The current military buildup in Puerto Rico is causing consternation over growing militarization in the U.S. territory. Among those complaining are a small group of proponents who favor Puerto Rico signing a Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the U.S., which raises the question: what is the relationship between free association and militarization?
What is free association?
When two sovereign nations — that is, independent countries — have a COFA, they have a negotiated treaty about the relationship of the two nations. That’s the “association” part. Either nation can end the relationship. That’s the “free” part.
For the United States, which has COFAs with three independent nations in the Pacific, free association involves a specific type of relationship. “The compacts ensure that the United States can maintain a military presence in the Freely Associated States, and they enable compacts island citizens to serve in the U.S. military,” Ely S. Ratner, former assistant secretary for Indo-Pacific security affairs, explained. “These compacts provide assured access for Department of Defense operations, and they prevent would-be adversaries from accessing sovereign [Freely Associated State] FAS land, airspace and territorial waters.”
On the U.S. side, COFAs provide military access and strategic control. For the small freely associated states, the relationship provides defense along with some financial support.
Would a COFA keep Puerto Rico free of U.S. military presence?
Supporters of free association often refer to the relationship as “sovereign” without acknowledging that free association entails independence while also giving up a piece of that nation’s sovereignty – its military powers. Each of the three current FAS are independent countries. Puerto Rico would also be an independent nation while being in free association with the United States. This status would not be the old fantasy of “enhanced commonwealth” in a new coat of paint.
When the U.S. negotiates a treaty of free association, its goal is to guarantee a U.S. military presence in the other nation.
The federal government has some power to maintain a military presence in each of the 50 states. All states contain federally-owned military bases, and the U.S. military has broad powers on their land within the state. The same is true of U.S. territories. States, though not territories, have sovereignty of their own and have some control over militarization outside of federal land within their states.
An independent nation of Puerto Rico would not have to allow the United States to establish or maintain military bases on their land. A new Freely Associated State of Puerto Rico would undoubtedly find that U.S. military presence is part of the deal.
