Last July 31st, US troops left the Philippines after a six-month military exercise with Filipino troops called "Balikatan" or shoulder-to-shoulder.

The 1,000 plus strong US force in the country was the biggest deployment of American soldiers after Afghanistan.

But US presence in its long-time ally may well return soon.

The US and the Philippines are discussing plans to implement the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement or MLSA between the two countries.

Under the MLSA, the US military will use the Philippines for support and service of its equipment.

Critics of the MLSA say the agreement is just a cover for its real purpose - to establish a military base in the Philippines -

Which in turn would be a strategic location for US interest in the region.

Among those who are against a US presence in the country is Philippine Vice President, Teofisto Guingona.

Guingona's stand against the US troops led him to make a crucial decision recently.

Foreign Secretary Blas Ople welcome to In Conversation. Your predecessor, the Vice President Teofisto Guingona resigned from the foreign secretary's post, which is why you are here. He resigned because he bitterly opposed the idea of US troops presence in the southern Philippines. You seem to like the idea; why ?

I do approve of the temporary American presence in our country. We have a Mutual Defence Treaty with America and of course to implement this treaty you need to improve the inter-operability of the two forces who may have to fight the war in defence of our country in the future. Inter-operability in equipment, in doctrines and all the operational options. So it is a necessary thing to do and I am glad that the US forces are participating in this programme. There is nothing they can do that does not agree with the authority of the Philippine government. So there is no question that Philippines sovereignty is in any way prejudiced by these exercises.

But what is the guarantee that the presence of the US troops and this arrangement that you now have will remain temporary? Because that is the fear of the Vice President that led him to resign.

With regards to this, the Philippine Constitution prohibits the permanent presence of foreign troops bases and facilities in our soil.

But Foreign Secretary, if I may interject here, a number of American sources are saying that the Americans are interested in having a foreign base in the Philippines. Surely you have heard of some of those arguments. What makes you believe that the Americans are not interested in using the Philippines as a forward base for the future?

Well in the first place we will not allow them. In the second place, I would like to remind you that all the responsible American authorities from President Bush to the Commander of the Pacific fleet in Hawaii, Admiral Bradford I think is his name. All have strongly stated that they are not interested in basing rights in the Philippines since this is prohibited by the Philippine Constitution. And I would give the American leadership the benefit of the doubt on this matter. As I told you, the Philippine Constitution does not allow the permanent presence of foreign troops bases and facilities and this will be upheld always by the Philippine government.

But surely you also realise that the Bush administration keeps talking about the Philippines as its second front in Southeast Asia. And Philippines in particular as it's second front in the war against terrorism.

Yes of course with the presence of the Abu Sayyaf terrorists in southern Philippines. We have defeated them militarily. They have been reduced to a band of stragglers and the ongoing military operations is in the nature of a mopping-up operation.

But has the Abu Sayyaf truly been defeated?

Recently, the rebel group made news again, by kidnapping several Filipinos on the island of Jolo in the Southern Philippines.

This incident is just a month after US troops left neigbouring Basilan, the stronghold of the Abu Sayyaf.

The American soldiers stationed in Basilan were not authorised to engage in combat with the Abu Sayyaf.

But their presence did bring a sense of peace and stability to the troubled island.

With the Abu Sayyaf back at the forefront of terror, does it mean that there's a need to re-establish the US presence in the country?

Why do you need another set of troops to come in to the Philippines? Why do you need the MLSA or the Mutual Logistic Support Agreement arrangement that you want to have.

The Americans were coming to train with our forces after the close of the Balikatan operations in Mindanao on July 31. They will not go to Basilan or to Jolo this time. This is part of a customary training arrangement under the Mutual Defense Treaty of 1951 which has been going on for years. But for some reasons this was interrupted when the Philippine Senate voted to end the bases agreement with the United States in 1991. So this is mainly a continuation of an all existing pattern of mutual defence exercises in Central and Southern Luzon.

Despite repeated attempts by Filipino troops to crush the Abu Sayyaf, the rebel group has never been defeated.

Many are wondering why it's taking the Philippine military so long to get rid of them.

The answer may lie in what a Catholic Priest in Basilan claims.

He told Channel NewsAsia's programme Insight last month, the Abu Sayyaf and some elements of the Philippine military are in cahoots with each other.

Father Cirilo Nacorda also told the Washington post the Philippine Armed Forces want the Abu Sayyaf to stay on.

Let me read out his quote there in the article "the military does not want the Abu Sayyaf to end" He's talking about the Philippine military; "the longer it goes on the more their budgets are up, the more guns and ammunition they can sell the guerillas, the more ransoms they get a cut of." An allegation that is now being investigated by the Senate in the Philippines.

Father Nacorda is a very respected figure in the Catholic Church in Mindanao. But he has been excessively exuberant about this matter and the allegations are right now being put to a test at a Senate committee. Yes, I think Father Nacorda is taking a very unkind view of the Philippine military forces in his area.

Father Nacorda is basically saying the Philippine army is corrupt.

Yes, he has made that allegation publicly. I think he has overstated his case.

If the committee that is investigating in the Senate now comes up with something that supports Father Nacorda's allegations, then what will happen to US troops' presence in the Southern Philippines and the cooperation that is going on between the two countries?

Yes, that will not affect the Balikatan exercises. In the first place as I said, these exercises have ended on July 31 and the Americans, about 1000 of them have already left the Philippines.

Segments 1 | 2 | 3