U.S. to sign military deal with Philippines but won't reopen base
MANILA — With President Obama scheduled to arrive in the Philippines on Monday, the administration announced on Sunday that the United States will sign a defense agreement with the island nation that will give American troops, ships and aircraft more access to the Philippines than they've had since the last U.S. military base closed here in 1992.
The accord, which will be signed by U.S. Ambassador Phil Goldberg before Obama's plane lands, “is the most significant defense agreement that we have concluded with the Philippines in decades,” said Evan Medeiros, the administration's senior director for Asian affairs.
It had been unclear whether U.S. and Philippines negotiators, who've been working on the accord for eight months, would agree before Obama's visit, the first by an American president since 2003. Signing it will symbolize American support for the Philippines as it confronts China over competing claims to vast stretches of the South China Sea. It will give Obama something solid to crow about as he returns to Washington on Tuesday night.
In an interview with a Philippines media outlet, ABS-CBN News, Obama said the agreement helps reaffirm the “incredible ties” between the American and the Filipino people. But he was careful to note it will not mean new U.S. bases in the Philippines, which would rile up nationalists and anti-war demonstrators, some of whom have protested Obama's visit.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- U.S. forces help rescue hostages in Yemen
- U.N. argues against redactions in torture report
- Israelis get eyes in sky for Jerusalem patrols
- Russian fliers have to get out and push
- 2-month Hong Kong occupation near end
- Ex-host of radio’s ‘Q’ charged with sex assault
- Islamic State got up to $45M in ransom payments
- Homes of Palestinians linked to attacks targeted by Israel
- Brits blame web services in soldier’s death
- Zambia’s interim president sub-Saharan Africa’s only white leader
- Lander data shows dust, ice