US military assistance which are also experiencing intra state conflicts so that both challenges and opportunities are identified. They can build upon the Filipino experience and try to pursue relevant pedagogy/research that will create better structures, systems, processes and arrangements for communities and societies. Post-Colonial US-Philippine Military Relationship It is undeniable that all throughout the post colonial era, the US has kept a dominant role in organizing and developing the Philippine military. Upon the instigation of the former colonials, the Philippine government under President Roxas passed the Military Bases Agreement of 1947, one of the very first laws passed after independence was acquired in Basically, it gave the US the right to put up military bases and installations which allowed American troops and materiel access to the Philippines. To supplement this, the RP-US Mutual Defense Agreement was forged in These laws set the tone and the overall direction for the US-RP military relations thus allowing the US to influence and design the overall Philippine military strategy especially in the areas of anti-insurgency and anti-secession. The Bases agreement was amended in 1979, updated in 1983 ad 1988 and expired in September 1991.Prior to its expiration, the US maintained two of the largest bases outside continental US in the Philippines: the Clark Air Base which was home to the 13 th US Air Force and the Subic Naval Base where the 7 th (Pacific) Fleet maintained its headquarters. From 1947 to 1991, these bases were vital for power projection practically in the entire Asia. As the involvement of the US military deepens, the military aid also grew steadily since WWII and it was heavily concentrated in the Philippines (See Table 3:US military aid to ASEAN countries).during these times, the raison d etre for maintaining a strong military presence and for providing aid was the defeat of communism.

5 When the bases agreement expired in 1991, US troops and facilities were withdrawn from the Philippines albeit the forging of security agreements like the Mutual Logistics and Support Agreement (MSLA) and the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA). This includes the entry of US troops for exercises and storage of American materiel, thus giving the US the equivalent of military bases without the need for maintaining permanent structures. US military assistance came mostly in terms of training Filipino troops in counter insurgency and the collection of intelligence. Eventually, a more active partnership, collaboration and interoperability was forged between the US forces and the Filipino troops as manifested in the conduct of year round cross training exercises called Balikatan (rough translation: shouldering the load together) There has been a paradigm shift in military assistance after 9/11. The US forces together with the Armed Forces of the Philippines embarked on a more expanded military operations on counter terrorism and counter insurgency particularly in areas where the presence of Muslim secessionists and local communists are felt. The US released a total of $3.8 million in 2001, $56 in 2002, $52.6 in 2003, $52.3 in 2004 and continued to give huge amounts in the succeeding years (refer to Table 5: US military aid to Southeast Asia).

6 Aside from the provision of military equipment, both small scale and large scale military exercises like CARAT, MASURVEX, PALAH, TEAK PISTON, BALANCE PISTON, HANDA SERIES, FLASH PISTON, EODX and SALVEX were conducted to enhance the capability of both the US and Filipino troops in combat training, surveillance and reconnaissance training. The succeeding table will show how the Balikatan exercises grew in strength and numbers over the years.

7 From the foregoing, it is clear how the US military presence and assistance have been inextricably linked to the secessionist and communist problems in the Philippines. While the Philippine government was trying to solve such problems, the US military was always and still is at the forefront of the campaigns, thus showing how deep their involvement is not only in the state of affairs of the military but of the entire country. What drives the US to pour huge amounts to assist the Philippine military? It is borne out of altruism or benevolence to the former colony? Is it a genuine concern to find solutions to the long standing armed conflict? The Present State of Communist and Secessionist Struggle in the Philippines Admittedly, there are upside and downside to the continuous stream of US military assistance to the Philippines. On the positive side, the US forces were instrumental in the successful neutralization by the AFP of several leaders and members of the CPP/NPA, the MILF and the Abu Sayyaf. There has been a significant decline in the overall strength of the CPP/NPA and the MILF. Though the problem is not yet completely resolved, there have been small victories and substantial gains in the last couple of years. The numbers of both the secessionists and the communists continue to dwindle but the threat is still there. Occasional skirmishes crop up every now and then as these groups are still capable of conducting surprise attacks, ambuscades and even bombings. The threat coming from the secessionists and the communists continue to drain the resources of the government and affect the different communities. The Philippine government attempted to dialogue and negotiate with both the communists and the secessionists but the peace talks eventually collapsed with the government declaring an all out war against them. Exploratory and informal talks were conducted between the Philippine government and the communists but nothing substantial has been achieved yet. In the case of the MILF, there has been a breakthrough in The memorandum of agreement on the Bangsa Moro Juridical Entity (BJE) brokered in by Malaysia and the US Institute for Peace was scheduled for signing but was shelved indefinitely when the Philippine Supreme Court ruled that the BJE is unconstitutional, it creates a state within a state. Despite the botched MOA on the Bangsa Moro Juridical Entity, the important role by the middle forces like Malaysia and the US Institute for Peace can not be discounted. They were able to introduce concepts that were useful to both government and the MILF panels especially in clarifying issues and causes of conflict as well as in prescribing possible resolutions. However, the fact still remains the target timeline of the government to crush the insurgency by 2010 will not be met. While the Philippine government is continuously trying to look for new processes and arrangements, a major area of concern now is the allegation regarding the deliberate ploy of the military not to completely annihilate the enemies to justify more assistance from the US and a bigger budget from the government. There are still other factors (both internal and external) to consider in the decline of both the communists and the secessionists. Within the organization, internal restiveness,

8 factionalism and the decision of some of its members to shift to the legal struggle and fully engage the government in the political arena one way or the other weakened the backbone of said groups. The external support coming from other communist parties and more friendly socialist states for the local communists and the Islamic states for the Muslim secessionists decreased significantly after the waning of communism and Islamic fundamentalism worldwide. Admittedly though, the civic action activities and intelligence gathering by combined US Special Operations Team and Filipino troopers were also factors in the decline of the CPP/NPA and the MILF in some regions of the country. Pros and Cons of US Military Assistance With regards the area of logistics and equipment, the technology the US provided definitely improved the signal (SIGINT) and human intelligence (HUMINT) capability of the AFP. One important contributing factor in the capture of Abu Sayyaf leader Abu Sabaya was the satellite imaging and GPS technology lent by the US to the combined Army and Marine troopers in Basilan. Ironically though, despite the steady flow of US military assistance and the passing of the AFP Modernization Law in 1995, the military equipment of the Philippine military is still mostly antiquated and WWII vintage. Only 1/3 of the naval ships are ready for sea (RFS) and very few Air Force planes are combat ready. In 2007, a Washington DC based think tank, the Jamestown Foundation reported that the AFP is one of the weakest military forces in Southeast Asia. Despite the big share it gets from the taxpayers money through the budget and the millions of pesos being put by the US through military assistance, it still lags behind other countries in the region. The US military aid apparently failed to stir the AFP towards the path of modernization. In the meantime, a series of corruption allegation charges was hurled against the Philippine military and the latest was the expose about the corruption and embezzlement of Balikatan funds by high-ranking military officers. The cross training exercises also served as a venue to continually improve the existing structures and systems used by the Philippine military. Dialogues and interactions often lead to the identification of best practices in military tactics and doctrines. This way, the challenges encountered and the solutions adopted are exchanged and shared. But then again, each country has its own peculiarities and interests, therefore the discussions and exchanges need to be contextualized. Nonetheless, there are still common areas of concerns like transnational crimes, regional security and terrorism thus, important lessons can be drawn here. US military assistance especially the emergency relief they provided in times of crisis produced positive effects as it mitigated the impact and somewhat lessened the sufferings of the Filipino people. The help they extended through disaster relief, infrastructure development and anti narcotics campaigns can never be discounted. For instance, they were swift in extending the much needed help benefiting a sizable number of those affected by flash floods, typhoons and other natural calamities. The mercy and goodwill missions although palliative in nature and unpopular to some quarters in society likewise produced limited but positive outcomes.

9 One area where military aid had been effectively used can be seen in the advancement of geopolitical interest of the US. The US claims that its military presence in the region contributes to Asia s security particularly in Southeast Asia which they consider as a terrorist breeding ground. For this purpose alone, the US military aid has steadily grown but this does not necessarily redound to benefit the Filipinos. It is true that the Philippines is always included among the top recipients of US aid but in return, US engagement, influence and control over the AFP also became more extensive. The Philippines is particularly valued not only because of its strategic location but more importantly because of its long standing record of political and economic subordination to the US (IBON Facts and Figures 2006). Many political analysts believe that the Southeast Asian (SEA) region is crucial to the US objective of securing its geopolitical and economic interests in the entire Asia. This was clearly pointed out in a speech by the Department of State s deputy assistant secretary on East Asian and Pacific affairs: There can be little doubt that SEA is and will remain- of the greatest importance to the US. It sits astride the sea routes from the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean to the Pacific, through which most of the world s trade and energy shipments flow and trough which assistance to numerous other friends and allies passes. Our interests in the region are bolstered as well by the presence of two of our treaty allies- Thailand and the Philippines- and a free trade partner- Singapore. Achieving our goals in waging counter terrorist activities will require intensive, active engagement at all levels. (Eric G John, before the House International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, Washington DC, September 21, 2005) The Philippines location is very strategic, it serves as a gateway to SEA. The Philippines is being used as hub/center for planning and programming activities in the country and elsewhere. According to RAND Corporation, a US think tank, the Philippines is the optimal location from which to maintain and support a presence in SEA. The Philippines carries with it a geopolitical relevance. On its north can be found the East Asian countries of Korea, Japan and China. Since the US is in constant bickering with Korea and considers China a political and economic rival, the Philippines can be used as a staging area for future entanglements. However, on the negative side, the military assistance paved the way for a deeper US involvement in the Philippines state of affairs, a big deviation from the supposed supporting role that they should play. To make matters worse, there had been persistent reports from various non governmental organizations (NGOs) that the US troops are imbedded in Philippine troops who are engaged in actual combat in conflict areas. This has serious implications as it violates not only the VFA and the Philippine Constitution but the sovereignty of the Filipino people by impinging on their patrimony and dignity.

10 The more vibrant and revitalized focus in conflict areas naturally led to the increasing loss of human lives particularly among the most vulnerable groups in conflict zones such as children, women and elderly. The situation was further exacerbated by President Arroyo s decision to effect greater militarization to stifle dissent and opposition. The level of militarization in the last couple of years evolved to a degree reminiscent of martial law days in the Philippines in the 1970s, but this time it is hidden behind the mask of civilian authority. The line between unarmed civilian and combatants, between armed components of either communist or secessionists groups and legal dissidents is not delineated anymore. According to Karapatan, a Non-Government Organization advocating human rights protection in the Philippines, there are more than 200 involuntary disappearances attributed to the present administration. Unfortunately, the US still continued to provide aid to the Philippine military despite the very poor human rights records. However, when it acquired world notoriety after the visit of UN Rapporteur Alston to the Philippines in 2007, the US belatedly suspended the scheduled $2M military assistance. The cancellation of the military assistance in the midst of gross human rights violations sent a strong signal, an implicit warning that the US will not tolerate such blatant forms of human rights abuses. But how about the collateral damage resulting from the military build up of the US in the Philippines and in Asia? It is a fact that when the USSR collapsed in 1991, the US shifted its attention from Europe to Asia. The US claims that it contributes to Asia s security particularly in Southeast Asia where Indonesia Jemaah Islamiyah and the Philippines Abu Sayyaf can be found. However, it is evident now from the Philippine experience that the increased military presence and the use of a purely military solution failed to quell the various social unrest but instead heightened the root cause of the unrest. Militarization and Aid Militarization In this light, the US military assistance in the Philippines is now taken in the context of militarization and aid militarization. Militarization aggravates the violation of the people s civil and human rights especially in a country like the Philippines where there is State sponsored repression. President Arroyo s military-backed rise to power signaled the redefinition of the role of the military towards more domination and intervention in politics. The political role of the military increased significantly together with its coercive power and oppression of the people. It veered away from its true role and mandate as guardians of democracy, safeguarding the interests of the people and reverted to its role during Martial Law, this time as President Arroyo s primary tool of oppression. Extrajudicial killings and other forms of human rights violations were done with impunity by the state s military. One of the very first things President Arroyo did when she assumed office in 2001 is to give the US the assurance that its interest will continue to be her prime concern and as a proof of this, she committed her entire government s support to the US war on terror. US President Bush who referred to the Philippines as a model of US involvement prior to invading Iraq sent an unprecedented number of US troops under the guise of joint military exercises using the Visiting Forces Agreement between the Philippines and the US. The US forces together with the Armed Forces of the Philippines embarked on a

11 more expanded military operations on counter terrorism and counter insurgency targeting the strongholds of the communists and the secessionists. Simultaneously, the Philippine government started to use the war on terror as a convenient slogan to zero-in on people s organizations and citizen which are very critical of the Arroyo administration through a revitalized and a more comprehensive counter insurgency operations (COIN). This signaled the switch to a purely military approach to the problems of secessionism and communism and justified increased budget allocation and military assistance. This unchecked use of military force significantly increased the propensity for human rights violations as manifested in the sharp rise in the number of cases of repression and utter violation of civil and political rights of the people. In the light of the various controversies haunting the military, a series of incidents showed the failure of military intelligence as in the spate of bombings in Mindanao and the disastrous operations against both the NPA and the Abu Sayyaf. The history of foreign aid shows that aid is not simply borne out of benevolence but fulfills specific political and economic agenda. The US pioneered in providing foreign aid to underdeveloped countries after World War II. Now called the Official Development Assistance (ODA), there are certain conditions attached to the aid that will require the country beneficiary to undergo structural reforms to make the economic policies more hospitable to the donors. In the Philippines, ODA was used in projects to mitigate supposed social impacts of the armed conflicts. In the past, it was also used to entice the secessionists to enter into a peace process. Though it was partly successful in winning the hearts and minds of some to come back to the folds of the law, the idealogues and the hardliners still chose to continue with their struggle. Military campaigns and poverty alleviation are strategically combined in the so-called aid militarization. The National Internal Survey Plan (NISP) of the Philippines now subsumes peace efforts, development goals and poverty reduction under a militarist mindset and in the process aggravates the conditions for conflict. The framework itself is flawed as it uses as basis the strategic importance to the anti insurgency campaign in identifying priority areas for social development. Amidst all these controversies, it did not come as a surprise anymore when the Philippine Senate made the announcement that it will try to rescind the VFA. In a resolution filed by senator Miriam Santiago, the Senate asks the Philippine government to seek a renegotiation of the VFA and at the same time demands the government to terminate the pact altogether should Washington refuse to renegotiate the agreement. There is no question about the need to find a resolution to this long standing national problem. For its part, the military should perform its mandate to serve as guardian of democracy. It is duty bound to protect the people from any kind of threat, both internal and external. However, in solving this secessionist and communist conundrum, it must be kept in mind that the country needs to develop a strong and modern military that can protect and ensure the security of the country but not to the extent of dominating the

12 state, terrorizing the citizens and undermining their political and civil rights. A strong military should be educated and politicized not with partisan politics but a heightening of social consciousness and adherence to the politics of the people- to defend human rights, political liberties and democracy. The Philippine government must admit at this point that it had become too dependent and mendicant to US assistance. It must strive to become self sufficient and to determine appropriate strategies to solve the problem of insurgency/secession and not depend on US designed programs and agenda because after all they have separate and distinct interests. The military together with the other sectors of the government should endeavor to search for solutions since they are in tune with what is happening on the ground and they have fuller grasp of the root causes of conflicts. There should be a major rethinking about the nature of the relationship between the US and the Philippines. Both should be willing to reframe and reconfigure their roles and work under the framework of symbiotic partnership for there is synergy when there is equality and justice. Multi-disciplinary approach to solving the communist and secessionist issues This problem cannot be solved by the military alone. There has to be a concerted effort coming from all the stakeholders, the public sector, the private sector and even the civil society because after all there is a commonality in the desire to have a sustainable peace and development in the Philippines. A more holistic understanding of the issue using the multi-dimensional approach should be explored more seriously because here, all aspects are taken into consideration. The armed conflicts should be looked at from different perspectives. All aspects (political, economic, social, cultural, religious) should be taken into account. Systemic and/or cultural elements of society should be considered in creating and implementing solutions. Institutions have to be strengthened to create the infrastructure that will deter the resurgence of the conflict. However, the main responsibility of solving the communist and secessionist conundrum still rests on the shoulder of the Philippine government. It must lead the way in genuinely working for peace that is based on justice. Once peace is attained, the government can refocus its attention to the more pressing problems of economic recovery and political stability. The government must embark on more poverty alleviation programs, equity building and other development projects to allow the marginalized sectors better access to social services so that they too can participate well in political and economic activities.

13 References Adriano, Fermin (2008). Mindanao Peace and Development Imperatives: A Call to Action. A paper read during the Philippine Development Forum on March 26-27, Africa, Sonny.(2006) US Imperialism in Southeast Asia and ASEAN, Institute of Political Economy (IPE) Caringal, Sharon (2010). The State of the Philippine Military Under the Arroyo Administration. A paper presented to the Graduate Program in fulfillment of the Master in Public Management, University of the Philippines Manila Collier, Paul, et al. (2003). Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and Development Policy. WB and Oxford University Press. Guerrero, Amado (1990). Philippine Society and Revolution. Reprint edition by the International Association of Filipino Patriots Philippine Development Forum Volume 5 Nos 1 and 2 Simbulan, Roland (2008). The Future of the Philippine Left. A paper presented as a centennial lecture for the Department of Social Sciences, CAS, UP Manila. Simbulan, Roland (2004) The Real Threats to National Security and Constitutional Rights: The Philippines after September 11, 2001, A paper presented before the International Workshop on National Security Issues and Constitutional Rights in the Asia Pacific Region in Canberra, Australia, Tarnoff, Curt and Larry Nowels. Foreign Aid: An introductory overview of US programs and policy, CRS Report for Congress, Updated April 15, 2004 The United States and Southeast Asia: Developments, Trends, and Policy Choices, statement of Eric G John, US Department of State deputy assistant secretary, East Asian and Pacific Affairs, before the House International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, Washington DC, September 21, 2005 US loans and grants (The Greenbook), accessible online at quesdb.cdie.org/gbk/index.html US involvement in Southeast Asia, accessible online at Vizmanos, Danilo (2006). A Matter of Conviction. Q.C.: IBON Foundation, Inc Washington Post, January 29, 2006