明明是南海争议岛屿除外，大漂亮忽悠美菲安保条约，菲律宾自作多情
本帖最后由 evereachyu 于 2024-6-22 10:48 编辑Absolutely fascinating document from the US archives, from a time that bears so much resemblance to the current tensions between the Philippines and China: a 1970s Memorandum from National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft to President Ford over a dispute in the Spratly islands (just like today!).This is the link: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76ve12/d353At the time, just like today, as the memo describes: "Peking, Hanoi, Taipei and Manila all claim title to the Spratly Islands and to the Reed Bank as an extension of the continental shelf of those islands". I.e. it is disputed territory claimed by many players: and to this day it's still the same players, with the addition of Malaysia and Brunei.And interestingly at the time "all of the cou**ies except the PRC have militarily occupied one or more of the Spratly Islands". We're always told by the insanely biased media bubble we're in that China started militarizing the South China Sea but the truth is the exact co**ary: they were the very last one in this game! As this memo attests, they hadn't started doing so in the 1970s when all the other players in the region already had...The memo goes on and describes the then-context where "the Philippines recently granted concessions to a private consortium headed by AMOCO to explore and drill for oil in the Reed Bank. Philippine military units in the area have been strengthened to protect these exploration activities."So much like today, the Philippines were making a move to unilaterally grab some of the disputed territory for themselves. And, as the memo describe: "this stepped-up activity has already produced one situation in which Vietnamese troops on one island fired at a Philippine plane." I.e. At the time it was Vietnam (today it's the PRC) which reacted vehemently to the Philippines' move.In the memo, Snowcroft tells Ford that Marcos (the dictator father, whose son is president today) "asked us for a clear written statement of whether we will respond under the Mutual Defense Treaty if his forces are attacked while operating in the Reed Bank". It's a pretty fair bet that Marcos junior has a very similar ask today...What Snowcroft tells Ford is that Marcos' request "poses a dilemma" because the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty does NOT apply to the Spratlys: "As disputed areas, the Spratlys and the Reed Bank can be defined as territory to which the treaty would not apply" and the US has "consistently declined to take a position on any of the claims to the Spratlys and the Reed Bank."As such he wonders what to reply to Marcos father because responding negatively "complicates gravely our current task of renegotiating the bases agreement" but responding positively "increase the possibility of tensions" and "might encourage Marcos to pursue his claims to the Spratlys more actively".He therefore asks Ford to authorize him to make "an ambiguous reply" in which they conveniently don't commit one way or another.Eerily similar to today's situation. The key question however is whether today, given it's undoubtedly been asked the very same question my Marcos junior, the US still went for an "ambiguous reply" to rein in Filipino expansionist ambitions or, given the US's current hostility to China, they instead opted for a positive response...All this also obviously raises questions on the constructive role of the US in the region, used 50 years ago, just like today, as a mischief partner by the Philippines. A responsible power, to the question "would you back us militarily over a land grab of disputed territory?" should always reply "no". That's the only correct answer, then and now.
来自美国档案馆的绝对引人入胜的文件，与菲律宾和中国之间的当前紧张局势非常相似：20世纪70年代，国家安全顾问布伦特·斯考克罗夫特就南沙群岛争端给福特总统的备忘录（就像今天一样！）。
这是链接：https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1969-76ve12/d353
当时，就像今天一样，正如备忘录所描述的那样：“北京、河内、台北和马尼拉都声称拥有南沙群岛和里德银行的所有权，作为这些岛屿大陆架的延伸。”即许多球员声称拥有有争议的领土：直到今天，随着马来西亚和文莱的加入，它仍然是相同的球员。
有趣的是，当时“除中华人民共和国外，所有国家都在军事上占领了一个或多个南沙群岛”。我们总是被我们所处的疯狂偏见的媒体泡沫所告知，中国开始将南海军事化，但事实恰恰相反：他们是这个游戏中的最后一个！正如这份备忘录所证明的那样，他们在20世纪70年代还没有开始这样做，当时该地区的所有其他球员都已经......
备忘录继续描述当时的背景，“菲律宾最近向以AMOCO为首的私人财团授予特许权，在里德银行勘探和钻探石油。菲律宾在该地区的军事部队得到了加强，以保护这些勘探活动。”
就像今天一样，菲律宾正在采取行动，单方面为自己夺取一些有争议的领土。而且，正如备忘录所描述的：“这次加紧活动已经造成了越南军队在一个岛上向一架菲律宾飞机开火的情况。”即当时，是越南（今天是中华人民共和国）对菲律宾的举动做出了强烈反应。
在备忘录中，斯诺克罗夫特告诉福特，马科斯（独裁者父亲，他的儿子今天是总统）“要求我们提供一份明确的书面声明，说明如果他的部队在里德银行行动时遭到袭击，我们是否会根据《共同防御条约》做出回应”。可以打赌，小马科斯今天有一个非常相似的问题......
斯诺克罗夫特告诉福特的是，马科斯的请求“造成了两难境地”，因为《美国-菲律宾共同防御条约》不适用于南谷：“作为有争议的地区，南谷和里德银行可以被定义为条约不适用的领土”，美国“一直拒绝对南谷和里德银行的任何主张采取立场。”
因此，他想知道该对马科斯的父亲做出什么回应，因为负面回应“使我们目前重新谈判基地协议的任务严重复杂化”，但积极回应“增加了紧张局势的可能性”，并且“可能会鼓励马科斯更积极地追求他对Spratlys的主张”。
因此，他要求福特授权他做出“模棱两可的答复”，即他们方便地不以这种或那种方式做出承诺。
与今天的情况非常相似。然而，关键问题是，今天，鉴于我的小马科斯无疑被问到了同样的问题，美国是否仍然寻求“模棱两可的答复”来控制菲律宾的扩张主义野心，或者，鉴于美国目前对中国的敌意，他们反而选择了积极的回应......
所有这些显然也对美国在该地区的建设性作用提出了质疑，50年前，就像今天一样，菲律宾作为恶作剧伙伴。一个负责任的权力，对“你会在争夺有争议领土的土地问题上支持我们吗？”应该总是回答“不”。这是当时和现在唯一的正确答案。
兔子就是要拉米帝下水一起打，没想到它自己早就找好台阶下了 可见鹰酱鸡贼，狒狒傻逼！
可见鹰酱鸡贼，狒狒傻逼！评价到位:lol 猴子自以为挟洋自重
页:
[1]