The divorce is over and the estranged partners are back in each other's arms. But the revived relationship is expected to last only as long as the terror menace in Southeast Asia stays.
Ties between Manila and Washington are at their most vigorous since the Philippines kicked out the U.S. bases more than 10 years ago. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was the first Southeast Asian leader to rally behind the U.S.-led war on terror.
Outside Afghanistan, the Philippines is the first country where America fought the new war and where the U.S. troops represented the largest single deployment of U.S. military might post Sept. 11. American soldiers trained the Philippine Armed Forces in counter-terrorism and it was the first time such training took place in a combat zone, Basilan island in Mindanao, the lair of the Abu Sayyaf.
Now, the Philippines is reaping the rewards. U.S. military aid took a giant leap, from $1 million in 1999 to $19 million this year. Economic assistance climbed to $94 million (2002) from $84 million last year.
The latest windfall is U.S. support for the fight against the communist New People's Army (NPA), the armed group of the underground Communist Party of the Philippines, which has been expanding in the past three years. Driven by exclusion and poverty, countryside youths have been joining the communists.
Following State Secretary Colin Powell's recent visit to Manila, the United States tagged the NPA a terrorist organization. This means U.S. backing in Manila's campaign to squeeze foreign finances of the guerrilla group as well as U.S. military aid and training in counterinsurgency.
With the Abu Sayyaf's temporary defeat, the Philippine military can now concentrate on two fronts: the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the NPA. The government is talking peace with both groups but hopes for breakthroughs with the latter are very dim.
Meanwhile, new leaders may emerge to take over the extremist Abu Sayyaf if the economic and social problems are not addressed. For terrorism in these parts is rooted in poverty and desperation-with Islam used as convenient cover.
Most of the Filipinos, though, welcome the Americans. Polls by reputable groups like the Social Weather Station (SWS) and Pulse Asia show that the majority of Filipinos are satisfied with the U.S. help to the Philippine military in fighting the Abu Sayyaf and favor an extension of bilateral military exercises called Balikatan (shoulder to shoulder). Support for Balikatan is highest in Mindanao where American dollars boosted local economy, says Pulse Asia. Others would like the U.S. soldiers to go to other combat zones, like those of the NPA and the MILF, according to the SWS.
But a vocal minority oppose U.S. involvement here.
There are undertones to the emotional debate over American presence in the country: Filipinos are asking: What to make of ourselves? What to make of America? This signals a process of self-definition for Filipinos. For vital to our search for identity is how Filipinos look at the United States, a country so deeply embedded in our history.
Some say Filipinos haven't gotten out of the insecurity and ambiguity of a former colony. But much of this can't be helped because the country remains poor and dependent on the United States for military aid.
Today, thrust in this new world, and with mixed feelings of approval and doubt on the U.S. forces, a process of clarifying what Filipinos really want in the their relations with the United States may begin anew. It's not going to be quick and easy.
In this changed world, what hasn't changed is the weight of history. Memories of American military intervention in the Philippines in the early 1900s come to mind. In 1906, close to 800 American soldiers killed over 600 resisting Moro men, women and children in Jolo. Significant Moro forces were vanquished in 10 years of bloody warfare.
It is 2002 and America has returned in vastly changed times. The insecurities of the 1980s and 1990s are fading away. The bases bogey is gone, although some still cling to it tenaciously. It's no longer a manipulative relationship, yet not necessarily one of equals, either. But there's new recognition of each other. The Philippines asserts and tries to drive a hard bargain.
The United States, for its part, has shown sensitivity to the Philippine government, and public opinion.
If this relationship were a person, he/she would be undergoing hormonal changes-inescapable and closely felt. Both sides have learned their lessons.
The Philippines has grown in the 10-year absence of the United States, proving that the country can be self-reliant in rebuilding what used to be U.S. bases. Manila has become closer to its Southeast Asian neighbors, even forming a new economic sub-region that tightens links to Muslim countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. The United States, as U.S. Ambassador Francis Ricciardone Jr. says, has gotten out of its 1991 ``trauma'' of being kicked out from the Philippines and its relations with the Philippines have since matured.
``During the Cold War, our relations were defined by the bases so much so that we strayed from our principles and we worked with a dictator to preserve what we thought were the essentials of the relationship... We've broadened the relationship,'' he says. ``After this very harsh divorce over the bases, we ignored each other and our military assistance went down to almost zero and our economic assistance was plunging as well....''
Now, most of the American soldiers have left Basilan. About 80 were left behind and will stay until October, working with civilians and concentrating on civil affairs like supervising building of schools, roads, bridges, and a water well.
If Basilan residents had their way, they would have asked the Americans to stay much longer.
Still, there are hard questions to ask, foremost of which is: Will this lead to revived dependence on the United States? That's for the Philippines and its leaders to answer.
* * *
Terror threat reconciles Washington, Manila