Discussion on the proposed military agreement with the United States on access to Philippine ports and facilities for weapons and other logistics storage were recently stymied, said a source.
Members of the U.S. and Philippine technical working groups could not agree whether the U.S.-proposed Mutual Logistics and Support Agreement (MLSA) needs senate concurrence.
Representatives from the Departments of Foreign Affairs and of Justice said the agreement violates the constitutional prohibition against the stationing of foreign troops, bases or facilities, unless the senate gives its approval. Defence representatives believe the MLSA should be an executive agreement.
A reliable source said President Gloria Arroyo issued an executive order last year, creating the negotiating panel for the MLSA, adding it should be an executive agreement and the panel should complete negotiations by December 31, 2001.
"The MLSA should be signed as soon as possible, within a week's time or six months. Definitely before this (Mindanao Balikatan) is over. We have to rush this if it's going to be of any utility to the U.S.," said Arroyo then.
Such remarks, sources said, could indicate why the executive branch is now hard put to explain the parameters of the substantial deployment of U.S. troops in the country, ostensibly for training Filipino soldiers fight the Abu Sayyaf in the name of the global campaign against terrorism, a source said.
The U.S. has been proposing a new defence agreement with the Philippines, following the rejection of the U.S. proposed 10 year extension of the defunct Military Bases Agreement (MBA) in 1991, which ended the U.S. presence in the region in 1992.
Defence accord talks stymied
Discussion on the proposed military agreement with the United States on access to Philippine ports and facilities for weapons and other logistics storage were recently stymied, said a source.