Joint India Indonesian Army Exercise Garud Shakti Concludes.

[Dayuhan]

Bringing in a US presence to be a threat in being to the Moro Muslim rebellion is like a red rag being shown to a bull!

So, the Philippines Govt wants to raise the hornets’ nest?

I find it naïve and too simplistic an explanation since I wonder if that meets the US strategic interest too! I would think that if the Moros were to be eliminated and not aggravated, 600 US soldier would not do the trick.

I wouldn't make assumptions about sectarian conflict in the Philippines based on observations in the Middle East and South Asia, very different environment, very different conflict. The US presence in the south has been in place for over a decade and it has not in any way raised a hornet's nest or provoked more conflict. It's actually had a calming influence and has been well accepted by the local Muslim populaces, mainly due to the perception (accurate IMO) that the Philippine military and government behave better with Americans watching them. The larger Muslim groups see the US less as a rival than as a potential mediator that has in the past tried (albeit ineffectually) to persuade the Philippine government to take a less hard-line stance on many of their core issues.

It should be noted that there is not and has never been any intention to eliminate the Moros: the US forces have been scrupulously kept away from the MILF, the larger and more influential rebel group. The mission was more to disrupt one of the smaller group sand attempt to neutralize its connection to the AQ/JI trunk line, a mission that has been fairly successful, though attempts to resolve the underlying drivers of insurgency have been far less effective.

At best, the stationing of US troops (whatever be the strength) is basically to have a ‘core group’ on which a larger force can build up on, if and when the necessity arises. Till then, they remain a ‘threat in being’ and a warning of greater things to come!

A "threat in being" to whom? Certainly not to the Chinese.

I don't see the presence in the south as a core group on which a larger force can be built on: the location and environment would be most unattractive for basing a larger force. Port and airport facilities are grossly inadequate and there'd be all manner of security/force protection issues. if the Philippine government ever decided that it was necessary to invite more Americans in, I doubt it would be built on that base, more likely they'd be positioned in completely different locations. I don't think that's very likely to happen.

I am not looking at local issue but the external issues and the indicators as I have already explained.

Viewing external issues and indicators alone will give you a very inadequate understanding of the local issues and of why local decisions are made.

I think the American Govt is neither fickle nor idiotic, nor do I feel that those who voted the Govt in are so.

I wouldn't say the Government is idiotic, though they sometimes do idiotic things and often stray annoyingly close to idiocy. Fickle they certainly are, by design: fickleness is unavoidably built into the US political system.

You may not appreciate it because you are in the Philippines which has a history of closeness to the US. I see what is happening in India and what has happened in Vietnam! India does not want to surrender its sovereignty, and yet she is voting with the US against her interests. Vietnam, a avowed enemy of the US, has sunk her pride and ‘aligned’ with the US.

I wouldn't know about India, but I don't think the Vietnamese have "aligned with the US", nor do I think they've had to sink their pride to deal with the US. They are pragmatic; they won their war and have no reason to shy away from engagement if it suits their perceived interests, whether economic or military. If it suits them they'll deal with the US or anyone else, but they'll do it for their own reasons and at their own initiative and to the extent that they see fit. They are not in the US camp, they are in their own camp.

No one has said there will be a major confrontation.

China is still not equipped to take on the US and its allies and friends.

They also have no reason or need to "take on the US and its allies".

One would then have to start from the time and manner how the Pope toppled the apple cart in Poland and how enemies of the US were slowly squeezed out and then how the focus shifted to another lot that were causing great anxiety to the US.

But as you rightly said, it is for another thread.

For another thread perhaps, but it illustrates a point: just because things happen that suits the US doesn't mean that the US made those things happen. Eastern Europe and ultimately Russia rebelled against communism; that suited the US well, but it wasn't the outcome of a US strategy or of any US action. People simply got sick of submitting to a system that didn't provide for their needs and their desires. Communism didn't fall because the US brought it down, it fell because it sucks and people hate it. Similarly, people who take actions that seem to fit in with US objectives aren't necessarily pawns of US strategy, they aren't joining the US camp, or being directed by the US... they're simply following their own perceived interests, which happen, for now at least, to be at least tangentially compatible with those of the US.