Was an aircraft carrier necessary?

There is another way at looking why it is better for us that our president continued with her visit to the US. It was her judgment call to be able to do two things instead of just one if she had cut short her trip. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita put it well: she was able to do this because of modern technology. It also makes a lot of common sense because she would be doing the same thing even if she had returned to Manila unless of course some professional critics would have her dive into the deep blue sea and look for the dead bodies herself.

But this is a democracy and criticism even the most outlandish is allowed. That is why it is important that whenever possible such criticisms are answered and made clear to Filipinos who otherwise don’t have the time nor the inclination to think for themselves.

Quezon Province Rep. Danilo Suarez echoed Ermita’s reply to critics. Unfortunately the effort to balance her time only drew sarcastic remarks and beamed through media just the same. I suppose it follows the presumption that the media does its duty only when it is adversarial. Not surprisingly, even when something good is being done it is distorted to  appear she cannot do right. Yes, she’s hardworking but must she wake up her officials in Manila to show she’s in charge. What kind of thinking is that?

Here is a hardworking president who sees it her job to do two things at the same time. Why should that be wrong? That she tried to do that is not what is in question but whether she was able to do both effectively. As for the inconvenience to the bureaucrats she left behind who had to struggle with time zones, it is their concern and they should be encouraged to do so uncomplainingly as part of their duties. This is well-known by those working for the president. As far as I know those who work with her admire her for that even if they are sometimes yanked out of bed or leave dinner parties when she summons them to the Palace because she is still working  at ungodly hours. Surely she deserves to be praised, not rebuked for being hardworking. And yes, she has every right to call the shots if she feels the need to do so to get things done.

*      *      *

Poor Senator Biazon. Whatever made him think that he can ask an intelligent question! The fact is he is right to ask why an aircraft carrier group is being deployed by the US to distribute relief goods and provide assistance to typhoon victims? The most innocent answer would have been ok if it happened to be standing by near the Philippines. But if according to press reports it was sailing from Hawaii in the next 24-48 hours to help scour for the victims trapped inside the ill-fated M/V Princess of the Stars, then there may be more reasons than one and these are not obvious to many of us.

Of course we appreciate help from everyone be it the US or China, but Senator Biazon has a point to ask about the proportion especially when the US President himself offered the help of the USS Ronald Reagan, the newest of the Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carriers in such a dramatic fashion as if we were going to war. In contrast, any such show of force even if in aid of disaster was resisted by the military regime in Myanmar as American hegemony. The military regime was pilloried for not allowing the American armada to enter to give aid unless it was done through Asean. They have a point. The Myanmarese generals may be paranoid but resisting America’s show of strength even in the guise of help can be a premonition of trouble.

The issue is not whether it was carrying nuclear weapons (which is hardly believable) but was it so necessary to flaunt American sea power to help typhoon victims. A naughty mind with Asian interests may see other reasons. Was it done to make a point to Myanmar, China or the entire region that America remains in charge in this region and it has the power to prove it? A lesser reason but just as plausible is to make sure it is not lost on the Myanmarese on what they have missed by refusing them entry into their waters with their aid. See what they missed for turning down American aid that was so quickly accepted by the Philippines? Imagine an aircraft carrier group being dispatched from Hawaii relief and rehabilitation work to unload boxes of rice and bottled water at the Iloilo International Airport? I don’t know if it’s true but a friend who was actively helping in Iloilo told me helicopters were arriving but there was no food. They need canned goods and immediate food. But granted that 11,000 pounds of rice and 20,000 bottles of water was indeed delivered, does it have to be carried on the nuclear powered USS Ronald Reagan?

I would agree with Senator Biazon that it would have been better if the United States sent salvage ships which are better equipped to do the work.

I sympathize with Biazon’s concern that the aircraft carrier could be carrying nuclear weapons that are banned under the Constitution although I do not think the ban is the more worrying aspect. More worrying is the how the arrival of the nuclear fueled aircraft carrier. It confirms our Asian friends’ fears that it was another demonstration of American hegemony in this region. Asian countries, with China becoming a superpower, worry this will be demonstrated through its presence in the Philippines.

The USS Ronald Reagan is the largest and newest of the Nimitz-class aircraft carriers and its fleet includes the cruiser USS Chancellorsville, the destroyers USS Decatur, USS Gridley, and USS Howard, the frigate USS Thach, and other support vessels. It is a combat ship. Biazon is right that said the country could do better with a salvage ship rather than fighter planes. “What will the F-18 fighter inceptors do there…I don’t think the USS Ronald Reagan is the appropriate ship to be sent there,” Biazon said. He pointed out an aircraft carrier is not designed for salvage and retrieval operations. That is grist for thought. I think Filipinos are not keen that our country should be used as another battlefield.