The Filipino-American Problem

Title

Creator

Roces, Alfredo R.

Language

English

Source

Panorama Volume XVII (No. 5) May 1966

Year

1966

Rights

In Copyright - Educational Use Permitted

Abstract

Reexamining the ties of friendship

Fulltext

■ Reexamining the ties of friendship. THE FILIPINO-AMERICAN PROBLEM It may be pertinent to con sider the discussions on Viet nam and the Philippine role at the recent PhilippineAmerican Assembly held in Davao. Bearing in mind that this assembly made an effort at high level and serious de liberations, and that there were prominent delegates from both sides (further given importance by the pre sence of speakers like Wil liam Bundy, the US Far Eastern affairs Secretary, and our own secretary of foreign affairs) their viewpoints on Vietnam should be of in terest. It was of course im possible ’ to disregard the question of Vietnam in the talk? on Philippine-American relations,' particularly since the bill providing military aid to Vietnam had just created debates in the Senate then. Let us first turn to the final, official report as pub lished. On Philippine-Am erican relations since after 1946, the report states this backgrounder that traces some major causes of discord in Philippine-American rela tions: “In view of certain limitations on Philippine in dependence it was particu larly difficult to establish the reality of this independence and its credibility in the eyes of other nations, more particularly, in Asia. From the Philippine viewpoint, such credibility was further compromised by pressures exerted from time to time on Philippine policies and decisions in the international field.” On “special-relations” as a whole: “The relationship has become so burdened with slogans and cliches that mutual understanding is fre quently inhibited. It should be accepted that the two na tions approach situations from different premises. Fili pino traditions and perspec tive of shared problems and interests differ from those of Americans — and vice versa.” And on Philippine foreign 2 Panorama policy: "The Philippines should continue to seek and utilize, in terms of its in terests, the opportunities for greater cultural, educational, economic, and political co operation within Southeast Asia. The United States re cognizes the inherent and legitimate responsibility of the Philippines for its for eign relations. We urge the United States to accept the validity of Philippine re gional aspirations and, wher ever possible, to support Philippine initiatives along those lines.” On Vietnam specifically: “The Philippine recognizes that it too has an important stake in the outcome of the struggle in Vietnam. It is already making its own con tribution, together with ma ny , other , countries, and should decide, in terms of its own assessment of its interests, the timing, form, and extent of further participation.” These are the pertinent points regarding our policy in Vietnam that may serve as a guide for the present dis cussions. It should be noted that the above is the final consensus arrived at by the Filipino and American par ticipants, and not the opinions of the rightist or radical members, because in truth, there was a Filipino in our particular group who was for fighting in Vietnam, while there was an American who questioned the entire policy in Vietnam and lean ed to the minority “pullout of Vietnam movement” in the US. The Philippine-American Assembly consensus on Viet nam comes from participants who can hardly be consider ed communist-dupes or irres ponsible agitators; and yet the final report, despite wa tering down and diffusion by cushioning phrases, clear ly distinguishes the Philip pine from the American role in Vietnam; the least dis cernment will reveal where Philippine policy direction regarding Vietnam, stands. — Alfredo R. Roces in Manila Times, March 22, 1966. May 1966. 3

pages

2+

Media