Destabilization

The word for the day is “destabilization.”

It seems only Filipinos use this dreadful term. It was popularized during the Marcos dictatorship, mainly to discourage public speculation (or wishful thinking) about coup conspiracies in progress.

Every time the word was unloaded by official mouthpieces, its practical effect was to discredit persons or groups critical of the political establishment. Although the word does not exist as a specific crime in our penal code, it was useful as a wide net for what might normally be considered exercises in free expression. The word was a tool for repression.

Last week, several people talked about “destabilization,” including the Palace mouthpiece. One news report broke the story about a proposed “caretaker” committee to be chaired by a widely admired business leader. A senator spoke about being approached about joining some sort of transition council.

It appears the word “destabilization” is used to refer to any extraconstitutional scenario being entertained. But given the inevitability of mission creep, the word could soon cover those now demanding the President resign. That will severely narrow the range of officially acceptable political demands citizens may freely air.

I am certain the word “destabilization” will be used more frequently this week as we move closer to the large demonstrations planned for Nov. 30. The administration obviously wants to defang the political demands that will be raised on that day of protest.

A number of political tendencies have shifted markedly from the hollow slogans of the rallies held last Sept. 21. Groups associated with the standard political left are now calling for both the President and the Vice President to resign. In their places, they propose setting up some sort of transition council to hold the reins of government while we sort out who should govern us.

Setting up a transition council is a standard proposal of the left whenever a political crisis blossoms. It is a sly concept used by the leftist groups to insinuate a role for themselves in any possible transition.

Lately, President BBM has found a new preoccupation. Each day, he has been briefing the public – in real time – about the progress in the service of arrest warrants issued against a former congressman and several bureaucrats in the initial cases filed related to the flood control mess. He has usurped the role traditionally filled by regular public information officers of law enforcement agencies.

The new preoccupation is clearly on the advice of public relations consultants. It is important to keep the people interested in the law enforcement response to the worst corruption crisis this nation has seen. There would be less inclination to speculate about any extraconstitutional solution to the present crisis – or so they hope.

In the conversations I had the past few days, however, it seems people are less enthused about which bureaucrat has been arrested. They are more inclined to speculation about how the country might be pulled out of the rut. The speculations range from several varieties of caretaker governments to the possibility that BBM might suddenly flee the country.

The political elite may be desperate. But the man on the street is even more so. It cannot be helped that seditious thoughts set in.

If this crisis is not effectively resolved soon, there will be hard times for all.

Clapper

Claire Castro carries a rather odd designation. She is “chief information officer” for the Office of the President.

An accomplished lawyer, she initially seemed well suited for the job – if this involved clarifying the legal intricacies of policy. Eventually, however, she has been losing her poise, especially in open discussions where her statements are subject to rigorous questioning.

Her job is stressful, to say the least. Serving a presidency under heavy siege, she appears on call around the clock, responding to every statement made by critics with sharp, innuendo-laden retorts. She has become the clapper-in-chief.

Castro might need a quick seminar for the job she is supposed to be doing – possibly from veteran corporate spokesmen such as Meralco’s Joe Zaldarriaga.

Joe, who also writes a column for this paper, is a calming presence in media. Even when a power outage happens and consumers are agitated. He calmly explains the issues, assures an effective response from the distribution utility and generally puts the public at ease.

By contrast, Castro snaps back, attempts to score points against those she considers enemies and sometimes obfuscates the issues at hand. Things went very bad after she announced the resignations of the executive secretary and the Budget chief. Her announcement came ahead of the actual resignations – and to this day, she has not fully explained why the two senior officials were fired.

Her job as Palace mouthpiece is to redeem the President at every instance, infuse some calm in distressful situations and clarify government policy decisions. She does not do these things. She claps back at every critic and goes on endless rants against the former president and his daughter. She neither calms the waters nor brings clarity to issues.

It is not to her credit that BBM has taken to making announcements himself, especially on the progress of government’s effort to punish those responsible for the massive looting of infrastructure funds. The President goes straight to the public through social media.

The “chief information officer” should be delivering information – not engaging in hand-to-hand political combat.