Considered a victory for Philippine sovereignty, concerned groups and individuals have cogent reasons to celebrate the historical event. Lest it be forgotten, the occasion marked the culmination of the long and arduous struggle against the continued American military presence despite the country's supposed independence in 1946.

The Americans promised aid in exchange for the continued stay of the US bases. In 1988, the aid package reached $352 million. The year after, then US president Ronald Reagan proposed to the US Congress a lower amount ($264 million). Be that as it may, then Sec. Raul Manglapus stressed that "anything above the $180 million" will be considered.

It is clear that such a ploy did not work, as the people resolutely struggled against the continued American military presence in the country.

Now, the memory of the past still lingers as the powers-that-be that try to come up with creative ways for the return of American troops.

Not contented with occasional joint military exercises which are still provided for by law, then President Fidel V. Ramos flirted with the idea of an Acquisition and cross Servicing Agreement in 1994 which sought to provide, among others, prepositioning and stockpiling of US supplies and equipment.

This US-RP agreement was later known as the Visiting Forces Agreement whose February 1998 final draft only had minor revisions.

While the ACSA may have taken a backseat due to public pressure, the VFA has been touted as the way to strengthen US-RP relations as enshrined in the Mutual Defense Treaty.

The VFA's preamble explicitly states that the proposed agreement reaffirms their obligations under the MDT and that "from time to time, the elements of the United States armed forces may visit" the country.

The VFA, therefore, is a means to recover the bases and restore the triad control along with the MDT and MAP.

History is not far from repeating itself. In the past, initial attempts to establish the US bases failed, but the Americans had their way.

1) The benefits which would accrue to the country as a result of VFA ratification is a myth if we were to look at how the Americans treated its "little brown brother" in the past. The Philippines did not get much military assistance in return for the use of the US bases. It only ranked seventh largest among the 13 countries hosting US military facilities as of 1981. In fact, Pakistan and Yugoslavia-all non aligned states have been recipients of larger amounts f aid than the Philippines.

2) That the country needs the presence of the strongest military force in the world due to the inherent weaknesses of the Armed Forces of the Philippines could only be considered if there were external threats. But even then, isn't it upon a sovereign nation to remain steadfast in the defending the territory and avoid depending on others in fighting its own war?

3) The country maybe dragged into the US wars of aggression against what Americans perceive to be hostile forces.

4) The VFA becomes a tool for he interventionist policies of the US, as its military interests have been historically tied to the American political and economic agenda.

5) The social cost of allowing the American troops in the country must also be considered, as in the past. Human rights violations, prostitution and other forms of exploitation of women and children have happened in the past.

The key issues that must be considered in analyzing the VFA are the following;

1)VFA and how it infringes the country's sovereignty.

2)The abrogation of the VFA, MAP and MDT as main prerequisites to the attainment of genuine independence and self-determination.

3) The policy of neutrality and the nuclear-free zone in the Philippines and the Southeast Asia.

4) The perpetuation of US global military hegemony and terrorism.