From a peaceful campus, a graduation into war

Holding that last "parade and review" on Palm Sunday must have been symbolic for the 138 men and women who graduated yesterday from our Philippine Military Academy. Today the glory – tomorrow the reality of war on scattered battlefields.

Technically, the graduating class did not participate in the parade. They were the honorees, and stood in their "thin gray line" watching the march-past. Then they hurled their shakos, those colorful plumed helmets, enthusiastically into the air to signify their liberation from cadet-status, and their acceptance of commissions in our armed forces. From cadet to second lieutenant or naval ensign. That’s what yesterday’s ceremonies were designed to announce. After four years of intensive training, those young cadets are now ready to fight.

And our armed forces, sad to say, have been constantly in combat. We’ve had rebellions with which to contend and overseas military expeditions like those to Korea, Vietnam and East Timor to undertake. We mustn’t forget Cambodia either, where our "policemen" were dispatched as members of the United Nations election-watch contingent. In every action, whether at home or abroad, the PMAers were there.

Being one of those fellows who agonize over not having delivered his message better after a speech, I’ve been regretting over the past week not having congratulated those earnest young cadets enough for having successfully bridged the transition from plebe to "warrior". Even worse, I fear not having inspired them enough about the bigger, more arduous and more perilous tasks and duties they will have to face in the weeks and years to come. On the other hand, I’m confident that they will understand in due time what honor and dedication demand. It’s poignant enough to realize that some of them will not survive the battlefield. But this is what the motherland expects of her sons and daughters: That they be willing to make this sacrifice. (There are those who would prefer to say "fatherland", as the Germans invoke their lieb Vaterland and the Canadians le beau Canada. But our heroes have always invoked the "motherland" as the French do, when hymning La belle France. Yet, what’s in a word? What matters is what we revere and uphold in our hearts.)

It was touching to watch the PMA graduation rites on television yesterday. And the announcers did it right: As each marching battalion went by, they named the cadet officers and the cities and provinces from whence they came. It was a roll-call, literally, of every community in our archipelago – as the old, beloved religious hymn in Spanish we used to say, de Aparri hasta Jolo. Indeed, from every point in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, our young men and women have come to the PMA to learn how they could serve our country.

Courage, Integrity, Loyalty. May they be true to this legacy of their Academy, until the last bugle calls them home.

* * *

Mexico’s Ambassador Enrique Hubbard contacted me yesterday to say how very sorry he is about the bitter incident last Thursday, in which the state government of Nuevo Leon had embarrassed our Vice President and Foreign Affairs Secretary Teofisto Guingona by turning him away from a luncheon tendered by the state governor, for the chiefs of state attending the United Nations Conference on Financing for Development, in Monterrey.

It’s clear that the Vice President, although he had shown up in response to a formal invitation, was humiliated by being shooed away by the governor’s protocol officers. Mr. Guingona, we hear, stood up and left. Sorry to say, whatever the apologetic aftermath, what’s done is done.

Poor Ambassador Hubbard was summoned to the Department of Foreign Affairs to "explain", and what else could he say? He asserted that the treatment of Guingona had represented "a terrible discourtesy", and that "nothing we say or do will fix the damage done."

He told me that "although it was all a terrible blunder by the government of one of our federated states, it affects bilateral relations as a whole. It happened in Mexico, regardless of the type of authority directly responsible."

Hubbard has expressed "sincere apologies". He added, however, "there isn’t much more I can do at this stage." I guess not. If it’s any consolation to Don Enrique (whose father, incidentally, published a newspaper in their home state), Filipinos – after the passion of the moment cools down – usually, although not always, have a forgiving nature. But they don’t normally forget.

* * *

Our old friend, Dr. Karl D. Jackson, director of Asian Studies in the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of the Johns Hopkins University, was in town this week to give a speech at the Asian Society here.

At the dinner tendered in his honor by Ambassador Bobby Romulo in the Tower Club last Thursday, I was fortunately seated next to Karl and we had a chance to catch up on old times. Jackson, who was a special assistant to the President (George Bush, Sr.) and Senior Director for Asia, National Security Council (1981 to 1991), and had even negotiated Japan’s $13 billion contribution to Operations "Desert Shield" and "Desert Storm" during the Gulf War, told our group that the mood in America remains not only militant but "united".

When we asked him what America would do now that the 11 Arab countries he had visited had rebuffed Vice President Dick Cheney’s attempts to nudge them into approving "a move on Iraq" as an "axis of evil" country which has amassed "weapons of mass destruction", and even America’s European allies are questioning US President George W. Bush’s belligerent intentions toward Iraq, Jackson replied that, the way current thinking can be gauged, America might be prepared "to go all the way to Baghdad alone."

Now that’s a disquieting thought.

Karl, of course, while a Republican and inclined to be a hardliner towards terrorism, is not dogmatic, or dismissive of other points of view. One of the critical books he referred to was The Paradox of American Power by Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, and former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council and an Asst. Secretary of Defense in the administration of former President Bill Clinton.

* * *

Fortunately, I had earlier read the book, and was familiar with its subtitle, which is: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go it Alone (Oxford University Press, 2002).

Incidentally, and this isn’t a commercial, many volumes just off the press can be found at "A Different Bookstore" (behind Rustan’s), which also has, for the past four years – even before they were "in vogue" – offered the best selection of titles on the Middle East, the Arab world, the Palestinians, Israel, Jerusalem, Islamic cultures, problems, and international "terrorism". I had to scrounge through bookshops in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Paris last September and October to complete my collection. Then, to my surprise, the Makati bookstore had the same titles on its shelves less than a week after my arrival.

In his preface, Nye asserts, "The tragedy on September 11, 2001, was a wake-up call for Americans. We became complacent during the 1990s. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, no country could match or balance us . . . We resembled Britain in its mid-Victorian glory, but with even greater global reach."

Indeed, Nye argued, not since ancient Rome had any nation enjoyed so much economic, cultural, and military power, but that power does not allow the United States "to solve global problems like terrorism, environmental degradation, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction without involving other nations."

Nye warns that it would be perilous for the US to proceed unilaterally, but, instead, "it must seek constructive relations with nations weak and strong."

I guess the former is the category under which we fall – namely, "weak."

Dr. Jackson, on the other hand, underscored that nowadays the Philippines rates highly in US esteem as a staunch ally. In his role as Senior Adviser of Cerberus Capital Management (since January 2000), he revealed that this powerful New York investment group is committed to bring US$1 billion in investment here.

* * *

In the concluding pages of his book, Nye declares that "The (American) public is also realistic about the limits of American power . . . . (and) large majorities oppose a purely unilateralist approach. Upwards of two-thirds of the public oppose, in principle, the US acting alone overseas without the support of other countries."

How then can Washington, DC propose to "attack" Baghdad, if even America’s foremost friend and supporter, Tony Blair, Britain’s eloquent Prime Minister (who’s just committed more Royal Navy commandos to "peacekeeping"duties in Afghanistan) is facing a mini-revolt in his own Labour Party over his latest initiatives, particularly on Iraq? As the Brits used to remark during their Colonial Blimpish days, for Blair "it’s sticky wicket, old boy, sticky wicket."

And yet, "Field Marshal" Bush, the tough Texan, pushes on. As a wartime President, his popularity runs high. Even the Democrats hesitate to cross swords with him on foreign policy, homeland defense, and the military budget.

Nye admits that "the dramatically decreased cost of communication, the rise of transnational domains (including the Internet) that cut across borders, and the democratization of technology that puts massive destructive power (once the sole preserve of governments) into the hands of groups and individuals all suggest dimensions that are historically new. In the last century, men such as Hitler, Stalin, and Mao needed the power of the state to wreak great evil. Such men in the 21st century will be less bound than those of the 20th by the limits of the state, and less obliged to gain industrial capabilities to wreak havoc . . . Countering such terrorist groups must be a top priority."

For our own national, even selfish purposes, I’m glad that Dubya Bush (as he’s known to his intimates) is such a go-for-broke toughie, just as dear old dad, for all his World War II combat record and his dramatic (but only half-fulfilled) leadership in the Gulf War proved a wimp. For the relentless, persistent, sneaky, and fanatical terrorists who’ve burrowed deeply into many societies, including our own, can be confronted only by an equally relentless, persistent, and yes, sneaky counter-force – and that, in these treacherous and troubled times, is an America commanded by a determined, almost fanatical, George W. Bush.

In the end, can America’s will hold up, and its deep pocket prevail? Abangan.

No, sir. We’re not about to be submerged as an outpost of the New American Empire, as some suggest. Sanamagan, how can we troublesome Filipinos be tamed or contained? But I submit it is useful to have allies like the US in our own battle to curb rebellion. terrorism, and some other ills that plague us.

President GMA may be out of tune on other issues, and may try too hard for popularity in her already perceptible re-election campaign, but the smartest and perhaps even most sincere move she made was when she picked up the phone and, by golly, managed to get through to Mr. Bush just an hour and a half after the Twin Towers and Pentagon tragedies. She pledged him and America the sympathy and wholehearted support of the Philippines. Bush, whatever his shortcomings, is not likely to forget that in that darkest hour of his life she was the third leader who called.

* * *

ERRATA . . . In yesterday's column, among other errors, there were two grievous ones. In New People's Army spokesman Ka Roger Rosal's declaration there would be no Holy Week truce, his final statement should have read, "if we find a target, we'll make a strike." The article "a" was omitted. Finally, in speaking of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), I referred to them as "David's Sling." It came out, stupidly, as "David Sling." Sounds like a drink, e.g. Singapore Gin Sling.