Interview on the Balikatan and Salaknib Military Exercises and Militarization of Asia and the Pacific

with Sarah Raymundo | member of BAYAN's national executive board and international liaison officer
hosted by Resist U.S. Led War Movement on the Counter Attack podcast

Date:  April 20th, 2026

Access the audio and video recording of this interview on: Youtube. Spotify.  Sound Cloud.  Apple podcast

• Could you give us an introduction to BAYAN and the specific communities or sectors you represent in the Philippines? What does BAYAN stand for and what are the main campaigns and achievements of BAYAN since its founding 40 years ago?
  

BAYAN is about to turn 41 on May 5th, Karl Marx's birth anniversary. Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, or the New Patriotic Alliance, is a broad alliance of progressive organizations led by the peasant-worker alliance. BAYAN also includes urban poor communities, indigenous peoples, national minorities, the youth, women, migrants, and other marginalized sectors in the Philippines. Professionals such as scientists, teachers, and church people are also part of the alliance. BAYAN was founded in 1985 during the struggle against the Marcos dictatorship, and for four decades has advanced campaigns for national sovereignty, genuine land reform, workers' rights, social justice, independent foreign policy, a campaign against U.S. wars of aggression, and solidarity campaigns with peoples and governments standing up against U.S. imperialism.

• Let's start with the current situation on the ground. There are massive war games happening right now. Can you share more about what the Salaknib and Balikatan exercises actually entail and how they directly affect the security and livelihood of the people living in the areas where they are conducted?

Balikatan and Salaknib must be understood not as routine military exercises, as they are called. These are institutional expressions of a long-standing military relationship rooted in U.S. colonial conquest of the Philippines, from the 1898 transfer of the Philippines to the United States under the Treaty of Paris. There, the foundations were laid for a military apparatus designed to serve foreign strategic interests. The formation of the Armed Forces of the Philippines under U.S. tutelage, synchronized by the role of Douglas MacArthur, ensured that even formal independence in 1946 did not produce genuine military sovereignty.
The Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) institutionalized this military dependency, later reinforced by the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) and the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA). These agreements enable the return of U.S. forces after the closure of U.S. bases Subic and Clark, which was a product of a very vigorous and vibrant anti-U.S. military bases movement in the Philippines. VFA and EDCA replaced a permanent base with a dispersed network of so-called agreed locations that function as de facto installations and permanent basing.

Balikatan was launched in 2001, and Salaknib is a bilateral army-focused exercise that emerged within this framework of Balikatan. Initially justified under the global war on terror, these exercises concentrated on counterinsurgency operations, particularly in Mindanao. Over time, Balikatan and Salaknib evolved into mechanisms for interoperability, logistics integration, and strategic positioning. This has embedded U.S. doctrine, command structures, and operational dependence into the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Salaknib started later, ten years ago in 2016. It is conducted in phases throughout the year and focuses on ground operations, interoperability, and command coordination between the Philippine Army and the U.S. Army. What is misleading about Salaknib is that it is often presented in civil and humanitarian terms, such as disaster response and community support. However, according to reports from rural communities, these activities overlap with combat and counterinsurgency capabilities. While separate from Balikatan, Salaknib serves as the preparatory and continuous phase: it standardizes ground forces year-round, while Balikatan scales this into large, multi-domain war exercises. Together, they form a sustained annual cycle of military integration. For communities, these exercises mean increased troop presence, restricted movement, disruption of livelihoods, and the conversion of civilian spaces into military use areas.

• What is particularly notable or concerning about this year's iteration of these exercises compared to previous years?

BAYAN has been following this closely and views Balikatan 2026 as representing a qualitative shift. It is no longer merely an exercise but an operational rehearsal for large-scale regional war. The integration of advanced weapon systems, the pre-positioning of materiel, and the expansion of infrastructure signal that the Philippines is being configured as a forward operating platform in the so-called U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy. "Indo-Pacific" is a geographical term invented by the United States and of recent vintage. Recent developments this year include planned fuel depots, ammunition manufacturing, and expanded logistics hubs, indicating a deepening of permanent war infrastructure under the guise of deterrence. The use of naval vessels to transport U.S. military equipment across islands demonstrates unrestricted operational mobility. The deployment of systems such as the Typhon missile system and the expansion of EDCA sites shows that U.S. forces are positioning for sustained presence. The Philippines is being transformed into an integrated battlespace because of this qualitative shift, particularly in 2026.

• How have you observed the increasing U.S. military presence and aggression changing since the announcement of the so-called "Pivot to the Asia/Pacific"?

The so-called pivot to Asia marked a strategic shift toward containing China and reasserting U.S. dominance in the region. In the Philippines, this translated into expanded military access through EDCA. Since the pivot to Asia in 2012, there has been increased frequency of joint exercises, as shown in the mutual dependence between Balikatan and Salaknib, transforming the country into a key logistical and operational hub for the United States.

• More recently, since the Marcos Jr. administration came into power three years ago, how would you characterize the relationship between the U.S. and the Philippines under the Marcos Jr. regime during this period?

The alliance between the Philippines and the Marcos Jr. regime has deepened significantly. The government has expanded EDCA sites under Marcos Jr., welcomed increased troop rotations, and facilitated new infrastructure projects for U.S. military use. This reflects a policy of heightened alignment with U.S. strategic interests.

• Question: What are the differences and convergences of the positions of China and the National Democratic Movement of the Philippines on these Military Exercises and U.S. military escalation in Asia Pacific?

China sees them as instruments of U.S. containment, encirclement, and military pressure in the South China Sea and the surrounding region. China's analysis is rooted in interstate rivalry and security balance. The Philippine National Democratic Movement also recognizes the containment of China as part of the U.S. strategy, but the National Democratic Left situates this within a broader anti-imperialist and class analysis. So the core issue is not simply power rivalry, but the subordination of the Philippines to U.S. imperialism through unequal treaties, military agreements, and economic dependence, which actually turns the Philippines into a forward operating base. From this perspective, the pivot to Asia intensifies a system of bureaucratic capitalism where the local ruling elite, and by local ruling elite, we mean state bureaucracy, the military establishment, and big business interests, collaborate with foreign capital and military power. This alliance enables the expansion of U.S. basing access, counterinsurgency operations, and militarization of communities while reinforcing domestic exploitation of workers, peasants, and indigenous people. In short, we want to go beyond the geopolitical analysis to address our specific problems and how we actually want to resolve this through a national democratic revolution, through genuine agrarian reform and national industrialization. So it is not just a matter of picking the lesser evil or choosing a side, but really being more strategic in terms of how we want to get free as a nation.

• There has been talk of new ammo depots, the establishment of "Task Force Philippines," and the semantics of "rotational forces." How does BAYAN interpret this language, and what is the reality of this presence versus a permanent basing agreement?

There is something very almost mythical about this. The language they use, like the language of rotational forces, obscures the reality of de facto permanent basing. That has actually been happening here in the Philippines. As mentioned earlier, the establishment of fuel depots, ammunition plants, repair facilities, and logistic hubs indicates long-term positioning. These developments show that the US forces are not merely visiting under the Visiting Forces Agreement; they are actually embedding themselves across Philippine territory. That language is meant to really mislead.

• You've highlighted military violence in the context of civil war. Can you walk us through some concrete cases of what communities are facing right now, specifically regarding strafing, bombing, and the militarization of peasant and indigenous lands?

We have been receiving reports annually from our BAYAN chapters in the rural areas, as well as from recent peace missions. These are solidarity missions that our friends from North America conducted in the past two years. So what have we received and analyzed from these reports? While Balikatan is increasingly oriented toward external war, its internal function remains rooted in counterinsurgency. Military operations have long resulted in the occupation of schools, forced evacuations, harassment of community leaders, and the criminalization of humanitarian work. These are actual reports we have been receiving. In the communities, as you mentioned, especially peasants and indigenous peoples, they face aerial strafing, bombing, sustained troop presence on their lands, and of course, what they share with us is how these conditions disrupt agriculture, displace families, and create an atmosphere of constant insecurity. That is the situation of our kababayans, especially in the countryside, whenever these Balikatan and Salaknib exercises are on a roll.

• How does the presence of these US-backed exercises coincide with or embolden this internal militarization against local communities?

The same military structures, trained through joint exercises, are deployed internally. The Armed Forces of the Philippines come up with almost daily reports giving updates on how the insurgency will end, and so on. The logistics, intelligence systems, and operational methods developed through Salaknib and Balikatan directly enhance counterinsurgency capacity. As stated earlier, external war preparation and internal repression are mutually reinforcing. However, when we talk about internal repression, we are talking about the Philippine military (AFP) tagging peasant communities as armed rebels. They are not really dealing with armed rebels themselves. So basically, the expansion of US access to ports, bases, and infrastructure further embeds militarization into the everyday life of peasant communities, turning civilian areas into potential, if not actual, conflict zones.

• Can you explain for our audience why BAYAN believes that a "people's war" is a necessary and just response to stopping US imperialist war in the region?

Perhaps the civil war, or more specifically the revolutionary forces here in the Philippines, call it people's protracted war. It can be best understood by distinguishing it from the logic of imperialist war. We have been talking about the intensification of Balikatan, and this reflects the logic of imperialist war, which is the projection of military power to secure geopolitical dominance. In this framework, the Philippines becomes a strategic node subordinated to foreign interests, largely because of its colonial history and its ongoing subjugation under US imperialism. That is the logic of imperialist war. In contrast, people's protracted war, as articulated in the revolutionary movement for national democracy and socialism, is rooted in mass participation, political consciousness, and the defense of national sovereignty. It arises from the conditions of inequality, landlessness, and foreign domination. So basically, the people's protracted war is the contradiction we have with US imperialism. We were talking about China earlier. Our contradiction with China is a conflict covered by the maritime regime on their own cross, and such a conflict can be resolved diplomatically. That is what you might call a non-antagonistic conflict. Our contradiction with the United States is antagonistic in the sense that the revolutionary forces here in the Philippines decided over 50 years ago that it will take a people's protracted war to end the subjugation of the Philippines by US imperialism.

• In the same vein what would a foreign policy that actually serves the people looks like and how does it compare to the current puppet foreign policy?

Yes, we do have an alternative to that, and it is a policy that is genuinely independent. Because, you know, the government always talks about independent foreign policy, but it is not an independent one. It is not genuinely independent. So how does that look like for BAYAN? It means rejecting foreign military bases, ending unequal agreements, and prioritizing national sovereignty and regional peace. It would focus on diplomacy. It would focus on self-reliant development and addressing the root causes of internal conflict, or even the armed conflict. That is a genuine foreign policy that we are trying to cultivate, not just among us, but promote nationwide, so that our people will have something to aspire to, that we cannot just be forever pawns of Western imperialism.

###