Reactions to my last column

I have received interesting responses from my friends in the United States to my last column. My friends, it would seem, still keep an eye on what’s happening in the Philippines through the Internet including local Manila papers.

Readers will recall I wrote about Putin’s seemingly unimpeded  annexation of Crimea.  I noted that Americans – mainly Republicans- condemned and mocked the Obama approach to foreign policy and intimated that he had lost the global credibility to do anything about Putin’s expansionist ambitions which apparently did not end with Crimea.  Many former State department friends reacted, with some conceding that my column spoke some truths painful as it was to admit the weakness of Obama.  Others though said that it was predictable for Republican politicians to make these sweeping generalizations and that Obama will resolve the situation positively. 

My column also intimated that the Chinese were closely watching the Russian moves. None  disputed my assertion that China may be encouraged by the tame Western response to Putin’s outrageous land grab to pursue their own expansionist ambitions.

Many others have the same view. Just recently Yuriko Koike (a former Japanese defense minister and member of the National Diet), wrote an OP-ED in the Lebanese Daily Star.

She commented: “China’s response to the Ukraine crisis was particularly revealing. For three decades, China has proclaimed “non-interference” in the internal affairs of sovereign states as the most important rule governing international relations. But when Putin invaded Ukraine, China showed the hollowness of its adherence to this principle. Instead of condemning Russia….it abstained at the UN Security Council and has offered more criticism of Ukraine’s new popular government than it has of Putin’s thuggish behavior.  Every country in Asia is bound to draw only one conclusion from China’s tacit approval of Putin’s land grab: China, too, thinks that might makes right, and if it believes that it can get away with invading disputed territories, whether in the South China Sea or in the Indian Himalayas, it will do so.”  

Worrisome Chinese presence in Phl

The Chinese military is not in our country, but their commercial presence is clearly discernible.  The names Huawei, ZTE and other electronic companies are everywhere in Philippine industry.  Their telecommunications and computer equipment are dominant in all telephone companies and other industries. A few years ago, an interisland shipping company was sold funded by a Chinese equity fund.  Recently DOTC awarded a Chinese company, in place of a Belgian company, to supply railway cars for the MRT.  I don’t want to sound alarmist, but I think it would be prudent for our intelligence establishments to assess possible vulnerabilities to such exposure in key areas like telecoms and transportation.

But what disturbs me most, because it can be  fixed, is the Chinese presence in small scale mining.  Industry sources estimate 500,000 small-scale miners are operating in more than 30 provinces. It is my understanding that these  Chinese mining companies have been the source of corruption among local government officials including governors.  Moreover, they are cheating the government of large sums, and yet the law enforcement officials have failed to stop their smuggling of our mineral resources. For example, according to UN trade data, Hong Kong’s official figures of Philippine gold in 2011 were 11 times the Philippine statistics for gold shipments to Hong Kong.  Perhaps the BIR would find it more worthwhile to focus on the tax liabilities of these  small scale miners and smugglers than the “penny wise and pound foolish” media blitz on restaurants and doctors.  

In many ways, Chinese commercial enterprises in the Philippines is like a Trojan horse and we should beware of threats to national security and increased corruption in government sectors. 

Reassurances: Prelude to Obama’s Asian visit

I have been consistent in expressing reservations about the so-called “Pivot  to Asia” primarily because America’s plate is full in resolving  other  geopolitical challenges whether it be the recent Crimea crisis, the Mid-East, the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks etc. In last week’s Fareed Zakaria  panel discussion, one panelist commented that the US will find most of the issues in the  regions I just mentioned as insoluble. Yet, he felt that Obama’s visit to Asia can make a great deal of difference.

Since the Philippines submitted their “memorial” to ITLOS, the United States has joined in attacks of the “nine-dash line” casting aside their usual diplomatic caution.  Moreover, State department assistant secretary Daniel Russell was quoted as saying that while Washington doesn’t take a position on the sovereignty issues, China’s pursuit of its claims by referencing the nine-dash lines creates “uncertainty, insecurity and instability”.  He even stated that the US would welcome China clarifying or adjusting the nine-dash line claim in accordance with the International Law of the Sea. 

Parenthetically, the recent gift of German Chancellor Angela Merkel to Xi Jinping must have caused a certain amount of annoyance and embarrassment among China’s officialdom. The gift was a 1735 map of China made by a French cartographer Jean-Baptiste Bourguignon d’Anville. The historical map showed a glaring deviation from modern China’s territorial map.  The Chancellor may have given it “with tongue in cheek”.  With all due respect, may I suggest that she is” one shrewd gal”. We need more leaders like her.

This week, US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel was in Beijing.  At a news conference, he categorically stated: “The Philippines and Japan are long time allies of the United States.  We have mutual self-defense treaties with each of these countries.”  He added the United States was “fully-committed to those treaty obligations.”

Last Tuesday, at the New York Asia Society Policy Institute, the Deputy Secretary of State, William J. Burns sought to allay concerns that the Obama administration was wavering in its so-called “pivot to Asia”.  Mr. Burns said: “No region will be more consequential for American interests and for the shape of the global system than the Asia Pacific”.

These words of assurance are welcome.  I sincerely hope that the Obama visit to our part of the world will demonstrate further by action that their “pivot” is not just rhetoric. 

Now we in Philippines might think that the rest of the world is fully aware of what is happening in our neck of the woods – China’s growing assertiveness, in particular. So I was taken aback by a comment from a former colleague in IBM who was a regional manager in Hong Kong for many years who also read my column. He said, Bobby, what is this issue on South China Sea?  I don’t read much about it unlike the news about Putin and Crimea.” I asked him to go to Google.  A few days later he emailed: “Wow that is serious stuff!!! Is the US government supporting your country’s cause? You should write a column about it so that our friends can know more about it.” My friend is not holed up in the hills of Arkansas far away from all forms of media making moonshine.   He lives in the San Francisco Bay area.  Perhaps it is time for DFA and the government to hire a publicist who will broadcast our case in the international press.