Is this blackmail or what?

[moghrabi]

US threaten cutting diplomatic ties with Philippines

By Barbara Mae Dacanay

Bureau Chief

Manila: US ambassador to the Philippines Frank Ricciardone said he had warned the Philippines that the US was considering severing diplomatic ties if the South East Asian nation pulled out its troops from Iraq.

He told reporters after a meeting with Philippines Foreign Secretary Eduardo Ermita yesterday that the US was considering downgrading ties with a key ally whose moves to pull out were "disappointing."

"In a time of testing, when enemies demand that you kneel, I just ask you, please don't confuse your enemies or your friends," he said.

Filipino truck driver Angelo de la Cruz, abducted in Iraq last week by a group calling itself the Khalid Ibn al-Walid Brigade, was declared "alive and safe" by a Filipino diplomat in Baghdad.

The kidnappers had threatened to execute the father of eight if Manila did not bring forward the withdrawal of its contingent by a month to July 20.

 

[Paco]

Sure it is. Attempted coercion by threatening an action. Too bad it didn't work.

As a result of the Philippines leaving, terrorists have become encouraged. They have since kidnapped:

:arrow: The head of an Iraqi construction firm.

:arrow: An Egyptian diplomat.

:arrow: Several truck drivers of which 3 are from Kenya, one from Egypt, and two from India.

The action taken by the Philippines was selfish and cowardly. Their exit from Iraq has only further endangered those who stay. Kenya, Egypt and India should sever diplomatic ties with the Philippines now. That would be a proper response.

 

[Numure]

It isnt their war. They have every right to back down, with no backstabbing. This further alienates the US.

 

[moghrabi]

Exactely as Numure said. This is not their war and they should not be punished for woryying about their citizens. The US and the Brits decided to go to this war without any UN support. They have themselves to take care of the terrorists. We can not go punishing people for what they think is appropriate in this situation.

 

[researchok]

That is true-- the have the right to do as they please.

As does every nation.

 

[Reverend Blair]

It has as much to do with what is going on in the Phillipinnes as Iraq. They didn't pull their 50-some guys out of there just for the sake of one worker, they did it because of political pressure. That pressure was generated because most of the people in the Phillipines did not agree with the war in Iraq in the first place.

If the US is going to sever diplomatic ties over this, then they should sever those ties with every country that does not belong to the coalition of the bribed and bullied.

 

[moghrabi]

Reverend, I wish I can come up with words like yours. I like the way you put things. Bribed and Bullied. Very well said and certainly true.

 

[researchok]

I agree-- the Philippnes has every right to do as it pleases.

They have enough pressure at home with the Abu Sayef-- brutal criminals who are resonsible for kidnappings, beheadings, etc.

Phillipinos, I think, want the Abu Sayef eliminated-- before they send troops off to a foreign land.

The fact the US and UK went to war without UN approval is irrelevant.

The war in Bosnia/Kosovo was also without UN approval

Does that mean that war was immoral?

 

[Reverend Blair]

I don't think that the lack of UN approval for the invasion of Iraq is irrelevant at all. I also don't think that it can be compared to Kosovo.

The opposition to the invasion of Iraq was massive. The actions the US took to go to war nearly tore the UN apart. It was clearly not a coalition of equal countries from the very start. The spectre of leaders of various countries suddenly opening up trade with the US after agreeing to join the coalition and of aid being cut to coutries that would not do so kind of underlined the blatant fact that this was a war being fought for money.

 

[researchok]

Perhaps.

On the other hand, some countries wanted to tie reconstruction contracts to participation, as was later revealed.

There was also the opposition to debt forgiveness-- which in itself was a fiscal reason not to go to war for some.

Lastly, the UN Oil for Food scandal may may be a reason for some to voice negative opinion on the war.

Call me cynical, but I think that will be brought up during the course of the election by the Republicans. The few documents we've seen to date don't reflect well on some countries.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I'm not at all sure that US companies with ties to the White House won't be implicated in the Oil for Food Scandal when it all shakes out, Researchok. I wouldn't be surprised to see some Canadians in the middle of it either.

It is very hard to move oil around, even legally. To do so illegally requires the greasing of many palms and the knowledge of many well-connected people.

Tying reconstruction contracts to participation in the war just strengthens my point...the Bush regime did not want non-participants getting contracts and they certainly didn't want any of the major contracts to go to non-US companies.

Debt forgiveness is going to become a major issue over the next few years. The legality of requiring countries to repay debt inflicted by dictators is questionable. The actions of northern nations, the World Bank and the IMF in requiring economic restructuring that leads to more debt are being reconsidered by every country that has suffered under them.

It was a factor in Iraq, no doubt. We'd better get used to hearing it though, because many nations and organisations have been lending money to brutal dictators to buy their allegiance.

 

[researchok]

Real issues are EU countries- France and Germany in particular- and Russia.

Debt forgiveness, will be a real issue to watch, no doubt. So far, the French and to a lesser extent, the Germans are fighting it, under pressure from corporate entities. The BNP issue also makes the French uncomfortable. It was probably a matter of benign neglect but it is hard to believe they didnt know.

I have to admit that the WB and IMF make me uncomfortable.

They're like a hospital that saves many-- but is lacking in sanitation, causing plenty of problems.

 

[Paco]

I don't disagree that the Philippines have the right to pull out if they so choose.

The question is... Was their decision an honorable one?

My analogy would be:

Four people are in a burning building. The Philippines, Kenya, Egypt and India. The Philippines can dash out of the building leaving the others to fend for themselves and with the knowledge those left behind will be harmed.

OR

The Philippines can stay behind and help the others knowing the potential for their own harm, albeit minor harm.

 

[researchok]

Thats not a good analogy.

Firstly, building is on fire because US set it on fire. Admittedly, it was smoldering beforehand.

The real issue o fthe consequences of Phillipine actions have yet to play out.

Personally, I think it was a mistake-- it will only embolden the Abu Sayef, not placate them as Arroyo thinks.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I'm not convinced that Arroyo doesn't agree with you, Researchok. Public opinion can cause leaders to take stances publicly that they aren't happy with privately.

Any leader of a nation like the Phillipines would be very aware of the political fallout of such a decision. I think domestic political fallout is taking precedence over international political fallout in this case.

I happen to agree with the Phillipines pulling out because I disagree with the war in the first place. I doubt that it will accomplish anything, positive or negative, in the Phillipines though. It will make Arroyo more popular for a time, but that's about it.

 

[researchok]

Yeahm thats about it, re Arroyo.

Big unknown is whether it will affect Abu Sayef, etc.

My bet is no.

 

[Numure]

I don't disagree that the Philippines have the right to pull out if they so choose.

The question is... Was their decision an honorable one?

My analogy would be:

Four people are in a burning building. The Philippines, Kenya, Egypt and India. The Philippines can dash out of the building leaving the others to fend for themselves and with the knowledge those left behind will be harmed.

OR

The Philippines can stay behind and help the others knowing the potential for their own harm, albeit minor harm.

By your logic, should spain also receive fallout for its decision to back off?

 

[Reverend Blair]

Big unknown is whether it will affect Abu Sayef, etc.

My bet is no.

That's my bet too, although I hope that when it has no effect and Abu Sayef continues to act the way they have been that it would cost them some support. I'm not holding my breath on that, but I am hoping.

There was a guy on CBC Radio 1's "Ideas" who was talking about nihilism in terrorist organisations. I think that was Wednesday night. If they have it available on the CBC site you should give it a listen.

 

[researchok]

Ill look it up

TY