Witness

Witness


Posted 10:52pm (Mla time) Feb 27, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 28, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.



THE POPE'S emergency tracheotomy last Thursday has raised, for the second time in a month, the one question that never fails to exercise news organizations around the world: Who runs the Church when the Pope is ill?

The question, however, proceeds from the wrong assumption. The Pope is not the chief operating officer of a complex multinational; he is the chief priest of a Church that is 2,000 years old. In other words, he leads a religion that counts time by centuries.

In the event that he is incapacitated, the Church will continue to do what it has always done: gather the faithful, preach the Christian revelation, minister to the needy, offer a sacrifice of the "joys and hopes, griefs and anxieties" of an imperfect and all-too-small world.

To be sure, running the Vatican is not the same as running the Roman Catholic Church. The Vatican is a city-state with outsize influence in global organizations and international forums; when news organizations consider the whole issue of schedules and deadlines, this is often what they mean. Who will run the Vatican?

The quick answer is: The same people who do now. The Secretary of State serves as the chief official, but the various congregations follow the lead of their respective prefects. There may be infighting, or at the very least some maneuvering, between influential cardinals and archbishops when the Pope becomes incapacitated, but patience is a virtue in large bureaucracies, especially that of the Vatican.

But if the Pope is incapacitated, who will "run" the Roman Catholic Church?

This question is erroneous, like the first, but it reflects a more important error. Indeed, it is a measure of Pope John Paul II's overwhelming success in redefining the papacy. For almost every Catholic, the "Church" was very much a local experience. Catholicism was the parish, the neighborhood Catholic school, the patron saint, the local feast. Before the great John XXIII threw the windows of the Vatican wide open in the 1960s, the Pope was a remote figure-an often sainted link to the past, but always remote. But if John XXIII traveled around Rome and Paul VI journeyed to other countries, John Paul II was the Pope who brought the Church into the modern, media-oriented age. He became anything but remote.

He may be the most traveled man in history, logging more than a hundred papal visits to countries great and small. He has also been very much an activist pope, the political liberal who helped overturn communism in Europe, the religious conservative who preached the gospel of life at every turn (and canonized more saints than any pope before him).

It may well be that the "Catechism of the Catholic Church," the first new summation of the Catholic faith in 400 years, will be remembered as his chief legacy. It is certainly characteristic of his reign: formidably intellectual, in many ways an invigorating departure from old ways of doing things, but by design and in effect a bold attempt to provide the Catholic faithful with the old, pre-Vatican II certainties.

The question of who will "run" the Church when he is seriously ill, therefore, is a product of the vital dynamism he brought to the center of Catholic life. But it is in error because, in the Catholic tradition, no human agent is alone responsible for the growth of the Church, or its decay.

The real question that should be asked again and again, in newspapers and on television, online and over radio, does not involve a political issue at all. It is not about the use of power, but the exercise of will. Why, we should ask again and again, does the Pope not resign? While the Vatican has not officially admitted it, it is well-known that John Paul II suffers from Parkinson's, a debilitating disease that turns even the ordinary act of breathing into a laborious, touch-and-go affair. (Hence, the need for a tracheotomy.)

Wouldn't the Church he has done so much to breathe new life into be better off if he stepped aside, to give way to a healthier successor, and to earn a well-deserved rest without the distractions of office? Perhaps not. Pope John Paul II has always been a teacher; now he is called to be even more-a witness, a co-sharer in the suffering that Christians believe is redemptive. By not resigning, he is only answering his vocation.

Amazing

Amazing


Posted 11:33pm (Mla time) Feb 26, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A12 of the February 27, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



AT A TIME so many doctors are taking up nursing so they can find employment overseas, Christopher and Maria Victoria Bernido would probably strike a lot of people as an odd couple. After going to the United States to earn their doctorate in physics, they came home. And they came back not to the University of the Philippines where they used to teach, but to their native Jagna in Bohol where Chris' grandfather had founded a small high school.

Even more amazing is what the Bernidos have done to their school and to their students in the relatively short time since they took over the school less than a decade ago. It's not so much that their neck of the woods has seen international conferences at which Nobel laureates in physics delivered lectures, although that is a rarity even in Metropolitan Manila. It is not even that they are helping institutions in the south improve their science teaching and research capabilities by conducting training sessions and seminars. The most wonderful thing they have done is make their students really learn and appreciate Math and Science.

One good measure of how far they have come is that four of their graduates qualified for admission to the University of the Philippines in the 2002 exams and five in 2003, while no one had passed in previous decades. Moreover, visiting educators have marveled at the quality of the work the students produce as shown in the folios of activity sheets they put together, including examination papers, exercise sheets and laboratory reports.

How the students get to imbibe so much of their lessons is the product of a method unique in the Philippine setting. The emphasis is on "learning by doing'' instead of the traditional "learning by listening,'' as Raul Fabella, Cristina Fabella and Vigile Marie Fabella observed in their contribution to "Talk of the Town'' in last Sunday's Inquirer. Thus, lectures on a certain subject are limited to 20 minutes, while the rest of the period is given to the discussion of concepts among the students themselves, solving problems and doing exercises, and conferring with the teacher when the going gets tough. "The basic behavioral premise is that if you create an environment that rewards inquiry and reflection, students will follow the cue,'' the Fabellas noted.

Studying at the Central Visayas Institute Foundation is less of a burden to its students than in many other private schools. For one thing, the annual matriculation fee, which covers everything, is only P3,700. And since the system requires that their "homework'' be done right in school, students have more time, if called for, to help their parents, mostly farmers, with the real work of earning a living.

The next amazing thing about the Bernidos' grand experiment is that they have accomplished so much with so little. Their school squats on property it doesn't own. With the school fees kept low, sometimes the school has difficulty meeting the payroll. Whether it is for economic or other reasons, lectures are conducted "seminar style'' with all the students taking a particular subject in attendance.

What the Bernidos have going in their school perhaps offers what could be the best hope of reversing the downward spiral in the quality of Philippine education. They have shown that being among the bottom-dwellers in international proficiency tests in Science and Math, the two areas in which our Asian neighbors excel, need not be a permanent condition. They have shown that lack of resources, be it classrooms, teachers or physical facilities, doesn't condemn anyone to the lowest rung in terms of academic performance. But more than anything else, they have taught us, especially our education policymakers and officials, that the only limits to learning and imparting learning are those set by our imagination or the lack of it.

Wrong reasons

Wrong reasons


Posted 11:21pm (Mla time) Feb 25, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the Febrauary 26, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



SUPPORTERS of a national identification card system are quick to point out that we live in a society that demands identification for nearly any activity anyway.

There is merit to this argument. It is true that the government demands identification for many things, and provides all sorts of ways to assure identity. From birth to death certificates, driver's license, SSS, GSIS, TIN, CTC and passport numbers, the government has come up with many creative, time-consuming and income-generating ways to authenticate our individual identities. For virtually every professional calling, there is a corresponding authentication system. So when proponents of a national ID system declare that they are proposing something that already exists, they are at least partially correct.

We emphasize the partial quality of their arguments, because supporting a national ID is defensible only when based on promoting administrative efficiency, reducing bureaucratic red tape, easing the lives of a harassed citizenry and discouraging the counterfeiting of documents. If a national ID system were proposed so that government could do away with the many redundant and ridiculous identification systems, we would support it. Such a move would make the lives of citizens easier, make transactions more efficient and easier to track, and minimize the paperwork and fees ordinary people are made to endure as a part of life.

However, no such proposal has been made. Instead, convenience for the citizenry and efficiency for the bureaucracy are only promoted with regard to a national ID so as to sweeten popular misgivings over requiring such a card for purposes of national security. The reason many people are skeptical of a national security justification for a national ID system is based both on constitutional grounds (such as whether such a card would be used to contradict the constitutionally protected freedom of abode and privacy) as well as practical considerations. If the government cannot even properly issue and regulate the voter's ID card, which only applies to a specific segment of the population (of voting age), how could it possibly handle the processing and distribution of a national ID card? The tens of millions of voters still waiting for their ID cards that the Commission on Elections promised to deliver in time for the May 2004 elections are living examples of the problems associated with having a national ID card.

Inefficient and often criminal implementation of regulations is the bane of good governance in our country. We have wonderful plans, and a terrible record in implementing those plans. To date, no rational, practical, efficient and fiscally prudent proposal for a national ID has been made. At the same time, no serious effort has been put into establishing the parameters in terms of information, usage and scope, which would reassure the public that a national ID would not be used for spying on citizens or for extorting money or information from them.

We could propose that the government first explain to the public what information would go into a state ID, and the self-imposed limits it would place on the use of such a card, before the idea can be taken seriously. But we would rather suggest that the proponents of a national ID undergo a fundamental change in attitude. That attitude must be about service, and not about control. If the government said it wanted to serve the people better by issuing a state ID to every citizen, so that, from cradle to grave, the citizen has to use only one ID card, with one number, for a virtually limitless number of transactions, we would support it. Such a proposal would be useful and, indeed, timely. Singaporean citizens have benefited greatly from a unique identification number issued to each citizen, which is used for all public transactions and on all official documents.

However, to say that we need yet another card, with information and uses that are vaguely described, at an undetermined cost, in order to secure an equally undefined and vaguely worded concept such as "national security," or "fighting terrorism," inspires only feelings of insecurity and even terror. As it stands, the national ID proposal gives too much discretion to its proponents, and too little protection to the people who will be required to use it.

Voices: On reviving the mining industry

On reviving the mining industry


Posted 11:53pm (Mla time) Feb 24, 2005
INQ7.net



(INQ7.net editor's note: Below are selected, condensed postings of INQ7.net readers on the site's Talking Points section. For the full text of postings and to participate in the discussion, go to news.inq7.net/talkingpoints/)

I think the government should give more attention and push through with the real essence of sustainable development and fund more environmental projects instead of mining.
-- Lorenzo Jr. Cordova


* * *

Three things will materialize if mining is successful in the Philippines:

First is the revenue we will get directly from the revival of this vital resource. Second, since our country is doing something about the country's debt, our credit rating will go up. If our credit rating goes up, the interest rate we pay to service the debt will be much less.

Those dollars are enough to spend on infrastructure like schools, bridges, [and on] increased salaries [for] our teachers and public employees.

Third, there will be jobs for people who can handle a shovel and other skilled workers. The country wins threefold...
-- Mang Isko


* * *

I’m not into mining! The only one who will benefit this is Jose Pidal, not Juan de la Cruz.
--Arnaldo Batoon


* * *

Many countries prospered through their mining industry.

The mining industry, properly managed and regulated, will bring economic benefits to the Filipino people in general and to our country.

However, the culture of corruption in our country has endangered not only the environment but [also] our culture and mindset.

Corruption will endanger the mining industry and will bring immeasurable catastrophe to the environment and the Filipino people...
-- Benny C. Cenzon


* * *

How can the revitalization of the mining industry rescue our dying economy in concrete terms?

It is not enough to estimate our gains from the liberalization of the mining industry.

It is not fair [either] to allow other countries to take the lion’s share of our country’s wealth.

It is better if the government promotes and subsidizes the operations of local mining firms. In that case we are sure to head [down] the road to national industrialization and genuine economic restoration.
-- Nikki Rose Pili


* * *

Looking at the potential and magnitude of the resources, I believe we should revive the mining industry.

First, the one trillion US dollars is a gift from God which all of us need to … alleviate the poverty of our people. Not doing this is a total disregard of God's will.

Having said that, what we [must] do is develop a safe and reasonable mechanism, parallel with the exploitation of these resources, [to] ensure the protection of our environment. We also need to see to it that the government shares are protected … also of paramount importance.
-- Ben Guerra


* * *

There are two important end-results that drive the opposing sides of this debate about mining in our country.

Those in favor of mining will argue for the overall economic effect of the venture, thus saving this country from bankruptcy. Those who oppose it say it will not just ruin the landscape but also displace whole communities along its path, plus contribute to massive pollution and destruction of areas [with] high potential for tourism.

The economic benefits of mining are really meaningless unless the common "tao" sees the reward to himself and his family. Is it really worth destroying our natural environment for this? Is it really the solution to our large-scale poverty?

There are two countries in the world the Filipinos can look at and learn from their mining experience. These are the tiny Pacific Island nation of Nauru and Australia.

Nauru exploited its land and benefited immensely from the mining boom there for a short time. It became the richest country in the Pacific until their mineral deposits ran out and now they are almost bankrupt again and have almost nothing to show for it.

Their land is so severely stripped that it has become one of the world's worst environmental disaster areas. No amount of money can give them back their land. They can't even rely on tourism for income, as it's now an ugly land of bare soil with nothing on it. The only people who benefited are the corrupt politicians and foreign mining companies now looking for their next mining victims.

No doubt they will promise a lot but once the poor country's resources are gone, so will they ... [I]n Australia it's another story -- this is a big country with lots of mineral resources. This is one of the few countries in the world that continually benefits from large-scale mining and people are benefiting from this. Money from the taxes from mining companies goes to first-class roads, hospitals, world-class universities, etc.

Mining is one of the biggest export earners of Australia. Land here is also being stripped bare but this is a really big country with lots of desert land, which is almost useless but good for mining. One thing missing here is a corrupt system. This country is rich because of mining.
-- Archie Serafica


* * *

The real treasure of the Philippines -- the richness of our culture, the beauty of our indigenous people and the richness of our biodiversity -- has been rarely mentioned in the arguments for mining. If we put an economic value to what we already have, do you think it will not surpass the "possibilities" of mining?

The real problem lies in the fact that people in this country, whether indigenous or not, are not really valued and this is why we see this government even encouraging modern-day slavery in our Filipino entertainers, nurses, and teachers.
-- Cornel Bongco


* * *

In my honest opinion, mining is OK in the Philippines as long as politics will not or never comes in! One of the many reasons as to why investors are avoiding the Philippines is due to red tape and "dirty politics"!
-- Jun Arevalo


* * *

[T]he Supreme Court has spoken … it's high time we support the decision. Why allow a few selfish people to benefit from "underground" mining when there could be a lot of needy people? The issue now is the "greater proportion."
-- Monsi Serrano

No regrets

No regrets


Posted 11:36pm (Mla time) Feb 24, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 25, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



EVERY year as the nation commemorates the 1986 Edsa Revolution, Filipinos used to the Lenten feeling of remorse and regret to strike their breast, say mea culpa, and declare that everything has gone for naught. There seems to be a wide predisposition to pronounce the revolution dead, its spirit wasted away in the dispiriting times, its message lost in the welter of negative messages spawned by a people so prone to negative thoughts, like the Edsa Shrine clouded and vanished under the smog of traffic and the din of commerce.

We should be reminded what Edsa was all about, and why keeping its memory alive is important. Edsa was about the proverbial fight against tyranny, the struggle between good and evil. We may have put it too much in metaphysical terms, but all of us who lived through the terrible years of the Ferdinand Marcos dictatorship know that Edsa was nothing short of a holy war, a battle between light and darkness.

If Edsa is sometimes painted in terms of a miracle, it is not only because its victory was astounding. It was also a victory against all odds. It was something totally unexpected because it violated all natural laws of reason and human calculation. It was a preternatural event. If there are detractors of Edsa, it is those who protest its preternatural dimensions. The Marcos loyalists and many in the Left demean it as totally explicable, in the process blaming, for example, American interference and even CIA machination for the incident. These were the same people who had insisted that Marcos was invincible and irremovable exactly because of American sponsorship and support. When the outcome flew in their face, they had to insist that the Americans switched sides, in effect demeaning the people who went against Marcos' troops and tanks with nothing but a prayer and a hope that they would prevail with God's help.

There is, then, a dismissive attitude of democracy and the people among detractors of the Edsa Revolution. It is a dangerous attitude because it carries within it the seed of fascism; it is an orientation that has in fact spawned authoritarianism because it is contemptuous of the people's power to change things and decide for themselves. It is an anti-democratic attitude.

Edsa was a democratic revolution. It was a historic event because it reaffirmed the power and authority of the people to control and meet their destiny. If we hark back to the memory of Edsa, it is because we hark back to the singular moment of history in which we drew forth from the power of our solidarity and used that power to change things for the better.

For the better? But haven't things gone worse since then? In fact, many of our reservations about Edsa are really the result of the frustrations and disappointments we have felt since then. The revolution promised a lot, and it seems the promises have not been kept. We seem to have been left holding wretched stalks of disappointment.

But Edsa's validity and power derive precisely from its memory. We hold this memory dear in the midst of so much disappointment and frustration. This memory is potent as shown by the other countries that followed its example in order to spark their own people power revolutions. Edsa signaled a democratic transition not only in the nation but also in other nations with repressive regimes. It unleashed the pro-democracy tide that swept South Korea, Poland, Pakistan and the rest of the world.

The spirit of Edsa dead? It lives on. If not for it, there would have been no Edsa 2. If not for it, we would have no vantage point from which to evaluate our democratic progress, how much we have achieved and how much we have fallen short of the ideal. In short, Edsa remains a barometer of all of our noblest aspirations as a people.

Edsa remains a valid historical event that should be appreciated on its own terms. It achieved what it set out to do: throw off the yoke of dictatorship and restore the country to the democratic grace that is its birthright. If we have fallen short of its demands, it is proof of how poor we have grown in democratic grace if we denigrate its memory and demean its legacy. Edsa may be a historical memory but it is also a historical promise-it is also eschatology. It is something to be fully born yet.

Let us embrace Edsa and forge ahead with the revolution.

Diaspora is not good for us

Diaspora is not good for us


Posted 11:43pm (Mla time) Feb 23, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 24, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer


THIS is in reaction to the column of Johnny Mercado on the Philippine diaspora. (PDI, 1/25/05) We must remember that no country has ever become strong because of diaspora. Diaspora is to a nation what hemorrhage is to an individual. Diaspora is even worse because with it, a nation loses not only blood but also brain and brawn.

The classic example is Israel. After its citizens were scattered throughout the world by the Roman Empire, Israel practically died—it ceased to exist. It was revived through Zionism—the movement advocating the return of the Jews to Israel after the end of World War II.

Mass emigration occurs when a nation is in trouble. Another classic example was the potato famine in Ireland in the 1840s that led to the mass migration to America. Unemployment in England and religious persecution in Europe led to the mass emigrations in the 18th and 19th centuries. Only when the European countries, like Germany and Italy, began industrializing did their diaspora stop and they became strong.

Hitler’s dictatorship and persecution of the Jews led to the emigration of Jewish scientists to the United States. This brain drain partly led to the defeat of Germany in World War II because the scientists who fled Hitler developed the atomic bomb for the United States instead of for Germany. As the biggest destination of immigrants, the United States developed rapidly to become the strongest country after the war.

Philippine emigration started during the Spanish colonial rule when Filipinos were conscripted by the Spanish government for slave labor in the Marianas and to fight its wars against the Portuguese. At the start of the US occupation, Filipino laborers were recruited to work in the Hawaiian cane fields and to pick pineapple in California. After World War II, our emigration to the United States consisted mostly of educated Filipinos and professionals.

In the ’70s, the Marcos dictatorship consciously adopted the policy of encouraging mass labor emigration because of growing unemployment at home, to ease social unrest against the dictatorship and earn foreign exchange to pay its debts. This Marcos policy continues to be implemented by our government up to the present. However, despite the remittances of overseas Filipino workers, our country has not prospered.

An ADB study says OFW remittances have not helped the country to progress. It is easy to see why. Remittances by OFWs are used mostly for consumption by their families. Capital does not come from consumption but from profits, but the profits are being made by multinationals whose products are being bought by the OFWs’ families. Despite the heavy sacrifices of our OFWs, our people remain pathetically impoverished.

Unless we change policy and concentrate on internal development to keep our workers, intellectuals and professionals here, our country will remain impoverished, starving and humiliated.

—MANUEL F. ALMARIO, mfalmario AT yahoo DOT com

Unshared burden

Unshared burden


Posted 09:44pm (Mla time) Feb 23, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A12 of the February 24, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



BARELY three months after declaring that we were over the hump, President Macapagal-Arroyo has resurrected the specter of an Argentina-type economic meltdown. "The bottom line is, we need to raise P80 billion [through] legislative measures and P100 billion [through] administrative measures," she said during a visit to Bohol. "Otherwise, in two years' time we will be an Argentina."

That was, of course, the warning first issued by 11 professors from the UP School of Economics in August last year; a warning immediately picked up by the President herself. She then announced that the country was experiencing a fiscal crisis and quickly unwrapped a package of measures designed to increase revenues and cut government expenditures, with the ultimate goal of holding back a runaway deficit and arresting the growth of an already huge public debt. The people responded by muting their opposition to new taxes and, in some places in Mindanao, even chipping in some modest sums for a fund-raising drive organized by their bishop. Congress started discussing new tax measures, and some lawmakers offered to take cuts on, if not completely give up, their pork barrel allocations.

However, all the good will and good intentions evaporated as soon as it became clear that sacrifices had to be shared. It soon became clear that all the sacrifices would have to be borne exclusively by the citizens, from higher taxes to increased power rates.

After expressing shock over the high salaries and rich perks enjoyed by officials of a number of government-owned corporations, Malacañang seems to have forgotten that cutting expenditures can help reduce the deficit. When local government officials opposed a reduction in their internal revenue allocations, Malacañang also dropped the idea. After Congress passed two of the eight new tax measures proposed by Malacañang, some lawmakers promptly demanded the release of their pork barrel. It looked as if our lawmakers passed the new tax measures not to save the nation from bankruptcy and the resulting chaos but to preserve their pork barrel funds and their usual kickbacks.

The administration seemed to have lost sight of the real reason for its frenzied search for additional revenues. Like some congressmen who started licking their lips after smelling pork, Malacañang began talking about the many added services the government could provide as a result of the new revenue-generating measures. But then, didn't the President declare the crisis over some time in November, long before the government could collect a single centavo from the new taxes?

Malacañang and Congress were already counting the chickens--until the international credit ratings agencies, Moody's Investors Service especially, rudely reminded them that more than P5 trillion in public sector debt remained undiminished and the government's capacity to pay it remained in doubt. That reminder by itself, coming in the form of a two-notch downgrade in our sovereign debt rating, is going to cost us plenty, setting us back by $114 million in added interest costs yearly, according to some estimates.

That's nothing compared to what will happen if the government cannot put its financial house in order and very soon. For the President, it was time to re-issue the dire warning she made six months ago, if only to get Congress to act more quickly on the other revenue-generating measures, especially the increase in the value-added tax. But will the warning work this time? Will it make Congress work faster on the other tax measures, for instance? More importantly, will it make people understand and accept the need to bear a heavier burden in terms of more taxes and higher prices?

It's unlikely that people will rally behind the effort like they did last year. Not when Congress and Malacañang seem determined to dump all of the responsibility for paying off the country's debts on them.

Caught

Caught


Posted 11:11pm (Mla time) Feb 22, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 23, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



AT THE PRESENTATION of the Millennium Project report of the United Nations at the Hotel Dusit in Makati City last week, President Macapagal-Arroyo enthused: "More government officials are being charged with corruption. Soon, they will not only be charged, they will have their ill-gotten gains forfeited to the government. That is my next instruction to our anticorruption officials."

The statement followed reports about recent gains in another war-the war on graft and corruption.

The week before, obviously acceding to public clamor, the President "sacked" the acting secretary of public works and highways. Also, on the basis of complaints filed by private citizens, the Ombudsman suspended a deputy commissioner of the Bureau of Customs. Two congressmen were also earlier ordered suspended by the Ombudsman for acts of corruption committed in their previous posts as provincial officials. Of course, before them, there were the military officials, led by Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia, Lt. Gen. Jacinto Ligot and Col. George Rabusa who were tagged either for unexplained wealth or for anomalous deals.

Undeniably, the war on corruption, under the Arroyo administration, has never looked this good, as its haul gets heftier with bigger and bigger fishes. Let us look at the records: 81 corruption cases are pending with the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission; 100 have been endorsed to the Ombudsman and 23 to the Office of the President. These are the figures as of Jan. 31, 2005, mostly the "harvest," so to speak, from the lifestyle check that was started in 2003.

Aside from the high officials mentioned, the list of the accused includes two undersecretaries (of the DPWH and the Department of the Interior and Local Government); an assistant secretary of the Department of Transportation and Communications; the chief of a special investigation division of the Bureau of Internal Revenue; the general manager of the Laguna Lake Development Authority; and regional directors and assistant regional directors, among others. Notably, many of the accused come from the Armed Forces, DPWH, BOC and BIR, which are not surprisingly among the agencies generally perceived to be corrupt.


But not yet

PROMISING as the picture may seem to be, the harvest from the lifestyle checks is far from any assurance of success or complete victory in the war against corruption. Given the prevalence of corruption in all levels of government, the numbers are still relatively much too low. And even as the government seem to be scoring big lately, there is no clear sign that the enemy has slacked off.

In fact, Transparency International recently ranked the Philippines No. 2 among the world's most corrupt countries. The sacked public works secretary stays with his department as undersecretary, lower in rank but definitely still high in the totem pole, influential and powerful. Garcia, who has accumulated a large hoard of unexplained wealth, has only been charged with dishonesty, gross misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and has yet to be charged with the heinous crime of plunder. And there were the big fishes who seemingly were so easily let off after being caught in the net.

In fact, there are other officials, who are perceived by the public to be no less, if not far more, corrupt, but who seem to remain untouched. Thus, doubts persist about the sincerity and resolve of the government in bringing the war against corruption to its logical conclusion.

Doubtless, the public is aching to see the government's lifestyle dragnet spread more widely to catch bigger fishes in other government institutions, like Congress, for example. But it is not enough, though, to discover which public officials flunk the lifestyle check or even to shame them by making their names known to the public. The real challenge to the administration lies in pursuing the cases until these crooks are put away permanently and, as the President promised, their ill-gotten wealth are turned over to the national treasury.

Dishonorable

Dishonorable


Posted 10:56pm (Mla time) Feb 21, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A12 of the February 22, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



WHAT is Congress, or more specifically, the House of Representatives, coming to? In recent years, several members of the Lower House have been convicted or accused of crimes or implicated in their commission. (The chamber was called the Lower House because in the old Legislative Building it was on a floor lower than that of the Senate, but the adjective could also have referred to the general quality of its membership.)

Before World War II, the House was peopled by eminent legislators, some of whom later rose to become senators, jurists and Cabinet members. Two former congressmen, Manuel L. Quezon and Sergio Osmena Sr., were later elected president.

After the war, six former congressmen--Manuel Roxas, Elpidio Quirino, Ramon Magsaysay, Carlos P. Garcia, Diosdado Macapagal and Ferdinand E. Marcos--became president. Marcos at first appeared to be a brilliant leader, one who, according to his own public relations man, was destined to become "the best president the Philippines would ever have." Marcos turned out to be the worst.

Now, who are, or who have been members of the House? Among them are child molesters and rapists like Romeo Jalosjos of Zamboanga del Norte, people charged with or convicted of various crimes like Mark Jimenez (tax fraud, tax evasion and illegal campaign contributions in the United States), Nicanor de Guzman Jr. (gun smuggling), Jose Villarosa (double murder) and Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. (income tax evasion).

Jalosjos' constituents knew that he had been convicted of statutory rape and acts of lasciviousness, and yet they elected him to another term in office. Jimenez's constituents also knew that he was facing criminal charges, but still they elected him to the House. The people really get the representatives that they want and that they deserve.

Now, here is former Rep. Dennis Roldan who is a suspect in a kidnapping case. He will have to be tried in court and found guilty based on the evidence before we can say that he indeed is a kidnapper. If the charge turns out to be true, he must have really fallen on bad times. And if the charge turns out to be true, it will be another mark against the House whose reputation is already in tatters.

The House itself cannot ensure that only the best, the brightest, the most upright and most moral would be elected to its ranks. It is the people who elect these representatives who have to be better educated and better informed so that they can choose the best and the most upright men and women who will legislate for them.

From the heart

IT WAS a moving story, that one about bank executive Warner Manning who let go of the proverbial British stiff upper lip and wept while delivering a speech last Saturday at the launching of a housing project for families left homeless by last year's killer storms.

Manning, chief executive officer of the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp., is one of several expatriate businessmen who have been disturbed by the plight of poor Filipinos affected by recent disasters and who have decided to do something about it. Since he was posted in the Philippines, Manning has been involved in fund-raising activities for street children and for projects to improve and preserve the environment. The Gawad Kalinga project is the latest in HSBC's charities for the poor.

As Gawad Kalinga executive director Tony Meloto said during the launching rites, it would have been easy for HSBC to just donate money for the housing project. But Warner and his wife came and attended the ceremony and even laid down a hollow block foundation for a house. That they took time to do that, Meloto said, shows that their action "is something that comes from the heart."

Businesses and businessmen--both Filipino and foreign--can follow the lead of people like Manning who have decided to do something concrete about the problems of poverty, hunger, disease, ignorance and homelessness that plague the poor. They do not necessarily have to donate money all the time. Some can give of their time and their labor in, for instance, building houses for the homeless.

Of course, we do not expect businessmen to even approximate the magnitude of what Bill Gates of Microsoft has done. Gates set up a $28.8-billion foundation that is conducting a worldwide campaign against diseases like malaria, polio, dengue and HIV/AIDS. But with its financial, management and manpower resources, the business community can be a very effective force in fighting poverty, hunger and deprivation in this poor country.

Open City

Open City


Posted 10:22pm (Mla time) Feb 20, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 21, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.



THE BATTLE for Manila 60 years ago did not change the course of World War II or hasten its end. It did not inaugurate a new phase in the Pacific campaign or create a military breakthrough. But it was marked by unspeakable atrocities and plumbed new depths of human suffering. For that reason alone, it deserves to be remembered, not only in the country but around the world.

The incomparable success of Gen. Douglas MacArthur's leapfrogging strategy had put Allied forces within invading distance of Japan two years after the fall of Bataan. Japanese outposts had famously withered on the vine, left behind without supply lines and reinforcements as the Allies attacked some islands and skipped others.

The ironic consequence of MacArthur's success was that it threatened to make his celebrated promise to return to the Philippines militarily irrelevant. American commanders at the highest levels asked: Why not skip the Philippines altogether? Their preferred base of operations for an invasion of Japan was Taiwan, then known as Formosa.

When the Philippine plan finally prevailed, the stage was set for one of the most heartrending stories in the annals of warfare.

On the due of what survivors still call liberation, more Filipinos died in a single series of events than at any other time in history. The Battle of Manila was tsunami-like in its devastating impact: More than 100,000 died in the four weeks of fighting between Feb. 3 and March 3, 1945. Most of them relived Rizal's nightmare: that is, they died without seeing freedom dawn.

The Inquirer series in the last two weeks drew an indelible portrait of that horrific experience. Many of the dead were consumed in an orgy of violence, started by Japanese naval troops stationed in Manila and under orders to defend what was then the largest occupied city in Japan's so-called Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Many more were killed in an unending rain of fire: the Americans' massive and unrelenting artillery bombardment. Many others died simply because they were caught in the indiscriminate flames of crossfire.

We honor all of them by remembering their ordeal, their holocaust. But we honor them best by honoring those who survived them.

For every story of a baby bayoneted in the air, we must remember those who survived with desperate cunning, those who played dead, for instance, even when Japanese soldiers knifed them to make sure they were dead.

For every story of a family trapped by a collapsing, bomb-weakened wall, we must remember those who dug holes or helped others find trenches, braving shrapnel or debris on their missions of mercy. The honor roll, thankfully, goes on and on.

By praising them, we don't simply mean to ease their "survivor's guilt." By recognizing their pluck, their grace under intense pressure, their sheer will to live, we honor that which makes up truly human.

At a time of unbearable anguish, when the line separating man from beast was crossed again and again, the common example of human beings doing uncommon things was a sign of hope: Despite the horrors of war, in a city that should have been by all lights declared open a second time since 1942, it was possible to imagine life as it ought to be once again.

Dead letter

Dead letter


Posted 10:02pm (Mla time) Feb 19, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 20, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



WHEN the Kyoto Protocol was first signed, it was met with joy and excitement throughout the world. The 1997 agreement pledged its signatory countries to implementing programs against global warming. With the world weather patterns increasingly reminding the world that global warming is a real phenomenon, the wisdom of the global effort that resulted in the Kyoto agreement has been validated.

However, the United States, the largest energy consumer in the world, which accounts for a significant percentage of the planet's greenhouse gases, withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol during George W. Bush's first term. The decision of the American Republican administration was met with outrage throughout the world: not least because previous (Democratic) American administrations had been at the forefront of the lobbying for the agreement.

The Kyoto accord establishes, as global policy, the directive that the use of fossil fuels should be accompanied by strict emission standards and by a serious effort to develop more fuel-efficient technologies, as well as energy substitutes that reduce greenhouse gases. Obviously such policies endanger the healthy profits of oil companies, car manufacturers and electricity producers, all of which were significant contributors to the Bush campaign.

It is, therefore, no exaggeration to say that the official American about-face with regard to Kyoto was a matter of business. Long ago, an American president, Calvin Coolidge, said "America's business is business." Just as the American obsession with business interests and its inherent tendency to be isolationist torpedoed America's participation in the League of Nations (the post-World War I precursor to the United Nations) in the 1920s, so too does the withdrawal of Republican support from the Kyoto accord and the International Criminal Court show that American idealism tends to play second fiddle to American profiteering.

It's been said that America's turning its back on the League of Nations led to the unchallenged rise of fascism. America's ambivalence toward the UN after World War II has also led to an uneven American engagement with the global community. There is an American saying: "All politics is local." And the Bush administration's turning its back on two immensely important global agreements, the Kyoto Protocol and the International Criminal Court, shows as much.

The world community, faced with what could have been a catastrophic American withdrawal from the Kyoto agreement, decided to go on without the United States. It helped that emerging global economic and military powers, such as the People's Republic of China, saw that environmental protection cannot be separated from sustainable economic growth. The European Union, Japan and the emerging powers-such as India, China and Brazil- continue to be dedicated to the spirit of the Kyoto agreement. So does the Philippines, which has been feeling, deeply and painfully, the price of environmental mismanagement.

Energy Secretary Vince Perez hailed the most recent accession to the Kyoto Protocol by the Russian Federation. He recently announced new government initiatives seeking clean indigenous energy resources, and he said the government is keen on the development and commercial utilization of renewable energy. These government programs aim to promote clean alternative transport fuels and to enhance energy efficiency as well as conservation efforts to ensure sustainable energy development in the country.

On the surface at least, the country is on the right track. While it took five years (from 1998 to 2003) for our country to ratify the Kyoto accord, the fact is we did. As did so many other nations. This only goes to show that the tantalizing possibility of America increasingly getting left behind by the combined efforts of other countries may be upon us.

It may be a passing era when the United States could call the shots virtually at will in the global scene. America is powerful, but rivals are rising to the fore. America will be a crucial world player for generations to come; but it must increasingly adopt to the possibility of its remaining to be an important power bloc, but just one of many. Be that as it may, it's good to see that our country remains where it does best: not simply following the American Pied Piper, but discovering there is wisdom and strength in collective global engagement.

Overkill alert

Overkill alert


Posted 00:09am (Mla time) Feb 19, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 19, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.



THE VALENTINE'S Day bombings have resulted in a chorus of protests against terrorism. They have achieved what their perpetrators did not expect: a rousing call against extremism and its pretensions. They have consolidated the consensus among peace-loving people that terrorism is malice masquerading as political conviction. Malevolence has a face, and it is the face of the Valentine bombers.

But government risks melding with the face of the malefactors of malevolence when it over-reacts. It has not achieved that dubious distinction yet. But its propensity for shotgun investigations-"blame everyone first before an honest-to-goodness inquiry" -- prefigures that.

It is easy to blame, for example, the so-called renegade faction of the Moro National Liberation Front which attacked several military outposts in Basilan last week, killing several soldiers, generally amounting to a fly in the ointment in the run-up to the resumption of talks between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. (The MILF is the original MNLF breakaway faction that has somehow gotten the upper hand in claiming the position of spokesman for the Muslim secessionist movement in Mindanao.) It is likewise easy to blame the Abu Sayyaf and its allies in the Jemaah Islamiyah. After all, the Abu Sayyaf and the JI have been behind some of the more notorious terrorist attacks in the last several years. And didn't Abu Solayman, the self-styled Abu Sayyaf spokesman, claim on radio responsibility for the bombings?

What is surprising is that government and the military have not been too casual in assigning blame to the extremists or the secessionist groups. This may be so because it had written off these groups a long time ago. The bombings could have been so calculated as to constitute a slap in the face of a government that might have spoken too soon, who knows? If so, then one could only imagine government's shock.

The worse shock, of course, is that the government had been caught flat-footed. Despite billions of pesos in intelligence funds, the military failed to prevent the bombings or anticipate the boldness of their design and execution. This country has the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency that does not seem to coordinate all the disparate and often wrangling intelligence agencies, whether in military or civilian offices. The well-coordinated bombings last Monday should show who has a better sense of coordination.

Since the government would assign the blame neither on itself or its enemies (because it has long written them off and to name them would conjure them back from the tomb where the state authorities have consigned them in what now amounts to a virtual, and hence, spurious, burial), then it is most likely it would pin the blame on the most convenient scapegoats: the Muslim population. Already several imams and heads of Muslim communities have sounded the alarm that the bombings would merely lead to graver and more intense persecution of Muslims whose only sin is to have the same religion as the extremists. It seems to have been made a standard in the military and police rules of engagement that the first step in a post-bombing scenario is a dragnet of Muslims. Many people have been the victims of summary arrests only because they pray to Allah.

The government and the military should not take lightly its often knee-jerk reactions to bombings. The reaction is nearly always wholesale anti-Muslim persecution. And this is by no means merely local. Even foreigners have felt prejudiced by summary and strong-arm tactics that do not discern and distinguish. Many Middle-Eastern investors and businessmen, for example, have left the Philippines. Even Indians, who are mostly Hindus, have complained that they are being harassed by law enforcers just because they look like people from the Middle East. These foreigners are good investors and hardworking, disciplined and peace-loving. Some of them have intermarried with Filipinos and have considered the Philippines their new home. They have never failed in condemning terrorism, but overreacting law enforcers are making their lives hell.

In the wake of the Valentine's Day attacks, there has been an unprecedented public condemnation of terrorism and support for government initiatives to deal with the extremists decisively. But the decisiveness should be characterized by intelligence and discernment. The call to action is clear: government should respond to terrorism firmly, and it can only do so by not creating more enemies.

Bad mood

Bad mood


Posted 00:52am (Mla time) Feb 18, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 18, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



THE TWO-NOTCH ratings downgrade by Moody's Investor Service caught some of our august senators in a foul and fantastical mood. Ignore Moody's, Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. urged on the Senate floor on Wednesday afternoon, hours after the downgrade was announced. "We should act as if Moody's does not exist," administration maverick Sen. Joker Arroyo told reporters.

Unfortunately, Moody's and other credit-rating agencies do exist, and for good reason. Both borrowers and lenders need an independent third party to assess credit-worthiness, and thus determine risk. In sum, what a rating captures is a snapshot of market perceptions, about how much of a credit risk a particular company or country is. Now unless both Pimentel and Arroyo want the Philippines to opt out of global markets altogether, their advice to the country's economic managers to proceed as if nothing happened is worse than inconsistent; it is perilous.

This is not to say that the two-notch downgrade necessarily reflected reality. Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima immediately called the new ratings undeserved. "What is important to point out is that I believe Moody's downgrade is so severe. I believe it did not factor in the changes we've had in the past few months," he said, referring to fiscal reforms that are ongoing.

Revealing the danger inherent in the let's-ignore-them school of thought is also not to say that ratings agencies are infallible. Most famously, the agencies did not see the 1997 Asian economic crisis coming. By and large, however, their ratings do tell us what the markets think.

So we've been downgraded. Let's deal with it. Not by burrowing our heads in the sands of resentment, not by taking refuge behind the ramparts of patriotism, but (and to change metaphors yet again) by finally putting our fiscal house in order.

That is key. We must not forget that the downgrade was expected. Earlier in the week, Bangko Sentral Governor Rafael Buenaventura ventured to say he was expecting a one-notch cut. His statement served to legitimize the official government line, emboldened no doubt by Standard & Poor's one-notch downgrade earlier in the year, that Moody's was about to do the charitable thing.

But general surprise at the deeper downgrade should not blind us to the essential fact: a cut was expected. The reasons are all too familiar: the government spends much more than it earns; our debts have put a strain on our capacity to pay; we are not doing enough to solve the problem as fast as we can.

That is, in fact, what the official Moody's announcement said. "Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the Philippines' long-term foreign-and local-currency ceilings and ratings owing to concerns that the large build-up in government and external debt introduces heightened vulnerability to shocks despite recent efforts by the government and legislature to enact fiscal reforms." And: "[P]ublic-sector borrowing requirements will remain large even with more progress in fiscal reform, leaving the Philippines vulnerable to economic, financial, and political shocks, as well as to sudden changes in market sentiment."

Do Pimentel and Arroyo dispute any of this?

These are statements of fact. We may have a different reading of what they mean, but it would be sheer folly to pretend that Moody's does not exist, and that therefore its interpretation of the facts is irrelevant. (For one thing, lower ratings have a real if somewhat delayed impact: they will make our debts even more expensive.)

The Moody's announcement hints at the necessary reforms that need to be undertaken. These are not necessarily what the government should be implementing. For instance, the "rapid implementation" of so-called "front-loading" measures (meaning doing all the drastic reforms in the first years of the President's new term) may not be politically feasible or even economically desirable. It is up to both the executive and the legislature to design the reforms, and then to put them in place.

In other words, our focus should be on the reforms we need, not with the existence or non-existence of third parties who have the effrontery to grade our government's performance or lack of it.

Wishful thinking

Wishful thinking


Posted 00:27am (Mla time) Feb 17, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 17, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



THE EYES of the world media were riveted on Rome over the last weeks, when Pope John Paul II was reported to be gravely ill from the flu. As things turned out, prompt medical attention resulted in the 82-year-old Pontiff recovering fairly quickly and well. Still, his most recent illness has led to a resumption of the debate over whether or not the Pope should resign.

There are historical precedents for a papal resignation, but the overwhelming example is of popes struggling on in their ministry until death claims them. No earthly power, in fact, can compel a pope to resign.

Over the past 20 years, as Pope John Paul II struggled with age and the effects of the assassination attempt on him and disease, there have been speculations that he himself was quietly preparing Catholic leaders for the possibility of his retirement. But the possibility of a papal retirement may actually be wishful thinking on the part of those who want it. John Paul II has never given any sign that he thinks retirement is an option. Rather, his infirmities and weakening health seem to be, for him, a chance to bear witness and to suffer for God.

The decision to remain in office may be easier for the Pope and the hierarchy to make, because John Paul II continues to have a clear mind, and a firm grasp of the pastoral and moral direction his pontificate aims to take. The present pope has always been a profoundly pastoral, that is, teaching and guiding leader, rather than one interested in actual administration. He has always had a gift for delegating authority, which frees him up, in secular terms, to concentrate on policy.

Indeed, there is something inspirational about a man who simply refuses to surrender to age or infirmity. Each time age and health problems seem to catch up with him, the Pope bounces back, and increasingly, his recuperation is seen as a triumph of the will, and even prayer. The formerly vigorous Pontiff is now frail, but as his back has become increasingly bent, his moral messages seem to resonate even louder around the world.

It is clear that this pope has restored vibrancy and strength to the conservative ranks of Catholicism. Some Catholics are, in fact, worried by the traditionalism of John Paul II. And yet, the last decades of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st have benefited from the uncompromising moral clarity of the leader of the Catholic Church. From his fight against Communism, his outspoken condemnation of abortion, his opposition to oppressive regimes and the imperialism of the West, his espousal of Third World debt reduction, he has remained consistently relevant in world and spiritual affairs.

Most of all, John Paul II has proven that the affairs of the spirit cannot be bound to the ways and means of the world of politicians and the secular life. A profound shift in emphasis from the pomp and glitter of the wealthy, comfortable lives of many Western Christians to the challenges and moral requirement of bearing witness to an authentic faith in the poor and violent developing world has taken place under his watch. This pope still has much to teach the world. In his mind, and heart, too, it seems quite clear he believes he has much to suffer, endure and celebrate, as well.

The way of terrorists

The way of terrorists


Posted 11:15pm (Mla time) Feb 15, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 16, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



BY MAKING common cause with a faction of the Moro National Liberation Front loyal to Nur Misuari, the Abu Sayyaf apparently sought to gain recognition and support, if not respectability, as a revolutionary group among Muslim Filipinos. Since last week, the bandit group, which achieved international notoriety by boldly raiding plush resorts and kidnapping foreign tourists and Filipinos and beheading some of the hostages, has been fighting alongside a so-called MNLF breakaway group against government troops. The group said it was fighting to obtain justice for the killing of a couple and their 14-year-old boy.

As the fighting escalated and civilians were forced to flee their homes, several local leaders called on the government to declare a ceasefire and start negotiating with the group. Such a call would have been unthinkable just a few weeks back. Until the Abu Sayyaf joined forces with the MNLF faction, there was nothing in its past that would allow it to claim any revolutionary credentials, except its own rhetoric. With its long record of kidnappings, beheadings, torture and bombings, the group was considered widely as nothing more than a greedy and bloodthirsty bunch of criminals. After 9/11, the governments of both the Philippines and the United States classified it as a terrorist organization, and few people disagreed.

The fighting in Sulu put the Abu Sayyaf in a new light. By painting it as a fight for justice, it seemed to be well on the way to winning the sympathy and respect of moderate Muslim leaders in the south, who urged the government to stop its attacks on the combined Abu Sayyaf-MNLF forces.

The series of bombings last Monday, however, has blown to pieces any political gains the Abu Sayyaf may have achieved from its alliance with a faction of the MNLF. The blasts that left 11 people dead in General Santos City, Davao and Makati killed its chances of being acknowledged even by Muslims as a group that speaks for them and works for their well-being.

But the Abu Sayyaf leadership is either unaware of this or it has learned to love the sound of bombs and the sight of blood too much to care. Minutes after the last explosion rocked Makati, its spokesman Abu Solayman gloated in a statement he read over a radio station that the bombings were their "Valentine gift to Gloria," in reference to President Macapagal-Arroyo. "We will find more ways to inflict damage," he warned the Filipino people. "Grieve and mourn your dead. We will make no distinction between civilians [and soldiers]."

That is the way of terrorists, of course, and the Abu Sayyaf has time and again practiced what it preached, grabbing women and schoolchildren, torturing and killing preachers and foreign tourists, bombing ports and passenger boats. Even that reference to gifting the President with dead bodies was a mere rehash of what it said after beheading the American hostage, Guillermo Sobero, four years ago.

Obviously the Abu Sayyaf has never changed its ideology of violence and terror. What is rather surprising is that some other groups would think otherwise. Now that it has again shown its true colors, the Abu Sayyaf has alienated the people of Mindanao who have grown weary of the war as well as the Muslims who have come to resent the use of their religion as an excuse for bringing death and injury to so many innocent people.

A global step

A global step


Posted 01:01am (Mla time) Feb 15, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 15, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.



SOME people have the impression that the World Economic Forum is just one huge talkfest where participants discuss problems and issues to death. This year's annual meeting, held last Jan. 26-30 at Davos, Switzerland, should correct this impression; it took some concrete measures that would help relieve some of the most pressing economic, social and political problems of the world.

Poverty was the No. 1 issue on the agenda of the Forum this year. To help meet this problem, world leaders at the Forum urged the cancellation of the debts of the poorest nations. The initiative taken at the annual meeting appears to be having results. At a meeting of the G-7 held several days after the Forum, the world's richest countries agreed for the first time to pursue a 100-percent write-off of the $70 billion owed by the poorest nations to big institutions like the World Bank.

The Forum urged the implementation of a proposed international financing facility that would deliver aid to the poorest countries at a more rapid and predictable rate.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard said the single biggest contribution the developed world could make to alleviate poverty was to break down trade barriers. He said that "trade access is worth far more to underdeveloped countries than development assistance." To promote equitable globalization (which was the No. 2 issue on the agenda) and make trade fairer, the participants urged negotiators to complete the Doha Agenda of trade talks to enshrine the principles of reciprocity, free trade and the liberalization of trade in services.

Climate change was the No. 3 item on the agenda. Forum participants made recommendations on how to help halt the deterioration of the environment and prevent further changes in the global climate.

During the Forum's annual meeting, British Prime Minister Tony Blair hosted a roundtable with senior executives of leading businesses from around the world to discuss climate change and the challenges it presents to the global business community. The Forum and Greenhouse Gas Register agreed with the Carbon Disclosure Project, a collaboration of more than 100 investors with more than $17 trillion in assets, to increase the engagement of the corporate and investment community in tackling the problem of greenhouse gas emissions and carbon risk.

On education, the No. 4 item on the Forum's agenda, the participants urged that education be made available to all girls and women to eliminate gender disparities and to add the potential that women bring to the world's work force. They agreed that aid should be given to the developing world in a way that recognizes and preserves the dignity of the people.

The Middle East was the No. 5 item on the Forum's agenda. During the annual meeting, Israeli and Palestinian officials agreed that a window of opportunity to end the long-standing conflict was possible. They noted that the meeting was the first in a long time for both sides to come together in a public venue. Israeli Vice Premier Ehud Olmert said that "the most important thing is to set the right priorities to take the process forward."

Yasser Abbed Rabbo of the Palestinian Authority said that with the recent election of President Mahmoud Abbas, there would be a new beginning for the peace process. And indeed, the ceasefire that was declared a few days after the Forum augurs well for the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations.

On aid to the developing nations, some leaders had expressed concerns that it might just go into private pockets unless something was done about the problem of corruption. The private sector took the initiative on this, and 62 corporate leaders at the Forum signed a commitment on a zero-tolerance policy on bribery and corruption. The Partnering against Corruption Initiative, in collaboration with Transparency International, facilitated agreement by companies in three industry sectors on the Partnering against Corruption Principles for Countering Bribery.

The president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development agreed to explore the inclusion of anti-bribery language as part of the bidding process for infrastructure projects along the lines of an earlier agreement between PACI and the World Bank in 2004.

As measures go, the recommendations made and the initiatives taken at the World Economic Forum may be described by some as just nibbling at huge chunks of problems that have plagued the world for decades, if not centuries. But at least something concrete is being done. Political, economic and social leaders demonstrated at Davos that something concrete could be done about the world's most urgent problems if only they themselves would have the determination and political will to solve them.

Disjoint

Disjoint


Posted 00:09am (Mla time) Feb 12, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 12, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



DONALD Dee, president of the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), has said: "Imposing new taxes can cause short-term pains for business and consumers alike. However, its long-term effects will be beneficial in ensuring sustainable and continuous growth of the economy." Together with other groups, the PCCI supports raising the value-added tax rate from the current 10 percent to 12 percent.

But isn't there a disjoint here? Raising taxes, cutting down costs, and all the revenue measures of the government are meant to address the fiscal deficit, are they not? But now the government and other groups are pushing VAT increases and other measures as a means for apparently uplifting the plight of the poor. Here comes the confusion: Government lacks money because of debts and lackluster collections, not to mention an addiction to spending lavishly. The result is to reduce the resources available for health, education and other social services. The answer, according to the government, is... well, we're back to square one, the revenue raising measures.

The disjoint we're pointing out is between a need to raise taxes to ensure the survival of the government, and the supposed other, many benefits of the fiscal measures. Obviously a government in a healthier fiscal state is in a better position to offer basic services. But there remains a crucial difference between raising taxes because of an emergency need, and raising taxes because it's part of a long-term economic policy.

So which is it? The confusion among the administration's allies is evident as is their unwillingness to bite the bullet, so to speak. Now after passing a few of the administration-sponsored revenue measures, some lawmakers are already demanding that they be served their pound of pork pronto.

But can anyone blame them? Even President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo seems to have forgotten that it was the huge government debt (which stood at P3.8 trillion as of November last year) that lent urgency to the enactment of new revenue measures. Earlier this month, she declared that the additional taxes could be used to put up businesses and improve the quality of education. And she hardly talks anymore about the need to narrow the deficit or cut the country's debts, except when international credit rating agencies threaten a credit downgrade.

Which is hardly surprising, considering that after raising the alarm about a looming debt crisis, she rather very quickly announced that it was over as if such things happen with the wave of a magic wand. The impression it gave was that the Arroyo administration was either very capricious or extremely clueless in handling the economy.

The administration may be basking at present on some encouraging economic news. If it has some proven bad habits, one of the biggest is taking credit even for events that may be accidental-or not really of the government's doing.

The hope of the poor lies in responsible, visionary governance. The kind that does not panic, but soberly addresses the problems at hand. We want to see more methodical attitudes toward problem solving, and a more analytical approach to the genuine challenges that face the economy.

So let's clear the air and get it from the horse's mouth: What are the fiscal measures really for? Are they meant to address a potential fiscal crisis, or not? The answers set the parameter for the level of debate that follows. If the taxes are for long-term objectives, then they can be debated at greater length; if they are to stave off a looming crisis, what, then, is that crisis exactly? And what is called for, and within what time frame?

The home front

The home front


Posted 11:07pm (Mla time) Feb 08, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 9, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



US Ambassador Francis Ricciardone recently gave this advice to Filipinos: "You need to decide what kind of relationship you want to have with Iraq -- how you want Iraqis to remember Filipinos and the Philippines in the future."

This came, of course, in the wake of the renewed American propaganda offensive after the elections in Iraq. The United States obviously wants to make the most of the enthusiasm for elections shown by the Iraqi people. But as Filipinos know all too well, the hard part after elections is the counting -- and living with the results.

The truth is, as impending American activities show, the area of primary concern for the Philippines in the so-called "war on terror" is our home front. The Philippines and the United States are in the process of undertaking 28 joint military exercises this year. Twenty exercises will consist of combined maneuvers while the rest are to focus on anti-narcotics efforts and the training of light reaction units.

It is well known and well accepted that Jemaah Islamiyah either has camps of its own or has found sanctuary in the camps of rebel groups. The presence of JI trainees represents a genuine threat to the country and the region.

President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is optimistic about the prospects of the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front concluding a peace agreement that can then help remove the basis for rebel-JI cooperation and support. "Actually, there is ... peace in Mindanao," she said recently, "so writing the agreement is only making formal a reality." She went on to add, "In the meantime, what I can say is that our peace talks with the MILF are holding very well and our prospects for the peace process in Mindanao are very, very good."

If the President's optimism turns out to be validated by events, this still means she has to devote the country's political energies and financial resources to hunting down JI agents in the country, and to ensuring rogue MILF or even Moro National Liberation Front elements do not develop alternative alliances with the JI. There remains, too, the continuing government on-again, off-again peace talks and then all-out war strategy in dealing with the National Democratic Front and the New People's Army.

From a combination of American pressure and the findings of their own governments, Europe has slowly been showing an inclination to viewing the CPP-NPA as a terrorist group, even as countries like Norway do what they can to facilitate talks. Whichever tack the government takes, the increasingly belligerent behavior of the CPP-NPA points to its suffering from the erosion of foreign sympathies for it. However, government strategies must inevitably include the development of poverty-stricken provinces that are breeding grounds for rebellion and insurgency.

The President has already issued Executive Order No. 404 to implement an agreement with the NDF to lay down operational guidelines for a Joint Monitoring Committee to oversee implementation of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law. The agreement was signed by the government and the NDF in The Hague on March 16, 1998. The government monitoring committee will closely work with the Commission on Human Rights in probing human rights violations and monitor the government's compliance with its international treaty obligations on human rights. The country has a golden opportunity to show it has nothing to hide.

Development for provinces mired in poverty and scarred by insurgency and counter-insurgency requires billions of pesos, much political capital and tremendous energy. This leaves little room for expeditions overseas, particularly in equally insurgency-stricken nations like Iraq. If the Philippines really wants to help fight international terrorism, it already has its hands full here at home.

The home front is the primary front; our national security interests will be largely determined by how we handle homegrown or home-hosted threats, whether it is the JI, its allies, or the NPA and its depredations. The contributions of local and national officials and institutions, including the military, also point to the need for the government to concentrate its efforts at home.

The greatest moral issue

The greatest moral issue


Posted 10:58pm (Mla time) Feb 07, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 8, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.



LAST Friday in London, on the eve of a meeting of the leaders of the world's richest nations, former South African president Nelson Mandela demanded freedom for the millions of "slaves" of poverty all over the world. He said, "Like slavery and apartheid, poverty is not natural."

Mandela said poverty is man-made and can be eradicated by the actions of human beings. "And overcoming poverty is not a gesture of charity. It is an act of justice," he said.

To the credit of many of the world's leaders, they recognize that poverty is the No. 1 economic, social and political issue of our times. At the recent annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, for instance, nearly 65 percent of the 700 economic, political, intellectual and cultural leaders of the world chose to make poverty the No. 1 item on the agenda.

At the Global Town Hall that started this year's WEF meeting, participants said that the problem of poverty is fundamental to everything, and that alleviating poverty would reduce terrorism and instability. Indeed, if the poor nations could be put on the road to progress and prosperity, much of the instability that prevails in the world today could be reduced.

The talk at Davos, surprisingly, did not consist of glittering generalizations and empty rhetoric. In line with this year's motto, "Taking Responsibility for Tough Choices," the world leaders made concrete proposals. British Prime Minister Tony Blair committed the United Kingdom to treble its aid to Africa, the poorest continent in the world, and to insure that aid is more effectively administered.

President Jacques Chirac of France called on the developed countries to fulfill as soon as possible pledges made two decades ago to devote 0.7 percent of their gross domestic product to aid for poor nations.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard said that the single biggest contribution the developed world could make to poverty alleviation was to break down trade barriers. "Trade access is worth far more to underdeveloped countries than development assistance," he said.

Celebrity made its power felt in Davos, and not only did they focus attention on the problem of poverty, they raised funds to help alleviate it. For instance, there was Sharon Stone of "Basic Instinct" fame, who suddenly stood up during a discussion on the funding of the war on poverty to say that she was donating $10,000 to combat malaria in Tanzania whose president, Benjamin Mkapa, was one of the panel speakers.

Stone urged the participants to stand up and pledge donations. At the end of the discussion, organizers said they had raised $1 million in pledges. Previously, Bill Gates of Microsoft gave $750 million to vaccinate children all over the world against deadly diseases.

Before the meeting closed, it approved the creation of a fund to accelerate financial aid to the poorest nations and the removal of trade barriers that deprive poor countries of the dividends of global economic growth.

The recently concluded World Economic Forum at Davos stressed the need to address the problem of worldwide poverty before it explodes and causes greater misery and instability. The rich nations-the United States first among them-have to make hard decisions-decisions that will call for the expenditure of huge sums in aid and may work against their economic interests-to reduce the problem of poverty.

Right now, about 800 million people all over the world go hungry every day, according to the Global Governance Initiative Annual Report. We cannot imagine people of the rich nations going to bed every night without a twinge of conscience, without giving a thought to the 800 million of their fellow human beings who are hungry and destitute and deprived.

Unless the problem of poverty is relieved soon, the eventuality that President Jacques Chirac warned of in a special message to the Forum could come to pass. Chirac warned that the young people of the developing world could rise in revolt if the rich countries do not provide hope for a better future, by offering them a way out of the grinding poverty in which hundreds of millions live in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Which brings us back to Mandela, who said that "while poverty exists there is no true freedom." He said that overcoming poverty is an act of justice. But poverty is not only an issue that involves the economy, geopolitics, social classes or justice. Above all, it is a moral issue; it is perhaps the greatest moral issue of our times. It is a test of the humanness and humane-ness of people and nations who can do something to alleviate poverty and yet do nothing because of miserliness, selfishness or self-interest.

Reforming media

Reforming media


Posted 11:56pm (Mla time) Feb 05, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 6, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



OVER A HUNDRED journalists gathered in Tagaytay this weekend to discuss, yet again, the problems vexing the Philippine media. Should the public even care?

We all should, because as the "media summit" made clear all over again, journalists do not only mirror reality; they sometimes shape it.

To be sure, a recurring theme that echoed throughout the two days of the conference emphasized the opposite: Reality, it was said over and over again, is the main force that shapes both journalists and the journalism they practice. In particular, commercial reality, or the pursuit of ever higher ratings, was said to drive much of the thinking behind today's television programming.

As a network owner admitted, with conspicuous understatement, media organizations don't live in an ideal world. He meant that the profit imperative was an unavoidable part of the programming mix. He needn't have been so apologetic. In this day and age, a healthy bottom line may yet be the best guarantee of a free press, of editorial independence.

The necessary question, of course, is: What have media organizations done with their independence? The answers, even from those organizations who say that the news and public affairs department is the flagship of their fleet, are not uniformly satisfactory.

A quick and by-no-means-complete roundup of answers: A tsunami of entertainment programs racing to overtake the news flagship. Blood and gore stories swamping newspaper pages. Trivia swollen to ridiculous proportions. Politics mistaken for show business. Incidents of sound bite journalism on the rise. And so on and so forth.

Are these trends merely the reflection of reality? To a certain extent, yes. The coverage, for instance, of two immature government officials exchanging, and then retracting, heated words in public may strike some as trivial, but triviality and immaturity in high government office are in fact legitimate stories. It is in the public's interest to know.

But taken together, the trends go beyond mere mirroring. The very choice of stories, the decision to give one story larger play than another, the under-emphasis of other issues: All these are (and to borrow the evocative language of basketball) judgment calls. The sooner the media and the public come to terms with this truth, the better the chances that media organizations will in fact serve the public interest.

One development the conference gave voice to bodes well for the future of an engaged and financially viable media committed to serious journalism: the growing support for the idea of the media as a beat in itself.

Media organizations have become centers of both local and national power. Not only do more and more people see them as a substitute for government, especially in social welfare and in administration of justice issues. Media organizations also and all too often affect the climate of governance.

It is only right that the media be held accountable for the power it wields. One way to do that is to encourage coverage of media institutions and media issues-in other words, to treat media as a beat. The practice in other countries shows the way: reporters assigned to cover media, analysts and columnists dedicated to the critique of media.

To the public's benefit, government and big business drink the media's own tonic of close scrutiny and enlightened skepticism; the time has come for the media to drink from the same cup.

Precondition to peace

Precondition to peace


Posted 10:54pm (Mla time) Feb 06, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 7, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.



THE PEACE talks between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front resume in Kuala Lumpur this month. Because three armed encounters last month cast a pall over the already protracted peace process, the simple announcement that the next round will push through on schedule is cause for real, albeit cautious, optimism.

Last month, a group of renegade MILF rebels attacked an army outpost in Mamasapano, Maguindanao, killing seven soldiers. And in pursuit of Indonesian members of the Jemaah Islamiyah terrorist group allegedly harbored by another MILF command, the Armed Forces' 6th Infantry Division launched two military strikes in three towns in Maguindanao. The AFP has claimed killing 40 armed men, including three of the Indonesians.

Both supporters and critics of the peace process have sounded the alarm over the encounters, fearing that they spell danger ahead. And Bantay Ceasefire, a multi-sectoral group of peace advocates, warned that the continuing pursuit of JI members was jeopardizing the 18-month-old ceasefire itself. The group also appealed to the MILF to impose appropriate measures on the renegades, particularly its Commander Wahid.

Perhaps, self-consciously, the peace group sought to strike a balance, apportioning equal blame to the AFP and the MILF. If this is so, it is a stance we can easily understand. The group does not want to be perceived as favoring one side or the other.

But in this particular case, the equivalence of responsibility is in fact a false one. MILF renegades are a bigger threat to the peace negotiations than the military's continuing anti-terrorist operations.

Let us be clear: The status of "lost commands" in the MILF is a real obstacle to peace. They make arduous negotiations even more difficult. And they raise the question of whether any agreement reached during these negotiations can in fact be enforced.

On the other hand, neither the MILF nor any third party can seriously suggest that the government put its counter-terrorism campaign on hold. Jemaah Islamiyah, the al-Qaeda-affiliated network seeking to establish a pan-Islamic state in Southeast Asia, is a dangerous threat to national security. And unlike the Moro rebellion, the solution to the JI problem is not and cannot be a matter of negotiation.

To be sure, Bantay Ceasefire's argument against the continuing JI "manhunt" revolves around the question of collateral damage on the civilian population. "Bantay Ceasefire appeals to the Armed Forces to strictly follow the guidelines of their Commander in Chief, [which are] meant to lower the impact of military operations on civilians," the group's statement last week read. They have a point; to the extent that it can, the military must warn civilians in a battle zone ahead of an operation, or move areas of operation away from centers of population. But like the proverbial guerrilla swimming in a sea of people, terrorists also seek cover by blending in.

The AFP believes that some members of the MILF continue to give refuge to JI partisans. If belief is reflected in reality, then these MILF members must bear joint responsibility for any collateral damage a counter-terrorism strike may inflict on civilians.

But "some members?" "These members?" The language reminds us that the monster of renegade rebels has once again reared its head. Since the death of its founder, the MILF has had to struggle with the issue of the so-called lost commands. Their emergence has legitimized concerns about control-or the lack of it-over the MILF's 12,000 regulars. The MILF must resolve this issue once and for all.

Quantity over quality

Quantity over quality


Posted 11:43pm (Mla time) Feb 04, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 5, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



TWO developments have brought to the fore once more the woeful state of our education system: one is the finding by the British Council that there are too many colleges and universities that are "diluting" the quality of higher education, and the other is the renewed call to increase the number of years in basic education from 10 to 11 and even 12 in order for the country to be at par with the rest of the world. The call was again made in reaction to reports that among 45 nations whose basic-education students were graded in science and mathematics aptitude, the Philippines ended up 44th.

The call was nothing new. The Presidential Commission on Educational Reform during the Joseph Estrada administration had recommended that another year be added to the basic education program. But it is doubtful whether an added year to basic education would do the trick. Another year of elementary or high school means more resources poured into the education system, resources that may fall prey to the Pacman instincts of our voracious politicians. Big chunks of the additional investments in school buildings, teachers and textbooks may end up in the pockets of pork barrel-hungry politicians and their cronies.

Quantity, it appears, has a doubtful bearing on quality. This is shown by the British Council critique of higher education. While the 1,380 universities and colleges all over the country provide easy access to higher education-just as the thousands of public schools that congressmen are fond of establishing provide admittance to basic education to millions -- there's no assurance that the quality of education is excellent and responsible. Again, the question of resources here is relevant. As Gill Westaway of the British Council said, "In a country like the Philippines, where resources are scarce, it's better to have fewer universities with quality rather than allowing hundreds of universities that are diluting the overall quality."

Obviously there ought to be a moratorium on establishment of new colleges and universities, particularly state colleges and universities (SCUs), whose number has grown tremendously since the 1980s, and many of which have charters shielding them from effective monitoring by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED). SCUs have become the favorite creations of national and local politicians. One in Pampanga was reported to have conferred more than a hundred doctorate degrees in a year, outpacing even much bigger and established higher institutions.

Why SCUs continue to grow in number despite the dubious education they provide has something to do with resources. It seems that politicians have found a new way to tap resources by building new schools, which also means new hiring and new allocations for classrooms, supplies and textbooks. Even Calamba has its own university!

How politics is killing our education system is very clear in the political pressure being brought to bear on the CHED to recall its order closing down 23 nursing schools nationwide. Several lawmakers led by Las Piñas Rep. Cynthia Villar, head of the House committee on education, met CHED officials and demanded they rescind the order.

The CHED, led by its chair, Fr. Rolando de la Rosa, O.P., defended the closure, saying it was meant to arrest the decline in nursing education, as proven by the decline in the passing rate of the nursing board exam from 49 percent to 43 percent as well as findings that nearly a fourth of nursing schools had passing rates of less than 30 percent. The order, in fact, has met acclaim here and abroad. Foreign hospitals that rely on the Philippines for nurses have welcomed the move, saying that the quality of nursing education should not be compromised for commercial-and political-interests. But the lawmakers, who two years ago passed the nursing law empowering the CHED and the Board of Nursing Education to do everything to ensure the quality of nursing education, insisted on the recall of the CHED order.

Could the CHED turn to Malacañang for help? Alas, there's no reprieve. Even without hearing the side of CHED, Malacañang recently ordered the lifting of the ban on a nursing school put up overnight by an influential computer school to capitalize on the nursing frenzy.

The CHED is trying to nurse education back to health. But our lawmakers and Malacañang, who seem to want to nurse their own pockets and shady political ambitions, are pummeling it to death.

Dancing...

Dancing...


Posted 00:25am (Mla time) Feb 04, 2005
Inquirer News Service



Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the February 4, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer



THAT the Philippine government continues to flail at the immovable object that is Japan on the matter of its new policy of regulating the entry of Filipino entertainers poignantly illustrates the arid employment landscape -- and the knife-edge quality of life -- on these fair isles. Per reports, Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo was again to fly to Japan yesterday to plead for leniency in the implementation of the new policy, although he was quoted as saying that he was harboring "no false hopes" that he would succeed in his mission.

He could well be dancing in the dark. Romulo and various other Philippine officials, including Representatives Edcel Lagman and Roseller Barinaga of the House committees on overseas workers' affairs and labor and employment, respectively, had made earlier attempts to negotiate Japan's reconsideration of its new policy that was formulated expressly to fight human trafficking. But all their efforts were for naught, and the fortress of Japanese resolve as it applies to this labor issue has remained impregnable.

Unless a miracle occurs and the fortress opens a crack to let slip a glimmer of hope, a Filipino meaning to work in Japan as an entertainer must present proof of at least two years of training in music or dance at a foreign educational institution or two years of experience in another country before he/she can be deemed eligible for a visa. The artist's accreditation card issued by the Philippine government certifying the bearer's skills in the fine art of entertainment will no longer do. And no, not even those who have logged years of working as such in that country are "safe" from the new requirement.

Consider the figures as reported. Japan's new policy will mean a radical cutback in the issuance of entertainer visas from 80,000 to 8,000. The number of Filipino workers in the Land of the Rising Sun is estimated at close to 300,000 (most of whom are said to be employed in bars and nightclubs). Last year alone, the money they sent home amounted to as much as $258.26 million, according to Bangko Sentral records.

This is the problem of an economy that rests on the perilously unsteady foundations of labor export that includes the deployment of desperate men and women to uncertain fates. Imagine the upheaval that will be caused by the Filipino entertainers' sudden unemployment, as well as the dashed hopes of tens of thousands more who are determined to find survival in the neon paradise of the Ginza -- and understand why the Arroyo administration is moving heaven and earth to avert the inevitable.


...In the dark

UNDERSTAND also the position of the organization called Talents and Artists Managers Association (Tama), which is seeking President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's intervention in behalf of some 197,000 Filipino entertainers in clear danger of being repatriated from Japan -- and into the arid employment landscape at home. Tama is cognizant of the fact that its "performing artists" easily fall through the cracks and into the dark fleshpots of Japan "no matter how talented or legitimate" they are. But it insists that the "corrupt and abusive labor practices" of local recruitment agencies and Japanese promoters are to blame. And it proposes the creation of a monitoring center, to be run by concerned artists and independent nongovernmental organizations, to oversee the Filipino entertainers' daily activities and their general situation.

Tama's Joegrad de la Torre concedes that the Philippine government had as much chance to bend Japan's stance as a snowball in hell. He makes the point -- and the problem -- crystal-clear when he says: "We should be prepared for these new rules. The Japanese are concerned about human trafficking; our problem is economic."

Mighty Japan hastened to put its new policy in place after the US government cited it as among the countries where human trafficking is rampant. Shuhei Ogawa, spokesperson of the Japanese Embassy in Manila, has gone on record to say that more than 90 percent of the Filipino women working in Japan were forced to become "hostesses" in the nightclubs and bars. He described the situation as "very terrible," and wondered why Philippine authorities would want to "sacrifice those girls" in the course of seeking a moratorium on the new policy.

A pithy, if sanctimonious, question that this "strong republic" seems loath, or quite unable, to answer.