Philippine politics and economics

[Hutsori]

Huts, the Philippines is constrained because its army is poorly trained, its generals are corrupt and gain financially from the $40 million or so the US gives in military assistance each year, because the command structure is like a Rube Goldberg cartoon, because it has no Air Force or navy to speak of, and because it invests so little of its GDP in defense spending. Under this US administration I doubt the US cares if the AFP destroys the entire city to eradicate these guys. As countless others have pointed out before me, long before the eruption of the Marawi crisis, the power elites on both sides profit hugely from sustaining the conflict, which was been going on, intermittently, for more than 5 decades. The only thing that's changed much with the emergence of ISIS is that there's now a deeper pool of intransigents, the weapons are better and they're better trained, and there's zero commitment on the part of the government to exterminate them, so they'll retreat back to the jungles in Sulu and plant their next forays.

Understood. But even very well trained, highly professional militaries with overwhelming conventional fire power such as America's and Israel's are constrained by political leaders' concern over public sentiment and international opinion. Surely both militaries could wipe insurgents off the planet if the battle space was declared a free-fire zone.

I should have been more explicit in my earlier comment. A US administration, even Trump's, faces scrutiny and demands unlike Beijing. Even a poorly trained army requires a resupply of munitions to sustain the fight, but if the supplier, i.e. Washington in this context, cuts off the pipeline that's the end of the battle. Sri Lanka, which isn't an army of excellence too and may even be as bumbling as the Philippines', had a more reliable supplier, one which didn't care about international opinion. Many pander to Beijing and are easily cowed by it. Both Colombo and Beijing remained resolute. The Sri Lankans kicked out the NGOs, kept the international press out, and let it rip. Beijing provided the weaponry. The result: they won. The only documentation we have is "war trophy" videos shot on mobile phones, and this episode is largely forgotten about.

What we have is a public of inconsistent, even mercurial, morality. It demands higher morality from some and disregards the breaches by others. We hold China to low expectations and expect better, if not perfection, from the west, chiefly the US and the UK. Alinsky's Rules for Radicals #4, "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules," is applied.

It seems to me Beijing has the better strategy. It can behave egregiously with some outside criticism, and once in a while toss a bone to the international community, for example the Paris Climate Accord, which doesn't require China to do anything until 2030, and be lauded. (China will simply move its most polluting factories to less developed countries that have a longer period to comply. It's a shell game, IMO.) Even America at its worst is a better partner than China at its best. Just its adherence to the rule of law vice the rule by law makes it so. Trump gets a lot a criticism, justly so, yet in no way is he as powerful as Xi and Kim Jong Un. The rule of law constrains him.

I've digressed.

[GoodEnough]

The Philippines is constrained because the US is its weapons supplier. Sri Lanka was armed by Chinese, and Beijing doesn't play the westerners' game.

Huts, the Philippines is constrained because its army is poorly trained, its generals are corrupt and gain financially from the $40 million or so the US gives in military assistance each year, because the command structure is like a Rube Goldberg cartoon, because it has no Air Force or navy to speak of, and because it invests so little of its GDP in defense spending. Under this US administration I doubt the US cares if the AFP destroys the entire city to eradicate these guys. As countless others have pointed out before me, long before the eruption of the Marawi crisis, the power elites on both sides profit hugely from sustaining the conflict, which was been going on, intermittently, for more than 5 decades. The only thing that's changed much with the emergence of ISIS is that there's now a deeper pool of intransigents, the weapons are better and they're better trained, and there's zero commitment on the part of the government to exterminate them, so they'll retreat back to the jungles in Sulu and plant their next forays.

As to the lack of difference in violence between left / right, populism / globalism, or whatever the labels are au courant, I agree. The anomaly may be Syria, where labels mean nothing, there are no good guys, and no one has an upper hand militarily. My response to that fiasco would be to pull out and let them fight it out themselves. What sickens me about that imbroglio, and those in Libya, Yemen, and Iraq is the lack of any strategy. What does "winning" look like in those situations, and why are any of them worth the sacrifice of a single Western solider?

You might want to add Switzerland, Denamark and perhaps the Netherlands to your short list of civilized countries.

GE.

[Hutsori]

I think you miss the larger point. The connection between words and violence is that words strung together--often through interaction among groups of like-minded people--create attitudes that allow the adherents to justify violence toward those they dislike.

No, I didn't miss the larger point. I think it's an overwrought if not an invalid point. It's used by authoritarians of the left and right to trample on the liberties of the people. The irony is that those who say they're fighting violence are the violent group.

"Prayer Patriots" on the same campus.

Yes, I saw the video of them the other day. One group (of students and their academic supporters) took over the campus and held uni administrators in an office to address their demands. The president was told to "hold it" when he asked to use the toilet and was later escorted to it to be monitored by students. You have professors teaching their classes off campus because police told them stay away for their own safety. The other group, "Prayer Patriots", is a half dozen religious fundamentalists who came to the campus in response to the turmoil, score some points, and gain a bit of notoriety, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-jelGZjVUI Yep, they're equivalent actions.

I cannot recall any previous US presidential candidate openly justifying a crowd of supporters to rough up protestors who showed up for a campaign event.

I think you ought to delve back in US history. US politics was a violent affair, and so it has been in many other places. https://www.universityofcalifornia.e...us-about-today.

The secrecy with which the Marcos administration carried out its violence is deplorable, but at least the secrecy suggests that he understood what he was doing was not acceptable enough to be done openly.

I think Marcos had to be careful with his statements or else his patrons in Washington would have been upset.

... but I think most of us had hoped that the civilized world had learned the lesson of Nazi Germany.

Right there is only half of the problem. Not only was the left as brutal, it was even deadlier. Somehow it gets a pass, or at least it's ignored. "They were the wrong type of Socialists" and "That wasn't real Socialism. " Could you imagine large groups of people including journalists and academics saying Naziism was simply the wrong execution of National Socialism?

The civilised world exists in only a handful of countries, and seeing what's happening in some of them such as covering up mass crime I think calling them civilised is a bit of stretch. The facade is crumbling because certain political parties won't call a spade a spade. It's places like Singapore and S. Korea that are civilised, and they don't put up with much BS.

Anyway, I think the left-right dichotomy is kind of stale and ought not be the sole lens to view events. Most of the contemporary issues seem to be populist versus globalist, rural versus urban, logos versus pathos, individualism versus identitarianism, even-tempered liberalism versus emotive power politics. I think we're in a era of what Jung described as the devouring mother versus the tyrant king. You could see the writing on the wall when Perot won about 20% of the vote in '92. Sadly, it's about 15 to 20% of the population who are extremists on both sides and the rest are trying to go about their lives.

[Hutsori]

That said, I don't think he has any more idea of how to defeat ISIS and its tributaries than any of his Western counterparts. Eventually, the AFP will prevail militarily in Marawi, but the seeds of radical Islam will remain, and isolated violent confrontations, kidnappings, and terrorist acts will recur as they have here for decades. That's not a criticism of his leadership; no one else has any viable ideas of how to combat radical Islam either, but I believe that this country may become the Asian base for the movement.
GE.

I wouldn't advocate asking westerners for ideas on how to deal with that because they no longer fight wars to win them. I suppose being existentially removed from it, or at least the perception that it isn't existential, has weakened their will to fight. Look at people crying over mismatches of lethal force. You ought to be celebrating it; fewer casualties for your side. Drones are "dishonourable". Screw that. Darken the sky with them.

Look to Sri Lanka instead. After years of cowing to western pleas and pressure to allow yet another ceasefire, which only served to rebuild and rearm the Tamil Tigers, Colombo said "fuck it" and literally drove the Tamil Tigers into the ocean. By literally I mean literally; the bodies of the Tigers were on the shore and in the sea. The western world, the UN, the NGOs, and the media were all screaming bloody murder about protecting civilians, which the Tigers were using once again as human shields, but those fell on deaf ears. The terrorist group, which was one of the world's most potent and innovative, hasn't been seen since. Colombo was scolded a bit, and the NGOs are still in a funk over it, but no consequences ultimately. One should be wary of entering war, but it shouldn't be ended until the enemy surrenders or is destroyed. When a public doesn't demand victory, you've lost the war before the first shot is fired.

The Philippines is constrained because the US is its weapons supplier. Sri Lanka was armed by Chinese, and Beijing doesn't play the westerners' game.

[GoodEnough]

I read yesterday that Duterte's rating is over 75% and after my very little time spent here in Manila, Makati and travels up north to AC, every, let me say this again EVERY taxi cab driver and every call center worker and every person including the bar girls that I have spoken to in a restaurant and other conversations with Pinoy's have applauded his efforts and what he is doing for the people.

I could give a sh*t about politics but again you can't dismiss how the Filipinos are supportive of Duterte.

TTM.

It's true, his support is massive, and that's in large measure due to two factors. First, he's the first president in a long time (maybe forever) who does not come from one of the privileged elite that has ruled this place for centuries, with the full support of the Spanish and subsequently the Americans. Second, his reputation as the tough-guy Mayor of Davao, who made the streets safe again for ordinary Filipinos created the hope that he could do the same for the rest of the country. That said, I don't think he has any more idea of how to defeat ISIS and its tributaries than any of his Western counterparts. Eventually, the AFP will prevail militarily in Marawi, but the seeds of radical Islam will remain, and isolated violent confrontations, kidnappings, and terrorist acts will recur as they have here for decades. That's not a criticism of his leadership; no one else has any viable ideas of how to combat radical Islam either, but I believe that this country may become the Asian base for the movement.

GE.

[The Tall Man]

I read a column somewhere this morning, quoting some pundit who claimed that Fascism was the default political stance of humankind. The continuously unfolding political circus in the US may demonstrate that there's some underlying truth to this claim. This article in today's NYT suggests that Duterte's tacit approval of vigilante street justice in his so-called war on drugs may have further eroded was was already a fragile respect for law and due process in the Philippines. Those interested in the article can read it here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/o...l-right-region.

GE.

I read yesterday that Duterte's rating is over 75% and after my very little time spent here in Manila, Makati and travels up north to AC, every, let me say this again EVERY taxi cab driver and every call center worker and every person including the bar girls that I have spoken to in a restaurant and other conversations with Pinoy's have applauded his efforts and what he is doing for the people.

I could give a sh*t about politics but again you can't dismiss how the Filipinos are supportive of Duterte.

TTM.

[GoodEnough]

I think you miss the larger point. The connection between words and violence is that words strung together--often through interaction among groups of like-minded people--create attitudes that allow the adherents to justify violence toward those they dislike.

I find it sad, first that a leader in our current environment would make such a statement, and that (in the case of Duterte) others would simply laugh it off as typical rough talk from the President.

I read a column somewhere this morning, quoting some pundit who claimed that Fascism was the default political stance of humankind. The continuously unfolding political circus in the US may demonstrate that there's some underlying truth to this claim. This article in today's NYT suggests that Duterte's tacit approval of vigilante street justice in his so-called war on drugs may have further eroded was was already a fragile respect for law and due process in the Philippines. Those interested in the article can read it here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/o...l-right-region.

GE.

[Soapy Smith]

I want to make clear that, barring words that incite immediate violence, I don't believe words are violence.

(snip)

other groups like those who have taken over Evergreen College and manage it using the Lord of the Flies as its handbook.

(snip)

I think you miss the larger point. The connection between words and violence is that words strung together--often through interaction among groups of like-minded people--create attitudes that allow the adherents to justify violence toward those they dislike.

You may want to check out a broader set of sources. You interestingly comment on some group from the left "taking over Evergreen" with "Lord of the Flies as its handbook" (really?) while overlooking the recent role of Trump-supportting "Prayer Patriots" on the same campus.

Regardless whether a connection exists between socially-constructed hateful attitudes and violent actions, it is hard to overlook the ways that current leaders in both the United States and the Philippines openly justify violence on the part of people who agree with them. I cannot recall any previous US presidential candidate openly justifying a crowd of supporters to rough up protestors who showed up for a campaign event. Or how about President Duterte joking that he would defend any soldiers who ra-- women during the current battle for Marawi City?

I find it sad, first that a leader in our current environment would make such a statement, and that (in the case of Duterte) others would simply laugh it off as typical rough talk from the President.

Obviously Marcos committed many atrocities in having his enemies jailed and killed, but I have never found a record of public statements from him in which he justified members of the public acting out his violent intentions toward his enemies. The secrecy with which the Marcos administration carried out its violence is deplorable, but at least the secrecy suggests that he understood what he was doing was not acceptable enough to be done openly. I acknowledge I don't know about such statements from Latin American and African leaders of the recent past, but to me the times have changed when public leaders in countries that call themselves democracies are willing to make such statements condoning public violence. Obviously history is full of tribal animosities and violence, but I think most of us had hoped that the civilized world had learned the lesson of Nazi Germany.

[GoodEnough]

The MRT issue is big news GE as Grace Poe has been leading a committee and even asked the ex Transport Sec to appear and he said he just signed the documents given and blamed the previous chap in charge.

The Philstar editorial has a jounro (Frederico Pascual) who does regular and detailed updates on the issue pointing out flaw in the contract and everything since then. Grace Poe is trying to get to the bottom of it but as you know the wheels of justice etc move so slowly in the Philippines that a tortoise is faster.

But even a basic read of of Pascual's commentary will lead even the most unbiased reader to the conclusions you infer from your meeting with the gentleman.

Add to that commentary and details about the Agr Sec etc and rice smuggling plus the BOC. The guy seems to have a real investigative nose for corruption in the PNoy government IMHO.

But, as with all of the other scandals of the week or the month here, it's all empty rhetoric on the part of the politicians. No one important will ever be held accountable; no money will ever be recovered and business will continue as usual. This scandal will eventually be supplanted by additional, equally vacuous sound and fury directed at another target. It's how the soap opera of local politics is played out here. Nothing changes. Ever.

GE.

[GoodEnough]

I don't entirely agree; I think we can track this back to years before Trump sat in the Oval Office, for example the anti-WTO riot in Seattle in '99. I want to make clear that, barring words that incite immediate violence, I don't believe words are violence. It seems to me that over the years a belief that words are violence has taken hold amongst many of the left, hence their batty advocacy of speech restrictions, no platforming, physically attacking speakers and their audience, kidnapping people from the street to torture for two days, and even "punch a Nazi" advocacy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYaN9z0OqDg), where anyone to the right of the far left is deemed a Nazi. The manifestation of this belief is groups like Black Bloc and Antifa that are genuinely violent and other groups like those who have taken over Evergreen College and manage it using the Lord of the Flies as its handbook. Further, we see more reports of hate crime (a mere accusation that hasn't been proved), but many are later proved to be false flag operations. These false flags are intended as a pretext to demand concessions by authorities - to even include racial segregation - and serve to justify violence if their demands are unmet.

I ride jeeps often, but not late at night, without incident. One doesn't need to be a passenger of a hijacked vehicle to be crushed by one, as events in France, Germany, the UK, and the US prove.

I don't entirely disagree with you Huts. The schisms that exist in the US have been there for decades; Trump's election merely brought them to the forefront and made it "okay" to openly hate again. I detest the man, but I acknowledge that he didn't create the sectarian hatred that plagues and divides the country. And true, that words don't equate to violence, but words can incite it, whether from the right or the left. I'm of the "a pox on both your houses" school of thought, but that's another whole discussion and probably more appropriate for another type of forum.

As to Jeepneys and (in Manila) taxis and the MRT, I avoid them all and stick to Uber and sometimes Grabcar. I figure that at least I'm, minimizing my risk that way. I know people who have been robbed in Jeepneys during the daylight hours, the MRT is a public transport bad joke and the taxis are often decrepit and they often stink. Uber and Grab aren't much more expensive, and they're clean and a bit safer in my opinion. Here in Davao, I have my own car so it's not an issue, but, in keeping with some of the more recent suggestions of the government, I've started to avoid malls as much as possible and when I have to go, I go during off hours. I'm not particularly afraid, and I've not curtailed my activities, but I am more prudent about life in the big city.

GE.

[Hutsori]

Nope, you're not alone. The election of the Orange Buffoon in the US has made it okay again in that country to openly hate pretty much anyone you like, and to express that hatred through violence.

I don't entirely agree; I think we can track this back to years before Trump sat in the Oval Office, for example the anti-WTO riot in Seattle in '99. I want to make clear that, barring words that incite immediate violence, I don't believe words are violence. It seems to me that over the years a belief that words are violence has taken hold amongst many of the left, hence their batty advocacy of speech restrictions, no platforming, physically attacking speakers and their audience, kidnapping people from the street to torture for two days, and even "punch a Nazi" advocacy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYaN9z0OqDg), where anyone to the right of the far left is deemed a Nazi. The manifestation of this belief is groups like Black Bloc and Antifa that are genuinely violent and other groups like those who have taken over Evergreen College and manage it using the Lord of the Flies as its handbook. Further, we see more reports of hate crime (a mere accusation that hasn't been proved), but many are later proved to be false flag operations. These false flags are intended as a pretext to demand concessions by authorities - to even include racial segregation - and serve to justify violence if their demands are unmet.

I would advise would-be travelers here, whether experienced or newbies to avoid what passes for public mass transportation here, and thus to use taxis wherever possible. While I don't anticipate any sustained assaults in Manila, Cebu or Davao, all it takes is one suicidal jeepney driver to inflict mass casualties, and for me, the risk of riding a jeepney driven by someone "inspired" by ISIS, simply woulsn't be worth it. Then again, I've never in 15 years here taken a jeepney anyway so I may be biased.

I ride jeeps often, but not late at night, without incident. One doesn't need to be a passenger of a hijacked vehicle to be crushed by one, as events in France, Germany, the UK, and the US prove.

[Wicked Roger]

Just as an aside on a totally unrelated topic, I had dinner a couple of nights ago with a local Congressional representative from Davao whom I've known for years. He's been leading an invesigation into irregularities in the MRT maintenance contract, and it was fascinating listening to him explain how Pinoy and his cronies managed to steal tens of millions of pesos through this single contract. He's done meticulous research and can pretty much document everything he contends. Just throwing that non-sequitor into this post to demonstrate that corruption under the "clean" Pinoy administration continued unabated.

GE.

The MRT issue is big news GE as Grace Poe has been leading a committee and even asked the ex Transport Sec to appear and he said he just signed the documents given and blamed the previous chap in charge.

The Philstar editorial has a jounro (Frederico Pascual) who does regular and detailed updates on the issue pointing out flaw in the contract and everything since then. Grace Poe is trying to get to the bottom of it but as you know the wheels of justice etc move so slowly in the Philippines that a tortoise is faster.

But even a basic read of of Pascual's commentary will lead even the most unbiased reader to the conclusions you infer from your meeting with the gentleman.

Add to that commentary and details about the Agr Sec etc and rice smuggling plus the BOC. The guy seems to have a real investigative nose for corruption in the PNoy government IMHO.

[GoodEnough]

Thanks for your very interesting aside, GE.

Apparently, huge corruption was rampant during the Pinoy administration, of which the MRT scam was just the tip of the iceberg. Janet Napoles and huge pork barrel scams, the Renato Corona / Maria Lourdes Sereno scam, and the whole shabu explosion in the Phils during Pinoy's watch, to mention just a few. Pinoy made an art form of being disingenuous and professing to "not know" what was going on. "What, me worry?" Interesting articles by Rigoberto Tiglao of the Manila Times and others on various additional facets.

However, Pinoy and the Yellow Party were and are still the "fair haired boys" and darlings of the hugely biased and / or ignorant Western press.

Just one man's views.

OM.

Not just your views OM, but a view that's becoming ever more widely shared here. The depradations occurring under the deer-in-the-headlights Aquino are becoming every more widely publicized on local language newscasts, and there are lots of Duterte supporters who can recite chapter, line and verse of corruption sagas. The problem is that Pinoy, while he might have represented a high water mark on the spectrum of corruption, was hardly unique, and it continues unabated through to the present within the bureaucracies of government here.

Of course, I come from the US, where the buffoon-as-president is pretty openly using his office to profit to the maximum extent possible, so it's hard as an American to get self-righteous about corruption in the Philippines when our entire government is rather openly for sale. At least most of the sleaze here is hidden from public view.

GE.

[Omega 3]

*** I had dinner a couple of nights ago with a local Congressional representative from Davao whom I've known for years. He's been leading an invesigation into irregularities in the MRT maintenance contract, and it was fascinating listening to him explain how Pinoy and his cronies managed to steal tens of millions of pesos through this single contract. He's done meticulous research and can pretty much document everything he contends. Just throwing that non-sequitor into this post to demonstrate that corruption under the "clean" Pinoy administration continued unabated.

GE.

Thanks for your very interesting aside, GE.

Apparently, huge corruption was rampant during the Pinoy administration, of which the MRT scam was just the tip of the iceberg. Janet Napoles and huge pork barrel scams, the Renato Corona / Maria Lourdes Sereno scam, and the whole shabu explosion in the Phils during Pinoy's watch, to mention just a few. Pinoy made an art form of being disingenuous and professing to "not know" what was going on. "What, me worry?" Interesting articles by Rigoberto Tiglao of the Manila Times and others on various additional facets.

However, Pinoy and the Yellow Party were and are still the "fair haired boys" and darlings of the hugely biased and / or ignorant Western press.

Just one man's views.

OM.

[GoodEnough]

Good point, Huts.

And that's not even counting the GOP baseball team.

Another interesting statistic is annual automobile fatalities, which far outstrip annual deaths from shootings, at least in the US. Take away the guns, and you still have easy access to automobiles (or vans or trucks) which we have seen can be far more lethal than handguns or rifles.

Am I the only one who feels that the world has become a big loony bin?

OM.

Nope, you're not alone. The election of the Orange Buffoon in the US has made it okay again in that country to openly hate pretty much anyone you like, and to express that hatred through violence. The rapid descent of the US into chaos presaged the venting of violent hatred in several other countries as well. There's an article in today's NYT that states the US is averaging slightly less than one mass shooting a day so far in 2017, and the ownership of several members of congress by the US gun lobby continues unabated, so it's doubtful anything meaningful will be done.

The Muslims here, historically marginalized in Mindanao, where they were once the largest segment of the population, have been fighting (and losing) against "invaders" since the Spanish times, resurged with the American occupation in 1898 and beyond, resurged again when Marcos began repopulating Mindanao with Christians, and continues to this day. It's only quite recently however that the local terrorists have been able to align themselves with a worldwide radical terrorist network, and with pourpous borders, easy access to and from Malaysia and Indonesia, an insufficient navy to patrol territorial waters, and virtually zero aerial surveillance capacity on the part of the government, it's likely that the locals will continue to be bolstered by foreign fighters, weapons and money.

I would advise would-be travelers here, whether experienced or newbies to avoid what passes for public mass transportation here, and thus to use taxis wherever possible. While I don't anticipate any sustained assaults in Manila, Cebu or Davao, all it takes is one suicidal jeepney driver to inflict mass casualties, and for me, the risk of riding a jeepney driven by someone "inspired" by ISIS, simply woulsn't be worth it. Then again, I've never in 15 years here taken a jeepney anyway so I may be biased.

Just as an aside on a totally unrelated topic, I had dinner a couple of nights ago with a local Congressional representative from Davao whom I've known for years. He's been leading an invesigation into irregularities in the MRT maintenance contract, and it was fascinating listening to him explain how Pinoy and his cronies managed to steal tens of millions of pesos through this single contract. He's done meticulous research and can pretty much document everything he contends. Just throwing that non-sequitor into this post to demonstrate that corruption under the "clean" Pinoy administration continued unabated.

GE.