10853189
Territorial integrity and National security
"The Republic of the Philippines is a relatively young nation, having been in existence for less than sixty years. Yet, its islands have a very old and rich history - a history that has been influenced by some of the greatest empires and most powerful nations in the history of the world. The majority of its citizens are of Malay stock, descendants of Indonesians and Malays who migrated to the Philippine islands long before the Christian era of the 16th century. Chinese merchants and traders were the first of the non-Malays to settle in the islands, arriving in the ninth century A.D., and remain its most significant minority group today. Arabs then began to arrive in the 14th century, bringing Islam with them (primarily to the southern islands).
Europeans first appeared in 1521 when Ferdinand Magellan claimed the Philippines for Spain during his circumnavigation of the globe. That period of Spanish rule continued for almost four hundred years and was marked by numerous uprisings, ending in Spain's ceding of the islands to the United States in 1898 as part of the spoils of the Spanish-American war. America's occupation of the Philippines was also initially marked by a war of Filipino resistance against American rule (1898 to 1902). The U.S. government maintained that U.S. administration of the Philippines was intended to be temporary, pending the development of institutions that would support a free and democratic government and the readiness and ability of the Philippine people to assume responsibility for their own governance. U.S. administration of the Philippines ultimately lasted nearly fifty years, ending in 1946 with Philippine independence following the Second World War (during which the Japanese occupied the islands). The geography of the Philippines has also played a key role in the nation's history. One of the largest island groups in the world with an archipelago of over 7,100 islands, it enjoys a tropical climate with almost 50 percent of its land mass classified as tropical forest. It is the size of Texas and much of it is remote and isolated, experiencing little permanent contact with the national government. The majority of its 80 million populace are located on the main island of Luzon. Filipinos speak nearly ninety different native languages and dialects, with Tagalog and English predominant. It is a nation largely Roman Catholic (83 percent), yet it has a very vocal, albeit small, Muslim element (five percent). Politically, it is broken down into 73 provinces and grouped into 12 regions. An elected governor runs each province. This paper will discuss several issues within Philippine politics and is intended to expand on topics of particular interest to national security strategy practitioners attempting to better understand this "nosiest democracy in Asia." As coordinated with the field studies faculty seminar leader, those topics include: the changing political system; governmental stability and the impact of corruption; the impact of political parties; civil-military relations; judiciary
independence; and freedom of the press."[1]
Territorial integrity and national security had been very important to the constitution of the Philippines because according what I have learned from my professor on International Relations, Ambassador Manalo, “a state is a political legal concept, a group of people occupying a definite territory with a government of it’s own that practices their sovereignty”, this would verify why states should protect their territory. The Philippine constitution defined territory as “The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around between, the connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, from part of the internal waters of the Philippines.”[2]
Are there any issues or challenges to our current government? Does the problem depend on the leader or does the problem fall on the type of government that we have? Do we have any national security to our type of government? I have researched about this and an Adobe file showed up that explains and shows different answers that have been always interrogated. This issue was all about changing The Republic of the Philippines in to a parliamentary government, the agenda of this draft constitution that was proposed was to enhance the economic development of the country, ensure the national security of the country especially the safety of the citizens, and lastly changing the traditional unitary system to a federal system. According to my source this is the advantages of Federalism:
“The Advantages of Federalism. The proposed Federal Republic or Federal System is
based on the so-called principle of .dual sovereignty.. According to this the CMFP
Draft Constitution provides that governmental powers shall be distributed and shared
between the Federal Government (National Government) and the States (Regional
Governments) and their local governments.
Federalism is related to the principle of .popular sovereignty. which states:
.Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.
(Article II. Section 1). There is a constitutional partnership in democratic governance In which the States exercise substantial powers and functions with the needed resources or funding.
In brief, these are some of the specific and concrete advantages of Federalism.
First, a Federal Republic will build a just and enduring framework for peace
through unity in our ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity, especially in relation to
Bangsa Moro or Muslim Filipinos. Responsive Federalism will accommodate their
legitimate interests, end the war in Mindanao, and discourage secessionism.
Second, Federalism will empower our citizens by enabling them to raise their
standard of living and enhance their political awareness, participation and efficacy in
elections and the making of important government decisions. Governance will be
improved and corruption will be reduced by the new division of powers and functions
between the Federal Government and the States, and by the transparency of governance
and its accessibility to the people in the regions, cities, provinces, and municipalities.
CMFP Draft Constitution 5
Third, Federalism will improve governance by empowering and challenging
State and local leaders and entrepreneurs around the country. It will release them from
the present stifling central government control and regulation. It will compel them to
assume greater responsibility for leadership and delivery of services and business, and
reduce their dependence on the national government. As the people will be more
involved in government decisions, they will demand superior performance and public
accountability of their political leaders and officials. At the same time, the people will
be more willing to pay taxes that will finance government programs and services for
their direct benefit.
Fourth, Federalism will hasten the country.s development. Improved
governance at the national level and in the States and localities will stimulate
economic, social, cultural, and political development. There will be inter-State and
regional competition in attracting domestic and foreign investments and industries,
professionals and skilled workers, good teachers and scholars, artists, and tourists. A
renaissance of regional languages and cultures will enrich the national language and
culture. The Federal Government will help support the less endowed and developed
regions, and the poor and the needy across the land, thus promoting a more equitable
development.
Fifth, Federalism, together with parliamentary government, will improve
governance by promoting the development of program-oriented political parties that are responsible and accountable to the people for their conduct and performance in and out of power.
Sixth, Federalism will broaden and deepen democracy and make its institutions
deliver on the constitutional promise of human rights, a better life for all, a just and humane society, and responsible and accountable political leadership and governance. [3]
Other suggestions could answer our problem in enhancing our National security and integrating our territories by intergovernmentalism or joining into international organizations that has agendas that will intersect with our national interest or simply an organization that promotes world peace and ensures that your state is at peace without to affect a state’s sovereignty. An example of intergovernmentalism is the United Nations.
“The name "United Nations", coined by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt, was first used in the "Declaration by United Nations" of 1 January 1942, during the Second World War, when representatives of 26 nations pledged their governments to continue fighting together against the Axis Powers.
States first established international organizations to cooperate on specific matters. The International Telecommunication Union was founded in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, and the Universal Postal Union was established in 1874. Both are now United Nations specialized agencies.
In 1899, the first International Peace Conference was held in The Hague to elaborate instruments for settling crises peacefully, preventing wars and codifying rules of warfare. It adopted the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes and established the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which began work in 1902.
The forerunner of the United Nations was the League of Nations, an organization conceived in similar circumstances during the First World War, and established in 1919 under the Treaty of Versailles "to promote international cooperation and to achieve peace and security."
The International Labor Organization was also created under the Treaty of Versailles as an affiliated agency of the League. The League of Nations ceased its activities after failing to prevent the Second World War.
In 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. Those delegates deliberated on the basis of proposals worked out by the representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States at Dumbarton Oaks, United States, in August-October 1944. The Charter was signed on 26 June 1945 by the representatives of the 50 countries. Poland, which was not represented at the Conference, signed it later and became one of the original 51 member states.
The United Nations officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and a majority of other signatories. United Nations Day is celebrated on 24 October each year.”[4]
Peacekeeping are used to secure the safety of member states in U.N. these are ran by the Security Council. An related article to the U.N. peacekeeping is an article that the Philippines was one part of the Security Council:
he Philippine Presidency of the
Security Council, September 2005
REACHING FOR THE SUMMIT:
How The Philippines Organized the Third Security Council Summit
By AMBASSADOR LAURO L. BAJA JR.
Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations
WHEN THE Philippines began its second year as non-permanent member of the Security Council, I asked my team at the Philippine Mission how we can replicate the success of our June 2004 presidency of the Council. The release of the High Level Report on Threats, Challenges and Change by a panel of eminent persons commissioned by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, and a decision to hold a High Level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly in September to discuss what has since been termed as UN Reform, provided us with an opportunity and inspiration—a summit meeting of the Security Council in September while the Philippines is president.[5]
“The United Nations has several tools at its disposal with which to try to keep the peace. As a first step, once the Security Council determines that a threat to the peace exist or an act of aggression has occurred, it may seek o resolve the situation via discussion, in the Security Council. Occasionally, such discussion serves to defuse an impending conflict as one or both give vent to their charges before an international audience. On other occasions, the Security Council may pass a resolution or may pass a resolution or make a recommendation concerning the crisis. Usually, it is then up to the involved parties to adhere to or ignore Security Council recommendations and resolutions.[6]
Closely related to Security Council discussions, resolutions, and recommendations is the imposition of comprehensive economic sanctions. When it imposes comprehensive economic sanctions, the Security Council attempts to influence a country’s policy actions by applying economic pressure on it. However, because of the difficulty of getting widespread support for such sanctions within the Security Council and especially among its five permanent members, comprehensive economic sanctions are rarely imposed. Indeed, after comprehensive economic sanctions were imposed against the minority white government of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) in 1966 in response to its racial policies, the UN has only imposed economic sanctions three times, against South Africa in 1977 because of apartheid, against Iraq in 1990 because of its invasion of Kuwait, and against Serbia/Yugoslavia in 1992 because of its warfare against Bosnia-Herzegovina. Even when comprehensive economic sanctions are put into effect, individual UN member states decide whether or not they should abide by them.
Beyond rhetoric and economic sanctions, the Security Council may also ask UN members to make military forces available to UN. However, this is rarely done. Only twice in the UN’s history has there been a military enforcement action. The first time was in 1950, when under U.S. leadership the Security Council recommended that UN members “furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may be necessary to repel [North Korea’s] attack” against it. A “unified command under the United States, and the UN forces- mostly US forces, but from 16 other UN member states as well- were deployed to Korea. They remain there today. The second time was in 190, when under Resolution 678, the UN Security council approved “all necessary means” including force to expel Iraq from Kuwait. Within weeks, under U.S. leadership, the 30 countries that sent military forces to the Middle east to oppose Iraq’s takeover of Kuwait launched “operation desert storm.”[7]
In conclusion, there are many different ways to solve the problems of our national security but of course it would depend on our leader’s decision on which process to use to strengthen our security. I believe that if there is a strong military force there is security and power among states but in the case of the Philippines that does not have the financial support needed to strengthen our military forces I prefer hat we should focus on collective security because international relations is indeed very important nowadays. As they say “No one is an island.” In our world today it is very hard to be self sufficient hat is why we have foreign policies to have a set of guidelines in it’s relations with other states.
[1] http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA441546
[3] http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_6315-544-2-30.pd
[4] http://www.un.org/aboutun/unhistory/
[5] http://www.un.int/philippines/security_council/index_sc.html
[6] Daniel S, Papp, Contemporary International Relations: Framework of Understanding (Boston: Addison Wesley Longman 2001)
[7] Daniel S, Papp, Contemporary International Relations: Framework of Understanding (Boston: Addison Wesley Longman 2001)
