ICHRP On Trump-Marcos Meeting: Peace Must Be Based On Justice, Not Deterrence
The International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines (ICHRP) considers the Trump-Marcos Jr. meetings taking place from July 20 to 22 in Washington, DC as anything but a meeting of equals. The purpose of the visit as described by the Philippines is to discuss how the two countries can further deepen their security and economic engagements, including what Philippine Ambassador Romualdez has called 'peace through deterrence.' In reality the meeting represents the subservience of the GRP to the US, and the development of the 'peace through deterrence' strategy will only bring more war and destruction to the Filipino people.
This meeting follows the growing trend of increasing militarization in the Philippines. The US and its allies have ramped up preparations for war against China, boosting mutual defence agreements, and conducted large-scale combat exercises in the Philippines, with increasing frequency.
These recent moves include the February 2023 agreement to place four more US military bases in the Philippines – three of them oriented towards Taiwan – under the Enhanced Defence Cooperation Arrangement (EDCA). In April 2024, the US military began deploying in Northern Luzon a new offensive intermediate-range land-based missile system known as Typhoon, which is capable of reaching large population centres in mainland China. In June 2025 the US House appropriations committee announced the intention to establish a forward-based munitions factory and storage facility at Subic Bay, Philippines, and this July the US announced plans to build two new ship repair facilities near the disputed West Philippine seas.
'The US military build up in the Philippines is not defensive nor geared towards peace, but aggressive war preparations that put the Filipino people at risk to be collateral damage in a war with China. The Filipino people don't want to be a battlefield for a great power war,' said ICHRP Chairperson Peter Murphy. 'ICHRP urges all nations in the region to deescalate the frightening military buildup towards war,' said Murphy.
The Marcos-Trump meeting takes place following intensive attacks from Trump against poor and working Filipinos, both in the Philippines and in the US. On July 9, the White House announced a 20 per cent tariff taking effect on August 1st of this year, which disproportionately impacts peasants and workers in the Philippines. Within the United States, the Trump administration continues an all out attack on migrants including the detention, inhumane and illegal treatment of Filipino migrants. The imposition of tariffs, the maltreatment of Filipino migrants — unchallenged by Marcos Jr — and the increasing US military presence in the Philippines will further plunge the most marginalized in Philippines society into poverty.
Due to the major socioeconomic issues of the Philippines, the country remains embroiled in a long-standing civil war. But the US, Australia, Canada, Japan and other Western allies ignore gross violations of human rights and International Humanitarian Law occurring in the Philippines in favour of deepening military cooperation and arms sales to the Philippines as part of their broader preparation for war against China.
Peace in the Philippines and the Asia Pacific region will not come through the US 'deterrence' strategy. Genuine peace must be based on justice which necessitates the undoing of the unequal US-Philippines relationship most characterized by US economic coercion and military dominance of the country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
7 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
US 'will sell so much' beef to Australia after relaxed restrictions: Trump
The United States will sell "so much" beef to Australia, US President Donald Trump said today after Canberra relaxed import restrictions. He added that other countries that refused US beef products were on notice. Australia on Thursday said it would loosen biosecurity rules for US beef, something analysts predicted would not significantly increase US shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower. "We are going to sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that US Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE," the post continued. Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on US beef," US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for US farmers and ranchers." Australia is not a significant importer of beef, but the United States is, and a production slump is forcing it to step up purchases. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tons of beef worth $US2.9 billion ($NZ4.8 billion) to the United States, with just 269 tons of US product moving the other way. Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of US biosecurity practices. Canberra has restricted US beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the US but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said US cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if [the government] is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with US President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia, which imports more from the US than it exports, faces a 10% across-the-board US tariff, as well 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200% tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure." "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway."
NZ Herald
11 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Trump targets ‘woke AI' with new federal contract rules
Experts on the technology say the answer to both questions is murky. Some lawyers say the prospect of the Trump Administration shaping what AI chatbots can and can't say raises First Amendment issues. Experts warn the order raises First Amendment issues and question the feasibility of bias-free AI. Photo / Getty Images 'These are words that seem great – 'free of ideological bias,'' said Rumman Chowdhury, executive director of the non-profit Humane Intelligence and former head of machine learning ethics at Twitter. 'But it's impossible to do in practice.' The concern that popular AI tools exhibit a liberal skew took hold on the right in 2023, when examples circulated on social media of OpenAI's ChatGPT endorsing affirmative action and transgender rights or refusing to compose a poem praising Trump. It gained steam last year when Google's Gemini image generator was found to be injecting ethnic diversity into inappropriate contexts – such as portraying black, Asian and Native American people in response to requests for images of Vikings, Nazis or America's 'Founding Fathers'. Google apologised and reprogrammed the tool, saying the outputs were an inadvertent by-product of its effort to ensure that the product appealed to a range of users around the world. ChatGPT and other AI tools can indeed exhibit a liberal bias in certain situations, said Fabio Motoki, a lecturer at the University of East Anglia. In a study published last month, he and his co-authors found that OpenAI's GPT-4 responded to political questionnaires by evincing views that aligned closely with those of the average Democrat. But assessing a chatbot's political leanings 'is not straightforward', he added. On certain topics, such as the need for US military supremacy, OpenAI's tools tend to produce writing and images that align more closely with Republican views. And other research, including an analysis by the Washington Post, has found that AI image generators often reinforce ethnic, religious and gender stereotypes. AI models exhibit all kinds of biases, experts say. It's part of how they work. Chatbots and image generators draw on vast quantities of data ingested from across the internet to predict the most likely or appropriate response to a user's query. So they might respond to one prompt by spouting misogynist tropes gleaned from an unsavoury anonymous forum – then respond to a different prompt by regurgitating DEI policies scraped from corporate hiring policies. Trump's AI plan: Federal contracts for bias-free models only. Photo / 123RF Training an AI model to avoid such biases is notoriously tricky, Motoki said. You could try to do it by limiting the training data, paying humans to rate its answers for neutrality, or writing explicit instructions into its code. All three approaches come with limitations and have been known to backfire by making the model's responses less useful or accurate. 'It's very, very difficult to steer these models to do what we want,' he said. Google's Gemini blooper was one example. Another came this year, when Elon Musk's xAI instructed its Grok chatbot to prioritise 'truth-seeking' over political correctness – leading it to spout racist and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and at one point even refer to itself as 'mecha-Hitler'. The Google Gemini app, an AI-based, multimodal chatbot developed by Google. Photo / Getty Images Political neutrality, for an AI model, is simply 'not a thing', Chowdhury said. 'It's not real.' For example, she said, if you ask a chatbot for its views on gun control, it could equivocate by echoing both Republican and Democratic talking points, or it might try to find the middle ground between the two. But the average AI user in Texas might see that answer as exhibiting a liberal bias, while a New Yorker might find it overly conservative. And to a user in Malaysia or France, where strict gun control laws are taken for granted, the same answer would seem radical. How the Trump Administration will decide which AI tools qualify as neutral is a key question, said Samir Jain, vice-president of policy at the non-profit Centre for Democracy and Technology. The executive order itself is not neutral, he said, because it rules out certain left-leaning viewpoints but not right-leaning viewpoints. The order lists 'critical race theory, transgenderism, unconscious bias, intersectionality, and systemic racism' as concepts that should not be incorporated into AI models. 'I suspect they would say anything providing information about transgender care would be 'woke,'' Jain said. 'But that's inherently a point of view.' Imposing that point of view on AI tools produced by private companies could run the risk of a First Amendment challenge, he said, depending on how it's implemented. 'The Government can't force particular types of speech or try to censor particular viewpoints, as a general matter,' Jain said. However, the Administration does have some latitude to set standards for the products it purchases, provided its speech restrictions are related to the purposes for which it's using them. Some analysts and advocates said they believe Trump's executive order is less heavy-handed than they had feared. Neil Chilson, head of AI policy at the right-leaning non-profit Abundance Institute, said the prospect of an overly prescriptive order on 'woke AI' was the one element that had worried him in advance of Trump's AI plan, which he generally supported. After reading the order, he said that those concerns were 'overblown' and he believes the order 'will be straightforward to comply with'. Mackenzie Arnold, director of US policy at the Institute for Law and AI, a nonpartisan think-tank, said he was glad to see the order makes allowances for the technical difficulty of programming AI tools to be neutral and offers a path for companies to comply by disclosing their AI models' instructions. 'While I don't like the styling of the EO on 'preventing woke AI' in government, the actual text is pretty reasonable,' he said, adding that the big question is how the Administration will enforce it. 'If it focuses its efforts on these sensible disclosures, it'll turn out okay,' he said. 'If it veers into ideological pressure, that would be a big misstep and bad precedent.'
NZ Herald
12 hours ago
- NZ Herald
The case of Dahud Hanid Ortiz, a US-Venezuelan citizen brought home in Trump's prisoner swap
'The US has been completely silent, not giving information to anyone,' Victor Joel Salas Covenas, a lawyer in Spain who was targeted by Hanid Ortiz in the 2016 plot, told the Washington Post today. 'At this moment, no one knows Dahud's whereabouts. So the fear is real, isn't it? Of course.' Hanid Ortiz, 54, had been left behind on previous swaps brokered by both the Trump and Biden administrations, said a US official with knowledge of internal discussions in the wake of his release. The Administration's suspected failure to properly vet Hanid Ortiz before allowing him to board the Gulfstream jet that left Caracas for Texas on July 18 also has caused a rift within the State Department, which led the negotiations central to last week's prisoner swap. The US official acknowledged that Hanid Ortiz's inclusion in the release was 'ruffling a lot of feathers' at the department because the dual US-Venezuelan citizen was never on lists of Americans whom the Trump Administration sought from Venezuelan authorities. 'It seems like no one was checking closely,' said the official. Spokespeople for the State Department and White House have cited 'privacy reasons' for refusing to address the growing maelstrom surrounding Hanid Ortiz's release. In response to questions, Administration officials issued a statement saying, 'The US had the opportunity to secure the release of all Americans detained in Venezuela, many of whom reported being subjected to torture and other harsh conditions'. Diosdado Cabello, Venezuela's Interior Minister, said yesterday on his weekly broadcast that the Venezuelan Government had warned US officials at the airport that they were 'taking away a convicted murderer'. 'The US defended their murderer and asked for him to be included,' Cabello alleged. Efforts to speak with Hanid Ortiz's family in the US have been unsuccessful. The questions surrounding Hanid Ortiz have overshadowed what otherwise was seen in Washington as a significant foreign policy win by the Administration. He was among a group of 10 US citizens and permanent residents released by Venezuela. The deal also sent to Venezuela more than 250 Venezuelan nationals who had been deported by the US to a megaprison in El Salvador as part of Trump's aggressive immigration crackdown. The Trump Administration has not identified the Americans released in the deal, though it has acknowledged that eight of the 10 had been classified as 'wrongfully detained' by the State Department. That designation enables use of government resources to help free US people it believes should not be imprisoned abroad. Those classified as 'wrongfully detained' are offered support services upon their return at the Brooke Army Medical Centre in San Antonio. Two US officials said that Hanid Ortiz was not offered these services. And that's where the trail runs cold. Hanid Ortiz was last seen publicly as he waved to the news media in San Antonio after arriving with the other released prisoners. His presence among the group was first detected by media outlets in Spain. He did not get off the plane during a brief stop in El Salvador, said the US official. There, some of the other prisoners met with the country's President, Nayib Bukele, a key Trump ally, this person said. The situation is seen as pressing, given the nature of the crimes for which Hanid Ortiz was convicted, which were detailed in a Venezuelan court last year. According to court records, Hanid Ortiz had been living in Germany when he came to suspect his wife was having a relationship with Salas Covenas, the lawyer in Madrid. The court found that Hanid Ortiz travelled to Spain to take revenge on the lawyer, concealing his visit by recruiting a friend to pretend to be him at home so he had an alibi. When he arrived at Salas Covenas' law office, Hanid Ortiz asked two employees to contact the lawyer, saying he was exploring a lucrative business deal, court records show. The two women were killed with a knife and a blunt object before the slaying of a man who arrived at the law office to pick up some documents, an apparent instance of mistaken identity, the court records say. The court found that Hanid Ortiz then set fire to the law office in a bid to hide the crime. It was his accomplice in Germany who revealed the plot to authorities, court records say. The court documents also show that Hanid Ortiz admitted to the crime in emails to his sister-in-law. 'I did horrible things without wanting to, or whatever. Believe me, people lose their minds - I did,' he wrote in one email contained in the court records documenting his prosecution and conviction. Hanid Ortiz was arrested after fleeing to Venezuela in 2018, court records show. He was in possession of three national identity cards, one in his name and two bearing other names, according to the court records. Venezuela's constitution bars extradition of citizens, so instead he was tried in a Venezuelan court with Spanish and German officials supplying evidence. He was convicted and sentenced last year. Though born in Venezuela, court records show that Hanid Ortiz served in the US Army for more than 17 years and became a US citizen. He moved with the Army to Germany, where court documents show he was court-martialled and convicted of using a fraudulent address in New York City to claim housing allowances for his family, who had moved with him overseas. His release back to the US has caught senior government officials in Spain and Germany completely caught off guard, according to the US official familiar with discussions about Hanid Ortiz occurring at the State Department. The Spanish and German embassies declined to comment. The US generally does not extradite its own citizens to face crimes in foreign nations. Salas Covenas, the Spanish lawyer, said he was first contacted on Monday by German police. They told him Hanid Ortiz was at a military base in Texas and that it was 'very likely he would be released', Salas Covenas said. 'The only thing we know for sure is that he got off the plane; a camera caught him laughing,' he added. 'Obviously, he is mocking the entire American, European and Venezuelan judicial systems.'
