Not too long ago I found out that a Rep. Antonio Cerilles of Zamboanga del Sur proposed House Bill 4604 calling for the establishment of a "Philippine Naval Academy" (see Manila Standard Today, Online- September 19 2005; under political stories).

Among the points cited by Cerilles are:

1) The Philippines is an archipelagic nation of 7100 islands

2) There already exists a Philippine Merchant Marine Academy with facilities and training staff. BUT its graduates are not required to serve in the military although its midshipmen enjoy what practically amounts to a government scholarship. In fact, very few opt to serve with the navy or coast guard.

Needless to say, nothing came of this proposal as far as I am able to know. Very common arguments against the establishment of a "PNA" are among others:

1) lack of funds?

2) priority should be the procurement of more up to date ships and weapons?

But then again, if it's just a matter of upgrading an exisiting institution into a naval officer's school then why should "lack of funds" be such a compelling reason not to have it?

When it comes to the formation a viable naval service complete with its own naval traditions and pride in the service, isn't a Naval Academy the best way of addressing this lack? Afterall, even a old WW2 ex-U.S. Navy rust bucket of a ship still needs excellent engineering and seamanship in order to operate properly. Based on the current anti-insurgency and anti-smuggling operational roles commonly encountered by the navy, would a new SS or SA missile, or aircraft carrier be really a priority over the formation of a naval academy?

And of course there are Filipino Annapolis graduates, but they are so few and rarely stay with the service after their contract with the Philippine government is over.

Another thing is, it isn't as if the Philippines was always such an impoverished country. Why couldn't we have had a "PNA" back in the 50's or 60's?

I'm open for a frank discussion on this matter, among the things I'd like to know are other possible angles such as:

a) would there perhaps be some opposition from the PMA and alumni if there will be another school handling the training of regular officers for the Philippine Navy and Marines?

b) can a healthy inter-service rivalry work in the Philippine military? :pushup:

Tony.

Stop dreaming and look around. The RP doesn't need a Naval Academy. How can the RP boast a naval academy when Philippine Navy ships can't even compete with major foreign warships- the PN doesn't even have anti-shipping missiles like Exocets or Harpoons for Pete's sake!

The AFP can fill its current needs from both the PMA as well as the PMMA (merchant marine) as well as Naval ROTC programs at civilian colleges all over the country.

You shouldn't think that the RP should copy the United States just because they have the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis. Seperate service academies are the priviliege of well-established, well-funded militaries who can better manage their financial resources and have the adequate budget provided to them by their governments.

A good suggestion, but made at the wrong time. Perhaps when the PN has more modern, missile-equipped, ships, and even submarines- then we can look at this suggestion again.

BTW, you forgot Filipino citizen graduates of the United States Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point, New York. Retired Philippine Navy Admiral Espaldon is a graduate of that school.

http://www.usmma.edu/

I assume there are also RP graduates of the US Coast Guard Academy as well, since I remember seeing a USCGA cadet uniform displayed at the AFP Museum in Camp Aguinaldo.

http://www.uscga.edu/

Therefore, PN grads of foreign naval schools aren't as few as you think just because not all come from Annapolis.

some related discussions:

http://pdff.sytes.net/index.php?showtopic=1389

MSantor.

Well yeah, but who said anything about "competing" with other foreign warships? The current situation as it is has already conceeded Philippine territorial waters to virtuall every foreign warship that wants to come in and out with almost absolute impunity.

Since we don't want nor can we fight a conventional naval war with just about any neighboring country. Why would a multi-million peso missile system which rapidly becomes obsolete in five or ten years or a couple of additional major surface units be the priority?

We are talking here of fighting and winning the insurgency war and the anti-smuggling war with the ships we've already got, perhaps with better and more efficient propulsion systems, adequate ammunition, and better manned by expertly trained crews lead by professionaly trained and dedicated naval officers.

But you see, I HAVE been looking around. The problem is this current set up is WASTEFUL, needlessly wasteful.

Imagine a PMA cadet for instance undergoes a four year scholarship which trains him to be an army officer. If that guy ends up with the navy, precisely how much of his being a PMA cadet has prepared him to run a ship? 50%?...25%?...5%? Well heck no, he can lead a platoon into battle but knows squat about running even a small tugboat. What usually happens is the guy will have to undergo additonal training (meaning additional expenses) just to be able to know the basics of seamanship. WHERE IS THE SAVINGS HERE?

Espaldon is decades ago, we don't send anyone to Kings Point anymore. When was the last time an Annapolis graduate or U.S. Coast Guard Academy guy ever held on to reach flag officer rank?

And PMMA? Do you know that 90% of its graduates go to work with foreign shipping companies immediately upon graduation? I'm not even sure the Philippines has a merchant marine to merit the existence of a PMMA, but I'm pretty sure we do have a navy which does have a fleet of ships regardless of antiquity.

There is a reason why something is diplayed in a museum my friend, either because they are such a rarity or because they may be virtually extinct. :pushup:

Well, you are probably right about that.....not so much because we shouldn't copy the U.S. but more because we simply can't manage our financial resources any better, whether we have the money to mismanage or not. :pushup:

if we have a naval academy, what ships will we assign the future ensigns to?

Tony,

The purpose of a navy is first and foremost, to GUARD A NATION'S SOVEREIGNTY OVER ITS TERRITORIAL WATERS. That's why the PN's priority should be to get SSM-armed OPVs pronto! Its purpose is not mainly to be the Army's ferry service in this perennial insurgency, though the PN LSTs have been employed as such. As for the Marine Corps, their primary purpose had always been to guard navy ports and to establish beachheads which could have been later developed into safe anchorages for the navy, aside from being part of a further push inland for the Marines. That's why in the US, as in the PN, the Marines fall under the "Dept. of the Navy" though US Leathernecks enjoy the perks of shipboard life when they have sea duty, but treat sailors like fags.

Other nations with festering insurgencies such as Thailand (Narithiwat province) and Indonesia (Banda Aceh seperatists) still have decent, SSM-equipped navies in spite of the COIN problem. Another more comparable example from Latin America is Colombia, whose frigates still have SSMs in spite of their COIN focus against insurgent groups such as FARC.
Thus, an insurgency is NO EXCUSE to let down on external security.

Also, BTW, the RP does have sizeable merchant fleet, and I don't just mean the inter-island ro-ro ferries. 413 Ships to be exact, according to the CIA world factbook (scroll down to "Transportation") when you check the link)

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbo...s/rp.html#Trans

BTW, the PMA is not the only tri-service military academy in the world. You don't need to have a seperate service academy to produce capable officers for different services.

Take for example, the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston, Ontario ("Royal", since Canada is still technically part of the British Commonwealth in spite of independence), from which graduating cadets can choose any service.
Cadets who choose to become naval officers in Canada's Maritime Command (no longer called the Royal Canadian Navy), are just as capable as those who choose an "Army career" in Land Forces Command.

RMC-Kingston has produced capable non-army officers throughout history- including World War One Royal Flying Corps ace and RMC alumni Billy Bishop, who shot down about 80 Imperial German planes during World War One.

This is just one example.

The fact that you assume that PMA naval grads can lead a platoon in ground combat means you hold some misconceptions about the PMA, since cadets who choose the naval path are given adequate exposure to naval life through the naval science courses they take. Comparably, in the US Naval Academy, they spend the summers exposing the junior year cadets to a cruise aboard warship or possibly shadowing a USMC Lieutenant on a beach landing exercise, depending on which track they chose. It would only make sense the PMA must have some sort of shipboard excursions for the naval option cadets during their summer months or even weekend excursions to a naval base away from Baguio during the regular semesters.

I await your reply.

MSantor,

O.K., so you've just just stated the textbook and "politically correct" role of a navy. For some other countries, a navy's purpose is for POWER PROJECTION regardless of whether they'll admit it or not.

The most valid reason why state of the art shipborne missiles and guided missile cruisers can be worth the investment for a "third world" naval force is DETERRENCE, meaning to say....there is the presence of a known hostile external threat by a hostile foreign rival for regional power and influence. This actually boils down to a war of how deep the pockets of the belligerents are, so who blinks first looses. In short, the hope is such weapons and capabilities will never have to be actually used. One sees to it that enough propaganda of how wonderful it works and how so much one has of it at their disposal in wartime will be enough to deter potential enemy adventurism.

A way to lower the spiraling of costs to sustain such capabilities is to develop our own arms and ship building industry for export (like Pakistan or India). But mind you, modern weapons systems are often developed with certain specific naval or military "doctrines" that go with it. How can we even hope to develop naval weapons systems or hulls if we don't have any naval doctrinaire experience? How can we sell naval missiles and ships if we don't even have a naval tradition of excellence or even a naval academy?

I'm sure the leftists in government will not want the Philippines to be something like an "arsenal" exporting "death". They will do their very best to see to it that we will never have a miltary industrial complex. Philippine foreign policy has never even begun to understand such power play, let alone indulge into such things. The awful truth is that we are a nation of appeasers, and perhaps always will be.

Still, you are not far off the reality. You see when it comes to "external threats", the AFP role is exactly that of a security guard for an installation. A security guard's primary role is NOT the engage a well armed and determined break-in. A guard should be able to sense the presence of intruders, hide if there are many; and then ring in the the professionals (eg. police). Or if engagement is unavoidalble, a guard is supposed to hold on or live long enough to call in the police. In my analogy, we prefer that "professional police" to mean the the whole fury and might of a U.S. carrier battle group with its amphibious component of U.S. Marines steaming off to our rescue!

Where the Philippine Navy is supposed to fit in this role, I do not know? I'm merely stating an unspoken general feeling of acceptance for such a scenario by the rather "hopeful" Philippine government although there is no such formal treaty with the U.S. to that effect.

So the only thing we can really do (and MUST do NOW) for the benefit of the AFP as a whole is to improve the training and morale of our officers and men just enough to successfully combat internal threats more efficiently. Dated ships and weapons can still be good commie or jihadist killing machines if properly handled by well trained and highly motivated men.

But fact remains, few if any PMMA graduates bother to consider working in one of these 413 "ships". In any case, there are tens of thousands of tuition paying maritime students in any one of the hundred or so odd private maritime schools all over the Philippines. Why should government continue to assume a responsibility already more than adequately answered by the private sector? If for sentimental reasons the PMMA should never go defunct, it should progress into a Philippine Naval Academy or die a natural death.

By whatever name they choose to call their naval assets for political reasons or what not, They still function as navies. The Japanese for instance also call their navy the "Maritime Self Defense Force" and no longer the Japanese Imperial Navy for obvious reasons. It just so happened that the ruling "Liberals" in Canada during the late 90's up till recently had striven hard to make Canada a "socialist" state in keeping with it's 1960's reputation as a "hippie haven" for U.S. draft dogers. Nevertheless young Canadians still have sizeable access to "proper" naval officer's schooling at the Royal Naval Academy at Dartmouth. :pushup:

Cindy,

Oh I suppose the same ships the PN has now, if the current officers and crew have managed to keep them going long enough for the new boys and girls to use them.

I'm not saying new weapons and ships are unimportant, But if we simply can't have them right now we might as well improve the professionalism and "fighting spirit" of the men who will have to serve in them in order to make up for the inferiority in equipment....something like an institutionalized Filipino form of naval bushido. :pushup:

I hope for the sake of everyone on this board that the RP will NOT always be a nation of appeasers. Sometimes one must take a stand in a situation where one's very livelihood is threatened.

Even if that means having the BRP Artemio Ricarte and her sisters braving a PLA SSM barrage in order to close to gun range with Chinese Sorennemy Class Destroyer (a highly unlikely scenario while will see the PN Corvettes sunk), one must take a stand.

Thus, having a decent SSM-equipped navy is still a must! And its acquisition should be a priority, regardless of how the PN trains its officers. When I mean an SSM equipped navy, it doesn't even have to be Oliver Hazard Class Frigates, but it can even be smaller corvettes or even FPBs as long as the firepower is enough to take on any the possible adversaries in the region, from the Malaysian Kasturi class Frigates to the small PLA Hainan FPBs which the PN is more likely to encounter.

A lot of good that Bushido did for the Imperial Japanese Navy towards the end of their war, sacrificing their obselete planes and undertrained pilots in kamikaze runs on US warships in 1945- all a waste coz it didn't even stop Admiral Halsey and Spruance's Carrier armadas from advancing upon the Japanese homeland.

By the same reasoning, an obselete Philippine Navy corvette, no matter how well-oiled or well-maintained it is by an elite crew, is useless against a missile Frigate that can kill the corvette from miles away with an Exocet or Sunburn missile.

Therefore, as I said before, having a Philippine Naval Academy is just poor timing at this point. And almost as useless a gesture as having a Philippine Air Force Academy when there's no multi-role fighters to for the cadets to later fly!

Tony, BTW, why are you so fixated on having a PNA? Dont' you think NROTC programs at civilian colleges at the nation, besides the trickle who come from PMA and PMMA, will be enough? We don't need another academy clique that will further divide the officer corps among the services between ring knockers, and ROTCers/OCSers.

MSantor,

Yes I agree, but only if we have an integrated system such as a local defense technology industry to help defray the costs by way of arms exports. But you know now what has to happen within the government first, right?

In case the of the an Air Force Academy, I fully concur with your views. Just to illustrate how superflouous the U.S. A. F. Academy is, a new graduate cannot yet even be ready to fly on combat missions. He/ she still has to go to a flying school and stack up more flying hours and train with jets or other aircraft and graduate from that flying school and so forth. The PAF really needs aircraft!

Forget the MRCA concept! Such was proven to be a failure with the actual performance of the european Tornado jet in combat, notice they didn't repeat that mistake with the new eurofighter. What the Philippine Air Force can really use are those improved Harrier VSTOL jets which the U.S. Marines use today, and what the Spanish Air Force calls the "Matador". COIN aircraft isn't even that much as big a priroity. You just know when something is a proven success when the aircaft's basic configuration and role has remained unchanged for many years. The Harrier is still the best and only one of it's type in the world.

The U.S Air Force Academy was born out of the the ministrations of the U.S. Army Air Corps maveric named Gen. Billy Mitchell simply to provide a venue for a thoroughly "air-minded" cadre of military officers whose purpose is to show that an airforce deserves to be a separate arm in itself with a strategic role of its own and not just an "adjunct" to army or navy strategic requirements. This was rejected by the navy and thus the U.S. still has naval aviators and navair squadrons whose primary mission remains to protect the surface fleet.

But the Naval Academy? ...poor timing?....maybe, but even as near useless?..NO WAY!

Alam mo, the all important thing is VENUE. After all, others can probably lodge the same arguments against continuing to support a Philippine Military Academy. Why not just improve the ROTC or Army OCS? Bakit pa someone as young as a high school grad or college level youth be expected to fully comprehend what it means to sign a scholarship contract with the military? Isn't it better to just train a civilian college graduate who is at the prime of his young adulthood and who has a more mature outlook?....All these and so many other questions. If the only consideration was to save money then siguro nga, pero we know better, right?

Sometimes, you wonder what would have happened if the decision to establish the PMA wasn't done during the American commonwealth period. Knowing how narrow minded some of our local politicians can be.....we would still have a Philippine Constabulary Academy as the only dedicated four year government school for all branches of service. It would still be at the teacher's camp instead of at the Loakan.

All I can say is that the PNA is "FOR THE GOOD OF THE SERVICE", the very same rational which makes the PMA valid. Now if we view the fortunes of our armed Forces as an entity which functions primarily in the interest of the officer corps then yes we should worry for the the unity of the officer corps first and foremost. Would that be so? :pushup:

From your responses, you still haven't given me any good reason for the establishment of a PNA NOW. It would have made sense when the nation became newly independent in 1946 that they should have did away with the PMA and created the PNA, since the RP is, after all, archipelagic, maritime nation!

For the "Good of a Service?" Excuse Me? As I said, we don't need another clique that will further divide the Philippine Navy between ringknockers and ROTCers/OCSers who are more hell bent on advancing the careers of their class/batch brothers and themselves rather than thinking of the good of the navy and the nation as a whole. It's bad enough that PMAers get preference for high command positions and you want to creat a another clique BESIDES the PMA one? Geez, you must have such a LOW OPINION of ROTC and OCS grads, who make the up majority and backbone of PN and PMC officers and probably the whole AFP as well.

From what I see, you're just biased in favor of another navy officer clique just for the sake of pride when other things, such as modernization of the whole armed forces SHOULD COME FIRST!

Say, we do establish a PNA? What then? Ha? Are PNA naval cadets going to ponder over textbooks of Alfred Thayer Mahan and Nelson's writings and read about OTHER NAVIES' great victories when the most heavily armed warship in the PN is a measly Peacock-class Corvette that doesn't even have missiles? Or even torpedoes for that matter? A lot of "good" those elite PNA-trained ensigns will make when PLA Sunburn missiles are raining around their Peacock Class corvette that doesn't even have Phalanx!

Read my other post above again:

As I said before, a naval academy is the priviliege of a large, well-established, well-funded navy. This includes the former Imperial Japanese Naval Academy at Eta Jima. Or the Royal Navy Academy at Dartmouth, as well as the 3 US Naval Schools I mentioned at the USNA, USMMA and USCGA.

Perhaps scores of decades from now if the world hasn't frozen over from another ice age due to global warming, beyond our lifetimes, and IF the Philippine Republic not only still exists, but also has a WELL-FUNDED, WELL-ARMED NAVY with a proud, battle-tested, history behind it, then the PN will earn the priviliege of having a naval academy!

Until then, it's time to stopping polishing those old antiques we call combatants and start saving for a Harpoon missile-equipped Frigate! Even if it means draining the pork barrel for more basketball courts besides pock-marked roads that the RP Congressman sign off their funds for!


:headbang:

It is not only an upgrading of a school(PMMA) that is involved here...PMMA is not under the DND, so you can not just abolish PMMA and create PNA out of it...for you, it may be that simple but PMMA was created by a republic act so legally it is not that easy to do...this law specifies that PMMA produce graduates mainly for the merchant marine and secondarily for the PN in times of emergency ...your observation that the graduates do not serve in the PN is therefore absurd because they are not required to do so...you also mentioned something about private maritime schools turning out thousand of graduates for the merchant marine and therefore PMMA is no longer needed...yes, there are indeed a number of private schools producing thousand of graduates annually many of whom just joined the ranks of unemployed...why?? because these schools operate mainly for profit which I may say is a normal business objective...what is bad is that they charge very high tuition fees/expenses to students without even assuming the responsibility of helping them for the practical experience they needed on board ship...the merchant marine is a highly competitive business and if you are unable to secure the required one year experience as a deck/engine cadet before even taking the PRC exams, then you will not make it...in contrast, PMMA which is not profit oriented just train and produce quality graduates who are in demand in the crewing industry...the school has agreements with various crewing agencies to accept their 3rd year students for apprenticeships and they have difficulty supplying these cadets...you must understand that there are also poor but gifted students who can not afford to pay the high tuition fees and other expenses charged by these private schools...for them, PMMA and PMA are the only choices...also if I may follow your reasoning that the govt does not need to maintain PMMA because there are already other schools doing the same, do you imply then the govt does not need to operate also other state schools like UP,PNU,PUP etc since there is UST,Ateneo, La Salle etc all offering similar courses???

I'm not against the creation of PNA but the present resources of the PN and the govt has to be given due considerations...how much is the PN officer requirements annually??...how many of these can be supplied by PMA??.. PMMA has facilties to produce 250 to 300 graduates yearly...can they all be absorbed by the PN?? ..what is the use of having so many officers without ships to man???..at present, a small portion of the graduates join the PCG yearly since it does not have a regular source of officers...PMMA receives assistance from foreign sources and these may disappear if it is converted to a military institution..the present set up is adequate because graduates of the school contribute millions of dollars to the Phil economy by way of their remittances...if you agree that the OFWs are vital to the country's economy, then you should thank PMMA graduates because they are part of these groups which inject billions of dollars to the domestic economy which, by multiplier effect, enables the various industries like real estate developers,car dealers, mall developers etc to expand...if you are dreaming that PMMA will go away someday because you are infected by an unexplainable virus, your dream is far from becoming a reality


jacobsladder

MSantor,

Excuse me, but did I say we should do away with the PMA? The powers that be have realized the value of PMA by the time 1946 came along. Indeed they should have had it much earlier than 1935. I never suggested that the PMA should be replaced by a PNA.

Before the war, what we had during Quezon's time was a tiny force known as the OSP (Off-Shore Patrol) operated under the Philippine Army made up of British Thornycroft fast patrol craft called "Q"-boats (Quezon boats). O.K. so maybe we didn't need a PNA.

But after WW2 we had a sizeable fleet of up-to-date surplus ex-U.S. navy ships of various types. There was no reason to NOT have a PNA except for "political" reasons or simply perhaps for lack of will.

If there are cliques in the AFP it's mainly between regulars and reservists (officers with "O" plus four digits against those with more numbers). You can only blame that on individual stupidity. What I'm advocating is for a healthy inter-service rivalry. The best way for the the services to keep a sharp competitive edge is to be in friendly rivalry with the other services. The Army will have to prove that it can be more efficient than the Navy and the Navy does likewise. It will keep them on their toes 24:7.

The fact of the matter is, PMA graduates represent an overwhelmingly preponderant "clique" among regular officers in the AFP. Such a situation IS dangerous and harmful, (eg. high potential for organized coups etc.). You lessen the danger by forming a rival "clique" of roughly equal size within the regular officer corps.

The sensible strategy is not to try eradicating cliques, it can NEVER be eradicated. There are cliques within PMA gradutes serving in the same AFP branch you know. So the RATIONAL thing to do is to merely destroy it's potential for creating mischief. And how is this done?.....Make more cliques! make sure there are so many and so individually tiny that no one clique is so preponderant and powerfull. All this is just politics anyway. If they want positive changes, then one clique has to be more cooperative and less arrogant with others to form a coalition.

If the Army wants more tanks, let the ARMY lobby for it! The GHQ is a preponderantly "land-lubber" organization as it is. That's why I'm strongly lobbying for the "lobby power" of the navy by establishing a school which will churn out officers independent of the Army dominated high command and strengthen the hand of the navy in aquiring those ships and missile systems you so earnestly want. Otherwise the money just goes to the construction of some general's mansion and what not.

Like I have said to you before, you have to fix the government mindset first. We need an military and naval industrial complex geared for eventual export.

Let me give you an example of how simply aquiring new weapons ain't worth a tub of turd. Sometime in the late seventies or early 80's Marcos decided to get supersonic Crusader jets. So yes we had had an "instant" capability upgrade in our Air Force. But there was nothing done in terms of technology transfer, no localization of spare parts manufacturing, no avionics upgrade packages set forth. In short, we scared the Red Chinese and Malaysian airforces for only about as long as the last batch of Crusade jets could be operationally maintained...I'd say about a period of five years. But after that....what happened? Will all the money spent and no local export industry to churn out dollars to replenish the coffers we ended up with a PAF capability that became even more ridiculous than before we had those jets!......So who ended up laughing? :pushup:

Jacobsladder,

If you share the view that the PMMA "top foreign exchange" machine should not be troubled by thoughts of turning into a PNA then your welcome to it.

If the PMMA is really a civilian poverty alleviation project, or what amounts to a CHARITY INSTITUTION and so on then O.K., we don't touch the PMMA.

The Merchant Marine is after all a fully civilian entity. It is well supported by worldwide merchant seamen's organizations and other labor unions. INCLUDING THE KMU and GABRIELA!

I can't imagine a segment of the AFP having labor union members anyway.

All the more we need a Naval Academy which is built with its own cornerstone! NOT just a development or hybrid project of the Spanish regime or the American overlordship. A naval academy that is founded by Filipinos for the Filipinos! :pushup:

Tony,

That's still a poor excuse for NOT acquiring new weapons. There are lot of countries which do not have a large military-industrial complex/local defense industry and some which do not have it at all. Chile has F-16 fighters, as well as our neighbor Indonesia, and neither have much of a mil-industrial complex.

But if you have the money to buy spare parts/upgrades from the source country from which you bought those new weapons, then there shouldn't be a problem.

The RP is SCORES of decades away from building their own military-industrial complex because RP is more an agricultural nation than an industrial one. Therefore the best INTERIM solution to get a decent modern military in this world is to buy foreign-made weapons. And while foreign-made ships and planes crewed by AFP servicemen hold the line for decades, the RP govt. should start investing in the beginnings of a bigger mil-industrial complex that will eventually create their own planes, ships as well as the support/maintenance functions for those.

The RP could start by resurrecting the old Hummingbird and Cali Pinto aviation projects. Perhaps some innovative RP engineer could develop a aircraft engine that runs on ethanol from the Tuba-Tuba ethanol plant; the RP could fund a mil-industrial complex from civilian sales of that engine. After all, alternative fuels is the way to go in a world where the cost of oil is rising.

And you still haven't given me a VIABLE counterargument
to this quote:

As for your comment on forming PNA clique as helping prevent further "mischief" among the cliques already there, I'm afraid I must disagree my conservative friend who sees competition/rivalry between groups within the military as something healthy. That competition should only be between companies within the business world.

Graduates of Canada's RMC-Kingston and of Japan's Self-Defense Force Academy and the Australia Defense Force Academy still provide a clique of officers who still provide a sterling service to their service arm of choice in spite of having graduation batch mates who chose a different service arm. Thus you haven't made your case in proving that a tri-service PMA will help naval cadets less than a dedicated Philippine Naval Academy, since there are already navy, airforce and army cliques WITHIN the PMA as you pointed out yourself.

The RP has an unfortunate tradition of Patronage learned from their Spanish masters, and a PNA clique will only identify with their own rather than with the service as a whole. The same goes for the current PMA clique. They will even prefer less capable officers for promotion as long as that candidate for promotion have the ring. If they're corrupt, they will hoard whatever funds they extort for their own batchmates, to the detriment to modernization program and to the detriment of the nation's defense. Thus, having a PNA clique will only further divide the funds pie among cliques with their own interests rather than see the pie used for the good of the whole AFP and the nation.

Rivalry is only a good thing between individual, smaller units within the military, not between whole service arms. Canada did the right thing by unifying the RCN, RAF and RCA into one service in 1968- the Canadian Forces, where people identify with the military as a whole rather than with just their service. Canadian enlisted men (called NCMs or non-commissioned members), all go through same boot camp at St. Jean Quebec, regardless of whether they're joining land forces, air command or maritime command. Their officers only come from two sources- the RMC at Kingston and the BOTC course at St. Jean for graduates for graduates of civilian colleges. This negates the need for seperate general staffs and seperate logistics chains, so there is also less overhead.

On a similar note, the United States Marine Corps is the most efficient of all the US services because there are NO INTERNAL CLIQUES within the USMC. Of course, you have Marine aviators and Force Recon Marines, but these marines do not wear their medal and wings among fellow marines because it is heresy in a service where "all marine are riflemen". Force Recon marines are only considered "More Marine" than ordinary Marines in the regular battalions and in support units, but they do not wear any special badges. All Marines go through the school of infantry at Camp Lejeune after their first 13-week boot camp at either Parris Island or San Diego, regardless of what the chosen MOS or job was, since all marines, from avionics to mechanics to cooks, are riflemen. The same goes for Marine Officers who go through the Marine OCS at Quantico Virginia and later the vaunted "Basic School" where all marine officers, from aviators to staff dinks, still learn to lead a rifle platoon in combat in spite of their MOS.

This is unlike the US Army, which is FULL OF CLIQUES like the Airborne, the Rangers, Delta Force, Armor, Artillery and so forth. This dilutes the service identity and makes soldiers identify more with the unit and less with the service as a whole. The USMC are an example to the other services because they're the ones most dependent on joint-operations with other services to justify their existence. Thus they realize that fighting a war is a JOINT effort, and thus respect their need for the navy to transport them to foreign shores as well as the air force need to airlift their ground forces occasionally; this is in contrast to during the Cold War where you had the USN wanting its big carriers and the USAF competing by calling for their huge bomber fleets. The Marines were the service that most encouraged that "joint concept" and thus a joint military identity. If you don't agree with me, then read Thomas E. Ricks "Making the Corps" before you even start making your case against me. The Marines are thus an example of what could be done within a multi-role single service where everyone identifies with the same service; the Marine MAGTAF which has ground and marine air elements, supported by naval gunfire, is a testament of that genius.

For a country such as the Philippines whose military is only around 100,000 strong, one multi-role service would have sufficed for a country with limited resources. And that should have been one maritime service for an archipelagic service. It could have been the Philippine Navy, with its own naval figther wings, as well as its own land army in the form of the Marines. This maybe copying the USN, but one service for the RP would have discouraged inter-military rivalry because they all identify with the same service and thus less competition for funding and thus less overhead and no need for seperate general staffs.

Don't get me wrong, Tony, I'm not totally against the PNA. I just think that if you're gonna have a clique, it might as well be the whole military, and not within. And the whole military for the RP probably should have be one service- the Philippine Navy! Bravo Zulu! And there should have been a PNA instead of a PMA if you're gonna have one service academy. It should have been from the very beginning of this nation. No offence meant to members or retired members of other service arms.

However, since reality is far from the ideal, a PNA at this time is still a very bad idea, and only for the purposes of vanity/pride more than anything else.

MSantor,

It's not a question of large or small MICs, the point is Chile began to have a small indigenous arms industry by the mid 70's in response to the U.S. arms embargo against the military junta and the Pinochet regime. This is aside from the fact that the Chilean military budget is well covered by the country's well developed mining industry (especially copper). Don't underestimate Chile. It already had a battleship as far back as the 1880's and is often entangled with border conflicts with Argentina. the Chilean military and navy has long been developed by the British, Germans, French and Americans. It is a major player in south american affairs.

And I don't have to remind you that even the Indonesian economy and defense establishment is much better developed than the Philippines. Indonesian oil, rubber, & tin can finance their F-16s any day. Besides, they got those jets for a bargain from the Americans because the Australians earlier bought F-16s and Jakarta protested. Being the largest & most populous muslim country in the world and an absolutely vital U.S. strategic partner in southeast asia, the Americans practically gave the Indonesians those new jets just to keep them contented.

You can't say the idea of the Philippines having a burgeoning arms industry anytime soon is so far fetched when you look at Pakistan which started out having much less not too long ago. It's all a matter of political will.

But the "traditional" AFP idea of spare parts procurement is to aquire say a dozen new units and reserve three or four for future cannibalization for spare parts. This "tradition" stays in effect regardless of availability of funds or the lack of it.

Like I said. It is all a question of will to overcome the politics.

I don't have to because I'm not arguing the accuracy or truth behind your statement here. Even the whole AFP cannot do anything about this until the political leadership wisens up to a level which not only can sympathize with that idea but have the will to actually do something about it. So what can be done NOW? we wait for a regime change of hearts & minds?,... go for a coup and kill all the reds in government?

The only legal prerogative left right now is training and indoctrinating better service oriented people. We might as well finish off our business with our local insugents and finally send them all to hell, clean our own house, and THEN we can look at our external threats with undivided attention.

Well, that fine if you just want one overwhelmingly preponderant gang dictating the standards of service in our armed forces. If they say it's good enough even when it leaves much room for improvement then who else can say with authority that they can do a better job, or even perhaps that the "other" service is actually doing the same job better?

You lay all your eggs in one basket, if that one basket falls then you've got nothing left but broken eggs.

But the Canadians, the Australians, and of course the Japanese can afford to do that. Why?..because they already have established an undeniable record of excellence and retained an "imprint" of highly motivated professional service during the times when they schoooled most of their naval officers in service specific academies. (in the case of Canada and Australia, I mean Dartmouth; for Japan, I mean Eta Jima).

The Aussies can say, "yes we fought against Admiral graf von Spee at Coronel and off the Falklands". The Canadians can say, "yes we were at Jutland, and the Japanese can say, "yes we won the battle for Tsushima, the raid on Pearl Harbor & Java Sea and off Savo island in Guadalcanal!" Somehow, saying "yes we lopped off Magellan's head at Mactan!" can't seem to bring about a similar effect.

Remind me to cancel my subscription to Leatherneck Magazine. You must know that the Marines as a service arm started out as on-board-ship security guards to keep a watchful eye on mutinous sailors who might want to slit the captian's throat. In short, the Marines were traditionally the most despised of all service branches within the U.S. military. So the Marines as a whole began to to have a mentality not unlike the convict system where they found brotherhood and commonality from their own notoriety as "meatheads" and "rednecks". Their empahsis was on blind obedience and marksmanship. It was this type of Marine which won the savage battles for the Pacific in WW2. Still, it was just as well that the marines constantly had to compete with the the fleet for the Navy budget. It made them work harder to prove they were worth keeping (get the point?).

Although of course since the 80's they adopted more and more of the clean professional image of the much smaller British Royal Marine Commandos who are trained to fight as smaller formations and to think for themselves,... as they say..."adapt", "improvise", and "overcome"! Believe me a great deal of inefficiency went on in Vietnam before they learned to fight in a new combat environment....whole regiments or even divisions were positioned to cover areas before they learned the value of sending smaller detachments called LRPS. The reason why units became more mixed up with various specialties within was because the basic operational unit became much smaller and had to operate in the jungle independent of base camps for longer periods of time.

After Vietnam, they still encouraged multiple skills training mainly because a lot of marines wanted to go civilian or change service branches. The retention rate for personnel improved thereafter. These days, the more "skills and cross-training one has means a highier pay grade or promotion. But as you know, the U.S. has the money to do this. However, I'll tell you now that this system is NOT paying off in Iraq or Afghanistan because the "unit" is getting larger again and there's a lot of redundancy, meaning it's so much more expensive to put Marines in the field.

This is why the "multiple" cliqued U.S. army is doing the main job of maintaining the peace and order situation in Iraq, in much the fashion the AFP is operating in the Philippines we hope.

Then its would really be only a matter of ratio and proportion...small navy, small naval academy, humungous job to do.

I'm not asking for the "Manila Hotel" with an equal number of servants and staff you know, one or two buildings will do; an engineering shop; a lab; a modest marina plus a couple of foreign donated training ships and maybe a modest gym. If private businessmen can set up set up dozens of maritime schools, can't the government spare a couple of its nootime "luncheons" at the senate hall and use the money to build it instead?

We both only want what's best for our AFP and our nation. Given an ideal situation with a public largely respectful and proud of it's own military, a tri-service institute can do the job just as well. But you and I know the PMA is NOT an RMC-Kingston nor is the Philippines Canada.

West Point was only a fort sold by Benedict Arnold to the British during Washington's time and what sufficed for the U.S. Navy in 1776 were privateers manned essentially by pirates like John Paul Jones. Annapolis came to be the Naval Academy only very much later on at a time when the U.S. "fleet" consisted of exactly three frigates and a few merchant sloops. Then in America as now in the Philippines, we hear the same voices for and against. But when it came to their decision the Americans finally gave it the go. Indeed it was for sake of "pride" and "vanity" too, except of course they choose to call it more as "ambition" than anything else. :pushup: