Early Saturday morning a Philippine-flagged merchant ship collided into the side of a U.S. warship off the coast of Japan. The crash caused several parts of the American ship, the USS Fitzgerald, to flood. On Sunday, seven sailors who went missing after the crash were found dead in the flooded compartments. Now people are asking questions, as it was revealed it took the Filipino ship an hour to alert the Japanese coastguard.

Vice Admiral Joseph Aucoin spoke to reporters at Yokosuka Naval Base in Japan on Sunday. He said considering the damage that was done to the ship, many more people could have died. “There was a big puncture, a big gash underneath the waterline,” Aucoin said, adding that the flooding was “tremendous.” No one knows what caused the crash and there are multiple investigations underway.

On Monday, a spokesperson for the Japanese coastguard, Takeshi Aikawa, said that the collision happened at 1:30 a.m. But the Philippine-flagged container ship, named the ACX Crystal, didn’t alert Japanese authorities until at 2:25 a.m. Data from the ACX Crystal also shows that for some reason, the ship made a U-turn sometime between 12:58 a.m. and 2:46 a.m. Three U.S. crew members were injured, including Cmdr. Bryce Benson, who was in charge of the ship.

#USSFitzgerald listing after collision at about 3amJST with PH flagged container ship near Japan. (COR) Photo via NHK Helicopter pic.twitter.com/rSTVmE4Atw

— Robert Speta (@robertspeta) June 16, 2017

Japanese officials said they are conducting two separate investigations, one of which is for “endangerment of traffic caused by professional negligence.” It was unclear whether that applied to the U.S. ship or the Filipino one. The U.S. Navy and Coast Guard also opened an investigation.

U.S. Navy confirms all 7 missing sailors from USS Fitzgerald found dead https://t.co/amOOEjsg7h pic.twitter.com/NTQCetvr2E

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) June 19, 2017

No one seems to understand how the Fitzgerald, one of the most technologically advanced warships in the world, could be involved in an accident like this. The damage indicates that the Fitzgerald was hit on its right side, while the Crystal was damaged on its left side, suggesting they were traveling in the same direction. Most of the crew on the Fitzgerald was asleep when the collision occurred and big container ships like the Crystal are often lightly crewed and use an autopilot.

There is also the question why the Crystal made a sudden U-turn right before the accident. Acting Navy Secretary Sean Stackley said the Navy is determined to get to the bottom of things. “In due time, the United States Navy will fully investigate the cause of this tragedy,” he said.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post More Questions than Answers as Investigations into USS Fitzgerald Crash Begin appeared first on Law Street.

Two weeks ago, militants in Marawi City, a Muslim enclave on the Philippines’ southernmost island, burned buildings down and clashed with government forces. Since the initial siege, Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte declared martial law, and the military descended upon the city of 200,000. Islamic State-linked militant groups occupy parts of the city–about 10 percent, according to government officials.

Over 170 people, including 20 or so civilians, are believed to have perished in the conflict so far. Hundreds of residents are trapped in the city–180,000 have already fled. The remaining militants, ranging from 40 to 200, according to government authorities, are hiding underground, burrowed in tunnels and basements, stockpiling food and weapons. Led by the Maute group, also known as the Islamic State of Lanao, militants have reportedly destroyed churches and schools; they have also taken hostages, including a Catholic priest.

The conflict began on May 23: Government forces tried to arrest Isnilon Hapilon, a senior leader of Abu Sayyaf, a local extremist group that has declared allegiance to ISIS. Hapilon is also on the FBI’s list of Most Wanted Terrorists; the agency has slapped a $5 million bounty on him. Marawi, located in the middle of the southern island of Mindanao, a Muslim-majority slice of the mostly Catholic country, has long been a staging ground for militants. None, however, have held on to this much territory for so long.

The center of Marawi City. Shots and explosions from many directions. Fires burn from end to end. Day 18. pic.twitter.com/3zwRYzVv9W

— Chiara Zambrano (@chiarazambrano) June 9, 2017

“If the situation in Marawi in the southern Philippines is allowed to escalate or entrench, it would pose decades of problems,” Singapore’s Defense Minister, Ng Eng Hen, said at a conference this week with other regional leaders. “All of us recognize that if not addressed adequately, it can prove a pulling ground for would-be jihadists.”

As for what the militants–a loosely-knit menagerie of fighters from the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, and Chechnya–desire, a recently captured video of them plotting the initial siege gives some clues.

Gen. Eduardo Ano, the Filipino military’s chief of staff, said the video, which was provided exclusively to the Associated Press, shows that the militants have “this intention of not only rebellion, but actually dismembering a portion of the Philippine territory by occupying the whole of Marawi city and establishing their own Islamic state or government.”

According to Filipino news outlet ABS-CBN, the military launched airstrikes on Maute rebels on Friday. At least three soldiers were killed, with dozens of others wounded. Earlier, a 15-year-old boy who was praying in a mosque was killed by sniper fire.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Siege of Marawi, Philippines: What You Need to Know appeared first on Law Street.

In March, Filipino Congressman Gary Alejano filed an impeachment complaint against President Rodrigo Duterte, accusing him of being responsible for the mass killings of civilians in the country. But on Monday, lawmakers dismissed the complaint, claiming that Alejano could have no “personal knowledge” about these allegations.

Duterte has, in an attempt to crack down on drug trafficking, presided over a campaign of extrajudicial killings. Police statistics show that more than 4,000 people have been killed by police in drug raids, or during drug-related conflicts, since he came to power last June. But even so, agencies and institutions are hesitant to do anything.

“Institutions are just unwilling and are unable to prosecute the president. What is the people’s recourse? Where will you complain? We will look for other ways to seek justice,” Alejano said. A majority in the country’s House of Representatives favors Duterte and this decision blocks additional impeachment cases until next March.

Philippine lawmakers struck down an impeachment complaint filed by Rep. Gary Alejano against President Duterte for crimes against humanity. pic.twitter.com/nqL0rzTrcK

— AJ+ (@ajplus) May 15, 2017

In April, a Filipino lawyer filed a complaint against Duterte in The Hague’s International Criminal Court in the Netherlands. Jude Josue Sabio alleged the same crimes as Alejano but went further back in time. More than 9,400 people have allegedly been killed since Duterte became the mayor of Davao City in 1988. He wrote:

The situation in the Philippines reveals a terrifying, gruesome and disastrous continuing commission of extrajudicial executions or mass murder from the time President Duterte was the mayor of Davao City.

Sabio represents two Filipino men who claim they were part of Duterte’s so-called Davao Death Squad. The group set out to kill drug dealers and criminals guilty of minor crimes. The president and his spokespeople deny all wrongdoings and called the reports “false news.”

Duterte’s many contentious statements include comparing himself–favorably–to Hitler, calling then-president Barack Obama a “son of a whore” and calling United Nations experts “stupid.” He regularly curses or uses profanities in public and has been aggressively resistant to criticism. But despite those comments, he was elected in a landslide victory precisely because of his promise to crack down on drug users and his constituents don’t seem to be complaining. An independent poll from late March showed that three-quarters of respondents still believe Duterte to be trustworthy, while 78 percent approved of his performance as president.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Philippine Lawmakers Dismiss Impeachment Complaint Against President Duterte appeared first on Law Street.

This is NOT Spinal Tap

Harry Shearer, along with three others, created “This is Spinal Tap”, a 1984 rock mockumentary that will go down in movie history as one of the best comedies to do laundry to on a Sunday. Harry Shearer on the other hand, got swindled. Big time. He claims that since the movie’s release, he and the other creators have not received a dime in royalties.

via GIPHY

He is suing Vivendi, the company that owns the copyright, for $125 million dollars.

Shearer and the gang co-created the music, the script, and played the lead roles in the film.

@theharryshearer i’m asking respectfully, is this due to “creative accounting” on Vivendi’s part, or did you sign a bad contract?

— do I care? (@BKeachDay) October 18, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: October 19, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Since becoming president of the Philippines on June 30, Rodrigo Duterte has primarily been consumed with ridding his country of drug-related crimes. This past Friday, however, the Filipino head of state officially declared a “state of lawlessness” after alleged Islamists attacked a marketplace in his hometown of Davao. Only a tier down from enforcing martial law, this latest decree now permits police and military forces to halt vehicles or frisk civilians at their total discretion.

“We have to confront the ugly head of terrorism,” said Duterte on Friday, September 2. “We will take this as a police matter about terrorism.”

Sources say that Abu Sayyaf was responsible for the attack that killed 14 and injured around 70 in the city where Duterte served as mayor for more than 22 years. Categorized as a terrorist organization by both the Philippines and the United States, the militant group is considered to be an ally of the ISIS and originally funded by al Qaeda.

Equipped with over 400 members, the insurgents are committed to forming a sovereign Islamic state on Mindanao Island, which is also where Davao is located. Known for conducting ransoms and abducting foreigners to help fund their endeavors, Abu Sayyaf’s latest operation transpired as Filipino forces led an offensive attack against the separatists in Sulu province.

Now anticipating more attacks, currently Davao is under tight surveillance with numerous checkpoints scattered throughout the city of two million people. Even though Abu Sayyaf has claimed responsibility for Friday’s detonation, “The Punisher” president is adamant about investigating other potential culprits. Bearing in mind that more than 2,000 Filipinos have been extrajudicially killed since Duterte took office, such military progressions are troubling signs that violence may intensify in the upcoming weeks.

“These are extraordinary times and I supposed that I’m authorized to allow the security forces of this country to do searches,” said Duterte while visiting the battered marketplace. “We’re trying to cope with a crisis now. There is a crisis in this country involving drugs, extrajudicial killings and there seems to be an environment of lawless violence.”

Duterte’s Controversial Track Record with Human Rights

During his candidacy Duterte gained widespread support for his “no nonsense” platform against drugs–yet 10 weeks into his presidential tenure the international community had already condemned Duterte’s policies as draconian. Although he is praised by some for his disciplinarian approach to combating drug addiction in the Philippines, others lament the manner in which he is allowing citizens to be persecuted without any legal representation.

According to Sputnik News, Duterte could very well resort to using similar tactics in his response to Abu Sayyaf’s recent belligerence. For example, as police units continue to collaborate with neighborhood patrol squads, accused drug users are being rounded up in “knock and plead” operations where they are expected to voluntarily surrender or face retaliation.

Criticized for encouraging vigilante violence by offering rewards to would-be assassins, the professionally trained lawyer has also angered the United Nations for his observed disregard on human rights, saying that “junkies are not humans” to begin with and that they’re not worthy of second chances.

On top of this, Duterte earned the reputation for being unapologetically brash after making some disparaging comments over the rape and murder of an Australian missionary in 1989–saying, “I was angry she was raped, yes that was one thing. But she was so beautiful, I think the mayor should have been first. What a waste.”

Jacob Atkins

Jacob Atkins is a freelance blogger and contributor for Law Street Media. After studying print journalism and international relations at American University, Jacob now resides in Madrid where he is teaching English, pursuing multimedia reporting projects and covering global news. Contact Jacob at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

http://jacobson.pressfolios.com/

The post Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte “Confronts Ugly Head of Terrorism” appeared first on Law Street.

The number of suspected drug criminals that have been killed by police in the Philippines since President Rodrigo Duterte took office seven weeks ago is believed to be as high as 1,800 people, according to Philippine National Police Chief Ronald Dela Rosa. Local politicians, the United States, and the U.N. have started voicing concern about human rights violations as the country ramps up its fight against drugs. In response to recent criticism, Duterte lashed out at his critics and even suggested that the Philippines may leave the U.N. in the future.

At a Senate hearing on Monday, Dela Rosa said that police had killed 712 drug dealers and users since July 1. He also mentioned that they are investigating 1,067 other drug-related killings, but did not elaborate further. According to Reuters, two U.N. human rights experts recently urged the Philippines to stop the extrajudicial killings of suspected drug dealers that have escalated dramatically lately.

Late Sunday night, President Duterte held a press conference, in which he threatened to fire everyone in the government who had been appointed to his or her position by a previous president. At the press conference, he said the police did not carry out the extrajudicial killings. He also said, responding to critics at the U.N., “I will prove to the world that you are a very stupid expert.” In his speech, he asked people to not only think about how many drug dealers were killed but to also take into account how many innocent lives that are lost to drugs.

President Duterte even threatened to pull out of the U.N. saying, “I do not want to insult you. But maybe we’ll just have to decide to separate from the United Nations.” He went on to say that the Philippines might instead start a new international organization with China and several African nations.

Duterte continued to criticize the U.N. for not stopping the war in Syria:

You know, United Nations, if you can say one bad thing about me, I can give you 10 [about you]. I tell you, you are an inutile [useless]. Because if you are really true to your mandate, you could have stopped all these wars and killing.

The United States is normally a close ally to the Philippines but has expressed concerns similar to the United Nations in light of the recent deaths. The Philippines’ foreign minister, Perfecto Yasay, said on Monday that the President’s words had been no more than an expression of a strong disappointment with the U.N. “We are committed to the U.N. despite our numerous frustrations and disappointments with the international agency,” Yasay said. He added that Duterte has promised to respect human rights and that it is irresponsible for the U.N. to “jump to conclusions.”

But Senator Leila de Lima, a fierce critic of Duterte, is also concerned; she began a two-day inquiry on Monday, questioning police about the many killings. “I am disturbed that we have killings left and right as breakfast every morning,” she said. She also expressed her fear that the president’s war on drugs could be an excuse for law enforcement to kill with impunity.

On Sunday night, Duterte did not seem to worry about effects of his statements. When asked about his comments he said, “What is… repercussions? I don’t give a shit to them.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Philippine President Duterte Threatens to Leave U.N., Calling it Useless appeared first on Law Street.

On Tuesday morning, the top international court unanimously decided China holds no legitimate claim over the South China Sea. The verdict–doled out by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague–cannot actually be enforced (no PCA rulings can), but is an important symbolic blow to China. It solidifies and gives meaningful support to the international community’s contention that China’s historical claim concerning the South China Sea is unfounded and illegitimate.

The arbitration request concerned two of the six nations that claim territory in the South China Sea, an important trade route that moves $5 trillion worth of goods annually, specifically the Philippines and China. In July 2013, the Philippines submitted an arbitration request to the international court, headquartered in the Netherlands. They requested a ruling on China’s claims to the sea, as well as the legality of China’s aggressive infringements upon the 200-mile exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, mostly used for fishing and petroleum exploration.

The court’s ruling concerns the waters within China’s claimed territory, denoted by the red line. [Image courtesy of naturalflow via Flickr]

The five-member panel’s main ruling stated: “to the extent China had historic rights to resources in the waters of the South China Sea, such rights were extinguished to the extent they were incompatible with the exclusive economic zones provided for in the [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea].” They also found China in violation of the Philippines’ 200-mile zone. The violations include:

• China allows its fishermen to operate within the zone while interfering with Filipino fishermen as well as with Filipino oil rigs. China’s aggressive patrolling of the waters within the 200-mile zone has resulted in a massive loss of revenue for Filipino fishermen.
• At a detriment to the environment as well as to its relationship with the United States, China is building artificial islands in the South China Sea. China believes its territorial claims of a chain of tiny islands–the Spratlys–will gain legitimacy if it dredges enough sand to create an inhabitable island, complete with landing strips and a basketball court.

The court clarified that while China has no rights regarding the waters of the South China Sea, it could not rule on its claims of the rocks, reefs, shoals, and islands within those waters. Tuesday’s ruling predictably resulted in praise from the Philippines and the other Pacific nations–Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, and Japan–that oppose China’s bullying and lay claim to territory in the sea. China rebuked the court’s decision, saying in a statement, “China neither accepts nor recognizes it.” The statement continued, “China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea shall under no circumstances be affected by those awards.”

Japan’s foreign minister applauded the ruling, and the Philippine Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay said, “The Philippines strongly affirms its respect for this milestone decision as an important contribution to ongoing efforts in addressing disputes in the South China Sea.”

The most destructive consequence that could result from Tuesday’s decision? Naval skirmishes and perhaps a full-blown war between China and the United States. After all, the 1951 Mutual Defense Pact ensures U.S. military support of the Philippines. And if China doubles down on its claim, already testy waters can turn turbulent. This is an issue to keep your eyes on in the years to come.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post International Court Rules Against China’s South China Sea Claims appeared first on Law Street.

Want to shoot a drug dealer in the Philippines? No worries, you won’t go to jail, you’ll actually be rewarded under president-elect Rodrigo Duterte. In a nationally televised speech late Saturday, Duterte encouraged citizens to take the law into their own hands by using deadly force against drug dealers who threaten them or resist arrest.

“If he fights, and he fights to the death, you can kill him,” he said. “Shoot him and I’ll give you a medal.”

Critics have dubbed Détente, who won the presidency last month, the “Filipino Donald Trump.” His campaign promise that landed him the victory? He vowed to end crime and corruption within the first six months of his presidency, which explains the support he gives civilians in handling drug lords on their own. “Please feel free to call us, the police, or do it yourself if you have the gun … you have my support,” he added.

Also in an attempt to cut crime and corruption, Duterte, 71, announced that he is increasing the bounty for drug lords from 3 million Philippine pesos ($65,000) to  five million pesos ($108,000). “I’m not saying that you kill them, but the order is ‘dead or alive,” he said.

Drug lords aren’t the only part of crime and corruption Duterte is concerned with–also on his agenda is removing corrupt police officers. In his speech, he asked three police generals based in the capital to resign for unspecified crimes. If they don’t quit, he threatened to humiliate them in public, or perhaps worse–kill them. Because some cops may have bribed their way back to the force after being involved with some sort of drug scheme, Duterte is also calling for a review of dismissed criminal cases of active police.

“To all police who have cases and are wanted now, if you are still involved in drugs, I will kill you,” he said. “Don’t take this as a joke. I’m not making you laugh.”

Not only does Duterte encourage civilians to resort to whatever means necessary to take down a drug lord, he also supports security forces shooting and killing anyone that resists arrest. Duterte, above all, really knows what it means to take matters into your hands. While he was the mayor of Davao City, he pulled the trigger on many suspected motorcycle-riding assassins, better known as “Davao death squads.” 

“Me? They are saying that I’m part of a death squad? True, that’s true,” he said.

However, human rights activists say that he has never been charged because no one has dared to testify against him. Many Filipino citizens may love his anti-crime and corruption rhetoric, but human rights activists fear that it will lead to widespread rights violations.

Police and drug lords aren’t the only ones who can fall to corruption, journalists are also guilty, Duterte thinks. 

“Just because you’re a journalist you are not exempted from assassination, if you’re a son of a bitch,” Duterte said. “Freedom of expression cannot help you if you have done something wrong.”

Duterte begins his six-year term June 30.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Filipino President-Elect: It’s OK For Civilians To Kill Drug Lords appeared first on Law Street.

The South and East China Seas conflicts are suddenly dominating the news. Multiple countries are claiming ownership over a number of islands in the South and East China Seas–and the debate has gone international, even involving the U.S. But why does the United States even care who owns these islands? Read on to learn about why these islands and territories are so important, and why we should all be paying attention to this conflict.

A History of Conflict

What is under dispute?

The islands under question are located in the East and South China seas. China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, including those islands. But along with China, the Philippines and Vietnam both claim the Paracels and Spratley Islands. China and the Philippines both claim the Scarborough Shoal. And Malaysia and Brunei also claim disputed maritime territory in the South China Sea as well.

The East China Sea Conflict revolves around a group of five inhabited islets named the Diaoyu Islands according to China or the Senkaku Islands according to Japan. Taiwan, along with China and Japan, also claims these islands in the East China Sea, although China also claims Taiwan.

South China Sea 

China’s claims in the South China Sea base from ancient times. China documents territorial rights from the Xia and Han dynasties. China uses a map with a nine-dash line to chart its territories that include 291 islands and reefs in the area. The nine-dash line was formulated in China by the nationalist Kuomintang party in 1947 and is still used in China’s maps today.

But other countries don’t agree. Vietnam, Taiwan and the Philippines all have a military presence on at least some of the islands in the region as well. But it is really in the last eighteen months that China’s massive construction has started to spark tensions higher than ever.

East China Sea

The beginning of the East China Sea Conflict can be dated back to the end of the first Sino-Japanese War in the 1890s, fought between China and Japan over Korea. In defeat, China ceded a number of territories to Japan in the Treaty of Shimonoseki. China claims the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands were a part of this cession, although there is no mention of the islands specifically in the treaty. Japan claims to have had them all along, since it discovered and annexed the lands in 1895. In 1937, Japan invaded China and fortified its military strength. This time period really honed the bad blood between Japan and China, as the Chinese people suffered gravely. After WWII, China demanded the islands back, even though China never actually controlled the islands and they were now under U.S. control. When the United States finally left the islands in 1972, post WWII, the Japanese government resumed control. Whether the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands were ceded to Taiwan or considered part of Okinawa (remaining with Japan) remains a heated point of debate today.

What’s so special about these islands?

When it comes to the South China Sea, it all boils down to economics. The area is home to an abundance of natural resources, fertile fishing grounds, and “the world’s most dynamic economies.” The South China Sea holds vital global trade routes, especially for oil. The dominant country in the region, China, could control trade shipments from all over East and Southeast Asia and control foreign military access. The South China Sea conducts $5.3 trillion in total trade each year. There are 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic of feet of natural gas in the South China Sea. If that isn’t enough, 90 percent of Middle Eastern fossil fuel exports are expected to pass through Asia by 2035.

The conflict over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands is a little more complicated. Presumed oil and gas reserves are important factors. But the conflict is also a bit more symbolic–China is now the big man on campus, and wants to show its strength. Nationalism and honor play big parts on this side of the maritime conflicts. Old wounds are not forgotten. “Maritime disputes suggest that China’s rise is not going to be without its frictions,” says Council on Foreign Relations Director for Asia Studies Elizabeth Economy, “That is many instances China feels that its economic throw weight really does give it a greater stance and a greater ability to assert its interests, in some cases to reform norms, and in some cases to upend them.”

Recent Developments

In recent news, the conflicts are heating up due to China’s major building. In the last eighteen months, China has created more “new island surface” than all the other countries involved combined, amassing to about 2,000 acres. Although China already started land reclamation in controversial areas close to the Spratly Islands last year, this recent action is on a whole other scale. China has placed military equipment such as military airfields and motorized artillery pieces on the man-made islands and plans to continue that action in the future.

China isn’t the only one building however. Similar actions have been taken by Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia on much smaller scales. For example, in 2008, Taiwan completed a 3,900 foot land strip on the Itu Aba, part of the Spratley Islands, fit for search and rescue missions and military aircrafts. In a more recent example, Malaysian Defense Minister Hishamuddin Hussein announced a plan in 2013 to place a marine corps on a yet to be created naval base on Bintulu in Sarawak.

U.S. Involvement

The major concern for Americans is a conflict between the U.S. and China. Conflict amongst the Asia-Pacific countries can easily bring in the U.S. We have a stake in the trade markets and no interest in allowing China to control the region and our allies like Japan.

This month Secretary of State John Kerry met with China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, in Malaysia. Kerry pressed for China to immediately halt “problematic actions” and expressed concern for the “militarization of features there.” After the meeting, Kerry was optimistic to other diplomats and called the conversation a “good meeting.” Kerry stated, “We want to ensure the security of critical sea lanes and fishing grounds, and we want to see that disputes in the area are managed peacefully and on the basis of international law.” Still points of contention remained. Although Wang promised to stop land reclamation, he did not promise China would vacate current projects .

This previous May, a U.S. surveillance plane flew over some of the contested waters. The flight was conducted in order to apparently “make clear the U.S. does not recognize China’s territorial claims.” The Chinese sent eight warning against the aircraft from an island over 600 miles away from the Chinese coast. The warning made clear that China considers the area its jurisdiction.

Kerry and Wang were in Malaysia for a meeting held by ASEAN, a 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations. China and ASEAN previously agreed to negotiate a “code of conduct” regarding the disputed regions. But ASEAN secretary general, Le Luong Minh, is not happy with the progress. ASEAN calls for an earlier resolve of the “code of conduct” and for China to stop all building.

Conclusion

We haven’t seen the last of the arguments over the islands in the East and South China Seas. While the conflict may have served as a show of strength between the United States and China, it also involved many other nations that continue to have influence in the region. Moreover, given other extenuating factors like the Trans-Pacific Partnership debacle, the Chinese-American relationship may definitely be heading toward icy waters. Whether or not that will affect the disputes in the East and South China Sea will have to be seen.

Resources

CFR: China’s Maritime Disputes

Associated Press: ASEAN wants China to stop work in disputed sea

CNN: China Warns U.S. Surveillance Plane

The Economist: Who really owns the Senkaku islands? 

The New York Times: Kerry Urges Beijing to Halt Actions in South China Sea

Reuters: Everything you need to know about the South China Sea conflict

The Wall Street Journal: China to Build Military Facilities on South China Sea Islets

The Washington Post: China is not the only country reclaiming land in South China Sea

The Washington Post: Tension with China loom larger as Obama prepares to welcome Xi Jinping

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The South and East China Seas: Conflict Continues appeared first on Law Street.

Terrorism is a global problem and has been an especially challenging issue for the Philippines. A nation with a long and complicated history with the United States, the Philippines plays an important role on the global stage. Read on to learn about the history of the Philippines, its relationship with the U.S., and the struggles it faces today.

History of the Philippines

The settlement of the island nation began as early as 30,000 years ago. It continued with waves of Malay immigrants and Chinese merchants. Islam was brought to the area in 1500, and as Islam spread, Christianity was also introduced.

Christianity was brought to the Philippines by the Spanish, who then spent the next two centuries conquering the nation and establishing colonial rule. This was ultimately challenged and the Spanish were temporarily defeated by the British in the late 1700s. While the Philippines was eventually returned to the Spanish, the mindset had changed and rebellions against colonial rule became more prevalent, especially among the ostracized Muslim communities. As a result, Spain slowly allowed the nation greater freedom, eventually allowing free trade and a form of quasi independence.

Despite increased freedom, resistance and nationalism continued to grow, led by native Filipino members of the clergy. This led to a series of revolts that Spain was able to put down until it entered war with the United States in 1898. The Spanish were defeated by the U.S. and subsequently relinquished control of the Philippines to the United States. The video below explores the history of the nation.

Relationship With the United States

Philippines: An American Colony

While some in the Philippines saw the Americans as liberators and fought alongside them against the Spanish, this viewpoint quickly changed. Although the Filipinos quickly attempted to assert their own independence and even elected a president, the Americans snuffed out any efforts toward immediate independence. This led to years of fighting between the two countries.

Americans eventually became the de facto new colonizers of the Philippines, with Filipinos supposedly being brought along the path toward independent self-government. The final path toward independence did begin in 1934 with the creation of the Commonwealth of the Philippines. Soon after, the Philippines saw the election of its first president, Manuel Quezon, and the approval of its constitution. This time these actions were also sanctioned by the United States. The American plan was to allow for a ten-year transition period before proclaiming the Philippines an independent nation; however, this was all quickly undone when the Japanese captured the Philippines during WWII. The nation was eventually freed from Japanese rule in 1945 and during the following year, 1946, finally gained its independence.

Philippines: After Independence

Although technically independent, the Philippines was still highly dependent on the U.S. for trade, and there were still numerous American military bases on the islands. These bases and other forms of American intervention would occasionally crop up as major issues for Filipinos for the rest of the century. There were also concerns over American support for President Marcos, a strongman who effectively ruled the country as a dictator for over 20 years.

A particular low point in the relationship came in 1991, when the U.S. was forced to abandon its military bases in the Philippines after the government refused to renew the leases. However, the threat of a rising China and the events of 9/11 caused the Philippines to again seek a closer partnership with the U.S.

In 1999, the two sides signed a Visiting Forces Agreement under which the two countries could engage in joint military exercises as long as no American bases were established and the U.S. maintained a non-combatant role.

Following 9/11, a rotating Joint-Operations Task Force was also created in the Philippines numbering approximately 600 soldiers. Its purpose was to help the country fight against Islamist extremist groups. While several of these groups were created worldwide to fight terrorism following 9/11, the Philippines, as a long-standing American ally, was an area of grave concern. Not only was there already an established Islamic insurgency in the south, but there were concerns over two terrorist groups, Abu Sayyef and Jemaah Islamiyah, that operate in the Philippines and have ties to other international terror organizations, including al-Qaeda.

Yet another agreement was signed in 2002, which permitted the U.S. to use the Philippines as a resupply center. The Philippines is a useful ally for the U.S. to have, especially when it comes to a sometimes contentious American relationship with China.

In addition, the U.S. and the Philippines have signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, which allowed greater access by U.S. personnel to Filipino military bases, the construction of new U.S. facilities, and positioning of defensive equipment. In 2014, while military cooperation was still ongoing, it was announced that the Joint-Operations Task Force would be dissolved as progress had been made. The video below documents U.S. efforts in the Philippines.

What issues are the Philippines facing now?

While many of the recent collaborative agreements between the U.S. and Filipino movements have been part of the United States’ overall involvement in Asia, the relationship between the two sides truly regained strength after 9/11. As terrorism became a main foreign policy concern for the U.S. it looked abroad to combat a wide variety of terrorist organizations, leading to its efforts in the Philippines.

In addition, the Philippines struggles with militant groups that make it difficult to successfully run the country. The current President of the Philippines is Benigno Aquino III; he was elected in 2010. He’s had to deal with many issues, including the Filipino-American relations, and the push against the terrorist and militant groups in the nation.

Terrorism

There are three prominent terrorist groups in the Philippines according to the U.S. State Department. These three are the Abu Sayyaf Group, the New People’s Army, and Jemaah Islamiyah. The Abu Sayyaf Group and Jemaah Islamiyah are both Islamist groups.

Abu Sayyaf Group

Abu Sayyaf Group, or ASG, is a splinter group of the Moro National Liberation Front. While smaller than the others, it has been the most aggressive. Its list of transgressions is long but includes such nefarious acts as murder, kidnapping, extortion, and robbery. It is mostly funded through those robberies. It operates primarily out of the southern islands of the Philippines, which have the largest chunk of the Muslim minority population.

Jemaah Islamiyah

The other Islamic extremist group is Jemaah Islamiyah. Unlike the ASG, Jemaah Islamiyah is based out of Indonesia but operates in the Philippines. The group engages in many of the same criminal enterprises as ASG, particularly in bomb-making. Both groups also have ties to Al-Qaeda which has provided logistical support for both, particularly Jemaah Islamiyah.

New People’s Army 

The third group is a bit of a throwback to an earlier era. The New People’s Army, or NPA, is the Communist party of the Philippines, founded with the goal of overthrowing the Filipino government. Unsurprisingly, the group was founded in 1969 during the height of the Cold War. This group mainly targets public officials and U.S. personnel, as it is highly critical of the U.S. presence on the islands. The NPA receives most of its funding locally or from ex-patriots in other countries. While the group’s main aims might be different however, its members still often train alongside Islamist groups.

Other Actors

Along with these groups are the Alex Boncayao Brigade and the Pentagon Gang which were other organizations that were formerly listed on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. However, their capacity has been reduced to the point where they are no longer considered terror groups.  The following video gives a detailed explanation of terrorism in the Philippines.

Militant Groups

Moro National Liberation Front 

Along with the terrorist groups that operate in the Philippines are two militant groups that are also very prominent. First is the Moro National Liberation Front or MNLF–“Moro” is the Spanish name for  Muslims in the Philippines. It comes from the word “Moor.” Founded in the 1970s, this group has waged a guerrilla campaign against the Filipino government, which it believes has marginalized Muslims in the southern area of Mindanao. In 1996 the two sides reached an agreement with Mindanao achieving semi-autonomy from the government in Manila. Following the agreement and a failed uprising the MNLF’s status has declined.

Moro Islamic National Front 

The second group is the similarly named Moro Islamic National Front, or MILF. Besides sounding similar, the overlap extends further, as the MILF is actually a splinter group formed from the MNLF. Also founded in the 1970s, this organization employs many of the same tactics as the MNLF. The MILF reached its own peace agreement with the government in 2001; however, whereas the MNLF declined following its treaty with the government, the MILF–which is the larger of the two–has continued fighting in hopes of creating an independent Islamic nation in the south.

As fighting continued for the next decade, both sides were also working to reach some kind of a peace agreement, which they finally did in 2014.

Current Outlook

With peace made between the main insurgent threat and the Filipino government, it is fair to ask whether the efforts by both the Filipino government and the U.S. have succeeded. While the terror groups have not completely abated and probably never will, their capabilities have been greatly reduced to the point that the U.S. feels comfortable enough to dissolve its anti-terrorism unit there. Thus, while it may not be the best-case scenario, it does provide a type of closure in the war on terror that is better for both sides than more fighting. This type of agreement might also prove to be the standard going forward in the war against terrorism globally for other afflicted nations.

There are of course many other issues that the Filipinos will have to address in the coming years. As the continued U.S. presence suggests, the Philippines may be a central point of action if relations between China and the U.S. deteriorate to the point of no return. Although this seems far from certain, potential flash point disagreements still exist between China and her neighbors, many of whom are U.S. allies, including the Philippines.

Other issues also exist, such as extreme poverty. The gravity of this problem was on display following the devastation from Typhoon Haiyan, which killed over eight thousand people. The storm also destroyed large swaths of desperately needed farmland. This forced as many as four million people to be displaced and seek help from outside sources. Already many people there were living on around a dollar a day and scavenging just to get adequate food supplies.

Domestic violence has also been on the rise in the nation. While more cases were naturally expected to be reported following the passage of the Violence against Women and their Children Act in 2004, the results are unsettling. According to one report by the Women and Children’s Protective Center, the rate of violence rose over 150 percent from 2004 to 2011. While these numbers are unnerving, it is still suspected that incidents are underreported as abuse is seen as a private matter.

These are only some examples of existing issues and while they are certainly not exclusively Filipino problems, they do point to areas of future concern. Also, while an agreement is in place, something more concrete will likely need to be worked out between the ruling government in Manila and its autonomous regions. Whether this is full independence or greater inclusion of the Muslim minority, the status quo does not appear likely to hold out forever, as evidenced by history.

Resources

Primary

Council of Foreign Relations: Terrorism Havens: Philippines

Additional

Anti-Defamation League: The Philippines and Terrorism

Nations Online: History of the Philippines

Foreign Policy: Old Frenemies

War on the Rocks: End of An Era in the Philippines

Global Security: Moro Islamic Liberation Front

Huffington Post: Is This What Terror War Success Looks Like?

Reuters: Typhoon Haiyan

IRIN: Philippines Steep Rise in Gender Based Violence

International Business Times: China-Philippines Territorial Dispute

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Philippines: A U.S. Ally Grapples with Terrorism appeared first on Law Street.

So this week in controversial t-shirt news, a market in the Philippines received a bit of backlash via Twitter over a top encouraging rape culture. Supermall, the major department store chain with several locations throughout the Philippines and China, promoted the offending item featuring the message “It’s not rape, it’s a snuggle with a struggle.”

In this case, I can’t really give Supermalls the benefit of the doubt. What’s even more bizarre about the product is that it was apparently featured in the little boys section of the store because you might as well get them to start disrespecting women as early as possible. There’s no way this could have been an oversight. Although I don’t know how aware Asian culture is regarding the topic of rape, the only excuse that I could begin to provide for Supermalls is that perhaps something got lost in translation. The word “rape” may not translate the same from Tagalog or Mandarin but I can’t see how “struggle” could mean anything other than something that implies difficulty, which is not a word that anyone would want to use to describe sexual encounters.

‘It’s not rape – it’s a snuggle with a struggle’: Store withdraws T-shirt after complaints http://t.co/jCnIn3jZt3 pic.twitter.com/gLMiAepsmI

— Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) September 24, 2014

In response to all the Twitter backlash, Supermalls released the following statement:

Update on t-shirt statement. pic.twitter.com/cDTPamPC1e

— SM Supermalls (@smsupermalls) September 23, 2014

Why thank you, Supermalls as long as you’re sorry it makes it okay right?

What’s even more interesting is that Supermalls’ Twitter banner features a picture of a happy Filipino family with the statement “Everything’s Here for the Love of Lolo (Grandpa) and Lola (Grandma).” Because I’m sure wearing a shirt that promotes rape culture would make Lolo and Lola extremely proud.

Supermalls also apparently has its own foundation in which they “contribute to the welfare and well being of various communities,” according to its website.

While I’m not sure exactly how such a disturbing t-shirt came to be, the issue behind it only goes to further prove that many countries, including the United States, have a long way to go to erase the mindset of rape culture. The U.S. could learn from this incident in the Philippines and work toward spreading awareness about rape prevention while enacting laws that prevent such vile messages from being featured on advertisements and products.

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Controversial T-Shirt News: Store Sells Shirt Downplaying Rape appeared first on Law Street.