Ironclad defense agreement

lives when the occasion requires, and his economic managers had to bite the bullet while an obedient Congress passed the same without worrying about future fiscal repercussions.

Salceda filed a bill in 2021 to fix the pension system for MUP as it faces an “imminent existential threat” because of its current unsustainable funding which mostly comes from government borrowings.

Was not Salceda a member of Congress in 2018, after serving three years as Albay governor? Surely the House leadership also relied on this economic whiz at the time.

But, as always in this benighted land, what is done is done. Remedies are now needed before the problem becomes so big it defies acceptable solution. I qualify “solution” because in a democracy, measures need to be “acceptable” and the most difficult part of governance is undoing what has been done, especially when it affects a sector who constitute the “protectors of the State.”

In fact, this is one reason why our people must support Constitutional changes.

The right-sizing and the right-funding of government’s humongous bureaucracy is in great part needed since the 1987 Constitution “permanently” legislated more than it should have.

Isn’t it unfair that officials of “Constitutional bodies” and the judiciary get huge pensions for life even if they served in such positions for a few years only, that being because the incumbent president of the time favored them with an appointment?

One can only hope some solution on the question of pensions can be mutually arrived at by the executive and the legislature, because a Gordian Knot solution could lead to unrest.

Which is why despite the resultant unpopularity, Pres. Emmanuel Macron of France gets my admiration for forging through with increasing the retirement age from 62 to 64 years, as a measure to stem the unsustainability of the pension system of one of the world’s most liberal democracies.

‘IRONCLAD’ is how its leaders describe the commitment of the United States to come to the defense of the Philippines if we are attacked by a third party under the terms of Mutual Defense Treaty we signed back in 1951.

The situation then may have been different in the post-Second War era with the US engaged in a Cold War with its arch-rival, the Soviet Union.

With the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991, China has now emerged as a rival superpower fast catching up with the US in building a robust economy and a powerful military.

With tensions in the South China Sea not likely to go away with Beijing claiming practically the whole of the vital sea lane on the basis of a mythical ‘nine-dash line,’ our military alliance with the US serves as a deterrent to aggression that would threaten peace and stability in the region.

But ironclad does not mean the agreement is rigid and inflexible.

In fact, last week (May 3), the two treaty partners issued what’s called the Bilateral Defense Guidelines to update and modernize alliance cooperation to pursue their shared vision of a free and

The guidelines also seek to strengthen the United States and the Philippines’ combined deterrence in an evolving security environment open Indo-Pacific region.

The guidelines reaffirm an armed attack in the Pacific, including anywhere in the South China Sea, on either of their public vessels, aircraft, or armed forces, including their Coast Guards, would invoke mutual defense commitments under Articles IV and V of the MDT.

The treaty partners also recognized the fact that threats may arise in sev- eral domains, including land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace, and take the form of asymmetric, hybrid, and irregular warfare and gray-zone tactics.

After all, it has been 72 years since the MDT was signed, and modern warfare has assumed various modalities since 1951.

The newly crafted guidelines chart a way forward to build interoperability in both conventional and non-conventional domains.

The guidelines also seek to strengthen the United States and the Philippines’ combined deterrence in an evolving security environment.

Not only do the guidelines reaffirm the continuing relevance of the treaty in addressing both current and emerging threats, they also foster a common understanding of roles, missions, and capabilities within the framework of the alliance to face regional and global security challenges.

The Philippines will benefit from the updated guidelines on mutual defense cooperation as it would allow us to accelerate modernization of our armed forces and attain a credible defense posture amid heightened security challenges in this part of the world.