Where do we go from here? - FROM A DISTANCE By Carmen N. Pedrosa

In the next few days, weeks, months, maybe even years, Filipinos will be challenged as a nation, as they have not been for sometime now. A hundred years separate us from the first efforts of our heroes at strong nationhood. Proving that Erap is not fit to govern the Philippines perhaps is the easier part of the political enterprise. Only fools (I’m sorry to say there are a few on the side of the Senate bench) would deny that what Governor Singson is saying is true.Even with the reservation that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, the fact that Singson broke away from the phalanx of Erap conspirators should have moved the senators to listen more closely to what he had to say rather than compete with each other in defending Erap. The behavior of some senators demonstrates what we have known all along – that once elected, government officials regard themselves as above the law and do not have to account to the citizenry. Suddenly the privileged positions they have been elected to are conveniently made to serve their personal fortunes and ambition rather than the public interest. That explains why some senators would be hard on Gov. Singson and soft on Erap’s two sons, Jinggoy and Jude. Only the presence of large crowds in the hearing and newspaper reports have helped to stymie this rush to pursue selfish interests. We may be indignant now that Singson has set the tone of widespread dissatisfaction against Erap but on the whole we would have been happy to coast along until the next elections because that is the way we conduct our public life. As a people, we are slow to anger and disgust against bad governance until we are safely in a mob. That is why public officials get away with murder in our country, and that is literally and figuratively because we let them. That is why I submit that the hard part of our job as citizens is less about what we will do to oust Erap than what we will do next after Erap is removed. Although Erap’s removal should remain the focus of events, it will be foolish to think that he is our only problem. There are many others. How do we begin to change a system that has not served our people and our country well?

* * *

Already the debate in the streets is not limited to the removal of Erap. I know that some anti-Erap protesters are anxious about taking on the problem of what comes after Erap at this time. It is a divisive issue and fraught with danger. I saw a wall with a painted spray message asking all officials to resign. Among the groups of the traditional left there is resistance against Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo despite her being the constitutional successor. Although I have had my earlier reservations about GMA’s reluctance to come out openly against Erap, I think it is time to give her a crack at leadership. She should be given a chance to prove her capability as a leader. If she fails, then she, too, goes out, but not before then. This course of action is not only good for her but good for us, too. It will hone our capacity to exercise sovereignty when elected leaders betray our trust. Some political quarters see l’affaire Singson as an opportunity to overhaul our system of government. Although there is agreement that differing sectors in the protest movement must band together as they did against the Marcos rule, their differences will soon come to the fore as events unravel. The more difficult question is whether the different groups can agree on what should take the place of Erap.

* * *

More Filipinos have since become wary about ‘peaceful revolutions’ because 1986 did not deliver the reforms promised at the height of the political passion then. Because of the lessons learned from EDSA 1, the protest movement against Erap or what some have already termed EDSA 2 will not be easy. Certainly the question of how the middle forces, the moderates of the center, will accommodate the left and the right in the shaping of the country’s political future will be a paramount consideration. This is a repetition of the political dilemma of EDSA 1, when the radical left made the political mistake of excluding themselves from the broad political protest against Marcos. So too with the right which rightly or wrongly refers to RAM or military idealists who tried to seize government at the time of Cory Aquino. This time with all the lessons learned since EDSA 1, it will not do to just ignore their demands. The challenge is how to cobble a broad coalition government that can be effective. Maybe it need not even be a coalition in the sense of party coalition (remember the Cory cabinet that failed because of strange bedfellows in her cabinet). But whatever shape or color the government after Erap, it should at least be a government that broadly reflects the different groups and interests spawned by dissatisfaction with Erap. It means a government sensitive to both local problems – housing for the poor, jobs, food production, etc. – as well as one that is able to cope with the increasing demands of globalism. This is a most difficult challenge but one that I am sure Filipinos are creative enough to tackle the way other Asian countries have done, if given a chance.

* * *

Remember Stratfor, the obscure US think tank who foretold that Erap will not finish his term? They are back in the scene. The same group now says Erap’s impeachment may lead to a new US-RP alliance. Here’s part of their report I read on the internet: If Vice-President Macapagal Arroyo becomes president she may increase military ties with the United States in order to confront a greater threat – China. If Estrada leaves office, Vice President Arroyo will become president for the remainder of Estrada’s term, and security relations could become stronger between the Philippines and the United States. Meanwhile, the United States regained a foothold in the Philippines partly because Manila needed military aid. The two signed the Visiting Forces Agreement in 1999 and ran joint war games last February for the first time in five years. But the aid was small – mainly trucks and helicopters – and the military relationship remained a shadow of its former self.The Georgetown-educated Arroyo - daughter of former President Diosdado Macapagal – has spent the last decade in politics. She was elected as a senator in 1992 and vice president in 1998. Arroyo keeps a tight lid on her opinions and has been a model vice president, supporting and parroting the president’s decisions. But a few hints have emerged about her views on security issues, which focus more upon external threats than internal ones. Fully aware of her country’s colonial hangover, Arroyo voices the primacy of Philippine national interests and shies away from a resumption of the patron-client relationship that existed with the United States for most of the 20th century. That said, last August Arroyo said she "cautiously welcomed" the possibility of U.S. intervention in the long-running hostage crisis, according to Mindanao News Digest. She also noted at the time the United States’ role as a traditional ally of the Philippines. Arroyo views China as a greater threat than the United States. Arroyo was one of two Philippine senators to visit Taiwan on its National Day in 1994, a symbolic move that provoked protest from Beijing. And she has gone on record over her concern about Chinese designs on the disputed Spratley Islands, which lie in the South China Sea west of the Philippines. Beijing has set up an outpost on reefs claimed by Manila. Arroyo has maintained national interest, rather than history, must determine political priorities. China has a history of proprietary behavior in the region and is a much greater long-term threat to the Philippines than is the United States. With Arroyo in office, the military relationship between Manila and Washington may intensify.

* * *

Comparison with Ecuador. When the Ecuadorans realized that keeping the comedian Abdala Bucaram president was doing harm to their country and wanting to exercise their sovereignty they impeached him for mental incapacity. Neither the Ecuadoran Congress nor the Ecuadorans quibbled on what ‘mental incapacity’ means in their Constitution. After all, it was not a medical bulletin but a political declaration that led to a wide interpretation of mental incapacity. If the objective was to get rid of him in the higher interest of what was good for the country the justification for doing so was found and quickly dispensed with. We do not find this flexibility among our lawmakers who seem more inclined to look for reasons to defend Erap and prolong the people’s distress and its bad effect on the economy.

* * *

Our ningas cogon mentality. To me, the more dangerous enemy is ourselves and our ningas cogon mentality. We are afflicted with this penchant for quick solutions and think that we can solve our problems overnight. I don’t know from where the leadership will come to remind us again and again that the shaping of a nation takes hard work and when correctly done is generally without glamor or showbiz. It happens with each day of resolve to do the best one can for our country. Yet we may be hamstrung in that longer term effort of reform if we are injudicious in our efforts to get rid of Erap as quickly as possible. We may be so determined that the economy is not damaged further that we are prepared to compromise that future by cutting deals with the same opportunistic personalities. Please let us not have the circus all over again. While we need to sustain the surge of patriotism that might see us through real reforms we must resist the blandishments of the Johnnie come latelys . As we build on public protests capable of showing political strength we must be careful not to sell out to groups with ulterior motives. We come together as citizens and not as appendages of groups with hidden agenda.

* * *

My e-mail address is: [email protected]