US Presidential visits to the Philippines are always good for the incumbent President. FV Ramos actually scored two from Bill Clinton, but one was the APEC summit, and he was probably the best President the Philippines has had so far - I remain moderately optimistic about the incumbent, but will withhold judgement until the end of his term.
Started badly with the Quirino Grandstand massacre of a bus load of Hong Kong tourists, but that may have been largely the fault of the then Mayor of Manila and the police. Have been quite favourably impressed in the past couple of years - his political skills as shown in the successful impeachment of Corona and in the passage of the RH Bill have improved no end, but the pork barrel scandal and the MNLF nonsense are not making life easy for him, and Mar Roxas doesn't look as electable as he might as the presumed successor.
Not much, due to geological instability. However, it is a strategic position in the Western Pacific, which is critical to world trade.
Well, if there isnt any hydrocarbons worth all the trouble then at least they think there is in the region of $26.3 trillion worth. The contested area of Recto Bank looks to be within the aseismic region. Interestingly the region of Assam in India is geologically active yet has been rich in oil. And has been developed as a significant oil producing region. The waters are also rich fishing grounds.
Simpler than that. Maybe 60 per cent of world trade, at least, passes through the Western Pacific and all of US trade with Asia. Conflict there will strangle the US economically and China claims a large area extending from SE Asian to the Philippines as its own waters.
I respectfully beg to differ about the motives of the USA. According to the OECD, in 2010 11.2% of US GDP was represented by exports and 14% was represented by imports - the latter mostly oil, via the Atlantic, which is being substituted by domestic production thanks to fracking. These are very low figures. Britain's numbers are in the thirties and Germany is in the forties. I don't think US trade is a motive. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/...l?itemId=/content/chapter/factbook-2011-33-en
Yes. I dont suppose the USA interest in regional hydrocarbons is for their own market consumption. But presumably in its connection with regional instability, Chinese motives and their potential to hog the shipping lanes in their endeavour to exploit the resources of the sea and the hydrocarbons beneath it. Added to that, of course, is their relatively strong ties with the Philippines. It all seems to be tied together. Making the region one ginormous tinderbox.
"Panels negotiating details of a framework agreement on increased rotational presence of US troops in the Philippines will not rush their talks because of the visit to Manila of American president Barack Obama on October 11 to 12. Foreign Affairs Assistant Secretary Carlos Sorreta said Obama's visit is not related to the discussions between Philippine and US officials on the joint plan by the two long-time allies to conduct intensified joint training of Philippine and US air, naval and ground troops. "Our negotiations started even before there was a definite date given for Obama's visit. We will not rush finishing [the agreement] in time for that (visit)," he said. The fourth round of the talks is scheduled on October 1 to 2 in Manila. When approved, the arrangement would also pave the way for more US military assistance to the Philippines. Sorreta said that although the both parties are halfway through the negotiations, there is no definite date when an agreement will be reached. We will sign when we are ready and [when we're sure that] the Philippines has gotten what it wants [in the agreement]," he said. During the third round of talks held last week in Washington, both parties agreed that the two countries' respective Defense departments will be in charge of implementing the policy's framework agreement. Defense Undersecretary Pio Lorenzo Batino, head of the Philippine panel, said the increased rotational presence means American troops can only access training facilities and areas at the invitation of the Philippine government. Sorreta said US troops can build temporary structures in the country as provided for in the agreement but these will have to be removed or turned over to the Philippines once the joint exercises are over. He added that although agreements such as the increased rotational presence typically have a duration of 20 years, the Philippines is looking for a much shorter duration for the stay of US troops in the country. "Twenty years is too long for us. Although we want to cooperate with the US, we would like the agreement to last shorter than 20 years," he said. " http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/stor...lks-on-increased-us-military-presence-dfa-dnd
Obama Cancels Trip to Philippines and Malaysia http://www.nytimes.com/news/fiscal-crisis/2013/10/02/president-obama-cancels-malaysia-trip/?_r=0
