Fool's errand
Noynoy is on a fool's errand abroad. In Europe, he is meeting or has met with his counterparts in Spain, Belgium, France and Germany, as well as the European Union, to try and rally them to the Philippine side in its territorial dispute with China. In the United States, he is also expected to make a push for an acceptable international agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
This is not to say that the issues involved are not important. On the contrary, they are extremely relevant and urgent. This is also not to say that Noynoy cannot gain the intended support he seeks. In fact, he already has, based on the news reports reaching the Philippines from such meetings. Not a single country has declined to support Noynoy.
But here is the rub. All of those who pledged support only committed words of exhortation. And even then, the words of exhortation never exhorted China to return to the Philippines what it has already grabbed for its own. The exhortations only asked all parties to adhere to international laws governing such disputes. It did not even addressed China directly but very carefully said "all parties."
Now, it is not that we want these countries to go to war for us. But it is the height of naiveté to assume even for a moment that other countries will side with the Philippines in its dispute with China beyond what they just did, which is to exhort all parties to abide by international laws. The truth is, we cannot expect even a categorical commitment of some form of sanction to be slapped against China.
And that is why the trip of Noynoy abroad, as far as this issue is concerned, is nothing but a fool's errand. And anyone who thinks it is beyond that is just as foolish. Virtually all of the countries Noynoy has courted do not have direct territorial stakes in the South China Sea. It would be foolish for anyone of them to get involved in somebody else's quarrel.
True, they may be our friends. But they are friends with China as well, or at least to the extent that they do not have a quarrel at present. On the other hand, they have very strong and lucrative economic ties with China. Only a fool will seek to compromise and jeopardize such relations to come to the aid of a party that, to them, is at the very least on equal footing with China as far as bilateral relations are concerned.
So what Noynoy got from the European countries whose leaders he met was only what they can actually give -- a verbal exhortation for all parties to adhere to the rule of law. It was as good as it gets, which is not really as good as we can ever hope to be. Why Noynoy had to come begging for a support he should have known they could not give, I don't know.
In fact, I suspect, the European leaders that Noynoy met were not truly happy with what Noynoy tried to ask from them. It only placed them in a very difficult situation. They were asked to do something they could not do, and yet have to pretend they were actually doing something even if they knew it did not amount to anything. What a terrible situation Noynoy placed them in.
The European fiasco, even if his entourage and his fans will never admit it was, should never have happened if only Noynoy and his advisers had their feet planted squarely on the ground. Unfortunately for the country and its citizens, Noynoy and his advisers are nothing but daydreamers. They just could not see that if even the Philippines' greatest friend and ally the United States cannot go beyond mere words to confront China, how much more for others less close to us.
If Europe had been largely reluctant and ineffective in dealing with a more urgent problem that is closer to home, which is the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, how willing and effective do you think it will be with a problem that is less urgent to them and is half a world from home? Only America can help the Philippines and even it is not helping enough. How could Noynoy and his advisers have missed that?
A fool's errand as well is Noynoy's stated mission in the United States, which is to make a pitch for an acceptable international agreement to reduce greenhouse emissions. Noynoy will probably receive more thunderous applause if he delivered a speech of such nature before Pacific islanders, whose lives are now under very real threat from rising sea levels that are the direct result of greenhouse emissions and global warming.
But in the United States? Have Noynoy and his advisers forgotten the great American reluctance to sign on to international agreements limiting greenhouse emissions? America has been reluctant to sign on to any commitment that would impact its dependence on industries that are among the main contributors to greenhouse emissions. He will be like that Die Hard character of Bruce Willis, walking a black neighborhood with a placard bearing words offensive to blacks.
To be sure, Noynoy will be speaking on invitation of Ban Ki Moon. But there is little comfort in that, considering that the words of Noynoy will have little or no effect on what the UN secretary-general might have in mind about the effect his speech may have on the global stage. Noynoy might as well be a Boy Scout speaking of how to start a fire before an audience of nuclear scientists.
To me, this trip of Noynoy abroad is a total waste of time and precious public resources. His first trip abroad was better. It had no pretensions and was more like a getting-to-know-you affair. It was a p.r. trip that, despite the hype, did not really generate much expectations. Besides, at the time, Noynoy was a curiousity to the world.
This time, Noynoy is largely an established figure as a leader of a country from whom some expectations are due as a matter of course. He and his advisers, therefore, should have chosen better issues for Noynoy to espouse or take up with other leaders of the world. Noynoy is desperate for accomplishments, if not on the domestic front, at least on the global stage. Apparently, he is bound not to make any on either.
- Latest
