Turn down the heat

I can’t say that the sort of open antagonism and unabashed confrontation we’re seeing now on several fronts is part of Malacanang’s get-tough policy. But I can say that this bare-knuckle, take-no-prisoners attitude is both turning off a lot of middle-roaders and causing significant concern in the business community.

If GMA’s unleashing of her dogs of war is intended to bring back a sense of stability and national purpose, that hasn’t happened. Instead of a healing process after the impeachment failed, what we’re seeing is unremitting retribution which causes existing wounds to fester and even worsen.

This is not a recipe for getting back to business and focusing on licking poverty. It is a prescription for more of the same internal crisis that has caused this country to stagnate and be the laughing stock of the Asian community.

Whenever we gloat about our impressive economic growth rate, it turns out that practically everyone else in the region is doing better. Countries that were once pitied due to intractable civil wars and ideological conflicts are now seen as better foreign investment venues than this country. The reasons don’t change: corrupt and inefficient governance, unpredictable and inconsistent policies, poor infrastructure, lack of peace and order, etc., ad nauseam.

To the Palace, I suppose, everything must take a back seat to the most urgent priority of quelling all threats to the incumbency of the present Chief Executive, actual or imminent, real or perceived. The energy and resources devoted to that cause are justified by the worse adverse consequences that would allegedly befall this country if the President is unseated. The negative impact, it is claimed, would be, more than the obvious personal political cost to GMA, on the country as a whole. Thus, the fight to save GMA is really a fight to save the nation. Or so it is claimed.

I’m not so sure the country’s interest is furthered by what’s actually going on. And if someone tells me the government hasn’t at all lost focus, that the work of government proceeds unimpeded by the political crisis, that the economy continues to flourish despite all the noise, well, I have a bridge across the Pasig I’d like to sell.

If I didn’t know better, I would have thought that the reincarnation of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was let loose in government with only one mission: to hunt down and exterminate all enemies, traitorous comrades and anyone else who stands in the way. In the way of what? Let’s discuss that.

The skeptics would say her only agenda is to hold on to power, one way or the other. The optimists would argue that this is a leader who is single-mindedly pursuing her vision of a strong and prosperous nation. To my knowledge, no survey has been taken yet of how many consider themselves skeptics or optimists.

I often wonder what’s driving all this. Many of us don’t want to engage in simplistic pontification and brand all people in government as inherently flawed characters infected with a fraudulent streak. Is it possible that ambition and power can so corrupt that lying becomes second-nature, that the winning of power overrides all considerations of decency or morality and that the retention of power excuses deceit, cover-up and the merciless eradication of all opposition?

In the best of worlds, perhaps the ruler is ideally the wisest, the most intelligent, the most competent and the only one who knows what’s best for us. After all, as disciples of Machiavelli argue, what he’s really telling us is that governance is essentially a dirty and distasteful business, that in governing moral questions are rarely black or white but mostly gray, and that bad and amoral men can be outstanding rulers.

But for the skeptics, as defined above, bad men, and women, can only be bad rulers. For them, the story of a deliberate conspiracy, led by no less than former President Cory and Senate President Frank Drilon, is pure poppycock, whatever Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales say.

Further, the story of a Drilon "set-up"of GMA’s "I Am Sorry" speech is fatuous. The claim of a "serial impeachment" in Senate investigations of the Venable lobbying contract and the North Rail Project is pure fantasy. The No Permit, No Rally policy is alarmist overkill and is rejected by the government’s own Human Rights Commission.

To the skeptics, too, GMA’s renewed vigor in pushing charter change is driven not by a patriotic desire to improve our government system and usher the country into a modern age of international competitiveness, but by firm resolve to ensure her stay until 2010 and, probably, thereafter as Prime Minister in a new Parliament.

In this effort, Speaker Joe de Venecia is regarded, to paraphrase Winston Churchill’s description of Soviet Russia, as a bit of a mystery wrapped in a riddle wrapped in an enigma. His "Kill the Senate" rhetoric is okay with GMA, but his claim that she will "give way" in 2007 or accept a largely ceremonial role as a much-diminished transitional president is considered about as realistic as Joe de V’s politely-received but basically ignored Debt for Equity proposal.

But in this case, the devil is not in the details but in the overall effect. Even if the optimists see statesmanship at work in an apparently confrontational government, the reality of continuing turmoil and strife is undeniable. And the question many ask is simple: Is all this necessary? Does not the nation deserve surcease, some breathing space after the trauma of the impeachment process? Is it not to the interest of the nation that we genuinely go back to work, and that the government lead the re-engagement?

In other words, rather than looking and sounding tough, should not the President simply ignore whatever saber-rattling is still out there and follow her own advice to get back to the more urgent task of building a nation. If there are indeed conspiracies, the conspirators will, as in shooting galleries in amusement parks, pop their heads out soon enough for the people to shoot off. With achievement, no conspiracy is possible. Without achievement, no conspiracy is necessary.

One more thing: Stonewalling against the truth is a terminal disease. You can’t hide behind allegations of institutional torment perpetrated by an abusive Senate, or of orchestrated lawlessness by demonstrating radicals. It’s still cover-up, persistent and unabated. GMA must find a way out of this corner. So far she has not. A get-tough stance doesn’t address the dilemma, it worsens it.