US Gives Over 100 Military Vehicles to Philippines

[GS Zhou]

Another sentence in which you showcase your own ignorance and you keep underestimating Philippines due to your ignorance, you are unaware that Philippines is fourth largest shipbuidling nation since 2010 and automotive and aerospace industry are well developed too, also Philippines has launched satelites since mid-late 1990's and Philippines economy is growing and their debt is below 50% of GDP thus from financial standpoint they fine.

Philippines operates M113A1's since 1967, they know how to maintain the thing they use for nearly 50 years!



Are you really that desperate? Where did I mention F-22 and ICBM's in this thread? I didn't and now you went off-topic.



You keep oversimplifying to avoid as much facts as possible and turn this discussion in your favor.

Anyway, US allocates 3.5% of its GDP to their armed forces compared to 1.2% that Philippines does for their armed forces, if Philippines allocated 3.5% for their armed forces then it would be 1/60th of US armed forces or over 10 billion USD or 1/13th of PLA's budget.



Philippines primarily use equipment that is based or from USA and they have experience with M113's since 1967 when they got M113A1 and they can maintain M113's if they want too, remember that there is a thriving automotive industry in Philippines and most if not all cars use aluminium.

Yet making parts for M113 in Philippines does not make sense due to Philippines army only having around 450 units, if they had 1500-2000 units minimum then it would be more affordable to maintain then import parts for it or if they want to locally produce M113A3 variant and upgrade M113A2's.



I am not bragging, you're delusional and where did I said that they are perfect condition? Because I refuted your incorrect claim that those M113's are "trash" you think that I think that they are in perfect condition? How is according to me? You simply want to force an idea of yours that I have claimed that yet I didn't.



During Vietnam... A lot has changed since then...



M113A2 was produced from 1979 to 1986... M113A2 is 3rd-gen, M113A1 is 2nd gen...



US stoped buying them because they have over 16000 of them!



As expected, you are taking it out of context...



Is 6 months to 1 one too much for you?

You touched the right point. Manufacturing capability is the most critical part for the discussion. For the three areas that you think Philippines is doing good with: automobile, shipbuilding and rocket/satellitte

1. Automobile:
the 2014 vehicle production volume in Philippines is about 90k units, an extremely small number even compared with other ASEAN peer countries: Thailiand, almost 2 million units; Indonesia, 1.2 million units; Malaysia 600k units.

What's worse is that most of the vehicles produced in Philippines is done via CKD format, i.e. Philippines only does the final assembly work, while most of the parts are imported from other countries. According to IHS, the CKD rate for Philippines 2014 is 91%, or the rate of CBU (Complete Built Up) is only 9%!

Just look at engines: within the 90k vehicles PH produced, 46% of them were using the engines from Thailand, 30% from Japan, 12% comes from Indonesia.

Automobile industry is the best reflection of a country's manufacturing sector. The high dependency on imported parts clearly tells us how bad the manufacturing sector in Philippines is!

2. Shipbuilding
World No.4 sound a great achievement! But the reality of the Global Shipbuilding Industry is that it is almost 100% dominated by China, S. Korea and Japan: China and S. Korea each takes about 40% of the market, Japan owns about 15%. How much do you think could be left for No. 4 to 10 countries??

The good number of the PH shipbuilding industry is contributed by the Japanese or Korean Shipyards in Philippines. The reasons that they come to Philippines is because of:
- PH has high quality coast lines (coast line is almost the most important reason for the location decision of a shipyard)

- PH is close to S. Korea or Japan, hence won't be too expensive for transport the parts to Philippines

- Low labor cost in Philippines.

Similar to the shipbuilding industry, PH also does a pure assembly work in shipbuilding. Almost all major parts of vessels: engines, transmissions, generators, radars, etc. need to be imported. Even the steel sheet are imported. Just look the steel figures of Philippines given by World Steel Org.: Philippines steel production 2013 was 1.3 million tons; while the net import is 4.8 million tons! Import is almost 3 times bigger than domestic production! BTW, PH's reliance on imported steel is very close to Iraq, a country suffered by consecutive war times since 1990. According to World Steel Org. Iraq's net import of steel is 4.5 million tons!

3. Rocket/Satellite
the 1990s' PH Satellite you mentioned should be ABS-3, a satellite made by Loral of US and launched by China in 1997. See? An American satellite plus Chinese rocket!! If I could have 1 billion dollars in the pocket, I could ask for the same package from US and China as well. But does it mean I therefore could make the satellite and rocket on my own? The answer is obviously NO!

See? That's the real situation of the PH manufacturing sector! That's why I don't believe Philippines could keep the grandpa vehicles in a good status. Again, for a task that US or China could handle well, it doesn't mean a country with much poor manufacturing capabilities could also handle the task well.

BTW, to double or even triple the defense spending of Philippines? We all know how bad the corruptions in Philippines, I think the PH generals and their families will be very grateful to your great ideas!

 

[Nike]

You touched the right point. Manufacturing capability is the most critical part for the discussion. For the three areas that you think Philippines is doing good with: automobile, shipbuilding and rocket/satellitte

1. Automobile:
the 2014 vehicle production volume in Philippines is about 90k units, an extremely small number even compared with other ASEAN peer countries: Thailiand, almost 2 million units; Indonesia, 1.2 million units; Malaysia 600k units.

What's worse is that most of the vehicles produced in Philippines is done via CKD format, i.e. Philippines only does the final assembly work, while most of the parts are imported from other countries. According to IHS, the CKD rate for Philippines 2014 is 91%, or the rate of CBU (Complete Built Up) is only 9%!

Just look at engines: within the 90k vehicles PH produced, 46% of them were using the engines from Thailand, 30% from Japan, 12% comes from Indonesia.

Automobile industry is the best reflection of a country's manufacturing sector. The high dependency on imported parts clearly tells us how bad the manufacturing sector in Philippines is!

2. Shipbuilding
World No.4 sound a great achievement! But the reality of the Global Shipbuilding Industry is that it is almost 100% dominated by China, S. Korea and Japan: China and S. Korea each takes about 40% of the market, Japan owns about 15%. How much do you think could be left for No. 4 to 10 countries??

The good number of the PH shipbuilding industry is contributed by the Japanese or Korean Shipyards in Philippines. The reasons that they come to Philippines is because of:
- PH has high quality coast lines (coast line is almost the most important reason for the location decision of a shipyard)

- PH is close to S. Korea or Japan, hence won't be too expensive for transport the parts to Philippines

- Low labor cost in Philippines.

Similar to the shipbuilding industry, PH also does a pure assembly work in shipbuilding. Almost all major parts of vessels: engines, transmissions, generators, radars, etc. need to be imported. Even the steel sheet are imported. Just look the steel figures of Philippines given by World Steel Org.: Philippines steel production 2013 was 1.3 million tons; while the net import is 4.8 million tons! Import is almost 3 times bigger than domestic production! BTW, PH's reliance on imported steel is very close to Iraq, a country suffered by consecutive war times since 1990. According to World Steel Org. Iraq's net import of steel is 4.5 million tons!

3. Rocket/Satellite
the 1990s' PH Satellite you mentioned should be ABS-3, a satellite made by Loral of US and launched by China in 1997. See? An American satellite plus Chinese rocket!! If I could have 1 billion dollars in the pocket, I could ask for the same package from US and China as well. But does it mean I therefore could make the satellite and rocket on my own? The answer is obviously NO!

See? That's the real situation of the PH manufacturing sector! That's why I don't believe Philippines could keep the grandpa vehicles in a good status. Again, for a task that US or China could handle well, it doesn't mean a country with much poor manufacturing capabilities could also handle the task well.

BTW, to double or even triple the defense spending of Philippines? We all know how bad the corruptions in Philippines, I think the PH generals and their families will be very grateful to your great ideas!

The thing is, the task to maintain arms and weapon systems is lie at gov. responsibility not at private industries. Actually ph. Army has long been operating and maintaining m113 since 1980's, hence they had securing the principal chain supplier for the parts and technical capacity to do some daily maintainance, so there is no reason they cant do that this time.

And if somehow they are struck with a more bigger problems for their m113 fleets, like MRO, repairing combat damage vehicles and so on they still can outsourcing the works to foreign firms.

As long as you had bucks in your pocket there is plenty of options

 

[Zero_wing]

You touched the right point. Manufacturing capability is the most critical part for the discussion. For the three areas that you think Philippines is doing good with: automobile, shipbuilding and rocket/satellitte

1. Automobile:
the 2014 vehicle production volume in Philippines is about 90k units, an extremely small number even compared with other ASEAN peer countries: Thailiand, almost 2 million units; Indonesia, 1.2 million units; Malaysia 600k units.

What's worse is that most of the vehicles produced in Philippines is done via CKD format, i.e. Philippines only does the final assembly work, while most of the parts are imported from other countries. According to IHS, the CKD rate for Philippines 2014 is 91%, or the rate of CBU (Complete Built Up) is only 9%!

Just look at engines: within the 90k vehicles PH produced, 46% of them were using the engines from Thailand, 30% from Japan, 12% comes from Indonesia.

Automobile industry is the best reflection of a country's manufacturing sector. The high dependency on imported parts clearly tells us how bad the manufacturing sector in Philippines is!

2. Shipbuilding
World No.4 sound a great achievement! But the reality of the Global Shipbuilding Industry is that it is almost 100% dominated by China, S. Korea and Japan: China and S. Korea each takes about 40% of the market, Japan owns about 15%. How much do you think could be left for No. 4 to 10 countries??

The good number of the PH shipbuilding industry is contributed by the Japanese or Korean Shipyards in Philippines. The reasons that they come to Philippines is because of:
- PH has high quality coast lines (coast line is almost the most important reason for the location decision of a shipyard)

- PH is close to S. Korea or Japan, hence won't be too expensive for transport the parts to Philippines

- Low labor cost in Philippines.

Similar to the shipbuilding industry, PH also does a pure assembly work in shipbuilding. Almost all major parts of vessels: engines, transmissions, generators, radars, etc. need to be imported. Even the steel sheet are imported. Just look the steel figures of Philippines given by World Steel Org.: Philippines steel production 2013 was 1.3 million tons; while the net import is 4.8 million tons! Import is almost 3 times bigger than domestic production! BTW, PH's reliance on imported steel is very close to Iraq, a country suffered by consecutive war times since 1990. According to World Steel Org. Iraq's net import of steel is 4.5 million tons!

3. Rocket/Satellite
the 1990s' PH Satellite you mentioned should be ABS-3, a satellite made by Loral of US and launched by China in 1997. See? An American satellite plus Chinese rocket!! If I could have 1 billion dollars in the pocket, I could ask for the same package from US and China as well. But does it mean I therefore could make the satellite and rocket on my own? The answer is obviously NO!

See? That's the real situation of the PH manufacturing sector! That's why I don't believe Philippines could keep the grandpa vehicles in a good status. Again, for a task that US or China could handle well, it doesn't mean a country with much poor manufacturing capabilities could also handle the task well.

BTW, to double or even triple the defense spending of Philippines? We all know how bad the corruptions in Philippines, I think the PH generals and their families will be very grateful to your great ideas!

Wow corruption in china is far worse at less our anti corruption efforts have been very successful man you chinese imperials are just adopate trolls

 

[Cossack25A1]

Wow corruption in china is far worse at less our anti corruption efforts have been very successful man you chinese imperials are just adopate trolls

The data he provided would have been different if we had opened our economy by either removing the economic restriction to allow ease of doing business or at least lessen the restrictions though...

 

[GS Zhou]

Wow corruption in china is far worse at less our anti corruption efforts have been very successful man you chinese imperials are just adopate trolls

To address your comment:

• Efficiency of Philippines to use the defense spending

Philippines actually has a much higher defense spending than other developing countries in Asia. Just to name a few, e.g. Myanmar or Bangladesh. According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Philippines's 2014 defense spending is 39% higher than Myanmar, or 64% higher than Bangladesh. But what is the defense spending efficiency among the three countries? Let's list the total number in service of four typical weapons of the three countries. The order is Philippines, Myanmar and Bangladesh.
- Number of Tanks in service: 45, 569, 680
- Number of Self-Propelled Guns in service: 0, 108, 18
- Number of Fighters in service: 0, 56, 45
- Number of Frigates in service: 3, 5, 7

There are definitely lots of corruptions in Myanmar and Bangladesh. But even though, the comparison still shows how efficient they perform for using the defense spending in a proper way. On other side, it also shows how HORRIBLE the corruptions in Philippines is!

• Efficiency of China to use the defense spending

To discuss China's corruptions in this thread is actually derailing the topic. But since you raised it, fine, I don't mind to speaking some words here.

There are lots of corruptions in China. We never deny it. We've done a lot to fight with the corruptions, e.g. to even arrest the deputy Chairman of the central military committee. But even with the corruptions, China still shows a great efficiency on spending the military budget in a proper way. Let's make a China vs. Japan Comparison.

According to SIPRI, Japan's military budget is about 30%~40% of China (depending on years). To match the same efficiency of China, theoretically, the new equipment procured by Japan should also be 30%~40% of China.

I guess you must think Japan is a country with very few corruptions. In order to illustrate Japan's great advantage of "clean government", the proportional of the new equipment Japan gets should actually be higher than 30 or 40%, maybe 50%? For example, for every 10 new fighters China gets, Japan should get 5 fighters at least.

Let's do the comparison now. But I don't want the comparison to be exhaustive, because China has lots of new weapons that Japan doesn't have at all! E.g. Navigation Satellites, National Missile Defense systems, Anti-Satellite Missiles, hyper-sonic glide vehicle, nuclear weapons, nuclear submarines, ICBMs, 5th-Gen. fighters, etc. I won't make comparisons on these dimensions, because you may shout to me that "This is an Apple vs. Orange Comparison". So, let's make the comparison for two piece of systems that are believed to be as the backbone of Japan's Military Forces: Aegis types destroyers (Kongo and Atago-class of Japan, 052C and 052D class of China) and fighters (F2, F15J of Japan, J10/J11/J15/J16 of China).

Aegis Destroyers:
The last Aegis Destroyer Japan got was delivered to Japan in 2008 (DDG-178/Ashigara). I.e. Japan gets NO new Aegis destroyer in the past six years!

Look at China. In the past three years, China gets seven new Aegis Destroyers! (DDG 150/ 151/ 152/ 153/ 172/ 173/ 174)

So the comparison for Aegis Destroyer is China 7 vs. Japan zero.

Fighters:
The production of F2 was ceased in 2011, which means Japan gets NO new fighters in the past four years!

Look at China. According to Rand of the US, China produced about 30 J10s, plus 40 J11s a year. I.e. 70 new fighters per year, or 280 new fighters in the past four years.

So the comparison of new fighters is China 280 vs. Japan Zero.

That's the comparison result between the corrupted China vs. honest Japan. I guess you don't like my fact-based comparison. But fact is fact

Lastly, pls stop posting hysteria and void comments here. PDF welcomes figures and facts, but NOT bu****it.

BTW, want to share you a 2015 satellite picture of a shipyard in China. Six Aegis-destroyers in construction simultaneously in one Chinese Shipyard! Guess how many Aegis destroyers Japan currently has in total? Six! 4 Kongo and 2 Atago!

Damn it, if no corruptions happened in China, maybe we could see seven, or eight new Aegis destroyers be constructed simultaneously!

 

[jhungary]

To address your comment:

• Efficiency of Philippines to use the defense spending

Philippines actually has a much higher defense spending than other developing countries in Asia. Just to name a few, e.g. Myanmar or Bangladesh. According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Philippines's 2014 defense spending is 39% higher than Myanmar, or 64% higher than Bangladesh. But what is the defense spending efficiency among the three countries? Let's list the total number in service of four typical weapons of the three countries. The order is Philippines, Myanmar and Bangladesh.
- Number of Tanks in service: 45, 569, 680
- Number of Self-Propelled Guns in service: 0, 108, 18
- Number of Fighters in service: 0, 56, 45
- Number of Frigates in service: 3, 5, 7

There are definitely lots of corruptions in Myanmar and Bangladesh. But even though, the comparison still shows how efficient they perform for using the defense spending in a proper way. On other side, it also shows how HORRIBLE the corruptions in Philippines is!

• Efficiency of China to use the defense spending

To discuss China's corruptions in this thread is actually derailing the topic. But since you raised it, fine, I don't mind to speaking some words here.

There are lots of corruptions in China. We never deny it. We've done a lot to fight with the corruptions, e.g. to even arrest the deputy Chairman of the central military committee. But even with the corruptions, China still shows a great efficiency on spending the military budget in a proper way. Let's make a China vs. Japan Comparison.

According to SIPRI, Japan's military budget is about 30%~40% of China (depending on years). To match the same efficiency of China, theoretically, the new equipment procured by Japan should also be 30%~40% of China.

I guess you must think Japan is a country with very few corruptions. In order to illustrate Japan's great advantage of "clean government", the proportional of the new equipment Japan gets should actually be higher than 30 or 40%, maybe 50%? For example, for every 10 new fighters China gets, Japan should get 5 fighters at least.

Let's do the comparison now. But I don't want the comparison to be exhaustive, because China has lots of new weapons that Japan doesn't have at all! E.g. Navigation Satellites, National Missile Defense systems, Anti-Satellite Missiles, hyper-sonic glide vehicle, nuclear weapons, nuclear submarines, ICBMs, 5th-Gen. fighters, etc. I won't make comparisons on these dimensions, because you may shout to me that "This is an Apple vs. Orange Comparison". So, let's make the comparison for two piece of systems that are believed to be as the backbone of Japan's Military Forces: Aegis types destroyers (Kongo and Atago-class of Japan, 052C and 052D class of China) and fighters (F2, F15J of Japan, J10/J11/J15/J16 of China).

Aegis Destroyers:
The last Aegis Destroyer Japan got was delivered to Japan in 2008 (DDG-178/Ashigara). I.e. Japan gets NO new Aegis destroyer in the past six years!

Look at China. In the past three years, China gets seven new Aegis Destroyers! (DDG 150/ 151/ 152/ 153/ 172/ 173/ 174)

So the comparison for Aegis Destroyer is China 7 vs. Japan zero.

Fighters:
The production of F2 was ceased in 2011, which means Japan gets NO new fighters in the past four years!

Look at China. According to Rand of the US, China produced about 30 J10s, plus 40 J11s a year. I.e. 70 new fighters per year, or 280 new fighters in the past four years.

So the comparison of new fighters is China 280 vs. Japan Zero.

That's the comparison result between the corrupted China vs. honest Japan. I guess you don't like my fact-based comparison. But fact is fact

Lastly, pls stop posting hysteria and void comments here. PDF welcomes figures and facts, but NOT bu****it.

BTW, want to share you a 2015 satellite picture of a shipyard in China. Six Aegis-destroyers in construction simultaneously in one Chinese Shipyard! Guess how many Aegis destroyers Japan currently has in total? Six! 4 Kongo and 2 Atago!

Damn it, if no corruptions happened in China, maybe we could see seven, or eight new Aegis destroyers be constructed simultaneously!

View attachment 279064

I do not understand what you are trying to argue in all these post?

Do you want to argue M113 was junk, or trash? Or Do you want to argue It's a stupid idea for US to transfer the M113 to Philippine?

If you try to argue how M113 was. Well, that's your opinion, I can accept whatever you say, I know for a fact when I first driven a M113A2 back in 2001 during cavalry school that you are wrong, but I can accept you have your own view.

If you are trying to argue its quite stupid to transfer the "junk" of N113 to Philippine, then wouldn't that be Oxymoron? If that is junk then it post no threat to you or China, then what is the point of argument?

So I don't understand how you go from arguing M113 into How Philippine spend on its military......I mean even if they want to pocket 4 out of 5 dollars, then it still not your business to take....

 

[GS Zhou]

I do not understand what you are trying to argue in all these post?

Do you want to argue M113 was junk, or trash? Or Do you want to argue It's a stupid idea for US to transfer the M113 to Philippine?

If you try to argue how M113 was. Well, that's your opinion, I can accept whatever you say, I know for a fact when I first driven a M113A2 back in 2001 during cavalry school that you are wrong, but I can accept you have your own view.

If you are trying to argue its quite stupid to transfer the "junk" of N113 to Philippine, then wouldn't that be Oxymoron? If that is junk then it post no threat to you or China, then what is the point of argument?

So I don't understand how you go from arguing M113 into How Philippine spend on its military......I mean even if they want to pocket 4 out of 5 dollars, then it still not your business to take....

There are other people in this thread saying Philippines need to double or even triple the defence spending. A discussion on defence spending efficiency is thereof a very natural extension. Why do you point the finger to me?

A discussion on China corruptions is derailing the topic. I stated it very clearly in my previous post. But I'm not the guy that initiating China corruptions to the thread. Why don't you challenge the PH guy that first raising the topic?

 

[jhungary]

There are other people in this thread saying Philippines need to double or even triple the defence spending. A discussion on defence spending efficiency is thereof a very natural extension. Why do you point the finger to me?

A discussion on China corruptions is derailing the topic. I stated it very clearly in my previous post. But I'm not the guy that initiating China corruptions to the thread. Why don't you challenge the PH guy that first raising the topic?

But it was you who raise these topic to begin with, at post #36 after other member tell you this move is to off set the small defence budget of the Philippine Armed Force. At #36 you mention the corruption is the first mention of Corruption in this thread and basically since then you did not debate anything remotely related to the topic which is the M113 beside that they are trash,

Again, let me ask you this, is this your express purpose to state the M113 Philippine is about to receive is trash? If you, you said so many time already. Or is it your express intention to debate how Uncle Sam always duped the Philippine government by trying to give them the "Hand Me Down"? If so, you have just contradict yourselves, if the M113 is trash, then there should be no problem for China to see it as any sort of threat.

 

[pr1v4t33r]

It's a green initiative. Recycling old stuff, good move.

 

[Aepsilons]

But it was you who raise these topic to begin with, at post #36 after other member tell you this move is to off set the small defence budget of the Philippine Armed Force. At #36 you mention the corruption is the first mention of Corruption in this thread and basically since then you did not debate anything remotely related to the topic which is the M113 beside that they are trash,

Again, let me ask you this, is this your express purpose to state the M113 Philippine is about to receive is trash? If you, you said so many time already. Or is it your express intention to debate how Uncle Sam always duped the Philippine government by trying to give them the "Hand Me Down"? If so, you have just contradict yourselves, if the M113 is trash, then there should be no problem for China to see it as any sort of threat.

Let's redirect the power here, shall we? A unique application of Aikido, i suppose, in context to debate Ki. My question to you is this:

Is it wrong for the Philippine Government to place greater importance on poverty alleviation, business creation, educational programs, health provisions programs and other civic-based platforms, over military and defense acquisition? I suppose we can see that the Philippines is developing their society first before aggressive military acquisition. I mean besides some minor disagreements in regards to maritime territoriality with the Chinese , the Philippines really has no 'enemy', does she? She is an archipelago with relatively demarcated borders. Their greatest threat is poverty, and the poverty alleviation mandate of their national and provincial governments is their number one mandate to the people. So i suppose having a robust military is necessary, but it should be a balance. Under the Aquino administration, the phrase they use is "minimum effective deterrence" .

Gradual growth of their military is the name of the game when you refer to the Philippines; as I have said, before.

Regards.

It's a green initiative. Recycling old stuff, good move.

That is part of the nature of Filipinos that I have learned to admire and love. Their adaptability; in my time doing work in Cebu City, I had befriended many folks who helped me with directions to visit one barangay (village) to another barangay, and tho the people that I met in those villages lived in poverty, they always , always smiled. I was even humbled by the times that i would visit a home to give an interview with the head of the household; the family would offer me food and whatever meager food rations they had. They give despite they are poor. That is the Filipino Spirit. The good nature of Filipino people. I notice that that is also a unique characteristic of Indonesian people as well; I noticed this when I was in Jakarta City years before , even in Kuala Lumpur. Perhaps this is a Malay trait, yes? A trait of Austronesian peoples. Because despite the host recipient be a Christian Filipino, a Muslim Sundanese Indonesian or a Christian Malay in Kuala Lumpur, they are like that.

I suppose it gives us a greater understanding of the spirit of 'brotherhood' in the Malay archipelago societies. Poverty is relative.

Again, let me ask you this, is this your express purpose to state the M113 Philippine is about to receive is trash? If you, you said so many time already. Or is it your express intention to debate how Uncle Sam always duped the Philippine government by trying to give them the "Hand Me Down"? If so, you have just contradict yourselves, if the M113 is trash, then there should be no problem for China to see it as any sort of threat.

Let me also address that although the M113 is 'aged' per se, given it is a 30 year old platform, it is still effective and was used in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq and in many other theaters. Its interoperability is without question; neither is its dependability and applicability in the terrain.

The Philippines is a developing economy with a national GDP of less than $400 Billion. They are not a regional or an international power, and their interests are more so immediate. They do not have the wealth to afford the newest defense equipment as more affluent powers. I am not trying to be mean when I say this, just stating the obvious and stating realistic fact. So with that said, for a developing country with limited means, these 100 or so M113s is a much-needed acquisition for the Philippine Army and Marine Corp, which requires greater armored support for their anti-insurgency objectives as well as to better enhance the abilities of their land forces already.

Perhaps to China, which is a major power and with a massive defense budget, these M113s are 'inferior' or 'cheap', but to developing countries like the Philippines, they are a much needed, realistic, necessary acquisition. Our Chinese friend needs to realize that the Philippines' greatest threat is not so much the Chinese (because there will never be a Chinese invasion of the Philippines), but more so insurgency prone areas in the south as well as the threat of extremists coming from Sabah into the Tawi Tawi Island Group.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

@Nihonjin1051

Philippines only allocates 1% of its GDP for its armed forces while it is recommended 2% which should't be an issue since their economy keeps growing and they debt is shrinking...

 

[Aepsilons]

There are other people in this thread saying Philippines need to double or even triple the defence spending. A discussion on defence spending efficiency is thereof a very natural extension. Why do you point the finger to me?

A discussion on China corruptions is derailing the topic. I stated it very clearly in my previous post. But I'm not the guy that initiating China corruptions to the thread. Why don't you challenge the PH guy that first raising the topic?

To address your comment:

• Efficiency of Philippines to use the defense spending

Philippines actually has a much higher defense spending than other developing countries in Asia. Just to name a few, e.g. Myanmar or Bangladesh. According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Philippines's 2014 defense spending is 39% higher than Myanmar, or 64% higher than Bangladesh. But what is the defense spending efficiency among the three countries? Let's list the total number in service of four typical weapons of the three countries. The order is Philippines, Myanmar and Bangladesh.
- Number of Tanks in service: 45, 569, 680
- Number of Self-Propelled Guns in service: 0, 108, 18
- Number of Fighters in service: 0, 56, 45
- Number of Frigates in service: 3, 5, 7

There are definitely lots of corruptions in Myanmar and Bangladesh. But even though, the comparison still shows how efficient they perform for using the defense spending in a proper way. On other side, it also shows how HORRIBLE the corruptions in Philippines is!

• Efficiency of China to use the defense spending

To discuss China's corruptions in this thread is actually derailing the topic. But since you raised it, fine, I don't mind to speaking some words here.

There are lots of corruptions in China. We never deny it. We've done a lot to fight with the corruptions, e.g. to even arrest the deputy Chairman of the central military committee. But even with the corruptions, China still shows a great efficiency on spending the military budget in a proper way. Let's make a China vs. Japan Comparison.

According to SIPRI, Japan's military budget is about 30%~40% of China (depending on years). To match the same efficiency of China, theoretically, the new equipment procured by Japan should also be 30%~40% of China.

I guess you must think Japan is a country with very few corruptions. In order to illustrate Japan's great advantage of "clean government", the proportional of the new equipment Japan gets should actually be higher than 30 or 40%, maybe 50%? For example, for every 10 new fighters China gets, Japan should get 5 fighters at least.

Let's do the comparison now. But I don't want the comparison to be exhaustive, because China has lots of new weapons that Japan doesn't have at all! E.g. Navigation Satellites, National Missile Defense systems, Anti-Satellite Missiles, hyper-sonic glide vehicle, nuclear weapons, nuclear submarines, ICBMs, 5th-Gen. fighters, etc. I won't make comparisons on these dimensions, because you may shout to me that "This is an Apple vs. Orange Comparison". So, let's make the comparison for two piece of systems that are believed to be as the backbone of Japan's Military Forces: Aegis types destroyers (Kongo and Atago-class of Japan, 052C and 052D class of China) and fighters (F2, F15J of Japan, J10/J11/J15/J16 of China).

Aegis Destroyers:
The last Aegis Destroyer Japan got was delivered to Japan in 2008 (DDG-178/Ashigara). I.e. Japan gets NO new Aegis destroyer in the past six years!

Look at China. In the past three years, China gets seven new Aegis Destroyers! (DDG 150/ 151/ 152/ 153/ 172/ 173/ 174)

So the comparison for Aegis Destroyer is China 7 vs. Japan zero.

Fighters:
The production of F2 was ceased in 2011, which means Japan gets NO new fighters in the past four years!

Look at China. According to Rand of the US, China produced about 30 J10s, plus 40 J11s a year. I.e. 70 new fighters per year, or 280 new fighters in the past four years.

So the comparison of new fighters is China 280 vs. Japan Zero.

That's the comparison result between the corrupted China vs. honest Japan. I guess you don't like my fact-based comparison. But fact is fact

Lastly, pls stop posting hysteria and void comments here. PDF welcomes figures and facts, but NOT bu****it.

BTW, want to share you a 2015 satellite picture of a shipyard in China. Six Aegis-destroyers in construction simultaneously in one Chinese Shipyard! Guess how many Aegis destroyers Japan currently has in total? Six! 4 Kongo and 2 Atago!

Damn it, if no corruptions happened in China, maybe we could see seven, or eight new Aegis destroyers be constructed simultaneously!

View attachment 279064

My friend, no one here questions the industrial might , the industrial abilities and potential of the Chinese Industrial and Military Complex. No one. Instead of focusing on the might and innate capability of China, which we do not question but appreciate in a rival power, focus on the context of the M113 acquisition for the Philippines' Army goals. You also have to know that these inventory will not be used 'against China', but will mostly likely be used to augment the Philippine Army's ability to wipe out insurgency groups such as the NPA, Abu Sayaff, MILF, MNLF, and other separatists forces.

Perhaps when relations between China and the Philippines improves, there will be possibility of Chinese defense sales. Who knows. The future, afterall, is never written in stone.

@Nihonjin1051

Philippines only allocates 1% of its GDP for its armed forces while it is recommended 2% which should't be an issue since their economy keeps growing and they debt is shrinking...

He he he, you're absolutely right. You know back in 2012, I attended a conference in Cebu City's Shangrilah Hotel, and the guest speaker there was Mr. John Gokongwei, a Chinese-Filipino entrepreneur and a billionaire. In attendance was the numbers of Chinese-Filipnos, as well as a group of Japanese-Filipnos and Japanese business men who have relocated to the Philippines. The topic that Mr. John Gokongwei talked about was the theme of "Good, Effective, Responsible Governance", and how this trickles down from the National level to the municipal level. Pro-transparency goals leads to greater governance and to decrease corruption in the branches.

He shared with us his experiences and his observations of the development of the Philippines in recent years; from being the 'Sick man of Asia' to becoming one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Inherent to this was the importance of addressing costs and benefits to adopting certain policies. I think what is needed to understand is that starting under President Fidel Marcos, the Philippines had begun to adopt a pro-economy standard , focusing on national development and poverty alleviation over gross military development. And so far in the past 20 some years, it has worked since the Philippines' economy is booming right now. Corruption continues to decrease and pro-transparency measures are being enacted and supported, as well as gradual military acquisition is being seen in proportion to their economic growth.

So going back to Mr. John Gokongwei, the concept of 'Effective, Good, Responsible Governance' requires conservative fiscal policy. Reducing the debt, increasing the national currency reserve, increasing the number of their work force, improving and developing pro-sustainability economic measures is what will guarantee Philippines' prosperity in this century and beyond.

Btw, John Gokongwei was a poor Chinese-Filipino. He grew , gradually, from immense poverty to becoming one of the richest men in the Philippines. As he said to me, "I became a Billionaire not over night, not by rushing to become rich, but through trial and error, through long term goals."

@Nihonjin1051

Philippines only allocates 1% of its GDP for its armed forces while it is recommended 2% which should't be an issue since their economy keeps growing and they debt is shrinking...

For your information, this is Mr. John Gokongwei:

I had a pleasure of shaking his hand and exchanging some fond words on the side after the symposium. Even met his son, Mr. Lance Gokongwei, who was there as well:

@Nihonjin1051

Philippines only allocates 1% of its GDP for its armed forces while it is recommended 2% which should't be an issue since their economy keeps growing and they debt is shrinking...

Yes, ideally the defense budget should be 2-3 percent, but as it stands, the Philippines is not in the position to allocate that number for defense. I think the idea is to strengthen the abilities of their current forces, and implement gradual acquisition. Strategically speaking, the Philippines can secure her borders by bolstering relations with Indonesia and Malaysia to cooperate together to decrease illegal migration throughout their maritime contiguous borders. In fact in 2014, the Philippines and Indonesia enacted a maritime border, further guaranteeing sovereignty of each other's border and intergovernmental cooperation in regards to instances of illegal crossing.

The Philippines can apply the same measure with Malaysia, which would greatly secure her maritime border in the south. In other words; the tool for Philippines' national sovereignty is through diplomacy. She has largely solved border problems through respectable diplomacy. It was through diplomacy that the Philippines and Indonesia agreed to border demarcation.

Philippines and Indonesia resolve 20-year border dispute - BBC News

It was also through diplomacy that the Philippines and Taiwan solved their maritime issue through a intergovernmentalist fisheries act that was signed just this week:

Taiwan, Philippines sign fishing agreement over disputed waters - Channel NewsAsia

I also believe that it will be through diplomacy that the Philippines can solve the maritime issue she has with the Chinese (Mainland, PRC). It takes time, but it can happen. In fact the Philippines has all the time in the world; as an island power, she has relatively safe borders. All she needs to do now is to maintain her poverty alleviation goals, boost industrial development, and the future is bright for her. She is neither seen as an aggressive or expansionist power, but a regional, diplomatic and responsible society. There are challenges for them, sure, as in the case of any developing country, but so are her potentials.

 

[Zero_wing]

Thanks for the back up see you chinese imperials these are the points you do not understand

 

[Cossack25A1]

Just for the record, those jeepneys that plow the Philippine roads use second-hand truck engines, so we don't have any problems dealing with M113s as we are used in using and fixing second-hand vehicles.

 

[jhungary]

Let's redirect the power here, shall we? A unique application of Aikido, i suppose, in context to debate Ki. My question to you is this:

Is it wrong for the Philippine Government to place greater importance on poverty alleviation, business creation, educational programs, health provisions programs and other civic-based platforms, over military and defense acquisition? I suppose we can see that the Philippines is developing their society first before aggressive military acquisition. I mean besides some minor disagreements in regards to maritime territoriality with the Chinese , the Philippines really has no 'enemy', does she? She is an archipelago with relatively demarcated borders. Their greatest threat is poverty, and the poverty alleviation mandate of their national and provincial governments is their number one mandate to the people. So i suppose having a robust military is necessary, but it should be a balance. Under the Aquino administration, the phrase they use is "minimum effective deterrence" .

Gradual growth of their military is the name of the game when you refer to the Philippines; as I have said, before.

Regards.

It's nothing wrong for the Philippine to focus on developing their country first and then focus on modernize their military.
The question is, even tho Civil Project do come first, the Military still need to be at least maintain on a basic level. Which is what the Philippine is doing right now.

It's easy for the Philippine to spend 10 billions or 20 billions for their Defence and forsake their civil populace, the question is why? The need for a modernize armed force is mainly to protect their own citizens and without a proper nation to protect, all the shiny new equipment is just for show. Unless there are clear and present threat to the Philippine National security, there are no need of big spending. The current defence agreement with the United States are more than enough to protect the Philippine.

The military was supposed to growth with the population, not the other way around, when the civilian structure is good enough, then and only then would be the only time when they are to afford a larger budget for national defence.

Let me also address that although the M113 is 'aged' per se, given it is a 30 year old platform, it is still effective and was used in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq and in many other theaters. Its interoperability is without question; neither is its dependability and applicability in the terrain.

The Philippines is a developing economy with a national GDP of less than $400 Billion. They are not a regional or an international power, and their interests are more so immediate. They do not have the wealth to afford the newest defense equipment as more affluent powers. I am not trying to be mean when I say this, just stating the obvious and stating realistic fact. So with that said, for a developing country with limited means, these 100 or so M113s is a much-needed acquisition for the Philippine Army and Marine Corp, which requires greater armored support for their anti-insurgency objectives as well as to better enhance the abilities of their land forces already.

Perhaps to China, which is a major power and with a massive defense budget, these M113s are 'inferior' or 'cheap', but to developing countries like the Philippines, they are a much needed, realistic, necessary acquisition. Our Chinese friend needs to realize that the Philippines' greatest threat is not so much the Chinese (because there will never be a Chinese invasion of the Philippines), but more so insurgency prone areas in the south as well as the threat of extremists coming from Sabah into the Tawi Tawi Island Group.

As I said, many people underestimate the M113 and what they can do. It would be wrong to assume the M113 are no more than a piece of rusting junk. In many way, I would actually prefer the M113 than the M2 Bradley I was train to go to war with (I only train on the M113 for APC manipulation)

The M113 is old, there are no other way for saying that, but being old is one thing, being capable is another. There are many thing a M113 can do a Bradley can't and that's what we should be focusing about. Engine can change, Main Armament can change, gearbox can change and if they are getting too old for it, you can simply put in a new gearbox or found some newer armament and stuck it on a M113 and they will still works, and it does not really matter how old it was, as long as it can function what they are supposed to, and they can be used for what they are supposed to, that's the only thing that should count.

When Philippine get to where China were or what Japan was doing a few years back, then they can start talking about getting or making new stuff on their own, but for now, WORKS, is the only word they need to hear, and what they should be considered