890.20/3–2149

The Chargé in the Philippines (Lockett) to the Secretary of State

No. 319

Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Embassy’s despatch no. 314 of March 21,1 entitled “Reaction in the Philippines to the Proposed North Atlantic Treaty,”2 and to report that some interest appears to have developed here in the idea of a Pacific Pact modeled along the lines of the North Atlantic Treaty.

Following the original press publicity given to the negotiations surrounding the proposed North Atlantic Treaty, the Manila Bulletin published an editorial on February 28 suggesting the formation of [Page 1124] a Pacific Pact to prevent aggression in the Pacific. The Bulletin editorial apparently was, in part, inspired by an article published in the same paper on the same day by Vicente Villamin, entitled “Pacific Security Pact.” In its editorial, the Bulletin, after examining the purposes of the North Atlantic Treaty, went on to discuss its applicability to the Pacific area. It posed the question “If a group of nations bordering on the North Atlantic believe it necessary to band together for mutual protection, why not the Pacific also?” The Manila Times followed up the Bulletin editorial with one of its own on March 2 entitled “Me Too”. The Times characterized the proposal for a Pacific pact as something growing out of “the me too school of political reasoning …” It ridiculed the idea as “plain hot air” saying that the “implementation of such a proposed act is a physical impossibility, logistically, financially and politically…”

These editorials apparently stirred only moderate discussion of the idea. On March 20, however, President Quirino gave fresh impetus to the idea through the medium of an exclusive interview with Ralph Teatsorth, local chief of the United Press Bureau. Mr. Teatsorth had apparently gone to the President seeking his comment on the North Atlantic Treaty. The President took advantage of the occasion to urge the United States not to neglect the needs of Asia. Speaking of Europe, the President said “Europe is used up—an economic liability.” Asia, however, said the President, “is a virgin region with unmeasured resources and people who are eager to take advantage of the blessings offered by democracy.” He appealed to America to “take the lead in the Far East and not concentrate her entire attention on Europe.” Asked specifically about a Pacific Pact, the President said that such a pact “seems advisable.” He added “There are no objections and, on the contrary, there are many advantages.”

The Manila Bulletin featured the President’s comments with a front-page headline “Quirino urges Pacific Pact,” and other Manila newspapers also gave prominent attention to the interview. The Bulletin also, in its issue of March 21, continued to give editorial support to the idea of a Pacific Pact. Other newspapers are also expected to comment editorially on the subject within the next few days.

There is little doubt that the Philippine Government and Filipinos in general are interested in the idea of a Pacific Pact. Most of them, however, seem to have little confidence that such a pact can be realized in the near future, if at all. The interest thus far evidenced in the proposal reflects the anxious search of the Filipinos for some measure of definite security against possible outside aggression. It does not indicate any change in their basic hope (and assumption, in many cases) that the United States will come to the defense of the Philippines in the event of an emergency. It does indicate that the Filipinos are anxious to have American support and assistance whether it comes [Page 1125] in the form of a Pacific Pact or whether it comes in the form of direct government-to-government assistance from the United States.

Respectfully yours,

Thomas H. Lockett
  1. Not printed.
  2. Signed at Washington, April 4, 1949; Department of State, Treaties and Other International Acts Series (TIAS) No. 1964, or 63 Stat. (pt. 2) 2241.