Those might not be the most important things.
The really important thing was the great esteem with which our leader was accorded in the capital of a major ally. In the well-measured world of diplomacy, where every adjective is calibrated and every utterance is deliberate, the level of respect President Gloria commanded is stupendous.
That level of respect is not merely, to use Senator Joker Arroyo’s phrase, a "personal triumph".
It is testimony, no doubt, to the adeptness and credibility with which PGMA exercised the responsibilities of leadership over her troubled land. It is testimony, as well, to the receptivity of our national community to modern governance.
That is the final basis for the esteem our President enjoys abroad.
The lush red carpet Washington rolled out for our President was not entirely because of our consistent support for America’s war on terror. A corrupt, inept or otherwise incredible leader of a developing country would not get that sort of warm treatment even if he vociferously professed undying support for US policy.
The point here is that it is not subservience but merit that is the basis for the lush welcome our President received in Washington.
Like the rest of the international community, the Americans recognize that under President Arroyo’s leadership the country has been reasonably well-governed despite the odds. It has done extremely well compared to the gangster presidency that preceded it and that was ousted by popular dismay.
Next Thursday, our economic managers are expected to announce a GDP growth figure of something like 4.6 percent for the first quarter of the year. While that might normally be described as "modest growth", it is remarkable considering the context of a general global slowdown, war in Iraq and a plague in the region.
That is a growth figure made even more remarkable because it happened despite all the damage to our tourism and countryside development caused by the Abu Sayyaf, the CPP-NPA, the MILF and SARS. In our time and place, these are the equivalents of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse.
It is a growth figure that is impressive when taken comparatively, set against the growth rates of the more mature industrial economies that we trade with. It is an impressive growth made possible by sober and prudent economic management as well as adept responses to sources of threat, be it terrorism or disease.
Lest we forget, the Philippines survived the SARS epidemic with minimal casualties. Strict controls at the immigrations frontline and a comprehensive response by our health authorities prevented the worse from happening.
Lest we forget, too, the Philippines thus far avoided the much-anticipated "collateral terrorism" in the aftermath of coalition action in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although a few Mindanao cities were hit by makeshift bombs, sustained counteraction by our security officials prevented terrorist cells from mounting larger attacks.
Today, the Armed Forces are engaged in "punitive action" against select MILF units linked to terrorist attacks. A wide security dragnet has netted quite a number of suspected terrorists.
This is the sort of unremitting vigilance required to protect the rest of our economy from twin scourges of terror and disease.
In the last analysis, this was what the lush welcome in Washington was all about. It was about nation struggling to consolidate effective institutions of governance against great odds. It was about a leadership committed to consolidating those institutions of governance – from security administration, management of epidemiological outbreaks and fiscal discipline.
We are all honored by the international recognition that President Gloria now enjoys. It is recognition that despite the odds, and sometimes despite ourselves, a modicum of modern government functions in this land capable of dealing both with the contingencies of calamities as well as the longer-term requirements of reform.
Which brings a troubling question to our minds: Can we sustain these gains in the modernization of our governance beyond Gloria’s term?
True, we value our democracy. But there are times when this very democracy seems to be a plague on our development.
Our electoral cycle is too short. Our politicians are self-seeking and near-sighted. Our voters are sometimes immature and impressionable, vulnerable to demagoguery and glitter. We saw that in 1998, when out voters chose the least qualified to the most responsible post in the land.
At this time, next year, we should have chosen a new leader for our land.
This time next year is not a very long time from now. But it seems a great distance from where we stand because on the horizon we see mostly pretenders and demagogues seeking to be our President.
When will be the next time a Filipino leader will be welcomed with such respect in a foreign capital, with the pomp and pageantry we saw last week in Washington, for leading the country with quiet effectiveness, with deeds rather than demagoguery?
Our quaint electoral culture penalizes quiet achievers and rewards the merchants of scandal. What is popular to many of our voters is not consistently what is correct. What is impressive to the great number is often not consistent with what is right.
We vote for faces, not for horizons.
For this reason, I look at May 2004 with some trepidation. In the recent past, every time things begin to go well for us, we commit some ghastly mistake to undercut it.
When Japanese investments began migrating outwards in the late eighties, Popoy Lagman and his gang kidnapped Wakaoji and scared away potential investors. When our economy started to roar in the early nineties, our power supply ran short. After the period of reforms and robust growth during the Ramos years, we elected Erap president and set the stage for a political calamity.
Things are beginning to look up for us today. What ghastly mistake will we inflict on ourselves next year to abort it?