Conversations on Military Bases with Amb. R. [Richard] Murphy.
What is meant by “external attack?” We raised this with the mutual defense board in 197______ at the beginning of the [William] Sullivan-[Eduardo] Romualdez negotiations.
Does it include infusion of foreign trained troops and foreign arms freely given by a foreign power?
Our position is that this type of aggression is a part of modern war—in fact the most effective proxy war utilized by the communist states like the Soviet Union and PRC [People’s Republic of China].
The type of help that the U.S. need not be a declaration of war or commitment of troops which is taboo in the U.S. after the Vietnam debacle.
But the least we would expect would be support and aid in the form of arms and equipment.
This position should be taken with the policy of the Philippines not to involve its allies in a purely domestic conflict like civil war, rebellion, insurrection or anarchy.
If the five year review means a capability to terminate or abrogate the Military Bases Agreement, then what happens to the bases and facilities?
Our position is that we should be trained and prepared to take over and the facilities of the U.S. should be retained so as to make the bases operational.
This was the reason for the original proposal for a civilian management of the bases.
Actually there are only two main issues pending resolution:
- Jurisdiction
- Compensation
It is unknown where this text comes from because this entry is missing.
No Official Gazette entry for this day.