Journey to Hua Hin

It is understandable if President GMA considers how the Philippines could take part in the $5 billion calamity fund as on top of her agenda. She brings with her the burden of the damage by typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng to the Philippines when she attends the Asean summit in historical Hua Hin.

But I believe she should do more than that. Albay Gov. Jose Salceda, an economic adviser to her, is focused on proposing an Adaptation Fund. He said the fund would work like the Chiang Mai Initiative that was set up to help the region’s financial institutions at the height of the global financial crisis. But these are about the mechanics of funding.

The journey to Hua Hin has more substantial aspects and for me, if there were a list of things to do, the monetary aspect should belong to the middle rung of concerns not because we do not need it. We do.

But the approach for funding should be underpinned by a greater commitment to the region.

I remember that in one conference I attended in Bicol, Gov. Salceda stressed discussions were to be limited to preparedness among local authorities chiefly the barangays. We were not there to discuss the politics of climate change, he said. But I wonder if it would not have helped if we did. If President GMA should, as one report said, make “a strong pitch for fighting climate change” at the 15th Asean Summit in Hua Hin, she should also state how and why countries like the Philippines have become victims of competing superpowers. That said, it should be clear we are not asking for help but restitution for the destruction and deaths wrought by the insatiable appetites of countries engaged in hegemonic contests.

The Adaptation Fund should not be regarded merely as a fund. If the Philippines starts from the premise of the politics of climate change we will give a more forceful message in Hua Hin. We must articulate and represent grievances as victims instead of merely giving polite proposals on how we could be helped.

*      *      *

There is a long list of items in the Hua Hin agenda, among them the start up of an Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, a free trade agreement between Southeast Asia and East Asia and as expected, an Asean position on climate change under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

But as other Asia watchers have said the importance of Hua Hin is an opportunity to connect and reinforce the members’ sense of belonging to the region. The Philippines is at a disadvantage because it is an archipelago but it can still enhance connectivity through other means.

S Ramesh of Channel NewsAsia wrote that Asean will be looking at enhancing connectivity amongst its members as well as with China and India by road and rail.

The Philippines should participate actively when connectivity is discussed in Hua Hin even if we are not in the mainland. As Singapore’s Foreign Minister George Yeo said the leaders will propose forming a group to study the idea in detail.

“We have, on the one side, China; on the other side, India — two very big countries with developed or developing infrastructure and we are in between. If we, in our own integration, make sure our links connect to theirs, not only will Asean be linked to China and India, we will link China and India together.

He admits that the road and rail links will benefit the mainland more but there is also sea connectivity or what he referred to as maritime Asean and that is where the Philippines should come in.

 “We are looking at the whole of Asean as one integrated space now, and if there is growth for Asean as a whole, it is bound to create direct and indirect benefits for individual member countries,” added Yeo.

*      *      *

One difficult issue is Myanmar and human rights.

Yeo is not perturbed that differences will overwhelm the desire to create a strong region. “It is natural — given our different histories and backgrounds — that we should have different views about this and some countries rightly fear that human rights might become a lever by external powers to put pressure on them. But I believe in the end, if we go about this in a consensual manner, we will be able to make progress while achieving a good agreement among the group.”

It already has.

The American shift to a more conciliatory policy towards Myanmar has contributed to optimism that differences can be resolved in the spirit of compromise. The Asean leaders meet with US President Barack Obama in Singapore next month. There had been a time when this was seen as impossible because of former President Bush’s hard line policy and a preference for sanctions rather than dialogue. It is to the credit of Asean leaders that they remained steadfast in looking for an Asian solution for the Myanmar problem while remaining open to US and Western suggestions.

*      *      *

My late husband, former Ambassador Alberto A. Pedrosa and I became good friends of then Ambassador Thaung Tun, and his wife Sandar Lwin.

He arranged that we visit the country and see it for ourselves. It was also he who coaxed me to study the history of Myanmar to understand contemporary problems. I am especially grateful to him for introducing me to Thant Myint-U’s River of Lost Footsteps. The author has been vindicated with the US change of policy towards Myanmar. He was one, if not the main Burmese advocate, of engagement rather than sanctions against his country.

“I wrote this book with an eye to what the past might say about the present. Since the 1988 uprising, Burma has been the object of myriad good-faith efforts, by the United Nations, dozens of governments, hundreds of NGOs and thousands of activists, all trying to promote democratic reform.

But the net result has been disappointing at best and may very well have had the unintended consequence of further entrenching the status quo and holding back positive change. And given that result, I think it is no coincidence that analysis of Burma has been singularly ahistorical, with few besides scholars of the country bothering to consider the actual origins of today’s predicament. We fail to consider history at our own peril. I suspect, not only in the case of Burma, but in that of many other “crisis countries” around the world.” Like the Philippines.