Finally, the cat is out of the bag

At first glance, it had seemed only that – rowdy domestic politics - with some ambitious senators wanting to oust President Arroyo because she is ‘unfit’, because she cheated in 2004, because of extra-judicial killings blamed on the military, etc. etc.

It unfolded in stages with different dramatis personae being paraded into center stage and pasted in headlines of newspapers eager to sell sensation. Underpinning the ‘headlines’ and ‘talk shows’ were timely surveys conducted to demonstrate the unpopularity of the President. No matter the strides the government made in the economy during her watch President GMA was just unpopular. In a sense it was naïve of President Arroyo to pin her hopes on public support because she had done fairly well in the economic sphere.

But she did not reckon with one issue — the American–Chinese rivalry in the region and in the most sensitive area of competition — the quest for oil. The President, as well as other officials of the Philippine government, took for granted all along that they were acting in the name of governing an independent country. It was a fatal mistake. We may have needed funds for development and infrastructure but it should not be sourced from China. Never mind if China’s rival, our former colonizer the US of A could not and would not provide such funds. But why shouldn’t the Philippines accept funding from China that would redound to our interest?

The joint exploration of the Spratlys among China, the Philippines and Vietnam was a brilliant diplomatic maneuver to stave off a potential powder keg in the region. Cooperative ventures are effective and a well-known strategy for blunting military aggression. It was something akin to the concept of the European Coal and Steel Community that later evolved into the European Economic Community and now the European Union. The six countries that signed the Treaty of Paris — Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany pooled their coal and steel resources and achieved harmony.

Following that model the China, Philippines and Vietnam Joint Exploration of the Spratlys is being impugned and cast as “treason’ by America’s chorus boys in pursuit of trivial ambitions to take over Malacanang.

Unless this rivalry between the US and China is factored in trying to understand recent events, we will be groping in the dark and only half-understanding the unfolding events. It is not just about domestic politics no matter how virulent.

In an analysis of America’s competition with China in the quest for oil, Kari Huus of MSNBC wrote as early as in 2006: “Americans feeling the pain at the pump also are feeling the impact of China’s prosperity. With gas prices hovering above $3 a gallon in many places, analysts say the spike is due, in large part, to the rising demand in the 1.2 billion-strong nation — where economic growth was a whopping 9.9 percent last year.

Is there an end in sight? Not if Beijing has anything to say about it. For the Chinese leadership, survival depends on maintaining momentum, which is why Chinese companies have struck out in all directions to secure oil deals.

It is a quest that now largely drives Chinese foreign policy, displacing old ideological concerns, and has led to a pragmatic view of the world in which no oil-rich country is too dangerous or remote for exploration, and no regime too corrupt or unsavory for a contract.”

* * *

With that background, it is hard to understand why critics should brand President GMA a traitor unless of course we are not free to decide what is in the best interest of the country. I would think that if she considered Philippine interests ahead of any other country’s, the US of A included, then the joint exploration can hardly be called an act of treason. It may have been naïve but not treasonous if she thought that China’s rival for oil, the US of A, will sit idly by while the Chinese set about dominating the region in their quest for oil. Remember we do not even have the oil yet, only a joint exploration of the much talked about but still unproven “oil riches under the Spratlys”. As far as I know the countries with competing claims on the islands were working on other harmless cooperative ventures such as common research on the flora and fauna, archaeology, etc. that would in the end shape a working framework. When the time came for dividing the oil among the claimants, an infrastructure for cooperation rather than conflict would be in place.

Cast that background with the brouhaha on the joint exploration and you will see a different picture from the name-calling resorted to by our ignorant and selfish politicians. I am not saying that there could not have been some money transactions involved because I do not have access to such information. But commonsense tells me that if the result of the joint exploration agreement meant we would have money for our North and South railway system, the ZTE or whatever to make life easier for Filipinos and spur the economy then let us have it. It is realpolitik that the US of A will not hesitate to do if they were in China’s shoes.

The intense economic rivalry can be gleaned from the frantic activities of Chinese leaders. After his trip to the United States Chinese President Hu Jintao jetted to Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer, then off to Morocco and then to Nigeria. In Nigeria, Huus reports that “Jintao agreed to a $4 billion investment in infrastructure in return for first dibs on a specific drilling area in the impoverished but oil-rich African nation. He went on to sign a deal for oil exploration rights in Kenya, a country that has only begun to assess its potential oil reserves.”

So long as it is the country’s interest that is paramount, we can play along with the game and use the China-US rivalry as an opportunity to our advantage. It is an opportunity we would miss if we listened instead to self-serving politicians who do not want to displease America. Ay, naku.

The joint exploration agreement is consistent with Chinese foreign policy “to invest in far-flung countries large and small that have oil reserves, vying for a share of new production, courting major Middle Eastern oil producers, and building pipelines to transport the oil to its own energy-hungry industries and car owners. In doing so, China is bumping up against the interests of established international oil companies, humanitarian initiatives, and striking deals with countries Washington considers rogues, undermining efforts to marginalize them.”