Puerto Rico has supported the United States military since the Revolutionary War, particularly through its high level of military service. Yet the U.S. territory has also resisted military buildup on the Island itself. Recent news reports indicate that local reluctance to U.S. military presence is being tested yet again.
The U.S. Navy left Puerto Rico in 2003 following extensive social unrest and civil disobedience in protest of U.S. presence in Vieques. Now the military is back in Puerto Rico, in the form of warships, stealth fighter planes, and both Navy and Marine Corps personnel on the ground. Puerto Rico’s status as a U.S. territory makes this use of the Island possible. Would the federal government have the same freedom if Puerto Rico’s political status changed?
Territory Status
With the current territory status, Congress has full authority — “plenary power” according to the U.S. Constitution — to make all decisions for Puerto Rico under the Territory Clause. The territorial government is currently expressing an openness to U.S. military presence in Puerto Rico, but the U.S. actions are controversial on the mainland as well as on the Island.
If Puerto Ricans decide that they do not want to be part of a Caribbean military operation, they have limited opportunities to say so. Protests such as those that convinced the Navy to leave Vieques would be possible. Puerto Rico residents could ask friends and family living in the states to communicate with their representatives, since Island voters do not have senators or members of Congress with voting privileges. However, with their limited voice in the American democratic process, Puerto Rico voters have little influence over the federal government’s choices, as is now well established since the enactment of the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA) in 2016.
A Page from History: An End to the Illusion of Puerto Rico Sovereignty
Statehood
States are sovereign and able to make their own decisions. They also have a voice in the federal decision making process. Citizens of a state of Puerto Rico would have U.S. senators and representatives with voting power argue for their positions. Voting representation in the federal government would put the people of Puerto Rico in a different position than they find themselves in now.
U.S. military can be deployed on land owned by the federal government. Military bases in the states are owned or leased by the federal government, so the government can make routine decisions about their use. However, states have a say in federal decision making, and military actions on state-owned or privately-owned land requires cooperation from the owners.
If Puerto Rico were a state, the re-use of former military base Roosevelt Roads, for example, would be a possibility. The United States is in the process of transferring the property to the territorial government but still owns some parts of the facility. The freedom the military would have to use the base would depend on who owns the land and the views of the state government at the time.
Independence/Free Association
An independent nation of Puerto Rico would have to work out the details of U.S. military bases and federally owned land with the government of the United States. The options for the U.S. military to make use of these lands for military purposes would depend on the arrangements made. For example, the United States leased Naval Station Guantanamo Bay in Cuba in 1903, when Cuba became independent, and still has jurisdiction over it.
If the new Republic of Puerto Rico negotiated a Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the United States, the terms can be expected to be similar to those negotiated by the current free associated states: military access in exchange for defense of the nation by the United States. A freely associated state of Puerto Rico could expect that the U.S. military would have, as Admiral John Aquilino put it, “full authority and responsibility for security and defense matters… including special and extensive access to operate…a forward combat credible presence.”
The U.S. military would have unfettered access and control in a freely associated state a Puerto Rico. A nation of Puerto Rico, with or without free association, would have no resident commissioner in Washington and no voice at all in Congress.
Permanent Military Presence but only Temporary Economic Help under Free Association
What’s in it for the Military
As conflict with Venezuela continues and national security issues arise, the U.S. military has stronger motivation to maintain its presence in the Caribbean. While the administration is describing the current military build up in and around Puerto Rico as part of a response to Venezuelan narco-terrorist cartels, The Economist expresses the international skepticism about the motivation. “Few,” they say, “think drugs are the sole or even the main focus.” The activity could reflect ongoing concerns about Panama, China’s influence in Latin America, and other national defense issues. A solid foundation in the Caribbean appears to be increasingly important for the U.S.
Defense Department Praises Compacts for Securing US National Security Priorities
