The problem as I see it is not the relevance of the F-16 or even its price. The US is rich enough to donate a couple of old F-16s (as
excess defence articles) but the problem is that the PAF must have the budget to train on them and operate the fleet. As I see it, it is the inability of your government to increase your country's tax base or to meet 2009's P798.5-billion collection target, resulting in the need to under invest in everything ranging from health care to education to your military. In fact, in Oct 2009,
Sixto Esquivias IV resigned as commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) because, according to him, “it was the honorable thing to do... The BIR has a large tax collection shortfall right now, and I feel ashamed to stay.”
Before the PAF acquire fighters, they need to budget for and maintain advanced jet trainers, which was the plan before their President made a public statement that led to the current situation. This resulted in the need for the US administration trying hard not to insult the sitting Philippine President, by saying no directly to his request for F-16s as excess defence articles (EDAs). Military skill sets (of operating fighters) once lost are not so easy to regain (when the Philippines decided to retire their F-5s in 2005). This demonstrated their prior government's lack of determinaton to fund and operate fighters. This is totally unlike the current situation in Indonesia, where external parties have taken notice of the determination of the Indonesian government to plan, to fund and to modernise the TNI with an emphasis on raising, training and sustaining.
I suspect that's why Philippines min-def still try to find alternative (including went to Italy), since that USD 1.6 bio (the way I read it) is planned not only for Air Force alone. Yes, with USD 1.6 bio, Philippines can afford those 12 ex USAF F-16, but the questions is, will they (Philippines Min-def) willing to invest large chunk of procurement budget only for 1 sq of F-16. After all, with the similar amount of money (+/- 400 mio) they can get (for example) 2 sq of ex Italian AMX or 2 sq of ex Checks L-159.
The PAF is an organsation in desperate need for improvement and change, with personnel who love to travel but seldom come home with an order (with one or two exceptions and already posted in this thread). As previously posted in this thread:-
"Air force spokesman Miguel Ernesto Okol said the military fleet was in dire straits, backing up a 2010 government audit that found only
91 of the 393 aircraft were 'full mission capable'."
IMHO, they are not ready to take the leap to operate fighters (and hence not eligible for EDA transfers even if their current adminstration wants to pay for the upgrades) and they also have a demonstrated inability to manage and preserve the assets given to them in the past. The PAF needs to work on restarting their advanced pilot training before moving on. If you think I am harsh, wait till you hear what US sources reviewing Phlipppines military capabilities actually think (eg. see quote below from Sheldon W. Simon):-
"...Philippine defense capabilities have been a perennial joke within ASEAN. Lacking modern air and naval forces, the islands have been rife with smuggling, piracy, and fishery poaching..."
Beyond the fact that, in Sep 1991, the Philippine Senate did not ratify the US-Philippine Military Bases Agreement, which resulted in the removal of US bases from Philippine soil thereafter, a little recent context on the 'reliability' of the Philippines as an ally to the US is in order:
(i) on 20 May 2003, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) spoke of "unshakable resolve" in Philippines' support for the US in the White House on the 'War on Terror';
(ii) in return, the Bush administration provided Philippines with US$1 billion in benefits on the generalised system of preferences, increased quotas on textiles from the Philippines and a US$200 million special line of credit;
(iii) James Tyner (2005), writing on "Iraq, Terror and the Philippines will to War", described your country's approach at page 94, as "a member of the Coalition of Opportunists", who tried to capitalize on the Iraqi reconstruction efforts and angle for a piece of the action. Tyner quoted the then Philippines Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo as saying: "We have the names of 1 million workers, from skilled mechanical engineers to crane operators, with passports and are ready to go... But, when it comes to skilled labour, we definitely have the value added..."; and
(iv) fourteen months later, that "unshakable resolve" collapsed. In April 2004 a Filipino was abducted and in July 2004, another Filipino truck driver was abducted. In GMA administration's attempt to get the 2nd Filipino abductee released, your country gave in to the demands of the abductors and ordered the withdrawal of the Philippines' 51-strong contingent from Iraq. Subsequently, their government also banned Filipinos from working in Iraq.
This incident clearly demonstrated that when the going gets tough, the Philippiines gets going. The country's commitment has been described by Tyner as opportunistic.
I have been making the point that PAF has been making do with what they have but I cannot in good conscience say that the PAF has become more capable. On the basis of my previous posts, I believe I have shown that there are long running critical short falls in PAF abilities and equipment that has taken away from PAF's capabilities. Objectively speaking, since the people power revolution of 1986 to the present, the PAF has lost significant capabilities. A case in point would be the retirement of your F-5s without a replacement in 2005...
...Increasing PAF war fighting capabilities without improving local governance is futile. However, good governance should not and does not have to be achieved only at the expense of PAF's capabilities. I can understand why the F-5s were retired but not to aspire to have replacements planned in 2011 or thereabouts is not responsible...
Both Ananda and I live in countries, who are members of ASEAN. As fellow members of ASEAN, we would hope that the US will help the the Philippines acquire additional military capabilities, as it would enhance regional security (and as far back as Dec 2009, I've clearly said that the PAF needs to plan ahead and get ready to operate F-16s). However in a mature discussion, we must also take note that any US adminstration donating F-16s as EDAs must also demonstrate good stewardship of American tax dollars and the PAF as an organisation must demonstrate the capability to operate and to sustain the military capability donated (via having sufficient allocations for maintenance and other operating expenses for their existing fleet). It takes about 24-36 months to refurbish a squadron of F-16s at Lockheed Martin's factory, but it takes more than twice the amount of time to train a squadron leader or a crew chief of a fighter squadron. And that's just basic competence for the air force.
Developing a combined arms doctrine in an air-sea battle for the PAF will take even longer. The MRF chosen needs to be matched to each country's threat matrix. To be honest, Benigno Aquino III is supportive of the need for modernisation but he seems out of his depth in defence matters. See below for the depressing defence budget numbers for the Philippines (showing years of neglect):-
Population......................................: 91.98 million
Literacy rate (and Life Expectancy)...: 94% (72 years) (World Bank data)
2009 GDP (nominal) .......................: US$161.19 billion (IMF data)
2004 GDP (nominal)........................: US$$86.7 billion (Nation Master data)
2000 GDP (nominal)........................: US$75.9 billion (Nation Master data)
No. of Troops (active/reserve)..........: 120,000 (active) and 171,000 (reserves)
*Defence Spending as a % of GDP .....: Between a low of 0.8% to a high of 1.0% (from 2000 to 2008)
*2009 Defence Spending...................: US$1,424 million (at constant 2008 prices)
*2004 Defence Spending...................: US$ 1,275 million (at constant 2008 prices)
*2000 Defence Spending...................: US$ 1,270 million (at constant 2008 prices)
*Data from SIPRI