On June 1, the Philippine government informed the U.S. Embassy in Manila that it had frozen a February decision to withdraw the Philippine and U.S. Visiting Forces (VFA) agreement. The agreement between the two countries facilitates the possibility for the United States to send military forces to the Philippines and supports the mutual defense treaty signed in 1951 by the U.S. and Philippine governments. After the fall of the Soviet Union and the decline of the communist threat in the 1990s, bilateral aid to the Mutual Defence Treaty took a rollercoaster ride; especially in the Philippines. In general, the Philippine government has remained supportive of the treaty since its inception and has often relied on the United States to rely on its defence, as it has done since World War II. This was highlighted during the Cold War by the many U.S. military bases operating in the Philippines. The most notable and controversial of these bases are the Clark Air Force base outside the Angeles City subway station and the U.S.

Subic Bay Naval Station. The bases were occupied for nearly 40 years after the end of the Second World War until the early 1990s. In 1991, the anti-American atmosphere in the Philippines forced the Philippine Senate to reject a new basic agreement that subsequently forced the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Philippine soil. [5] Faced with the rise of global terrorism with the events of 11.9. However, as china`s economic boom and militant expansion, the United States strengthened relations with its Asian allies, particularly the Philippines. [6] First, the Philippine security establishment still appreciates the alliance. Philippine forces continue to benefit from the VFA and receive military assistance, training, training and weapons. And although the Philippine Foreign Minister and Defence Minister mentioned the need to review the agreement and develop an autonomous national defence, the two did not openly ask for an end to the VFA. Major Philippine lawmakers also called on Duterte to reconsider his decision on the VFA.

Article V defines the significance of the attack and its purpose, which encompasses all attacks by an enemy power, is held as an attack on a metropolitan area by both parties or against the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or against its armed forces, public ships or aircraft in the Pacific. [2] Article VI states that this treaty does not infringe the rights and obligations of the parties under the Charter of the United Nations, obstructs or is not construed as an infringement. [2] Article VII stipulates that the treaty will be ratified in accordance with the constitutional procedures established by the United States Constitution and the Philippine Constitution. [2] Finally, Article VIII provides that the contractual terms are indeterminate until one or both parties intend to denounce the agreement. If the contract is terminated, each party must terminate one year in advance. [2] In 2009, China presented the United Nations with a map of its land claims in the disputed waters, in which it asserted its claims on the basis of the controversial “Nine-Dash” line [PDF].