Two-faced US-Aquino-Abe

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / Daily Tribune / June 30, 2014


While BS Aquino was in Japan shaking hands with Shinzo Abe on the “collective defense” deal against the supposed “aggressor” encroaching on territories on actually disputed China Seas waters, Aquino also met with al-Haj Murad promising to deliver Philippine land and sea territory to the MILF along with seventy-five percent of all economic wealth. That’s the two-faced Aquino, talking anti-China patriotism to the Filipino people while selling out the country to the real aggressors and terrorists — the MILF — who invariably meet with Aquino in the Land of the Rising Sun, Land of the Invaders of the Philippines in the Second World War.

Shinzo Abe talks “collective defense,” obligating Japan, the Philippines, the US and other allies to come to each other’s military aid when either is attacked, with Aquino while Abe has no authority at all. In a survey last June 22, Tokyo Times reported that Japanese public opposition to Abe’s plan rose from 48.1 percent in April to 55.4 percent in June this year. Kyodo News reported 57.7 percent of respondents say they are also against the Abe’s reinterpreting, rather than formally amending, the war-renouncing Japanese Constitution, while only 29.6 percent expressed support. But now Abe’s shaking hands on “collective defense” with Aquino while even the Japanese Diet has denied it its imprimatur.

The US needles China with snide remarks from 6,300 miles away in Washington with every disingenuous report of “Chinese aggression” such as the alleged super-close flyby of Chinese jets on Japanese planes (Japan says 30-meters away, China say 150-meters) or the reclamation of Johnson (Mabini) Reef which from the Chinese point-of-view is its right — and impliedly, a response to the US-Edca (Enhanced Defence Cooperation Agreement) converting the archipelago to one big military base for US aggression in Asia. The other face however, invites China to the biggest US- led multi-national naval exercise in Hawaii, and negotiates sales of US mainland assets by the billions.

While extending cooperative gestures to China, the US hones its war doctrine aimed solely at China, changing from Air Land Battle employed in the attacks on Serbia, Iraq and other past aggressions — to the Air Sea Battle doctrine designed to attack China from the East and South China Sea, overcome the final First Island Chain defenses of China and destroy the command-and-control networks of China inland. China fortified its A2/AD, Anti-Access/Area Denial capabilities with hyper-sonic anti-carrier missiles and the likes, US debates a shift to an “Offshore Control” doctrine to choke China’s economy by blocking off China’s access to trade routes by the 2020 deadline of Obama’s “pivot.”

Japan and the US have more double-faced posturing, like the constant iteration of complaint against China’s ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) when Japan and the US had imposed its own over Japan decades ago, even overlapping Chinese territory. Like them, Aquino too, harps on the island-reclamations and facilities building by China but keeps mum about the biggest real estate developer of the Spratlys, Vietnam which is the largest facilities builder there  with 20 facilities. The Philippines itself is building, in Kalayaan, which China cited in its retort to the complaint of the Philippines of violation of the status quo on the Johnson Reef works of China.

China, on the other hand, is straightforward. Even the indefatigable Philippine UNCLoS claims lawyer Harry Roque says, “… China’s acts are consistent with its published defense policy, which currently seeks to achieve ‘sea-denial capability’ in what it considers as its coastal waters, the waters within the so-called nine-dash lines. Clearly, one must commend the Chinese — albeit bereft of legal merits — for their consistency... Given… that contrary to the best hope of Philippine policy makers that US President Obama’s visit to the region will have a deterrent effect… recent events validate China’s design to expel all other claimant countries from the disputed territory on or before 2020...” Roque could have added “only claimants collaborating with the US.”

The Philippines is infected with double-faced ruling class families (switching masks before each colonizer). Aquinos were pro-Japan, now pro-US. Today the two-faced corrupt Aquino government is selectively prosecuting political opponents over “pork” to eliminate opposition the US-inspired cha-cha to pave its way to Sulu Sea oil with the MILF, while Aquino also saves members of his coterie - like Alcala as DA secretary and ERC chair Ducut — even after direct implication by Napoles.  Alcala keeps many Aquino secrets and Ducut is untouchable as Napoles’ lawyer hinted on a radio program, because Ducut was allegedly Ochoa and Aquino’s intermediary and bag lady with Napoles.

Meanwhile, Ombudsman Carpio-Morales shed her patrician face and showed the hoodlum-in-robe when she tried to give “state witness” status to Napoles to save BS Aquino from implication by amending the complaints. Mga Doble Cara!

(Tune to 1098am, Tues.-Fri. 5 p.m.; GNN Talk News TV, Sat. 8 p.m. and Sun. 8 a.m. on Destiny Cable channel 8 and SkyCable channel 213, www.gnntv-asia.com. or YouTube Talk News TV (add Sat. date); this week “New PCA versus Cocolisap;” visit www.newsulongpilipino.com)

Focusing on real issues

(DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / June 25, 2014 / Daily Tribune)


The mainstream media (MSM) obsession and treatment of the “pork barrel” issue has really become a joke, focusing on the shallow drama of mug shots and Spartan living conditions of the first celebrity detainee while urgent issues like the rice price crisis are given passing glances.

Politicians have been worse. Miriam Santiago shrieked that detention facilities should not be turned into a “private resort.” The lady is not lily white and may find herself someday in the same prison situation, denied ceiling to floor padding. BS Aquino too, when his time comes to stay in a cell he will certainly be denied his play station.

What are the more urgent issues? One is Atty. Alan Paguia’s crusade to put “Hello Garci” back on the public’s agenda. The Commission on Elections (Comelec) Chairman Sixto Brillantes says a statute of limitations has buried. Atty. Paguia has filed a second motion with the Comelec Legal Department to his first in 2007 which was never answered by the Comelec. The crimes in the “Hello Garci” case is incontrovertible because of evidence provided by the recordings of the incriminating conversations between Commissioner Garcillano and then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, and the latter’s “I am sorry” TV confession. Public accountability in the country is farce until this case is resolved.

Rice prices shot up this month and all Malacañang could say was the disingenuous line that the administration’s anti-smuggling campaign must be causing the price spike. It does not explain anything, instead it betrays the administration’s utter incompetence and lack of coordination. The fact is, it has been caught unprepared and a shortage ensued. They should have prepared local production or legally imported supply to maintain the normal stock and price levels. It was a rice price spike that spelled the doom for Fidel V. Ramos’ “Philippines 2020” in 1997. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo had a longer rice crisis, 2008 to 2010. Rice self-sufficiency and price affordability is the topmost priority of the nation.

Garlic prices shot up fourfold last week. Supermarket shelves are empty of it. Some attribute it to price manipulation by traders. The government again claimed that its intensified monitoring of garlic smuggling may be the reason. That stinks. If government planned a crackdown on smuggled garlic, it should also have expected a tightening of supply and taken action to increase production in anticipation. Given the high unemployment figures in the agricultural sector a “two birds with one stone” solution should have been foreseen in the garlic situation, expand land areas dedicated to growing garlic and mobilization of idle farm family hands to grow and process the harvest.

Anticipating and avoiding crises like the rice and garlic supply slumps is a fundamental government mission, BS Aquino should have focused on such tasks Day One of his administration in 2010. Medium term planning and day-to-day coordination among the numerous government agencies, and orchestrating legislative support are essential. But BS Aquino concentrated on morality plays, his “no wang-wang” and “tuwid na daan,”  instead of getting his Cabinet to roll up sleeves and pants’ legs, get into the rice paddies, dig irrigation canals and till vegetable patches with the farmers. Now, the country today is in deep trouble with shortages of the most basic staples.

Agricultural problems require two to three years to solve, in agricultural time which has run out on BS Aquino. Among the many crises there is one area where immediate decisions can bring immediate improvement — the fruitless and self-defeating foreign policy direction BS Aquino government has been dragged into on the South China Sea dispute with China.

For three years the Philippines has taken an adversarial, no-dialog, litigious stance which has not gained a single new islet of territory for the country but instead has lost/atoll after islands/stools to punitive occupations of disputed sea formations by China.

The litigious policy with China has proven totally bankrupt. It is based on the equally bankrupt thesis that the US will honor its “ironclad” promise to back the Philippines. Philippine intransigence allowed China the excuse to occupy and develop the most strategic Mabini or Johnson Reef which pro-US Filipino politician Roilo Golez said is a “game changer.” That neutralizes whatever strategic gain the US hoped for in the EDCA with the Philippines. Aquino can change all these, by a stroke of a pen appointing a new, independent minded Foreign Affairs secretary.  Aquino can start productive dialog and earn billions in joint development projects with China.

The idealistic “pork barrel” narrative has become a soap opera. After 11 months, it still is news - but not headline news. The MSM and the ruling powers clearly want it to be the central news to prevent the nation from focusing on the real problems and solutions. The real, alternative media should persist in bringing the real issues to the fore.

(1098AM, dwAD 5 to 6 p.m. Tuesday to Friday; GNN Talk New TV program on June 14, Saturday 8 p.m. and Sunday  8 a.m. on Destiny Cable Channel 8 and SkyCable Channel 213 or www.gnntv-asia.com. or YouTube Talk News TV and add date; visit www.newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

So let's start building

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / June 18, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Secretary Albert del Rosario shrieked through media frantically last Monday that China “and other claimant states” are rushing construction activities in their respective claimed territories to establish facilities.

Which the “other claimant states” are the non-Filipino-speaking DFA secretary did not say, probably to highlight only China, which he has been concentrating fire on from Day One of his appointment to the office by BS Aquino.

Del Rosario wants the Philippines to “call for a moratorium of activities that escalate tension,” which obviously the other claimants won’t do for obvious reasons.
Every party to the claims of disputed islands and territories on the China Sea knows that presence, possession, and development weigh far more than other factors in the determination of a claim. 

In fact, second to China, Vietnam is the most active in building facilities on its claimed islands — including the island the Philippines calls Pugad, where the Philippine military boasted, to spite the Chinese, they played soccer a few weeks ago with their Vietnamese counterparts. Vietnam calls that island Dao Song Tu Tay.

The Vietnamese have been building up their facility on that island since they took it over in 1975, after Philippine forces guarding it left to attend a party at a nearby island, indicating a lack of seriousness.

If the Philippines were to be taken seriously on its claims, shouldn’t it be as active, if not more, than the other claimants in establishing and constructing facilities in its claimed islands, atolls, shoals and reefs?

What we’ve seen so far from the Philippine government under BS Aquino and his DFA secretary is rhetoric and vituperations against one and only one claimant, China, which in reality it has no chance to oppose at all, while contradictorily, it cavorts with other claimants that have taken islands away from it, like what the Vietnamese did on Pugad Island.

I had a debate at the socials of the ribbon-cutting of the Botswana Consular Office at the First Global Building in Makati.  Among the guests were Gen. Danilo Lim and former GNN show host, Gerry Cornejo. When the Johnson or Mabini Reef reclamation by China came up, Gerry proceeded with a harangue against China as it had been mainstream media’s foreign affairs headlines for weeks.  I replied, “So, the Philippines should start building on its own claims!” Expectedly he said, “But we don’t have the money… blah, blah...”

If the Philippines can’t even raise funds to back its claims while trillions are siphoned off by oligarchs, politicians, and needless debts, does the Philippines deserve any of its claims?

It came to a point where Gerry asked (and in a friendly manner), “Are you Filipino?” — to which I responded without any hesitation, “I am more Filipino than you.” Naturally, he retorted, “How can you say that?”  My answer: “I’ve been detained several times for advocacies on national issues.”  Then, his reply was “How does that make you more Filipino than me?” “I put my life where my mouth is,” I emphatically said.

My erstwhile co-detainee from the 2007 Manila Peninsula siege, General Lim, was quiet; knowing him as a straightforward man of his word, I think he silently agreed with me. General Lim, I’m sure, would not tolerate the raging corruption of the system and had to resign his position in the present government.
I dispute the impulse of many Filipinos to treat China as an adversary and aggressor, and their penchant for labeling the pursuit of any other option as anti-Filipino.
I said in an open forum at a recent UP talk that “I resent this constant reference to China as ‘aggressor’ when the historical and continuing fact shows it’s the US and Britain.” To my surprise, the speaker, Central Intelligence Agency Asia expert Robert Sutter, responded, “Certainly, what China is doing is small cake compared with what the British and Americans have done.”

What China, Vietnam et al. are doing are not even “small cake” aggression, but probes and positioning with no intention to cause bloodshed or domination of another nation — with the promise of peaceful resolutions in the end.

In the recent China-Vietnam oil rig standoff, China has openly announced that it “will never send the military.”

China has been meticulous in following civilized international practice: In the 2012 Scarborough standoff with the Philippines, it only sent in its maritime surveillance ships when the Philippines used its BRP Gregorio del Pilar to arrest eight Chinese fishermen.  In the USS Cowpens and oil rig imbroglio, China issued “no sail zone” alerts when the ship from a country 20,000 kilometers away tried to enter the zone, and when ships form Vietnam came up to the security perimeter of the oil rig.

Meanwhile, as five Asian countries are on a building campaign on their claims, with two in a steel-crunching test of wills, the Philippines is merely yakking to the media and whining before an international tribunal.

(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

The 'dispute' trap

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / June 16, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Congressional insiders texted us to raise alarm on Speaker Feliciano Belmonte’s rush to pass Charter change on second reading in record time. Others wanted to clamor for an end to the nefarious precinct count optical scan system by restoring manual voting and/or counting to end the digital “Comelec-tion” farces.

While both are important calls, these are just some of the evils of the US-led lobby that BS Aquino and the “trapo” Senate and House kowtow to.
To defeat such projects, the power behind them must first be stopped, i.e. the hegemonic US sway over Malacañang, Congress, various national and local government agencies, as well as “civil society.”

Though the US is unrivalled in its hegemony in Asia, it now wants more of Asia under its control.

US strategic thinkers know as much as Mao Zedong that “Power comes from the barrel of the gun.” Guns open markets — like Admiral Perry’s guns on Japan in the 18th Century and Commodore Dewey’s in Manila Bay at the turn of the 20th Century. Guns can regain lost markets as well. The US “pivot” to Asia is led by the “shift in 60 percent of US military forces” to the region by the year 2020. Should China still wait for the full force of the new Perry and Dewey armada to arrive?
With the “pivot,” the US has already started the demonization propaganda of China by setting up its last Asian pawns to provide the provocations: Japan in nationalizing Diaoyu and the Philippines in arresting Chinese fishers at Scarborough.

Before all that, Sino-Japan and Sino-Philippine relations, notwithstanding certain issues, were friendly and productive. Japan’s trade with China was rising; and the Philippines, during the previous administration, was already into signing agreements with China — most notably, the Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking (JMSU).
But, after the US pivot and Diaoyu nationalization, imports from Japan crashed, an Air Defense Identification Zone was declared, and a war of words ensued. In the case of the Philippines after the pivot announcement was made, coupled with its Scarborough provocation, and then its International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLoS) suit and its signing of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the US, the country successively lost ground to Chinese physical assertions over disputed islands.

Ellen Tordesillas of Malaya, citing a US Navy study, once wrote: “History has shown that (the) Chinese never let pass a hostile move against them. The retaliation may not be immediate but they hit back.”

Tordesillas indicates that China does not initiate conflict but will not hesitate to respond to provocation. She quotes the US Navy study of Lt. Michael Studeman on the aborted Chinese-Philippine joint development deal of the gas-rich Reed Bank, which said, “Manila decided to grant a six-month oil exploration permit to Alcorn… (by) secretly licensing an exploration effort, the Philippines had appeared to engage in unilateral efforts to exploit the… Spratlys. Stung by Manila’s ‘betrayal,’ China decided to advance (to)… Mischief Reef… (where) physical occupation was the only method by which Chinese interests could be protected. Beijing’s own misstep was in not foreseeing that this characteristically ‘defensive’ response would be interpreted as offensive.”

Despite Philippine protestations against the Chinese, the government thinks very little of giving away the country’s interests to Western corporations, such as the Malampaya gas project where Shell and Chevron get 90 percent while the Philippines gets a nominal 10 percent, which is actually only 5 percent (after deducting taxes, investment cost of all parties, and the funds used to buy vintage US war ships and planes to “protect” the facility).

The Philippines today opposes joint development with China even on a 50/50 basis, which certainly makes the US and the Brits very pleased. The scrapping of many such joint deals, such as the JMSU, was actually carried out under intense pressure from the US and its puppet Philippine politicians in Congress.
In the UP talk I wrote about last week of Georgetown University professor and former Central Intelligence Agency Asia analyst Robert Sutter, I spoke at the open forum of how “myopic” (or tunnel vision-sighted) the Philippine intelligentsia is by focusing only on the “dispute.” In raising sentiments against our neighbor on the China Sea issue, I argued, the Philippines is missing the bigger picture: How the “dispute” angle entraps the Philippines in a conundrum.

It is certainly something that it can’t win because China is not participating in the ITLoS. In the meantime, the Philippines merely grasps at straws of US or Vietnamese support.

The US enjoys needling China with this while the Philippines pays the economic and diplomatic costs, seeking consolation in a football game with the Vietnamese — on an island where the Vietnamese kicked the Filipinos out of in 1975!

The Philippines and its intelligentsia should take a cue from Sam Bateman, senior fellow at the Maritime Security Program of S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, who said in a CNN report: “What I’m concerned about is all this debate is leading nowhere in terms of establishing effective regimes for managing the South China Sea and its resources… It’s taking us away from the effective cooperation that’s necessary because the reality is that I don’t think the sovereignty claims are ever going to be settled in the foreseeable future.”

The Philippine intelligentsia likes to argue and dispute, like Justice Antonio Carpio and his ancient map hullabaloo. (Recall in 1998 Ambassador Fu Ying showing a Philippine official map sold in National Bookstore that puts the Spratlys outside its territory?) But wasn’t Carpio just keeping the Philippines farther away from resolving the problem by tightening the psywar trap set by the US?

(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Disingenuous talk

(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 06-11-201

 
Last Monday the University of the Philippines Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea sponsored a round table discussion with Georgetown University professor and former Central Intelligence Agency China expert, Prof. Robert G. Sutter, on the US role in the China Sea crisis.  The Malcolm Hall seminar room was packed with eminent experts in relevant fields aplenty, such as former UP President Dodong Nemenzo, acclaimed international correspondent Chito Sta. Romana, writer Richard Javad Heydarian, former ambassador to ASEAN Wilfrido V. Villacorta, security expert Romel Banlaoi, journalist Ellen Tordesillas, and many others.
 
Prof. Sutter’s books take up two pages on Amazon.com.  On the Internet I found Sutter involved in a controversial refusal of cooperation with a Federal Bureau of Investigation “sting,” as well as in appeals for help in tracking Chinese spies, urging others to do likewise.  Sutter covered a very wide range of issues and never left any doubt as to his view of China as an “aggressor” and the usefulness of the US to its ASEAN allies in counterbalancing China.  Even though Sutter maintained a scholarly demeanor in his talk, to my mind, several lines betrayed the disingenuousness intention.
 
Sutter admits that a power shift has occurred in Asia with the ascendance of China and the decline of the US.  In explaining the US “rebalancing” (a.k.a. “pivot”) to Asia, Sutter admitted US perception that the future is in Asia and that Barack Obama is giving the “pivot” high priority.  He reiterated several times that the US is here to stay because Asia is important for “US jobs” and in order “to pursue free trade policies”--reflecting a US fear of growing Asian skepticism of US reliability.  But Sutter emphasized that the US is not out to isolate China; only to engage it.  One of what I thought was a very disingenuous line of his was when he posed this question regarding China’s peaceful intentions vis-à-vis its economic success: “Why are they (the Chinese) building their military if they are peaceful?”
 
As echoed by former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in his speech at the Pentagon in 2005, every student of international relations and diplomacy knows that “Weakness is provocative.”  As such, defense and military capability is essential for nation-states serious with their sovereignty; and China is no different.
 
Another Sutter line that struck me as utterly disingenuous was “(the) US does not like war, neither does it like appeasement,” which reminded me immediately of the destruction of the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, now Syria; the US drone wars in Pakistan, Sudan, and Yemen; the West’s deployment of new troops to Africa; and US destabilization of Venezuela (and now, likely, Brazil to weaken BRICS), ad nausea.
 
Sutter emphasized what he sees as tense relations of China with its neighbors such as India, Pakistan, Russia, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Indonesia while leaving out growing trade ties between India and China, the $4-billion gas deal between Russia and China, or how South Korea criticized Obama on Japan, etc.
 
Moreover, Sutter didn’t explain that the US “free trade” scheme in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which demands that other countries open their agricultural sector to US dumping, was rejected by South Korea and Japan, or that the TPP violates national sovereignty and prioritizes corporate power over human and economic rights of nations, which the Chinese trade pact, the Regional Cooperation Economic Partnership (RCEP) rejects in favor of respect of national economic sovereignty.
 
Sutter insists that the US is the “leader of Asia” (his words) because it provides “security and stability,” which Asians need because, as he claims, “Asians don’t like each other” and would require the US to mediate.  And so, the US is willing to spend “$50-billion to stay” (perhaps militarily) in Asia.
 
When the open forum started, the first to raise a question was Dodong Nemenzo who inquired about how “ironclad” the guarantee of Obama was to defend the Philippines, to which Sutter had no satisfactory answer.  Richard Heydarian then asked about the “nexus” of the Chinese people and the Chinese government’s policy on the China Sea claims, which Sutter had to admit was a serous factor as the Chinese have to respond to popular expectations.
 
Chito Sta. Romana asked whether China is claiming the seas or the islands (which has implications on adjacent waters).  I later stood to lament the myopia of Philippine forums missing the timeline and broad geopolitical panorama: Tensions started with Obama’s “pivot,” followed by (US pawn) Japan’s “nationalization” of the Diaoyus, and the Philippine naval ship BRP Gregorio del Pilar’s arrest of Chinese fishermen at Scarborough.
 
Finally, I asked Sutter, “What is US retired Marine Colonel T.X. Hammes’ ‘Offshore Control’ war doctrine (which is the US plan to choke off China’s economy by closing the Malacca and Lombok straits)?”--to which he pleaded ignorance.
 
Is China then building the “artificial islands” as forward defense to preempt the US shift of 60 percent of its forces to Asia by 2020?
 
(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m., this week on “Tiananmen: The whole truth”; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Aquino's two strategic errors

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / June 9, 2014 / Daily Tribune


BS Aquino assumed the presidency in 2010 without anybody, including himself, having any clue about his program of governance, much less his foreign policy direction.

This void in his domestic agenda, summed up in his “No wang-wang” State of the Nation Address, was made much more glaring when his early foreign relations crises betrayed his ignorance of even basic diplomacy — disappearing from sight and failing to communicate with Hong Kong’s chief executive at the height of the Luneta hostage massacre (followed by more fumbles four years on), as well as shooting-from-the-hip against Taiwan’s allegations in the 2013 killing of its fisherman, only to embarrassingly admit the culpability of Philippine Coast Guard personnel later on.

Considering the enormous significance the Philippines has played in global geopolitical relations, the cases of the HK Tourist Association and Taiwanese fisherman’s killing should really be very minor issues for a competent government; but, for a government such as Aquino’s, these become tsunamis of bad international publicity and a testy test of wills between the Philippines and the two smaller Chinese territories with tragi-comedic consequences, resulting in net losses to the country’s credibility and economic opportunities.

Even so, the deleterious effects from those two diplomatic debacles cannot compare to the disastrous handling by the current regime of its strategic relations with the leading nation of the 21st Century, China.

While BS Aquino fiddles with puerile theories of good governance through his vapid “no wang-wang” and “matuwid na daan” pronouncements, the rest of the world had already begun studying and responding to historic shifts in world history.

The global political landscape has changed so much that even the most powerful of the powerful on the world stage has had to read and catch the winds in order to steer the course of their nation’s voyage.

The world’s superpower, the US of A, waited for the opportune time to announce its “pivot” (later named “rebalancing”) to Asia, veering its power in the Asian Century toward the China Sea — in much the same way that it had captured the Philippines as its geopolitical base in Asia at the turn of the 20th Century.
A year after BS Aquino’s “election” into the presidency via Hocus-PCOS, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the US’ pivot to Asia as a return to its markets, primarily through the programmed transfer of 60 per cent of US military assets to the region by 2020.

China, of course, did not miss any of this nor any of the scathing lessons in its history with Western powers. China saw through the US prodding for the “nationalization” by the Japanese government of the Diaoyu (or Senkaku) Islands in 2012, and was not blind to Philippine officialdom’s appointment of a US green card-holding Foreign Affairs secretary, its elimination of credible China expert, Chito Sta. Romana, for the ambassadorial post to China, and its clandestine development with the US of the so-called Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (Edca), among many other developments.

The current deterioration in Sino-Philippine relations cannot be more markedly different to how it was in years past. Since the late 1980s, Deng Xiaoping had already discussed with Corazon Aquino the need for mutual respect and bilateral dialog, and of shelving disputes in favor of joint development of resources in the disputed waters of the China Sea. Even 50/50 arrangements were proposed. Cory Aquino had no objections throughout her term while Fidel Ramos and Joseph Estrada continued with the cooperative spirit. Gloria Arroyo even signed a Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking with China (that was unfortunately shelved).
But the tone soon changed under BS Aquino, who presided over the arrest of Chinese fishermen at the Scarborough Shoal in 2012 (leading to a “standoff”), before allowing his subalterns to hurl false allegations against China, such as the “concrete blocks” for construction in 2013, the “invasion of Pagasa in 2014,” and other anti-Chinese black propaganda.

Despite persistent appeals for bilateral dialog, top Philippine officials continued the anti-China harangue and reveled in “insulting” it by filing the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (Itlos) case.

All these, coupled with Barack Obama’s April 2014 Manila visit, where he uttered his disingenuous “non-containment of China” speech, timed with the signing of the Edca between the US and the Philippines, undoubtedly set the tone for China’s latest assertions.

Since dialog is now off the table, and with the Edca signaling advanced US military deployment to this part of the world, China’s answer has been its reclamation activity at the Mabini Reef. Now, the Philippine press reports a “worried” BS Aquino, telling the nation of more Chinese ships at the disputed Spratlys, with more reclamation being undertaken.

Will the US come to save the reefs and islets that its purported ally is claiming? The Web site Real Clear Defense answers that through Harry Kazianis’ article, “Would Americans give their lives for Asia? No.” Well, at least not before 2020, that’s for sure. So why should China wait until the US has 60 per cent of its military forces in Asia?

BS Aquino and his cohorts now see the prospect of China really taking over the disputed islands and waters without any Philippine capability of countering it, and with the Itlos not mattering a hoot as the Chinese have said.

Still, dialog can be put back on the table if BS Aquino can come to his senses and learn some foreign policy and geopolitical history lessons fast.

BS Aquino, however, is a really bad learner. In the Napoles case, for instance, he has also made the strategic error of training his guns only against opposition senators, instead of seeking an honest-to-goodness political resolution that can lead to overall reform of the flawed system, of which he is part.

As a result, BS Aquino and his allies are as damaged today as their intended victims. They may become even more damaged once the Supreme Court brings out its ruling on their infamous Disbursement Acceleration Program.

(Join me and Chito Sta. Romana, Benito Lim, and others on our GNN Talk News TV program on June 14, Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Tiananmen after 25 years

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / June 4, 2014 / Daily Tribune


It was June 1989. I was in the US for meetings with refugee program officials in my capacity as administrator of the Philippine Refugee Processing Center, as well as to visit a sister at the University of Pennsylvania. The bloody turmoil in Beijing was all over the media, and a rally was to be held at a university park. I attended and listened to a speech in broken English about liberty, freedom, and China. It seemed that Deng Xiaoping’s crackdown was widely condemned.

Chinese-British writer Han Suyin, however, had a different take. Renowned for her novel A Many Splendored Thing, which was made into a movie that won three Oscars, Han Suyin (who died in 2012 at age 95) defended the crackdown, arguing that China had to keep order and prevent chaos. As a celebrated cultural icon, her words carried weight.

For 25 years now, the Tiananmen events of June 1989 have been invariably described as a “massacre” (specifically, a massacre of “students”). Chinese government reports the number of casualties at around 300 while Western accounts place the casualties between 400 and 800 civilians (Nicholas D. Kristof, New York Times) or up to 1,000 (Amnesty International) and 2,600 (Time magazine in 1990 — since retracted). More often than not, the casualties on the government side (soldiers and police) — no matter how important, if one had to have a complete picture — aren’t ever mentioned. There are pictures of rows of Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs) burnt out and of police burnt to a crisp in their vehicles.

With 25 years of hindsight and new information available on the Tiananmen or June 4 Incident, we are given a chance to evaluate the events better. One crucial source that is now available (thanks to Julian Assange) is WikiLeaks, which showed secret US cables reported in The Telegraph on June 4, 2011 by Malcolm Moore (“WikiLeaks: No bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, cables claim”) that said, “Secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing have shown there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square... Instead, …Chinese soldiers opened fire on protesters outside the center of Beijing, as they fought their way toward the square from the west of the city.”

It added: “Inside the square itself, a Chilean diplomat was on hand to give his US counterparts an eyewitness account of the final hours of the pro-democracy movement… In 2009, James Miles, who was the BBC correspondent in Beijing at the time, admitted that he had ‘conveyed the wrong impression’ and that ‘there was no massacre on Tiananmen Square. Protesters who were still in the square when the army reached it were allowed to leave after negotiations with martial law troops…’ Instead, the fiercest fighting took place at Muxidi, around three miles west of the square, where thousands of people had gathered spontaneously on the night of June 3 to halt the advance of the army.”

The Web site nsnbc.me (not MSNBC) by Chritoff Lehmann has a 2,000 word piece by Dr. Long Xinming entitled, “Let’s Talk About Tiananmen Square, 1989: My Hearsay is Better Than Your Hearsay,” which says, “There were two events that occurred in Beijing on June 4, 1989. They were not related. One was a student protest that involved a sit-in in Tiananmen Square… The other was a worker protest… (where) a group of workers had barricaded streets in several locations leading to Central Beijing, several kilometers… from the Square… (And) there was a third group present… which consisted of neither students nor workers. ‘Thugs’ or ‘anarchists’ might be an appropriate adjective… The violence began when this third group decided to attack the soldiers… with Molotov cocktails, and torched several dozen buses —with the soldiers still inside.”

The Voice of America (VoA) played its role broadcasting 24/7 its version of the events at Tiananmen: “And all university students of that day… tell of listening to the VoA in their dorms, late into the night, building in their imaginations a happy world of freedom and light… offering comfort and encouragement, provoking, giving advice on strategy and tactics.” And what about the US government? “There were five or six primary leaders of the Tiananmen Square sit-in… They were spirited out of China, first to Hong Kong, then to Taiwan. And very shortly thereafter were in the US.”

One of the Tiananmen student leaders, Liu Xiaobo, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize years later despite (or because of) his support for the US attack on Iraq.
There is no question that China in 1989 was a country dealing with many challenges and problems. It had not yet become the Dragon Economy that it now is. Would it have progressed to its present enviable state as the top economy of the world if it had not restored order by some degree of force 25 years ago?

(Join me and Chito Sta. Romana, Benito Lim, and others on our GNN Talk News TV program on June 14, Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

'The People's List'

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / June 2, 2014 / Daily Tribune


It’s been 10 months since the manhunt for pork barrel queen Janet Lim-Napoles got underway last August 2013. But instead of the issues getting clearer, almost everything got muddled even more.  The so-called Napoles list has mutated many times with every involved party adding to the muddle.

Mainstream media (MSM) have not helped either.  Others not directly involved in the muddle have also stirred the cesspool. Economic oligarchs engaged in their own plunder of the economy, who exercise extraordinary influence, if not control, of MSM through direct ownership as well as of Internet news and social media through extensive PR operations, are paddle-churning the hullabaloo, too.

There is, however, one “list” that is infinitely more important but is being forgotten in the months that the MSM, particularly the “The People’s List”  as story trailbreaker privileged by feeds from the involved parties (Napoles and Malacañang), have focused on the pork barrel scandal. This list of important issues, which we call “The People’s List,” involves the basic necessities that were once provided at least cost by public utilities and service institutions, namely, water, electricity, fuel, infrastructure, and public transportation.

These basic necessities are the fundamental determinants of the people’s “living standards” and “productivity.” And only based upon these are we able to tell whether we have lived better than in the past—and for our children and their children to do the same later on.

In all the time that the Napoles caper became the burning national issue, items in the People’s List managed to bob up from the undercurrents, but only for a short time. Efforts of various factions in the Napoles scandal steered MSM back to political enemies or away from damage to themselves.  Of course, with the massive loot from the pork barrel scams, one could easily surmise that the factions could well afford to steer the news coverage by emblazoning this or that highlight of one list or version of the Napoles story.  And that meant issues on the People’s List were eventually drowned out, such as the multi-billion disallowances of water utility corporate income tax pass-ons and other privileges that should now be discounted from consumers’ bills but are not.

Meanwhile, public transportation fares are being raised to P8 (basic) without commensurate increases in people’s income or countervailing benefits in other aspects of the cost of living.  The result will be more belt-tightening for people who have added belt holes for decades now to keep their pants from falling off completely. The least the nation could expect now is for the people’s political and legislative representatives, and for media, to raise the issue of reviewing the “oil deregulation law.”  But this is not going to happen as the politicians and the MSM continue to play games, like the Napoles List, for months on end.
What must the people do to get these politicians and MSM practitioners to prioritize our most vital issues?

At the rate the Filipino’s standard of living is deteriorating due to the skewed priorities of our politicians and the Fourth Estate, we can be absolutely certain that our lives, particularly the vast numbers who are already “poor,” will be even worse off in the coming months — again.

We can also say with certainty that if the economic policies and structures that have led to the present inattention to the People’s List and the pathological obsession on futile exorcisms (like Napoles et al.) instead of tearing down the haunted house cursed by evil, or instead of demolishing and rebuilding a new home, our children and grandchildren will not be able to expect livable lives anymore.

The nation must tenaciously focus on the People’s List until the issues are resolved in favor of us having better lives in these lands and seas—with a home for all time for our people, our children, and their children.  Should it take a revolution to bring this about?  If we love our children and their future enough, we must resort to whatever means necessary in order to make it happen.

(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m., this week on “Philippines in the Asian Century”; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Petrodollar/OPEC end times

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / May 26, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Last week Russia’s President Vladimir Putin signed the “Holy Grail” deal with China’s President Xi Jing Ping, to supply Siberian natural gas to China for the next 30 years. The deal is worth $400 billion.

Part of the deal is a pre-payment from China of up to $50 billion for Russia to construct the direct pipeline to China. But that is not all. The two countries are constructing the $60 billion Pacific Ocean Oil Pipeline from Russia’s Skovorodino to China’s Mohe to delivery for 25 years $270 billion of 360.3 million tons of crude for the Chinese National Petroleum Corp. Russia is accepting Chinese Yuan for all these while China will in turn accept Roubles for what Russia will import in return. The next move, as one apt headline put it: “Russia Prepares Mega-Deal with India after locking up China with ‘Holy Grail’ Gas Deal.”

India as of May 1, 2014, according to the World Bank, overtook Japan as the third largest economy in the World in purchasing power parity terms. Talks of construction of a $30 billion Russia to India, through Northeast China, oil pipeline project are expected to conclude by mid-2014, says India’s Oil and Natural Gas Corp. The trade will be done in the national currencies. China supports the pipeline project while India has expressed interest in joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organization which includes Russia and the Central Asian states.

As the 21st Century turns, the World is turning from the West to East in a momentous shift marked by the “pivot” of oil, gas and energy supply away from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the Petrodollar. OPEC, organized in 1960, was controlled by Western big oil behind the five founding members Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela and Kuwait.

In 1971 as the US dollar collapsed on the weight of its Vietnam War debts, US State Secretary Henry Kissinger arranged with the largest oil producer, Saudi Arabia to accept only US dollar for its oil in exchange for security guarantees. This gave birth to the Petrodollar and subjected the oil-dependent World to its tender mercies.

The Petrodollar was the US Big Stick to compel countries to bend to US whims, like the Philippines, which hocked everything it had to get US dollars to buy oil and energy indispensible for economic sustainability and growth. The US manipulated the supply of the Petrodollar and caused currencies of other nations to rise and fall , like the devaluations of the Philippine peso from two-to-one in the early 50s up to over 50-to-1 at its nadir during the Asian Financial Crisis of 1998 and during the destabilization of Presidents Marcos 1983 to 1986 and Estrada in 2000 to 2001. The Petrodollar was the power then, but today even Saudi Arabia is striking direct deals with China, et al. OPEC and the Petrodollar are dying.

Ironically, OPEC and the US Petrodollar’s end were ushered in by the US itself. Hubris overtook the US after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. For nearly 25 years of US and Nato push that now threatens Russia at its borders with Ukraine, the US has treated Russia as a second class nation, insulting it with promises unkept, like the pledge not to expand Nato and such projects as the US-Nato missile defense system surrounding Russia claiming it is to defend itself against Iranian missiles (which can’t even cross Turkey). Now, Russia responds and shakes the foundation of US power over the World — the erosion and demise of the Petrodollar.

Where does the Philippines stand in the face of the radically shifting global oil, gas and energy supply scenario for the coming years? Under BS Aquino and the current ruling class (the Yellows) beholden to the Royal Dutch Shell, Saudi-Aramco/Chevron Texaco (and fronts) energy-finance enslavement to high-oil and energy prices of the Western energy transnationals and vassalage to their geopolitical foibles reign. Low cost energy from Russia, Iran and Venezuela awaits, but there will be no action. Vietnam, RP’s new ally on the China Sea issues, is into joint exploration and development of oil resources in the China Sea with Russia and India in its energy development projects.


The World is celebrating the end of times of the Petrodollar and the OPEC, and the Philippines should be celebrating with it and starting steps to join the emerging new world order led by the leading countries of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) — but Philippines is being left behind, to the Filipino people’s great present and future loss. Let’s ensure the Filipino people are enlightened about these changes in the World and prepare a leadership to take the new direction in 2016.


(Tune to 1098AM, Tues. to Fri. 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. “Sulo,” watch GNN TNT with HTL on Destiny Cable channel 8 and Skycable channel 213 Sat. 8 p.m. and Sun. 8 a.m., www.gnntv.asia.com or YouTube “Talk News TV (and date)” — this week “The Promise of BRICS’ New World Order ” with Hiro Vaswani, Richard Javad Jaydarian and Dr. Benito Lim; visit www.thenewkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Raging currents

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / May 21, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Russian President Vladimir Putin will be in China May 20 for a historic meeting with President Xi JingPing, Russia’s own “Asia Pivot,” a positive and more tangible one historically than the US whimper in Obama’s visit last month. Russia and China will sign the “Holy Grail” Russian gas supply to China of 32/bcm (billion cubic meter) per year for 30 years, equivalent to 30 percent of Russia’s supply to Europe per annum. US and Nato threats of boycotting Russian energy supply can only elicit laughs now. The deal will be made in Rouble and Yuan, shunning the use of the US dollar. Beyond this, Russia will similarly deal with India and other nations of the East.

The icing for China is a go-signal from Putin for the sale of S-400 anti-aircraft system to China. The S-400 can detect and track 37 targets simultaneously 600-km distance and hit targets 400 kms away. The deals will be a major wallop to US power and prestige over the world’s geopolitical situation, another tectonic tremor toward the collapse of the violent Pax Americana’s reign across the globe, and the dawn of multi-polar global harmony. It is in this light that Asia must see the tempests in areas of the China Sea currently roiling waters between China and Vietnam, and to a lesser degree with the Philippines.

China reckons its claim where it sent its oil rig in the Xisha islands where it has historical claims. Vietnam reckons it from its nearest shore where its EEZ, or Exclusive Economic Zone emanates. Both are valid and that’s the problem. Despite the violent civilian Vietnamese actions causing two Chinese deaths, three thousand evacuees, another thousand fleeing via Cambodian border exits and a continuing stand-off around the oil rig, the window for dialog is not closed. Hard bargaining lies ahead and both countries are tough players. China is moving troops to Vietnam’s border and the latter will not budge from the disputed oil rig area.

Vietnam arrested 1,400 violent protesters and Vietnam News reports “China, Viet Nam FMs hold phone talks on E. Sea issue.” The US scores points rapping China and dishing disinformation, like New York Times reporting 21 Chinese killed. Philip Bowring in South China Morning Post misleadingly writes “… it (China) has now succeeded in shifting Indonesia from a position of trying to act as a moderator …to opponent.” But the Jakarta Globe on May 15 reported that Indonesia’s Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa had been communicating with both the Chinese and Vietnamese and added that Indonesia would continue with efforts to mediate the conflict.

The report cites Indonesian foreign affairs expert Teuku Rezasyah calling on Indonesia to mediate the conflict and warning “… the US may get involved because it has a base in Darwin (Australia)… We cannot rely on Malaysia or the Philippines to mediate because they have their own interests in the South China Sea, and so does America (with its opposition to China)… I hope Indonesia can get involved with shuttle diplomacy. As a senior member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Indonesia can talk face-to-face with China.”

While the US takes advantage of tensions, it hankers for Chinese investments. New York Post’s Diane Francis asks US policy makers, “Why are we letting China buy American companies?” Filipino commentators doubt the US “ironclad” security guarantees to the Philippine because the US is afraid of its $3-trillion debt to China. These financial fears are simplistic. The US has reneged on its debt (last time 1971 by Nixon), and time and again it has used war to resolve such problems. It will try again with China. What the US fears now is its not being prepared against its ultimate target, China; it tries to buy time while expanding US bases — in the Philippines, Japan, Jeju Island in South Korea and in Australia.

We can only speculate on what China’s reclamation at the Spratly’s Johnson or Mabini Reef is for, but we surmise that China is moving to expand its perimeter defense too; before the time the US completes its transfer of 60 percent of its military forces to Asia by 2020. China cannot allow the inevitable use of a US ally in the China Sea rim to stop it from setting up its defense position. The US EDCA with the Philippines and 2,500 troops, radar and missiles sites Australia — all point to the “Offshore Control” strategic doctrine, proposed by US Marine (retired) Col. T.X. Hammes to cut China’s oil supply routes through the China Sea.
Last May 18, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in The Telegraph wrote, “China steps up speed of oil stockpiling … an unprecedented’ build up of oil reserves as West prepares for possible oil sanctions against Russia.” Raging currents set off from the faraway black Sea churning up the China Sea.

(Tune to 1098AM, Tuesday to Friday 5 to 6 p.m. “Sulo,” watch GNN TNT with HTL on Destiny Cable channel 8 and Skycable channel 213 Saturday 8 p.m. and Sunday 8 a.m., www.gnntv.asia.com or YouTube “Talk News TV (and date)”; visit www.thenewkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Fourteen years of Epira

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / May 19, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Last week I touched base with Alain Pascua who is a “bird watcher” and conservationist nowadays, frequently disseminating social media posts on the bird species observed at the last surviving marsh down in Parañaque that some oligarchs want to bulldoze. Alain is also a leading member of Liling Briones’ NGO renowned for exposing the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) or presidential pork, an issue seemingly buried now.

Back in 2001, Alain was a lead organizer of the anti-Electric Power Industry Reform Act (Epira) protests, whose members, who wore T-shirts that said, “I signed against the PPA,” emblazoned in red, for which I’m organizing a reunion. The PPA is the Power Purchase Agreements signed by Cory Aquino, FVR, and GMA with IPPs (Independent Power Producers) since the 1990s.

Such PPAs catapulted the Philippines’ power rates into the “highest in Asia.” And this was even before the Epira became law in June 2001. Epira, known as the Omnibus Power Bill in the late 1990s, did not become law under the Joseph Estrada administration despite intense lobbying from Big Business and their hatchet man in Congress then, Butch Abad. Estrada, advised by Sen. Juan Ponce-Enrile and Trade Secretary Jose Pardo, was skeptical of the proposed government guarantees to the power industry. Thus, Abad and company waited for Edsa II to fast break the Epira in less than five months by a lame duck Congress, before being swiftly signed into law by Gloria Arroyo in record time.

Amid numerous radio and TV ads in 2001 and 2002 promising an era of abundant, cheap household electricity, the public waited for the boon while the anti-PPA movement advanced to anti-Epira protests. These protests then culminated in a march from Bo. Kapitolyo’s Three Sisters restaurant, where Alain Pascua, Enrile, Rep. Boying Remulla, and hundreds more (myself included) signed the petition, to the Pasig Regional Trial Court, where we filed the historic case questioning the constitutionality of the Epira.

Despite our protests, the public continued to be lulled by the false promises of Epira. By late 2003, however, skepticism grew as power rates zoomed; and this disenchantment became so serious that someone had to cheat in the 2004 elections just to return to her usurped throne.

Two decades after the first PPAs were signed and 14 years since the Epira became law, the Philippines not only has the highest power rates in Asia, and sometimes the highest in the world — as in December 2013 and January 2014 when the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market manipulation added P4.17 per kilowatt-hour to the already highest in Asia P13/kWh, but it is also the only Association of Southeast Asian Nations country with major cities suffering from rolling brownouts and a major southern island (Mindanao) suffering up to 15-hour blackouts.

The power crisis in the Philippines from the supposed lack of electricity supply leads to tens of billions of pesos of losses to the domestic economy each year; yet for 10 whole years, the Philippine government, the elite “civil society,” and mainstream media allowed this crisis to go unresolved while devoting endless hours to comparatively trivial issues, such as the P10-billion “pork” anomaly.

And to take the monotony off such constant issues as “pork,” government and mainstream media belabor the China Sea disputes. Lately, a Chinese reclamation project in one of the Spratly islets drew vociferous protests from the Philippines that can do nothing to stop it. But the aggravating power crisis in the country, which is certainly within the powers of government to keep a lid on, gets only double-talk or short-lived attention and then endless procrastination from Malacañang.
One simple act that government could have done the past decade was to require private power companies earning billions in the Philippines to invest in new power plants here. But, clearly, with the way things are going, we shouldn’t be holding our breath.

Gathering the remaining members of the anti-PPA and anti-Epira movement to wear their “I signed against the PPA” T-shirts again should be an even prouder moment than before. It is a reminder that certain Filipinos were not sleeping when the thief crept in, and further evidence that perspicacious and visionary ordinary Filipinos saw through the veil of Philippine politics.

It will be a call to all citizens to exercise critical thinking whenever faced with foreign and local Big Business, their captured government agencies and politicians, as well as their controlled mainstream media and “civil society.”

(Tune in to “Sulo ng Pilipino” on 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; catch GNN’s Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m., this week on “The true list: People’s Grievances;” search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)

No-bullsh*t zone

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / May 14, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Mike Whitney, writing in Counterpunch, an independent US political Web site, on May 12 spoke of how “US Media Ignores Putin’s Peace Plan” because they “(do not) want people to know that Putin is not the ghoulish, authoritarian caricature he’s portrayed to be, but a levelheaded pragmatist who wants a swift and peaceful resolution to the (Ukrainian) crisis.”

Whitney further wrote: “Putin is a plain-speaking guy who shoots from the hip and says what he means. He’s not a bullsh*tter…”
That reminded me of a Filipino political leader, President-Mayor Joseph Estrada, who last Monday showed the Philippine media and public that he means what he says; such that wherever he is becomes a “no-bullsh*t zone.”

That occasion marked the City of Manila opening its doors to its “Command Center,” showing on a video wall the size of a fourth of a volleyball court actual, real-time scenes captured by closed-circuit television cameras across Manila’s critical areas of traffic, security, and sanitation concerns. When Estrada launched his candidacy for the mayorship of Manila, he pledged to clear up traffic and clean up the fiscal, governance, and sanitation situations. There were many skeptics. Now the video wall that a horde of media reporters and cameramen witnessed gave evidence to Estrada’s accomplishment of that pledge. No bullshi*t. It was right there: Divisoria, T.M. Kalaw, Adriatico, and a dozen other scenes — clear of traffic jams and mess.

Manila Mayor Estrada, with his Vice Mayor Isko Moreno, reported other details such as the R-10 expansion to an all eight-lane road to decongest the port area. Sixteen thousand “urban poor” houses and 32,000 families (squatter houses usually house two families) have been removed and relocated to sites in Batangas, Laguna, and some in on-site developments — with titles to their new homes. Manila raised revenues which should have resolved the City’s fiscal woes. Then something came from out from left field — city hall employees’ withholding taxes of over P680 million due to the Bureau of Internal Revenue from 2007 to 2011 were never remitted by the previous administration; but Estrada is confident it will be overcome.

Public Works Secretary Rogelio Singson to “Honorable President Mayor” Estrada in his agency’s request for the “moratorium on the truck ban… from May 13 to 20 (noontime), 2014 for 8 days in preparation for the World Economic Forum to be hosted by the Philippines from May 21 to 23, 2014.” The addition of “honorable” is apropos, as speaking in a clear tongue as Estrada does, is such a rarity in Philippine politics today. Plain talking reflects the integrity of word and deed, and a mark of honor — in contrast to the bullsh*t the public is getting today on the Napoles list and most everything else. I digress because the hypocritical, forked-tongues playing on the Napoles list need commenting.

Their hypocrisy is in direct contrast to the praise in this piece for integrity in talk and deed. On the issue of corruption, the self-righteous shams from stripteasing De Lima to Aquino to Lacson portray them as if they are immaculately white when their obscene Napoles striptease are but one of the many acts on the stage of the anti-corruption zarzuela being played out. In belaboring their immaculateness they believe they have no need to perform in real life, no requisite to deliver improvements in lives of the people and the nation that can be felt, enjoyed, and believed in. These people have made the entire country a Bullsh*t Zone. Now, BS Aquino has gotten in on the act to obfuscate the List.

Back to Manila, the city is bending backward to accommodate 6,000 trucks in batches of 200 trucks per hour for eight days — for the World Economic Forum. Local and foreign chambers of commerce shrilly protested the truck ban, accusing it of hurting the economy (Inquirer, “Manila truck ban pits Estrada vs business org,” Feb. 5).

The truck ban began February. At the Command Center press conference, Estrada held up a copy of one of the business sector’s favorite papers with the Inquirer’s May 10 headline, “S&P gives Philippine another credit upgrade,” to belie the business sector’s claim. The Big Business sector is just as self-serving as BS Aquino is too willing to sacrifice the public for their business bottomline.

Ironically, the World Economic Forum (WEF), established in 1971, will convene in Estrada’s “No-BS Zone” on May 21 while the organization presides over a world economy where, Oxfam says, “85 people now own 50 percent of world’s wealth,” and the Philippines, which this 23rd WEF describes as “poised to be the strongest performing economy in Southeast Asia,” was reported May 13 by local papers to be where “More self-rated poor went hungry.”

(Tune in to “Sulo ng Pilipino” on 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; catch GNN’s Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m., this week on “Power blackmail in Mindanao;” visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)

Tempest in a teapot

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / May 12, 2014 / Daily Tribune


Exaggeration. That was my first reaction to the headlines describing “tension” over the arrest of Chinese fishermen off the Spratlys and their detention by Philippine authorities. “Tension” was also the term used by international reports I read, and I immediately suspected a coordinated build-up.

Arrests of Chinese fishermen by Philippine authorities have been going on for decades. Infinitely worse incidents have happened — like the 2012 Scarborough standoff and the killing of a Taiwanese fisherman by the Philippine Coast Guard — which had expectedly pushed nerves to the limit. But cases of poaching —notwithstanding their gravity — ought not to be blown out of proportion. Protocols in these cases are clear as diplomatic and legal processes are expected.
I explained to my radio audience the apparent exaggeration of this “tension” and we seemed to have a consensus. Philippine and Western mainstream media, in sync with the US State Department, are prone to stir up the same tempests in teacups when it comes to the China Sea issues. This tendency escalated after the “Asia pivot,” which the US announced over three years ago, raising more justification for US involvement in the region.

I did a quick research into such cases of arrests, and on the Internet I found that the Philippines’ arrests of Chinese fishermen since the 1990s numbered many, many more than reports of Chinese authorities arresting Filipino fishermen, of which I found only one.

The almost simultaneous case of the ship-ramming encounters between Chinese and Vietnamese maritime vessels at the Paracels is different. The Chinese side is moving a $1-billion oil rig into what it deems as “indisputable” Chinese territory 50 kilometers off the closest Chinese Shisha islands but 150 kilometers off the closest Vietnamese reference points. Higher officials on both sides have called for dialog to resolve the issue peacefully, although the ships of both sides are in what seems to be a “Mexican standoff” for now. That the Chinese have reiterated their desire for dialog indicates that it would not be obstinate. Shouldn’t mutual development of the resources of the area be the solution?

Brinkmanship is part of the strategy in negotiations, which both China and Vietnam are employing in their ongoing face-off. At stake may be billions of dollars of revenues from the natural wealth of the China Sea for the two parties. We hope the two sides are careful not to draw blood and, especially, not to fire anything more than water cannons at each other. At this juncture, they are avoiding what seems to be the easy habit of Philippine Coast Guard and naval personnel of being trigger happy, as was proven in the killing of the Taiwanese fisherman and now in the arrest of 11 Chinese fishermen, who yielded after supposed guns were fired in the air (or at them, as alleged, which should be investigated).

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) meeting in Myanmar will be on its second working day when this column sees print. It would not be a surprise if the two incidents above happened in connection with this conference. Philippine mainstream media, reflecting the Aquino government’s strategy, created the impression, reflected in the prime establishment newspaper, the Inquirer, that “China tops Asean agenda” when, in fact, it is merely BS Aquino and his Foreign Affairs and Defense secretaries’ top agenda — not the Asean’s as a whole.

If anything, what the arrest of these Chinese fishermen will allow is for the Philippine side to raise the matter of a “joint” declaration on disputes over the China Sea, which it did not get in the last Asean meeting.

Vietnam and China are into negotiations without needing the intercession of any other international or regional bodies. Given the record of both China and Vietnam in resolving their most difficult issues, such as the border disputes that had led to military clashes some decades ago, but culminating today in cooperative efforts such as the Kunming-Hanoi road projects, it leads us to hope that the “oil rig” issue will be resolved peacefully and constructively for both.
On the other hand, relations and issues between China and the Philippines are another matter since the latter still refuses to engage in bilateral negotiations and insists on internationalizing the issue involving extraneous parties.

BS Aquino’s government is intent on raising the tempest in the teapot of the China Sea while unconcerned about the real tempest roiling with 100 million Filipinos who are experiencing or witnessing the following: 1) excruciating Mindanao power blackouts created deliberately by BS Aquino to enforce exorbitant, price-gouging power rates by the oligarchs; 2) increasing onerous taxes from Kim Henares sucking in professionals, as well as street vendors and pedicab drivers; and 3) the withholding of the Napoles “list” linking BS Aquino, his cover-up artist “Lie-la Dilemma,” and administration stalwarts.

(Tune in to “Sulo ng Pilipino” on 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; catch GNN’s Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m., this week on “Power blackmail in Mindanao;” visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)

Taxes and Filipinos' psychosis

DIE HARD III / Herman Tiu Laurel / May 7, 2014 / Daily Tribune

Last May 4, the newspapers reported an International Monetary Fund (IMF) advice to the Philippines: Widen the Philippine government’s tax revenue base.

Shanaka Jayanath Peiris, the IMF’s resident representative to the country, pushed for legislation to achieve this widening of the tax base “the sooner, the better.”
Peiris told reporters, “The tax to GDP (gross domestic product) ratio of the Philippines is still very low compared to other countries in the same level of development, and so for the tax to GDP to increase a lot, you probably need to broaden the base not only by administration but also changes in policies.”

Is high tax to GDP ratio the key to investments and progress? No. In the Philippines, the key is to lower high power rates to the region’s average. Peiris dispenses the usual IMF generalizations to divert from the real economic issues — and from alternatives that guarantee economic, industrial, and employment development.
The more important question is where our taxes go. If they’re not going to investment in the “hard industries” and public services, such as basic agro-industrial support projects (import-substituting fertilizers, steel, energy, and other strategic industries), but only into needless debt service, public services privatization funding, or consumer products-addiction imports, then no development can happen.

The IMF wants to tax every sector as much as it can and as much as taxpayers can stand. IMF gofer Kim Henares started to get the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) serious in taxing professionals such as doctors and lawyers, though her success beyond the “shame campaign” is doubtful.

My family’s recent visits to the doctors were still not covered by receipts nor was the advice rendered by lawyers’ offices. For years, the various BIR chiefs, who have been “seconded” from the IMF, have salivated over extending taxation to taxi drivers, street vendors, as well as tricycle drivers and operators. The latest news release of the IMF is a reminder to the government of its desire to tax these sectors.

The IMF wants to extract taxes from the “informal economy” which comprises at least 61 percent of the economy, or as high as 80 percent — even if the informal sector is already heavily taxed. The expanded Value Added Tax (eVAT) is already shouldered by small vendors or drivers whenever they purchase necessities for their micro-livelihood, such as cooking oil for their banana-cue or gasoline for their tricycles. Still, the IMF and Henares want to tax the income of these hand-to-mouth self-employed workers. Philippine eVAT is at 12 percent, compared to Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and Cambodia at 10 percent; Singapore and Thailand at 7 percent; and Taiwan at 5 percent. We have the highest corporate income tax and among the highest personal income tax.

The IMF is a US creation, one of the spokes of the global financial hub that turns the wheels of today’s financial world. It is a world already exposed as the fountainhead of corruption in the 2008 Wall Street financial collapse, then propped up by public tax increases and extractions by austerity to fund the Quantitative Easing policy; London Interbank Offered Rate manipulation; and the multi-billion fines on Citibank, JP Morgan, and HSBC for cheating depositors and investors, both private and institutional.

The Hub of the hub is the Bank of International Settlements, where policies are made for progressively centralizing all banking in the hands of the few Western banking families.

When we read that Filipinos admire the US government more than the US population itself, we get exasperated. How dumb can the Filipino people get?
At a media kapihan where the moderator, panel, and audience focused all their rage against China’s alleged “aggression” and pinned their frustrated hope on Obama, I countered by explaining the ceaseless political and economic abuses, as well as the oppression and exploitation of this country by the US. I lamented the “bobong Pinoy,” but the audience thought I referred only to BS Aquino and Malacañang, even though I was clearly referring to the vast majority of Filipinos, including many of them at that kapihan, still admiring and relying on the US.

Twenty-five years ago, James Fallows wrote that which Filipinos have is a damaged culture. He was being kind. Filipinos suffer a national psychosis — one that leads to loss of contact with reality, which makes them unable to see that the US is punishing them economically, financially, and politically without end, and one that makes them even love their tormentor.

How does one cure this insanity—induced by a cultural DNA mutated by 100 years old of US and neocolonialism, by mainstream media’s hallucinatory reportage, alongside delusionary TV and cinema, pitiful Americanized FM radio, as well as health and wealth religious groups, ad nausea? Shock therapy can be helpful. The IMF was behind the original VAT, then the eVAT (now the highest in Southeast Asia), which raised the cost of fuel, electricity, food, medicine, and other commodities in the Asian region. Let another round of spikes in these prices shock the people again.

(Tune in to “Sulo ng Pilipino” on 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.; catch GNN’s Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay Sunday, 8 a.m., this week on “Pork and DAP exposés” with Sandra Cam, Argee Guevarra et al.; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)