Obama Signs Executive Order Allowing Military To Fight US Citizens

UNITED STATES POLICY ON PRE- AND POST-STRIKE MEASURES TO ADDRESS CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN U.S. OPERATIONS INVOLVING THE USE OF FORCE

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. United States policy on civilian casualties resulting from U.S. operations involving the use of force in armed conflict or in the exercise of the Nation’s inherent right of self-defense is based on our national interests, our values, and our legal obligations. As a Nation, we are steadfastly committed to complying with our obligations under the law of armed conflict, including those that address the protection of civilians, such as the fundamental principles of necessity, humanity, distinction, and proportionality.

The protection of civilians is fundamentally consistent with the effective, efficient, and decisive use of force in pursuit of U.S. national interests. Minimizing civilian casualties can further mission objectives; help maintain the support of partner governments and vulnerable populations, especially in the conduct of counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations; and enhance the legitimacy and sustainability of U.S. operations critical to our national security. As a matter of policy, the United States therefore routinely imposes certain heightened policy standards that are more protective than the requirements of the law of armed conflict that relate to the protection of civilians.

Civilian casualties are a tragic and at times unavoidable consequence of the use of force in situations of armed conflict or in the exercise of a state’s inherent right of self-defense. The U.S. Government shall maintain and promote best practices that reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, take appropriate steps when such casualties occur, and draw lessons from our operations to further enhance the protection of civilians.

Sec. 2. Policy. In furtherance of U.S. Government efforts to protect civilians in U.S. operations involving the use of force in armed conflict or in the exercise of the Nation’s inherent right of self-defense, and with a view toward enhancing such efforts, relevant departments and agencies (agencies) shall continue to take certain measures in present and future operations.

(a) In particular, relevant agencies shall, consistent with mission objectives and applicable law, including the law of armed conflict:

(i) train personnel, commensurate with their responsibilities, on compliance with legal obligations and policy guidance that address the protection of civilians and on implementation of best practices that reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, including through exercises, pre-deployment training, and simulations of complex operational environments that include civilians;

(ii) develop, acquire, and field intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems that, by enabling more accurate battlespace awareness, contribute to the protection of civilians;

(iii) develop, acquire, and field weapon systems and other technological capabilities that further enable the discriminate use of force in different operational contexts;

(iv) take feasible precautions in conducting attacks to reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, such as providing warnings to the civilian population (unless the circumstances do not permit), adjusting the timing of attacks, taking steps to ensure military objectives and civilians are clearly distinguished, and taking other measures appropriate to the circumstances; and

(v) conduct assessments that assist in the reduction of civilian casualties by identifying risks to civilians and evaluating efforts to reduce risks to civilians.

(b) In addition to the responsibilities above, relevant agencies shall also, as appropriate and consistent with mission objectives and applicable law, including the law of armed conflict:

(i) review or investigate incidents involving civilian casualties, including by considering relevant and credible information from all available sources, such as other agencies, partner governments, and nongovernmental organizations, and take measures to mitigate the likelihood of future incidents of civilian casualties;

(ii) acknowledge U.S. Government responsibility for civilian casualties and offer condolences, including ex gratia payments, to civilians who are injured or to the families of civilians who are killed;

(iii) engage with foreign partners to share and learn best practices for reducing the likelihood of and responding to civilian casualties, including through appropriate training and assistance; and

(iv) maintain channels for engagement with the International Committee of the Red Cross and other nongovernmental organizations that operate in conflict zones and encourage such organizations to assist in efforts to distinguish between military objectives and civilians, including by appropriately marking protected facilities, vehicles, and personnel, and by providing updated information on the locations of such facilities and personnel.

Sec. 3. Report on Strikes Undertaken by the U.S. Government Against Terrorist Targets Outside Areas of Active Hostilities. (a) The Director of National Intelligence (DNI), or such other official as the President may designate, shall obtain from relevant agencies information about the number of strikes undertaken by the U.S. Government against terrorist targets outside areas of active hostilities from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016, as well as assessments of combatant and non-combatant deaths resulting from those strikes, and publicly release an unclassified summary of such information no later than May 1, 2017. By May 1 of each subsequent year, as consistent with the need to protect sources and methods, the DNI shall publicly release a report with the same information for the preceding calendar year.

(b) The annual report shall also include information obtained from relevant agencies regarding the general sources of information and methodology used to conduct these assessments and, as feasible and appropriate, shall address the general reasons for discrepancies between post-strike assessments from the U.S. Government and credible reporting from nongovernmental organizations regarding non-combatant deaths resulting from strikes undertaken by the U.S. Government against terrorist targets outside areas of active hostilities.

(c) In preparing a report under this section, the DNI shall review relevant and credible post-strike all-source reporting, including such information from nongovernmental sources, for the purpose of ensuring that this reporting is available to and considered by relevant agencies in their assessment of deaths.

(d) The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs may, as appropriate, request that the head of any relevant agency conduct additional reviews related to the intelligence assessments of deaths from strikes against terrorist targets outside areas of active hostilities.

Sec. 4. Periodic Consultation. In furtherance of the policies and practices set forth in this order, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, through the National Security Council staff, will convene agencies with relevant defense, counterterrorism, intelligence, legal, civilian protection, and technology expertise to consult on civilian casualty trends, consider potential improvements to U.S. Government civilian casualty mitigation efforts, and, as appropriate, report to the Deputies and Principals Committees, consistent with Presidential Policy Directive 1 or its successor. Specific incidents will not be considered in this context, and will continue to be examined within relevant chains of command.

Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) The policies and practices set forth above are not intended to alter, and shall be implemented consistent with, the authority and responsibility of commanders and other U.S. personnel to execute their mission as directed by the President or other appropriate authorities, which necessarily includes the inherent right of self-defense and the maintenance of good order and discipline among U.S. personnel. No part of this order modifies the chain of command of the U.S. Armed Forces or the authority of U.S. commanders.

(b) No part of this order modifies priorities in the collection of intelligence or the development, acquisition, or fielding of weapon systems and other technological capabilities.

(c) No part of this order shall prejudice or supplant established procedures pertaining to administrative or criminal investigative or judicial processes in the context of the military justice system or other applicable law and regulation.

(d) The policies set forth in this order are consistent with existing U.S. obligations under international law and are not intended to create new international legal obligations; nor shall anything in this order be construed to derogate from obligations under applicable law, including the law of armed conflict.

(e) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
July 1, 2016.

17th T'NALAK FESTIVAL Fireworks display and releasing of lighted balloons at Sport Complex SoCot.

https://www.facebook.com/abduljaman/videos/1120551067988682/

open this video.

Rody gov’t condemns attack on journalist

Malacañang condemned yesterday the attack on a radio broadcaster in Surigao City on Thursday, the first under the administration of President Duterte, who earlier received flak for his statement justifying the killing of corrupt members of the media.

Saturnino Estanio Jr., 41, anchorman for dxRS Radio Mindanao Network, survived the ambush. But his 12-year-old son was wounded and is in critical condition at a local hospital.

“We condemn this act of violence. We find comfort that both father and son have survived the attack,” Presidential Communications Secretary Martin Andanar said.

“We need journalists who will fight the same crusade as the government. We need journalists who will not be cowed by threats in order to rid the nation of vices such as illegal drugs and illegal gambling,” Andanar added.

He said Estanio was known for his tirades against the illegal drug trade and illegal gambling in Surigao City.

Andanar assured Estanio that those responsible for the crime would be held accountable.

“We assure you we stand by the side of good men. Justice will be served,” Andanar said.

Estanio believes the attempt on his life was job-related amid his commentaries against illegal drugs and gambling in Surigao City.

He said two men on a motorcycle sprayed them with bullets as he and his son got out of their car in front of their house in Barangay Rizal at past 5 p.m.

Estanio suffered three gunshot wounds but still managed to drive to the nearest hospital.

The National Union of Journalists in the Philippines (NUJP) also condemned the slay try on Estanio.

The NUJP earlier slammed Duterte for his remark on media killings in the country.

Duterte said some journalists were killed because of corruption and irresponsible reporting.

After receiving criticism for his statement on the killing of journalists, Duterte decided not to grant media interviews until the end of his term to avoid “wrong statements.”

President Duterte Inaugural food trips

Historic Inaugural food trips from  President Rodrigo R. Duterte very simple not lavish expenses for the National coffers.

FULL TEXT: President Rodrigo Duterte inauguration speech

Inaugural Address of President Rodrigo Duterte
Oath-taking of the President of the Philippines
Malacanang Palace | June 30, 2016

President Fidel Ramos, sir, thank you for your help (thank you for your help) making me president; President Joseph Ejercito Estrada; Senate President Franklin Drilon and the members of the Senate; Speaker Feliciano Belmonte and the members of the House of Representatives; Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court; His Excellency Guiseppe Pinto and the members of the Diplomatic Corps; incoming members of the Cabinet; fellow workers in government; my fellow countrymen.  

No leader, however strong, can succeed at anything of national importance or significance unless he has the support and cooperation of the people he is tasked to lead and sworn to serve.

It is the people from whom democratic governments draw strength and this administration is no exception. That is why we have to listen to the murmurings of the people, feel their pulse, supply their needs and fortify their faith and trust in us whom they elected to public office.

There are many amongst us who advance the assessment that the problems that bedevil our country today which need to be addressed with urgency, are corruption, both in the high and low echelons of government, criminality in the streets, and the rampant sale of illegal drugs in all strata of Philippine society and the breakdown of law and order. True, but not absolutely so. For I see these ills as mere symptoms of a virulent disease that creeps and social cuts into the moral fiber of Philippine society. I sense a problem deeper and more serious than any of those mentioned or all of them put together. But of course, it is not to say that we will ignore them because they have to be stopped by all means that the law allows.

No leader, however strong, can succeed at anything of national importance or significance unless he has the support and cooperation of the people he is tasked to lead and sworn to serve.

Erosion of faith and trust in government - that is the real problem that confronts us. Resulting therefrom, I see the erosion of people's trust in our country's leaders; the erosion of faith in our judicial system; the erosion of confidence in the capacity of our public servants to make the people's lives better, safer and healthier.

Indeed, ours is a problem that dampens the human spirit. But all is not lost.

I know that there are those who do not approve of my methods of fighting criminality, the sale and use of illegal drugs and corruption. They say that my methods are unorthodox and verge on the illegal. In response, let me say this:

I have seen how corruption bled the government of funds, which were allocated for the use in uplifting the poor from the mire that they are in.

I have seen how drugs destroyed individuals and ruined family relationships.

I have seen how criminality, by all means foul, snatched from the innocent and the unsuspecting, the years and years of accumulated savings. Years of toil and then, suddenly, they are back to where they started.

Look at this from that perspective and tell me that I am wrong.

In this fight, I ask Congress and the Commission on Human Rights and all others who are similarly situated to allow us a level of governance that is consistent to our mandate. The fight will be relentless and it will be sustained.

As a lawyer and a former prosecutor, I know the limits of the power and authority of the president. I know what is legal and what is not.

I know that there are those who do not approve of my methods of fighting criminality. They say that my methods are unorthodox and verge on the illegal.

My adherence to due process and the rule of law is uncompromising.

You mind your work and I will mind mine.

" Adherence.  Real Reform.  Truly Fluctuation  (Compassion. Real change.)" - These are words that catapulted me to the presidency. These slogans were not conceptualized for the sole purpose of securing the votes of the electorate. "Truly amendment. That is the objective of our government (Real change. This is the direction of our government). "

Far from that. These were battle cries articulated by me in behalf of the people hungry for genuine and meaningful change. But the change, if it is to be permanent and significant, must start with us and in us. [Applause]

To borrow the language of F. Sionil Jose, we have become our own worst enemies. And we must have the courage and the will to change ourselves.

As a lawyer and a former prosecutor, I know the limits of the power and authority of the president. I know what is legal and what is not.

Love of country, subordination of personal interests to the common good, concern and care for the helpless and the impoverished - these are among the lost and faded values ​​that we seek to recover and revitalize as we commence our journey towards a better Philippines. The ride will be rough. But come and join me just the same. Together, shoulder to shoulder, let us take the first wobbly steps in this quest.

There are two quotations from revered figures that will serve as the foundation upon which this administration will be built.

"The test of government is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide for those who have little. "- Franklin Delano Roosevelt

And from (Abraham) Lincoln I draw this expression: "You can not strengthen the weak by weakening the strong; You can not help the poor by discouraging the rich; You can not help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer; You can not further the brotherhood by inciting class hatred among men. "

My economic and financial, political policies are those contained in quotations, though couched in general terms. Read between the lines. I need not go into specifics now. They will be supplied to you in due time.

However, there are certain policies and specifics of which can not wait for tomorrow to be announced.

Therefore, I direct all department secretaries and the heads of agencies to reduce the processing time and requirements of all applications, from the submission to the release. I ordered all department secretaries and heads of agencies to remove redundant requirements and compliance with one department or agency, shall be accepted as sufficient for all.

I ordered all department secretaries and heads of agencies to refrain from bending the rules and changing government contracts, transactions and projects already approved and awaiting implementation. Changing the rules when the game is on-going is wrong.

I abhor secrecy and instead advocate transparency in all government contracts, projects and business transactions from submission of proposals to negotiation to perfection and finally, to consummation.

Do them and we will work together. Do not do them, we will part sooner than later.

On the international front community of nations, let me reiterate that the Republic of the Philippines will honor international treaties and obligations.

On the domestic front, my administration is committed to implement all signed peace agreements in step with the constitutional and legal reforms.

I am elated by the expression of unity among our Muslim brothers and leaders, and the response of everyone else to my call for peace.

I look forward to the participation of all other stakeholders, particularly our indigenous peoples, to ensure inclusivity in the peace process.

Let me remind the end of this talk, that I was elected to the presidency to serve the entire country. I was not elected to serve the interests of any one person or any group or any one class. I serve everyone and not only one.

That is why I have adapted as an article of faith, the following lines written by someone whose name I can no longer recall. He said: "I have no friends to serve, I have no enemies to harm."

On the international front community of nations, let me reiterate that the Republic of the Philippines will honor international treaties and obligations. On the domestic front, my administration is committed to implement all signed peace agreements in step with the constitutional and legal reforms.

Prescinding from there, I now ask everyone, and I mean everyone, to join me as we embark on this crusade for a better, brighter tomorrow.

But before I end, let me express the nations, on behalf of the people, our condolences to the Republic of Turkey of what has happened in the place. We offer our deepest condolences.

Why am I here? I do not belong there (This is not part of my speech). The past tense was, I am here because I love my country and I love the people of the Philippines. I am here, why? Because I am ready to start my work for the nation.  

Thank you and good afternoon.

Source: Presidential Communications Office

From Noy and Rody, nation in between...

As President Aquino completes his six-year term and incoming President Rodrigo Duterte begins his, this article looks into their respective brands of leadership through the lens of international relations theories, explaining how their belief systems translate to policies and pronouncements that will define their presidencies.

TWO WEEKS ago, outgoing President Aquino admitted that he toyed with the idea of imposing martial law in Sulu to allow state security forces to go after Abu Sayyaf bandits.

But in deciding against it, he said: “There’s no guarantee that there would be positive results. There might even be negative results. It might win more sympathy for the enemy.”

With these three sentences spoken in the final days of his term, Mr. Aquino demonstrated that his liberal thinking often outweighed the moments he entertained a realist approach.

Dogma of liberalism
The President’s almost predictably consensus approach to resolving internal security reflects the Kantian dogma of liberalism, emphasizing on the impact of behavior and the protection of people from excessive state regulation.

It is a paradigm that assumes the application of reason in paving a way for a more orderly, just and cooperative world, restraining disorder that can be policed by institutional reforms.

Parents’ influence

As Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, Mr. Aquino has described himself as a leader who seeks consensus, espousing a largely liberal thinking that almost certainly was the influence of his parents—democracy icons Ninoy and Cory Aquino.

In dealing with the overlapping claims in the South China Sea, the President’s state of mind urges him to champion a rules-based approach under the facets of idealism, magnifying moral value and virtue by asserting that our sovereign state and its citizens should be treated as ends rather than means.

The moral ascendancy the Philippines has gained from the arbitration case proves the centrality of a collective power.

Building alliances

Building alliances with other nations, Mr. Aquino recognized that while his administration pushed for the modernization of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, it remains one of the weakest in Asia after decades of neglect.

Mr. Aquino’s economic reforms can be construed by the principles empowered by neoliberals. The currency of economic liberalization, international trade, cross-border capital flows and regional integration somehow flirts with the language of increased investment, technology transfer, innovation and responsiveness to consumer demand that was achieved during his term.

By the time he steps down from office, the Philippines has become Asia’s rising star.

Concern for others

The social services pushed by the Aquino administration reflected liberal thinking adhered to by the outgoing President. The vision of widening equitability among the Filipino people in the hope of unleashing the fundamental human concern for others’ welfare makes progress feasible.

While naysayers of the paradigm agree that our world is anarchic and state interests are fundamental for survival, still, security reforms can be inspired by a compassionate ethical concern for the welfare of the people.

Whole-of-nation approach

As commander in chief, Mr. Aquino adopted the “whole-of-nation approach”—in which government and communities work together—to address the communist insurgency.

Notably, he defied protocol and met with rebel chief Murad Ebrahim to jumpstart the stalled peace negotiations with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.

The self-sacrificing act a leader may embody naturally coincides with the Kantian behavior of peaceful, consultative and cooperative virtues of Mr. Aquino.

He also showed belief in the justice system by hauling erring public officials to court, but ironically, he appeared to have undermined the judiciary at times.

He spearheaded the impeachment of the late Chief Justice Renato Corona, viewing the appointee of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as a possible obstacle to his campaign to make the Arroyo administration accountable for its alleged corruption.

Mr. Aquino also openly criticized Supreme Court decisions that he felt impaired his own governance.

However, his appointment of Ma. Lourdes Sereno as Corona’s successor was trailblazing for all intents and purposes for she will sit as Chief Justice for two decades.

Wendtian tendencies

Nonetheless, this can also be overshadowed by Mr. Aquino’s Wendtian tendencies to construct his own choices by relying too much on plausible stories without actual tests on anecdotal evidence.

For example, when the people, whom he famously called his “bosses,” wanted him to sack government officials for their ineptitude, he defended his men, pushing many of his supporters in 2010 to abandon him by midterm.

And even until the last months of his presidency, Mr. Aquino heaped blame on his predecessor for the country’s woes, which has become a turnoff for many.

At noon of June 30, Mr. Aquino hands over the country’s reins to incoming President Rodrigo Duterte. With it comes a change in styles of governance and belief systems.

Similarities

Indeed, the two Presidents share similarities: their devotion to their mothers, closeness and loyalty to friends, aversion to unsolicited advice and the ability to command an army of staunch believers.

They both walk the talk, albeit taking different approaches.

As the country embarks on a new journey in our transformative process as a young nation-state previously ruled by a dictator, a housewife, a general, an actor and two subsequent economist Presidents in contemporary period, the Philippines has yet to morph into an economic and military power in the region.

Now that a new driver takes the front seat of the presidency in the country’s roller coaster ride through democracy, is the country ready for another shift from a liberal to a realist?

The just concluded national elections have brought us to the smoothest transition we have seen in recent history.

Return of oligarchy

The narratives in Philippine contemporary period saw the effects of ironclad dictatorship and cronyism but also the return of oligarchy in a softhearted leadership.

People power uprising paved the way for unseating corrupt leaders but also installed successors who fell short of expectations.

The selective forgiving culture inherent in Filipinos has resulted in a people power fatigue.

Our contemporary Presidents’ rule mirrored the kind of leadership and reactive political culture we mustered during their respective terms.

Machiavellian realist rule

But six administrations of ups and downs—from martial law to the restoration of an immature democracy in the Philippines—gave us a picture of a Machiavellian realist rule and Kantian altruistic ideals.

After more than three decades of seeking the right kind of leader—mixing realist-, liberal- and constructivist-thinking Presidents from Marcos to the second Aquino—coming up with the best formula to make our country more secure and progressive remains elusive.

Now comes Mr. Duterte.

Campaigning for the presidency, the 71-year-old grandfather said he wanted to use Army Rangers to help the police force crackdown on drug syndicates, and then upon his election, announced he wanted armed civilian auxiliaries to take on the drug menace at the barangay level.

His draconian measures are hugely popular in Davao City, where he ruled as mayor for decades. People justified their allegiance to him and his ways by claiming they felt safe and such security made their businesses and livelihood thrive.

He has pledged to replicate his ruthless methods to eradicate criminality nationwide while his aides have backtracked on his campaign promise to do so in three to six months.

Death to criminals

A week before his inauguration, Mr. Duterte said that death to criminals was not deterrence to crime. It was retribution.

The thought of brutality in exchange for security has become a cause for great concern for human rights advocates.

Exuding power

This Hobbesian tradition of exuding power can best exemplify the type of governance that the incoming administration may possess.

The struggle to pursue consolidated national interests amid the country’s internal and external insecurities could result in realist-leaning statecraft for the administration to survive in a hostile environment.

The realist paradigm assumes that states are rational actors playing in their national interest.

Given the humongous responsibility bestowed upon Mr. Duterte, as he incessantly advocated restoring peace and order, presumed to lead to progress and development, his game plan would strongly resonate with his philosophical and ethical consideration.

The action is neither good nor bad as long as it will pave the way for the pursuit of his national self-interest.

Among other things, Mr. Duterte has promised to push for federalism, the restoration of the death penalty, peace with communist rebels and the passage of the freedom of information bill. Ironically, he declared he would use only state-run media, thus undermining the country’s free press.

Alliance with Marcos Jr.

Most alarming to those who fought for democracy three decades ago is Mr. Duterte’s alliance with losing vice presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., promising the latter a Cabinet position by next year and the burial of his father, the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

The incoming Cabinet is a hodgepodge of personalities from the Right and the Left to industry leaders and relative unknowns.

So far, only Mr. Duterte’s economic team brings some confidence to the rest of the nation that has now become an outsider in the former city mayor’s clique.

His security cluster is not exactly a formidable team for the heightened tensions in the Asia-Pacific region.

He himself has shown disdain for regional and international cooperation, judging by the remarks he made in his infamous postelection press conferences.

Beyond his being antiestablishment, Mr. Duterte was not to be disturbed from his slumber during the early morning Independence Day rites on June 12, raising the question whether traditions that make a nation might even be disregarded in the next six years.

Waltzian neorealism

The parsimonious and enduring persona the incoming President tries to paint before the people, whether consciously or unconsciously, is an astute personification of Waltzian neorealism.

This favors a systemic approach that asserts pragmatic, realistic and actual execution of relative power in a similar rational manner with outcomes falling within the expected range to ensure the leader’s own survival and that of the state he will be ruling.

Different styles

The transition from Mr. Aquino’s liberal rule to Mr. Duterte’s autocratic tendencies is one that will be keenly watched, not only by their constituencies but also by the international community, given the two leaders’ distinctly different politics and styles of governance within a democratic system of government.

Both campaigned on a platform of change—the single, most powerful word in any Philippine election.

But whether it is a collective change or personal change, personal interest or national interest, is something only the Filipino electorate can answer and define.

(Nikko Dizon is a defense and political reporter of the Inquirer. She holds a master’s degree in National Security Administration from the National Defense College of the Philippines (NDCP). Cabalza teaches national security administration at the NDCP and political anthropology at the University of the Philippines Diliman.)

Average Internet Download Speed in Select Countries