Soho wiser than Carpio

Soho wiser than Carpio

(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 07-06-2015 MON)

 

On the South China Sea/West Philippine Sea (SCS/WPS) dispute, seasoned public affairs TV news anchor Jessica Soho displayed more intelligence and wisdom with her plain common sense than the much vaunted Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.

 

That Soho interview was the culmination of Carpio's organized lecture series cum "experts' discussion" that kicked off last June at the plush Discovery Suites (sponsored no less by a Japanese neo-nationalist institute) and continued at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, as well as in the media circuit.

 

The July 2, 2015 episode of State of the Nation with Jessica Soho was where Carpio belabored the fact that the Philippines' International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea (ITLoS) case will "…take time…even an inter-generational struggle… (where even) if we will win … this generation will get the ruling… the next will convince the world… and maybe the next… after that will convince China…"

 

Since one generation is 25 years, Carpio is effectively talking of 75 years before any potential benefits.  To this Soho reacted with plain common sense: "Will there be anything left in the SCS/WPS after that time?"

 

After stumping Carpio with that question, Soho then led him to reflect on the question of the growing majority of Filipinos as to why the Philippines is not engaging China in bilateral talks over the SCS/WPS dispute between the two countries.  Soho asked Carpio why the Philippines has not taken the track of bilateral dialog at the same time (as many suggest, a two-track policy that includes dialog--especially after China spoke through its envoy, Ambassador Zhao Jianhua, last June 12 that it is open to dialog "without any precondition").

 

Carpio took pains to persuade his listeners that bilateral dialog is not a viable option as it would "jeopardize" the ITLoS case if China invokes the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLoS) requirement that disputants first submit to choice "peaceful means" of resolution, among which are dialog and negotiations, to resolve issues; and only upon the inability to come to terms through such initial "peaceful means" can the matter be brought to the court.

 

China contends that no such peaceful dialog has happened and Carpio's caveat may indicate that such can be claimed.

 

To buttress his arguments for the Philippines to desist from any effort to engage China in dialog and bilateral negotiations, Carpio was not beyond comparing bananas to lychees to make his case.

 

Citing the Nicaragua vs United States case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ)--not ITLoS--where the US was rapped for laying naval mines in Nicaragua's harbors against the Sandinista government (which, again, is not a territorial dispute) and where the ICJ decided in favor of Nicaragua with a $30-million award in damages (which the US repeatedly ignored), Carpio claimed that the US complied after mounting international pressure grew out of Nicaragua's repeated attempts at securing a resolution before the UN General Assembly.

 

The truth is the US did not even want to appear at the slightest bit to be complying with that ICJ ruling as it first required the repeal of a Nicaraguan law requiring compensation before even extending a politically motivated "aid" package of roughly over $500 million (not $1 billion as claimed by Carpio) to the US-backed Violeta Chamorro administration that succeeded the Sandanistas.

 

Carpio, as a member of the high court, demeans the stature of his position when he stoops that low as to attempt to deceive the public.  His apparent need to dissuade the Filipino people from engaging in "bilateral talks" with China seems so overriding that he had no qualms doing this.

 

Many international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, by their very nature, are not beyond the reach of geopolitical influences.  The world has seen this, from Slobodan Milosevic's trial to the abuse of the International Criminal Court against African political leaders not allied to Western powers.

 

Many countries, including China in this case, do not countenance involvement of such multilateral institutions controlled by the West.  In conflicts such as those in Libya, Côte d'Ivoire, or the Rwandan genocide, these institutions were part of the problem and not the solution.  Conversely, the Tribunal may also be used to turn against the Philippines' interest.

 

Carpio and his like-minded anti-dialog clique are really getting desperate as more and more Filipinos are wishing for dialog and bilateral talks with China over the SCS/WPS impasse.  As we wrote recently, "In the Laylo Survey from May 8 to 18 among 1,500 respondents, 53 percent of Filipinos supported a diplomatic solution (i.e. dialog) versus 47 percent who 'believe it is better'… to have filed a case… (which was followed by a) June SWS poll (that) reported 46 percent of Filipinos disapprove of the government's actions (filing the case at the ITLoS), which is a sea change from the SWS' 2013 survey where only 27 percent disapproved of the government's moves."

 

Note the advice from a young but internationally recognized Filipino writer, Ateneo professor Richard Javad Heydarian, in his Huffington Post article last June 30: "'Time for the Philippines to Adjust its South China Sea Approach' … Manila should pursue dialog with Beijing while it still can… the Philippines can still learn some lessons from its neighbors on how to better manage the ongoing disputes and best deal with the Chinese juggernaut.  Diplomacy isn't only about mobilizing… against your foes.  It is also about… managing differences with even the bitterest foes."

 

Got that, Carpio?

 

(Listen to Sulô ng Pilipino, 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m. to 6 p.m.; 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.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)

The DFA’s information war

The DFA's information war

(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 07-01-2015 WED)

 

It was the strangest news.  The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) announced that it was going into comic books publication to explain its South China Sea/West Philippine Sea (SCS/WPS) policy.  This followed an earlier announcement that the agency will start producing videos on the matter for distribution to the population.

 

The DFA engaging in such mass communication projects, when the nation's chief executive has other more competent agencies for such tasks, such as the Departments of Education and Local Government, is truly unprecedented.

 

Discussing this enigma with Philippine-China policy analysts, including Chito Sta. Romana, Rod Kapunan, and others, a consensus was evident: The DFA's impetus for this strange decision to produce videos and comic books must have been borne by the recent surveys showing the Filipino public, from Batanes to Jolo, favoring dialog and diplomacy over litigation and the contentious case filed against China at the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea (ITLoS).  The two recognized public opinion surveys seem to have the DFA worried that its anti-China tirade and propaganda need to be boosted.

 

In the Laylo Survey from May 8 to 18 among 1,500 respondents, 53 percent of Filipinos supported a diplomatic solution (i.e. dialog) versus 47 percent who "believe it 'is better' for the Philippines to have filed a case" against China over their disputed SCS/WPS claims.

 

Meanwhile, a June SWS poll reported 46 percent of Filipinos disapproving of the government's actions (mainly, filing the case at the ITLoS), which is a sea change from the SWS' 2013 survey where only 27 percent disapproved of the government's moves.  On the concern over war with China, the SWS surveyed the question in March 2015 and found that 84 percent of Filipinos were worried about it.

 

The Filipino public is learning, despite the "great wall of disinformation" set up by the DFA (with the Department of Defense's help, such as the September 2013 misreporting of US target anchors as "concrete foundations of China's new construction" to exaggerate tensions) and the distortions by mainstream media--with the latest being GMA News' "Taiwan claims Batanes" headline last June 3, failing to take into account an overlapping EEZ dispute, or "Chinese shoots guns at Philippine planes," which was later reported as a flare gun, then revised into a searchlight.  The list just goes on and on.

 

China has opened every chance for the Philippines to reopen "without any precondition" the dialog between the two countries over the issues, which Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Zhao Jianhua prominently reiterated in his visit to BS Aquino on Philippine Independence Day.

 

Looking deeper and wider, the BS Aquino government's obstinacy in keeping its door shut to dialog is a pretext for sustaining tensions, which serve to justify the "US' Pivot to Asia," as well as the drafting of a visiting forces agreement with Japan, all contrary to the wisdom and wishes of the Filipino people.

 

The Filipino people's concern over war brings me to the question about Tsinoys or Filipinos of Chinese descent that was triggered by Francisco Sionil Jose, who admits receiving $10,000 annually in the 1960s (worth P4 million today) from CIA front Congress for Cultural Freedom, when he argued last June 7 in the Inquirer that in case of a Philippine-China War, "many Chinese Filipinos will side with China."

 

Sionil Jose conveniently glosses over the fact that in the 1,500 years of engagement between the native inhabitants of the Philippines and the Chinese, there has never been any war.  Why then is he so overcome by the forebodings of such a war that 84 percent of Filipinos seek to avoid, to the point that he baselessly questions the fidelity of Tsinoys to the Republic?

 

The reputedly Amboy Sionil Jose knows more than he is saying and it becomes obvious when you read American geopolitical theoreticians such as Robert Kaplan.  In Kaplan's 2005 article, "How We Would Fight China," it says that "The Middle East is just a blip.  The American military contest with China in the Pacific will define the twenty-first century."

 

Filipinos would do well to recall what then US President Lyndon B. Johnson said on his country's conduct of the Vietnam War: "We are not about to send American boys nine or ten thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves (later paraphrased to 'Let Asians fight Asians')."

 

The way Filipinos are being brainwashed against China by Amboys and born-again Japboys (such as BS Aquino III and Rafael Alunan III, being grandchildren of Japanese collaborators), US gofers (such as Albert del Rosario, Voltaire Gazmin, Annapolis cadet Roilo Golez), steak commandoes (such as Loida Nicolas-Lewis and Rodel Rodis), and mainstream media (namely, Inquirer and PhilStar), we will again see Filipinos dying for America's gain.

 

Genuine patriotic Filipinos, including Chinese-Filipinos, should expose these Amboys' information war and break their "Great Wall of Disinformation."

 

Every effort must be made to explain how cooperation with China will bring the bright and promising future the people seek, by becoming pillars of the Asian Century and the new multipolar BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) world.

 

Genuine pro-Filipino Filipinos should similarly produce videos, pamphlets, books, and comic books, and bring these to the masses, the middle class, as well as to social media.  The stakes are high; the US intends to suck us into a limited proxy way and it's something that we must prevent.

 

(Listen to Sulô ng Pilipino, 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m. to 6 p.m.; 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.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)

Meralco’s new ‘elec-trick’ rates

 

Meralco's new 'elec-trick' rates

(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 06-29-2015 MON)

 

There may be many issues that are equally important but certainly none more vital to the Philippines' economic welfare than the World's highest power rates perpetually being imposed on its people.

 

The 2016 political arena may have been enlivened by VP Jejomar Binay's much delayed offensive against the BS Aquino administration.  But what could have been an atomic bomb to boost his fortunes was if he had also started lambasting the sky high electricity rates.

 

Last week, the Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) came up with its new "elec-trick" scheme to ostensibly hoodwink the public into paying for its double "capex" (capital expense) included in its billing to consumers.

 

The business newspaper, which, like Meralco, belongs to the same financial "investment" group, announced this latest "elec-trick" reverse-psychology gimmick on its Web site.  On June 24, 2015 it said, "'Meralco could delay July bills' … (specifically) the issuance of July power bills for a couple of days as it awaits regulatory approval for its proposed lower distribution tariff…"

 

That delay has been deliberated planned by the power company to circumvent the consumer advocates and "good" Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) elements who have been calling on Meralco to account for past capex projects it has yet to fulfill, amounting to tens of billions of pesos.

 

Meralco obfuscates by propagating misleading news items, like this June 11 piece headlined in many newspapers that claims "Meralco seeks lower interim rate for distribution," which delighted even our power consumer advocates--until one of our stalwarts, Jojo Borja, visited the ERC and looked into Meralco's petition.

 

This "lower interim rate" is actually a P20-billion capex petition for 2016 (which is double of all past years since 2007 of P7 billion to P10 billion a year) without accounting for numerous unfulfilled capex projects promised in Regulatory Periods 3 and 2, the rate setting exercise.

 

Every four years Meralco is required to justify its rate petitions and undergo a review of what it has really spent on, supposedly conducted, and not done.  Consumer advocates attending the ERC hearings now demand this before any new capex is granted.

 

Meralco has long been getting "provisional" (now "interim") capex privileges despite failing to show accomplishments on the billions of pesos in supposed improvements.

 

In the present instance, Meralco is basing its rate petition on the PBR (Performance Based Rate) scheme, which in itself has also been put into question by consumer advocates over the past decade.

 

The "replacement cost" valuation of Meralco's assets has raised the company's asset base from P48 billion in 2006 (under the old RoRB or Return-on-Rate-Base framework) to P96 billion in 2007 by the stroke of a pen--without any additional or new assets.

 

That is the heart of the PBR scam under the former ERC chairman Rodolfo Albano (who shamelessly wanted his daughter-in-law to replace him), which the current and soon-to-retire chairperson Zenaida Ducut continues to the present day.

 

The 100-percent increase in asset valuation effectively doubled Meralco's distribution rate base.  After the PBR asset revaluation, Meralco distribution rates rose from P0.70 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) in July 2007 to P1.167/kWh by June 2008.  And since Meralco annually claims new capex, its asset base has risen further; by 2011 it rose to P1.6464/kWh.

 

Between that period and the present with fluctuations in currency and other costs, the rate base declined slightly to the current P1.5562/kWh.

 

Meralco now claims it is reducing this (out of the goodness of its heart) to P1.3939/kWh but it is, as Jojo Borja explained to us, actually due to Meralco having already been awarded by the ERC billions in "under-recoveries" charged to "elec-tricked" consumers.

 

Consumer protection crusader Jojo Borja, along with the group United Filipino Consumers and Commuters (UFCC) led by RJ Javellana (whose group has been provided volunteer lawyers to help in filing cases versus Meralco), will be filing a new case to stop this new "elec-trick" gimmick to fast break the unprecedented P20 billion capex for 2016; and escape scrutiny and responsibility for eight years of 100-percent overpriced rate base, as well as 400-percent overpriced power transformers (which also go into Meralco's asset base) and 900-percent overpriced electric posts.

 

On the ERC situation, Borja has been giving us good feedback about several new officials in the institution who would like the agency to turn a new leaf.  They see the pending early-July retirement of Ducut as an opportunity to install an independent, consumer-sympathetic chairman at the helm.  However, presidential adviser and oligarchic factotum Rene Almendras is attempting to insert (illegally) a fellow factotum who is "contained" in the collegial board but who would be used by his Big Business bosses once becoming chairperson.

 

As it is, the executive director of the ERC is already seen as a factotum of the oligarchs, a situation which the better members of the body are advising the public to neutralize with the appointment of a truly independent chairperson.  My consultations with some consumer groups also raised the idea of a Consumers' Ombudsman, who will duly act on consumer complaints against these abusive and exploitative privatized utilities.

 

We really have to put a stop to these greedy power oligarchs' dirty "elec-tricks" if the nation is to survive.

 

(Listen to Sulô ng Pilipino, 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m. to 6 p.m.; 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.; search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com; and text reactions to 0917-8658664)