Joint India Indonesian Army Exercise Garud Shakti Concludes.

[Dayuhan]

One has to be a national of a country to realise their predicament.

And yet you tell me with great confidence, from India, that:

It is obvious that there is a threat perceived in the Philippine or else why are they now eating crow allowing US military presence, when on September 13, 1991, the Philippine Senate outrightly rejected the ratification of the treaty that allowed the presence of US troops?

On what basis do you make this assessment?

There are many non US citizens living for years in the US, who feel that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was a daft thing to do.

But the Americans, who actually faced the threat, possibly do not think so and that is why Bush was elected twice!

Possibly a minor point, but the first time he was elected pretty much nobody thought there was a threat from Iraq or Afghanistan.

Living in a land that is not yours, helps in understanding the people of the land, but it does not mean one had ingrained oneself in the psyche and mindset of all sections of the people in that land!

Can anyone claim to have "ingrained oneself in the psyche and mindset of all sections of the people" in any land, native or not? There are a pretty diverse range of psyches and mindsets in most lands.

I can tell you with some confidence that most Filipinos feel far more threatened (with good reason) by the mendacity, corruption and ineptness of their own politicians than they do by China, and that the Filipino elite feels more threatened (with equally good reason) by domestic threats than by anything the Chinese might do. That's pretty obvious just from observing the discourse on both sides.

Discussion of an expanded US military presence, by both those who favor it and those who oppose it, tends to revolve far more around local issues than around the supposed China threat. Of course the situation with China is part of the discourse, but it's not a dominant part and there's little to indicate that any part of the populace feels imminently threatened. Of course various groups are trying to use the "China threat" card to their advantage, both in relations with the US and in domestic politics, but that is based as much on opportunism as on perceived threat.

The US is already at organising such a 'grouping'...

...This brilliant strategy of the US would not have come into place if China did not transmogrify from the Peaceful Rise (having built up a cogent defence force in the time of the Peaceful Rise by lulling all and sundry including the US) to its new aggressive hegemonic pursuits. The Chinese belligerency has spooked all to close ranks. Interestingly, the closing of ranks is bilateral and not multilateral as yet.

I'm not at all convinced that what's happening is the result of brilliant strategy on the part of the US (some here would think that an oxymoron). I don't think it's centrally directed at all, just a matter of a number of nations reacting to a changing situation in the way they see fit.

I suspect that you're somewhat overstating the extent of a rise in both Chinese belligerency and the reaction from the US and local powers. Exercises in the area have been going on for a long time; they tended to be somewhat larger back in the days when Clark and Subic were operating. The pushing and shoving with the Chinese has been going on sporadically for a long time as well. Just because there's more media notice now doesn't mean things have fundamentally changed. The one thing that is substantially different is the Vietnam/US engagement, but of course that traces back to a whole host of factors, and the Vietnamese have more reason to fear China than most in SE Asia do.