 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| Winners and Losers
By Antonio C. Abaya Written on Aug. 25, 2008 For the Standard Today, August 26 issue Now that the Beijing 2008 Games are over, you and I can go back to our daily routines. I was spending four to five hours a day watching the Olympic action, from Day One to Day 16. I had no more time to read, to watch films on DVD, to listen to classical music, or to work in my garden. Thanks to the generous coverage by Solar Sports and its sister channels � Etc, 2nd Avenue, CS � cable TV viewers had a wide choice of events to watch. Previous exclusive coverage by (state-owned) channels had been notoriously inadequate, at times limited to events in which Team Philippines took part, which weren't many, to begin with.. This time, thanks to Solar Sports, the entire, or almost the entire spectrum, of Olympic action was literally at one's fingertips. My only complaint was the infuriating inaccuracy of the published schedules, which required surfing through Solar and its sister channels to look for the event that had been scheduled but didn't materialize, without any explanation from management. As for the repetitive appearances of some annoying adverts, I just made 10-meter dashes to my computer, or hopped, skipped and jumped to the washroom, whenever the ads appeared. I quite accepted the notion that, under the capitalist system, some profit-seeking companies had to pay for the coverage and were thus entitled to nag us with their commercials.. But next time around, Solar Sports should discourage over-zealous copywriters from writing hyperbolic platitudes about participating Filipino athletes. I realize the purpose was to boost the morale of our Olympians, but it was overdone. For example, a participating archer was purportedly made to say, in a voice-over, that "Missing my mark is not an option�.I feel the weight of every Filipino on my shoulders, and I cannot let them down�" and then went on to land 30th in a field of 35. .We don't need this kind of bull. I avidly watched men's and women's table tennis, men's and women's badminton, men's and women's gymnastics, men's and women's swimming, men's and women's volleyball, men's and women's track and field � always my favorite because I was a 1500-meter runner during college in the Ateneo - and took in some fencing, some rowing, some tennis, some football. I decided I didn't like men's or women's fencing. The action and excitement last only for one or a few seconds, after which the fencers must disengage. Boring stuff, if you ask me. The only fencing I ever enjoyed in my life was when Errol Flynn would swing on a chandelier into a banquet hall, kicking, slashing and thrusting his way past the bad guys for at least 10 minutes, and would then disembowel the villain after another 10. Anything less than that seems like sissy stuff. I skipped basketball, boxing, wrestling, equestrian, baseball, weightlifting, shooting, archery, cycling and those boring Oriental martial arts events where competitors spend 90 percent of their time bobbing up and down, waiting for the chance to kick each other. If I were asked which events I would scratch off the overcrowded Olympic menu, it would be wushu and the other woowoos. Ballroom dancing is more fun to watch.. I was waiting for some coverage of the sailing events, since I was a member of the Philippine yachting team in the Tokyo 1964 Games. But none were scheduled and I did not chance on any. Understandably, I suppose, because sailing is not a spectator sport and is exciting only to those who are actually immersed in it. I did watch white-water kayaking, with rapt attention. It looked terribly exciting and challenging. The closest (and much safer) activity I have ever engaged in was white-water rafting on a river in Joensuu, Finland, near the Russian border, in 1995 when I was a guest of the Finnish government. After a two-hour trek through the woods, a two-hour workout downriver, a sauna and a good night's sleep in the nippy air of the forest, we were totally refreshed the next day. Every tired and burnt-out body should try it. Better and less expensive than a weekend of pampering in some phony "wellness" center. But I digress. Beijing 2008 was the coming out party of China, and they succeeded enormously, despite the efforts of bleeding heart liberals to wreck it, over the issues of Tibet and Darfur, and busybody concerns about free speech. Certainly, winning 51 gold medals, 21 silvers and 28 bronzes � or a total of 100 medals � was a major achievement in itself. Aside from 1936, when Hitler hosted the Berlin Olympics, this was the first time that a country other than the US or the USSR/Russia won the most gold medals. Running a 16-day extravaganza with more than 10,000 athletes from 200 countries and territories would have been an organizational nightmare, but the Chinese seem to have pulled it off without a major hitch. Everything seemed to have worked like clockwork. China is now not only an economic superpower and an emerging global military power, it is now also an athletic superpower, with world-class athletes in many disciplines. China was the biggest winner in Beijing 2008, in more ways than one. The whole world knows about the record-breaking performances of Michael Phelps of the US in swimming and Usain Bolt of Jamaica in the dashes. But no one seems to have paid much attention to Kristy Coventry, a (white) swimmer from Zimbabwe, who won all the four medals (one gold, three silvers) of her country, probably it's very first Olympic medals. Coming as she does from a country that is fast disintegrating with a record 2.5 million percent inflation and 80 percent unemployment, her achievement is heroic. And one of my favorite winners was a girl from Bahrain who won her heat in the 200- meter dash, despite being covered from head to toe in the Islamic tradition. Too bad, she did not make it to the finals. Despite the 28C Beijing heat, she wore a tightly secured head scarf, and body-hugging sweat shirt and sweat pants, which would still have scandalized some conservative Muslims. But in an athletic field full of bare legs, glistening thighs and scandalously exposed mid-ribs � which undoubtedly drove many young bucks from sexually repressed societies mad with satanic lust - my fully covered champion was pushing the envelope of Islam. The winningest country per unit population in Beijing 2008 was Jamaica (pop. 2.8 million), which won six gold medals (three by Bolt), three silvers and two bronzes, or an outstanding 11 for such a small country, all in the dashes, for both men and women. This would make for an interesting study in DNA analysis. All or most of the outstanding short-distance track athletes in the US and the Caribbean (Jamaica, Bermuda, Bahamas, Cuba, etc) are descended from slaves who had been shipped to the New World from West Africa, and they are uniformly stocky and heavy-built.. But they are not winners in the medium- and long-distance runs (from the 800-meter to the marathon). Here the Olympic winners have been, for the past 20 years or so, blacks from East Africa, both men and women, all wiry in physique.. In Beijing 2008, Kenya won five golds, five silvers and four bronzes, all in medium- to long distance runs. Ethiopia won four golds, one silver, two bronzes, in the same events. Kenya won the gold in the marathon, Ethiopia the silver. A comparative study in DNA analysis could identity the gene or genes that give West and East Africans their unique winning advantages in track. If Jamaica was the winning country in Beijing 2008, based on population, India was, as usual, the loser. With a population of 1.2 billion, India �only now � won its first Olympic gold medal ever in individual sports. (India has previously won medals in field hockey.) India is the 800-pound weakling in the Olympic sandlot. But the fact that it finally won a gold � in shooting � gives hope that the other perennial Olympic loser � the Philippines -will in time win its first Olympic gold. Perhaps in 2020 or 2032? And maybe we have to amend the Constitution for that to happen? *****. Reactions to [email protected]. More articles in www.tapatt.org and in acabaya.blogspot.com. . To subscribe, send as blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to "Winners and Losers" More Reactions to "US Interests in Mindanao" More Reactions to "Thank you, Nene" More Reactions to "Go, Beijing, Go!" More Reactions to "Renegotiate" Thanks for the detailed accounts of the Olympics which made up for the games I missed. I like fencing, but like you, was bored by the brevity of the matches. Nothing beats those Errol Flynn movies and "Scaramouche". I was of course dazzled by the grandeur of the opening day, and I commented that it would be very difficult for the next host/s to match that. The Chinese really prepared well as we could see from the spectacular displays and colorful costumes, the dancers' precise steps, the drummers' coordinated beat, and the excellently choreographed moves of the performers. Their athletes were also well primed. We should be proud that an Asian country emerged first in the Olympics. Have you tried the river rafting in Cagayan de Oro City? (Not yet. ACA) Best, Yett Montalvan, (by email), Aug. 26, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony: It is possible that if the Philippines shifts from a so-called constitutional presidential democracy to, say, a monarchy rooted in divine rights, it could win four golds in swimming, four golds in men's sprints, four golds in women's sprints, and a gold in the men's marathon. It would also be within the realm of possibility for a Filipino finally to win the much-coveted Nobel prize in Physics, in Chemistry, and in Medicine. Divine intervention is what would surely make these possible. Mariano Patalinjug, (by email), Yonkers, NY, Aug 26, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, I am green with envy at the other countries � tiny dots in the globe, but giants when it comes to sports. The Philippines should have fared better, but it seems our officials were more concerned with posing for pictures beside Ana Ivanonic or Kobe Bryant than attending to the needs of our athletes. And with that I am purple with anger. Maybe next time, we should send to the Olympics our grade schoolers who compete in the Palarong Pambansa. I don't expect them to win medals - at least that's given. The exposure should be worthy. No need to send our so-called "Olympic caliber" athletes � they are all hype and nothing more. And no more sports officials to the Games. Just send the Public School teachers � at least they are more attentive to their athlete's needs. Thanks a lot Bong L. Alba, (by email), Aug. 26, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww TONY, BEFORE LONG CHINA WILL RIVAL THE U.S. FOR SUPREMACY. ECONOMIC SUPREMACY THAT IS. EVEN WITH ALL THEIR GLARING FAULTS, THEY HAVE PROVED THAT THE WESTERN MODEL DOES NOT WORK. WHEN YOU HAVE TOO MANY MOUTHS TO FEED, AND YOUR ONLY ASSET IS LABOR, THEN DISCIPLINE AT ALL COSTS IS THE ONLY WAY TO MOVE FORWARD. FREEDOM IN SUCH A CASE IS NOT CREATIVE BUT STIFLING FREEDOM WITHOUT DIRECTION AND DISCIPLINE MEANS NOTHING, JUST LOOK AT THE PHILIPPINES. WE HAVE BEEN INDOCTRINATED TO THE "SOMETHING FOR NOTHING" PREMISE, AND NOW IT IS ALMOST TOO LATE TO REVERSE. POVERTY HAS BECOME AN EXCUSE FOR EXPECTING EVERYTHING AND DOING NOTHING. FOR SURE PROGRESS HAS BEEN UNEVEN IN CHINA BUT THAT IS MORE A QUESTION OF A FEW HAVE MOVED FORWARD WHILE MANY HAVE STAGNATED. STILL THAT IS BETTER THAN EVERYONE IS STAGNATING. WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IN 28 YEARS NO COUNTRY HAS DONE IN 56 OR EVEN 84 YEARS. THE WESTERN ALL OR NOTHING PREMISE IS DEAD. IT IS NOT REALISTIC, AND THEREFORE GIVES PEOPLE FALSE HOPES. THE FAULT IN CHINA IS NOT THE DISPARITY OF WEALTH, BUT THE FLAUNTING OF THAT DISPARITY. IF THEY MEGA RICH WERE TO REINVEST RATHER THAN FLAUNT THEIR WEALTH, THERE WOULD BE FAR LESS DISCONTENT. JUST LIKE THE PHILIPPINES WHERE YOU SEE SOMEONE IN A FERRARI AND SOME URCHIN PEDDLING CIGARETTES ON THE STREET. THE DISPARITY IS DEHUMANIZING, AND SHOWS THESE ULTRA RICH TO BE A CALLOUS SOCIETY. THEY RECENTLY EXECUTED A LOCAL CHINESE OFFICIAL INVOLVED IN THE EVICTION OF THE POOR HOMEOWNERS BECAUSE THEIR LAND WAS COVETED BY DEVELOPERS. THE FEMALE BUREAUCRAT WAS EXECUTED BECAUSE OF THE INDIGNATION OF THE DISPLACED HOMEOWNERS AND THE NEGATIVE EFFECT IT WOULD HAVE ON THE GOVERNMENT. THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN IN THE PHILIPPINES. W HAVE NO REAL IDENTITY AS A NATION,A DN THEREFORE NO REAL SENSE OF WHAT WE MUST VALUE. LYNNAS, [email protected], Washington, DC, Aug. 27, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, You asked: "the Philippines -will in time win its first Olympic gold. Perhaps in 2020 or 2032? And maybe we have to amend the Constitution for that to happen? *****. Indeed, someday, the Philippines will win a gold medal. Take Lotto for instance. Though the odds of winning is astronomical, people are still buying at least a ticket hoping against hope that lady luck will smile on them and make one a multi-millionaire. It is not the logic that it's impossible to win, the driving force is the knowledge that indeed somebody has to win...and people do. Why? If the odds are 50 million to 1 in order to win and if there are say 200 million tickets sold, winning is indeed not that impossible. In Philippine sports, the odds of getting an Olympic gold medal mercifully is not that astronomical, yet some people have to consider the following conditions : 1. Basketball is not the only sports in the world. The sport is a game of giants, prowess in ball handling and smart team plays. The odds are the Philippines will never win an Olympic medal in basketball in the next thousand years. 2. POC and the Philippine Sports Commision should be quarantined from political patrionage. 3. Long term sport programs must be formulated supported by generous budget allocation. With 90 million Filipinos, the pool of future excellent athletes is inexhaustible. By the way, Items #2 & #3 above at this point are just dreams, almost like hoping and praying on winning the Lotto. Well, "hope springs eternal". Regards. Mark Enriquez, (by email), Pomona, CA, Aug. 27, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww You were right , Tony. They put the weight on our Olympians' shoulders. Imagine, what happened to them! I was in Australia at the opening of the Olympics and some Filipinos watching were surprised to see Pacquiao waving the Philippine Flag. Was he an Olympian? They thought Miguel Molina would be the one carrying the Philippine Flag. I realized that being there and not being a participant brought a demoralizing situations to our Olympians. Olympics is theirs. They worked hard to represent their country. Carrying the flag is probably the greatest honor one can achieve. Pacman is rich and highly paid and can do more honor to himself and country if he politely declined the invitation in honor of our Olympians. We heard he was only persuaded by Malacanang. Whew! Not true? We hope so. More power to you, Tony. Forgive my insinuations. Rene Santos, (by email), Los Angeles, CA, Aug. 27, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Mr. Abaya! How can we expect our athletes who were sent to the Beijing Olympics return home with medals when there was very little money spent by the government to help them in their training? Money which could provide for better facilities, equipment and food. Why dangle that reward money during the Games which could have been spent during the training period. That offer of monetary reward by Gloria Arroyo was another publicity stunt for pogi points. She even offered reward money for the Wusho team not knowing that it has been categorized by the IOC as a demonstration sport only. No amount of enticing the athletes can make them bring home medals if they did not receive adequate training and that's when the money would have been of better use. Narciso Limsiaco Ner, (by email), Davao City, Aug. 28, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony: ".....despite the efforts of bleeding heart liberals to wreck it, over the issues of Tibet and Darfur, and busybody concerns about free speech." Those were your own words. You deliberately inserted a political comment (to ingratiate yourself to the Chinese?) about the protesters for human rights and free speech which you have denigrated and maligned. It's amazing, incredible and ludicrous that, as a practioner of free speech, you have maligned and stumped on the very right and priviledge you have so long enjoyed. In protesting against the inhuman treatment of Tibetans and helpless people of Darfur, you have marginalized the protesters as "bleeding heart liberals". As a journalist, you must have seen/read the reports of outright violations of human rights in Tibet and Darfur. I am fairly conservative person and believe in protecting and defending human rights everywhere as well as a firm believer of free speech. If you consider me a "bleeding heart liberal" so be it, I couldnt care less. However, you have acted hypocritical in your profession by labeling those who protest in defending free speech as "busybody". Living and practicing free speech in the Philippines, it is difficult to comprehend why a noted journalist Tony Abaya condones violation of free speech in China. In your wish to have a perfect Olympic, you were pissed off at protesters who only wants to highlight the Chinese maltreatment of Tibetans & imprisonment of dissenters and condoning of Sudanese government commiting genocide in Darfur. Frankly, I am very disappointed at you Tony. May I request the courtesy of your reply. Martin Celemin, (by email), Las Vegas, Nevada, Aug. 28, 2008 (The fact that there was no similar protest in the name of the Uyghurs in Xinjang � who are next door to Tibet and who are making the same demands on the Chinese � tells me this was a deliberate public relations demolition job being manipulated by the usual suspects. See my articles "Free Tibet�later" (April 7, 2008) and "Manipulating Tibet" (April 21, 2008), archived in www.tapatt.org. (If you "believe in protecting and defending human rights everywhere," why have you not protested against daily human rights violations in Saudi Arabia where non-Muslims are not allowed to publicly practice their religion; where many Filipinos have been arrested and jailed for carrying a Bible in public or for trying to convert Muslims to Catholicism; where no Christian or other non-Muslim places of worship are allowed to be built even though there are thousands of mosques in Europe, North America, Australia-New Zealand, Latin America, the Philippines, even in China; where women are not allowed to drive cars; where girls and women must wear tent-like abayas, to cover their entire bodies when they go outside their homes, no matter how hot it may be; where women are not allowed to show themselves in public with men who are not their husbands, brothers or sons; where a woman was gang-raped by seven men earlier this year and was herself punished with 60 lashes for being with a man in public who was not a relative; where in March 2002 15 girls in a Mecca school were left to be burned to death [22 others were seriously burned] by firemen who refused to rescue them because they were not wearing head scarves; where in August 2008 (last month), a young Saudi woman was burned to death � after her tongue had been cut out �by her own father, because she had converted to Christianity; etc. (Have you read the latest news from that Enchanted Kingdom? Reuters reported from Riyadh last Aug. 22 that "celebrating anniversaries, birthdays or Mother's Day is against Muslim 'righteousness,'" according to the Grand Mufti Abdul-Aziz al-Sheikh, the top cleric in Saudi Arabia, who also enjoined the Muslim faithful against sending red roses on Valentine's Day. (You and bleeding heart liberals did not and do not protest these violations of human rights because there is no organized effort to embarrass the Saudis, as there is one, to embarrass the Chinese. And neither did/do the governments of the US and Europe lodge protests, because they all need Saudi oil. So how is that any different from the Chinese keeping quiet about Darfur because they want to have first crack at Sudanese oil? ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony , From a pool of 88.5 million Filipinos , the Filipino athlete failed to win any medal in the recently concluded World Olympics . Not even a tin can medal ! ! ! Your last paragraph analysis is awesome ! There is probably a need to "amend the constitution" in order to prepare the appetite of the Filipino athlete to win a medal for the next Olympics . Just the same , my confidence in the Filipino is fully intact and as strong as ever , especially when I hear my friends tell me : " Wala silang sinabi lahat sa Pinoy ! ! !" "Talagang lahing bigatin tayong mga Pinoy ! ! !" "Pisak silang lahat sa ating mga Pinoy ! ! !" Mabuhay ang lahing bigatin ! ! ! Mabuhay ! ! ! Juan de la Cruz Jr, [email protected], , Aug. 28, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. Great article with a mixture that refreshes- letting your readers get to know you more, current events and politics. Be of good cheer... Marilyn Ranada Donato, (by email), Virginia, Aug 29, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr Abaya --- After reading your "Winners & losers" and your description of the Muslim female athlete who, sadly, had to compete fully clothed, I thought you'd be interested to read a letter sent by a friend of mine to Hong Kong's South China Morning Post. Indeed, the display of female bodies and their prowess during the recent Olympics should put Muslim countries who traditionally treat their female population like dumb kids to shame. One quibble --- your stating that China is "not only an economic superpower and emerging global military power" (as shown by their Olympic success) is simply too adulatory. (Is it true or not? That is or should be the only criterion. ACA) You neglected to point out that only a ruthlessly authoritarian power could have produced that success. Prior to the Games, people were forcefully displaced from their homes to make way for the Olympic infrastructure, those who protested were imprisoned, even those who sought to use the areas set aside for protests were imprisoned and many arrested, plus local and foreign journalists who reported those events were harassed despite China's promises to the IOC to the contrary. (When the Soviets hosted the Moscow 1980 Games, did you protest the ongoing Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, or the tens of thousands of Soviet citizens still being held in the Siberian gulags at that time? ACA) There was, in short, so much wrong with the way the Games -- particularly China's broken promises to the OIC -- that it's surprising to find a democrat like yourself seduced like so many others have been. It's sad the IOC just let it all go (even though there's been an investigation over the cheating of the young gymnasts claiming to be 16), but understandable because they probably didn't want to be called wet blankets for China's big "coming-out party." China does indeed, as you say, want to be regarded as an "economic and military superpower," but that's no reason for responsible commentators to be sycophantic. Isabel Escoda, (by email), Hong Kong, Sept 05, 2008 (In two recent articles ("US Interests in Mindanao" and "Kosovo in Mindanao,") I referred to PGMA as "the Chinese-dominated Arroyo" and to Manila politicians as "greedily selling their country to the Chinese." Did that sound sycophantic to you? ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to "US Interests in Mindanao"(Aug. 19, 2008) Hi Tony, I noted my email to someone else strayed to your email address, the one that said "Whatever the Americans are doing down there is fine by me." I was referring to the presence of the US military in Basilan, Sulu and elsewhere providing service support to our troops and undertaking vital civil-military operations. Cheers! Raffy Alunan, (by email), Aug. 30, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, Do you know why the Americans built that airport in General Santos? Why are all the 'visiting forces' visiting only Mindanao? I am sure you can enlighten us. Ben Lim, (by email), Makati City, Aug. 31, 2008 (Obviously, this is all consistent with the expressed neo-con policy of increasing US forces in Southeast Asia, to monitor a) the activities of the Jemaah Islamiyah in Malaysia-Indonesia; and b) the activities of the Chinese in the Spratly Islands. And to have a forward base to launch strikes from, if that should become necessary in the future. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya, Let me react on your statement: "At the rate China is growing economically and militarily, she is bound to be the dominant player in Asia." (I did not write this line. ACA) I so much agree on this. Personally I believe that in over 10 years, they can possibly be a superpower considering their population base, economic and military growth With their sovereign fund increasing and accumulating for overseas investments and productively utilizing resources of other countries like the Philippines minerals, there is no doubt China will become a major global player in the years to come. Thank you for sharing your insights. Driggs Matabaran, (by email), Sept. 01, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, The first sentence of the reaction of Nonoy Ramos on the removal of the U.S. bases in the Philippines is a common mistake blaming certain Filipinos for it. The truth of the matter is that the Philippine Government Panel headed by then Secretary Alfredo "Alran" Bengzon were not for the immediate pull-out of Clark and Subic, as what had happened. It was for a gradual phase-out in a period of more than 5 years, but less than 10 years. I have forgotten the exact number of years - seven or eight ? -for the withdrawal of the U.S. bases. (In my columns at that time, I batted for a seven-year phase-out of US bases. But US negotiator Richard Armitage stubbornly insisted on ten years. ACA) Ironically, it was the Americans themselves who caused the rejection of the treaty by the Philippine Senate. Instead of dealing with the official Philippine Panel, they used a backdoor-channel in Malaca�ang through a willing Executive Secretary who was eyeing the presidency in 1998. The Americans succeeded in getting their way through Executive Secretary Oscar Orbos and of course, Presdient Corazon Aquino. Even then Mayor Dick Gordon marched with President Aquino in support of the Treaty approved by the Executive Branch but rejected by the Philippine Senate. The provisions of the the Philippine-U.S. Bases Treaty were so disadvantageous that the Philippine Senate REJECTED it! So who is to blame? None other than former U.S. State Undersecretary Richard Armacost who tried to arm-twist the Philippine Panel led by Sec. Alran Bengzon. But since Armacost cannot intimidate Bengzon, he used the willing backdoor-channel of Executive Secretary Oscar Orbos. All the information above are based on the authoritative two-volume book entitled "A Matter of Honor" by Alfredo "Alran" Bengzon, a 1991 Ramon Magsaysay Awardee for Government Service. By the way, the same State Undersecretary Armacost was responsible for the U.S. Debacle in foreign policy with Iran! But that is another story. Ric Ramos, (by email), Santa Rosa, Laguna, Sept. 01, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, Former Defense Secretary Fortunato U Abat knows what he is talking about re the US interest with other countries/areas in relation to the Philippines. While the Americans pay much (maybe too much) attention in rehabilitating Japan and Germany after World War II, they would not even lift a finger in re-building Manila where US forces destroyed it during the liberation of the Philippines from the Japanese. Up to now, the promise of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Filipino veterans (USAFE)who fought and died side by side with the Americans during the defense and liberation of the Philippines, (in a WAR not of their own making), has not been honored. While America grants aids and more aids to European nations and Middle Eastern potentates, she would not even honor her former Philippine Colony with "pittance". Now President Bush's policy to assist the MILF rebels in their ambition to rule over the Christians and other etnic inhabitants in Mindanao, could be the percursor of another "Kosovo". The killings of innocent civilians don't matter to the Americans, just so they can continue with their selfish political interest in these parts. While we admit personal agendas of our politicians and pseudo-nationalists caused bitter relations between our nation and the United States governments, America should not abandon our people.. I just read an Internet news about US AID of $1Billion to Georgia. An insult to us, isn't it? Having read your column and those of Mr. Esposo re American "selfish interest" in the aborted MOA and now the MILF killings of Christian civilians in Mindanao made me want to vomit. Is this why more and more people "Hate America"? How can one re-act differently? Jose I. Regino, (by email), Zamboanga City, Sept. 04, 2008 (Like other major powers, the Americans craft their policies on cold calculations of their national interests, not on emotional appeals about Filipinos having fought and died with them in WWII. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, In the below issue, former DND Secretary Fortunato U Abat, one of my respected former instructors, wrote: The interest of America on Mindanao was rekindled, after it relinquished its military bases back to Philippine jurisdiction, by geopolitical and strategic reasons to maintain its presence in the south and southwest Pacific and southeast Asia areas. And to do this, it has to ingratiate itself and kowtow more with the Moro secessionist movement than with the Philippine government. Its presence in Mindanao today, while purportedly part of its worldwide anti-terrorist campaign after the 9/11 incident, is certainly geared to its interest in that part of the Philippines. It is well known that Philippine forces have been fighting terrorism in Mindanao even before 9/11 without American support. It is only now after 9/11 that America came in to support Philippine forces because it has a geopolitical and strategic purpose. During CEMCOM days in the early '70's, America refused to honor its MAP (Military Assistance Pact) commitment to provide better military hardware and munitions to the Philippine forces because they were fighting our own people (the MNLF). (Why the HMBs and later the NPAs?) Another reason was America's greater interest in oil, that it did not want to dirty its hands supporting an armed force against a force that the Middle Eastern potentates were supporting. Even in the early days of the American occupation, after the failed Pershing and MacArthur (Arthur) expeditions against the Moros, the American occupation government in Manila had to create the Department of Mindanao and Sulu to give special attention to the welfare and needs of the Moros. In the heydays of the Misuari-chaired ZOPAD, the Americans were allowed to build an international airport in General Santos City indicative of American interest to establish their base either in the Christian province of Sarangani or in the adjoining Muslim town of Palimbang. Now, America's interest in the MILF's MOA AD that would extend ARMM's dominion beyond what Misuari conceived in ZOPAD is more revealing in that it may not only be just a territory for a base but may include US protection of the Moroland exclusive of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines. It is not easy to disagree with a respected "idol", but I think there is a lot of misconception here. True, the US has done many of the things covered in your column but in the Philippine case, the often usual Yankee high-profile nature has created a lot of wrong impressions and bias against American intentions. Since the beginning, I have contended that the US would not go against the interests of the Philippine government on the Mindanao issue. More specifically--- Gen Abat: Its presence in Mindanao today, while purportedly part of its worldwide anti-terrorist campaign after the 9/11 incident, is certainly geared to its interest in that part of the Philippines. It is well known that Philippine forces have been fighting terrorism in Mindanao even before 9/11 without American support. It is only now after 9/11 that America came in to support Philippine forces because it has a geopolitical and strategic purpose. Of course, US interest is involved here, but not to the detriment of Philippine authority. We can indeed, albeit with some difficulty, handle the MILF problem, but US assistance is a good thing. Even former Deputy Speaker Gerry Salapuddin defended Balikatan in Basilan when it was initiated a few years ago. Just making the MILF at ease with US limited presence in Mindanao, and thus avoid US troops being a target, is enough US "interest". Gen Abat: In the heydays of the Misuari-chaired ZOPAD, the Americans were allowed to build an international airport in General Santos City indicative of American interest to establish their base either in the Christian province of Sarangani or in the adjoining Muslim town of Palimbang. The General Santos City airport, as well as the Makar Port Expansion, was selected on the basis of the master plan prepared as part of the Mini-Marshall Plan of the Reagan administration after EDSA II in support of President Aquino's administration. I know this because I implemented the Makar project in 1995-98 as PPA head. The choice of projects was made by NEDA under the Mindanao Development Master plan. If Misuari had his say, the airport would have wrongly been in Sulu. Gen Abat: Now, America's interest in the MILF's MOA AD that would extend ARMM's dominion beyond what Misuari conceived in ZOPAD is more revealing in that it may not only be just a territory for a base but may include US protection of the Moroland exclusive of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines. It was the unusual body language of the US Ambassador, including the project proposal of the USIP to be involved in the MOA negotiation, coupled with the widely-publized (by the MILF and their supporters) crazy thinking that the US would support the MILF's interest based on an ancient agreement with the US in the early part of the last century, that created this myth. Ambassador Kristy Kenney for the first time on 15 Aug 2008 explicitly stated that the US merely supports the Philippine government in the peace process, that it is an internal matter under the Philippine Constitution, and that the US would not push for an independent Muslim Republic in Mindanao. I agree though that in our relationship with the United States, it appears that we have not been given much attention, in terms of military and economic assistance. Last night I saw Sen John McCain deplore on TV the fact that the US spends billions of dollars supporting countries that go against the interests of the United States. Maybe in their review, they will realize that not only did we stand by them since colonial and commonwealth days, but almost all throughout the Cold War until today. Regarding the deuterium issue, I have lowered my expectations on the Philippines as the country that could most benefit from it. Please see the attached column I wrote for the Maritime Review, Sep-Oct 2008 issue. Keep up the good work. Chuck Agustin, (by email), Sept. 04, 2008 President, National Defense College of the Philippines (Chuck, as I have stated several times in this space, deuterium in Mindanao is a hoax. Tony) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to "Thank You, Nene" (Aug. 14, 2008) Tony, Just reflecting on the wonderful forum that your column has generated and continues to do so which is what I originally shared with you in order that serious citizens and thinking Filipinos have a model that they can focus on. And now you have thousands in your online forum...bravo Tony. I think this format is even better and quicker since EVERYONE who comments with some substance can read others who have similar dynamic ideas all for the sake of our beloved country. Not all heroes shoot bullets. There are those who formulate and share and expose ideas that can bear fruit. Yours is in the forefront. Congrats Tocayo. You make all of your friends and admirers proud indeed. Onward! Tony Joaquin, (by email), Daly City, CA, Aug. 26, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hello, Mr. Abaya. I saw the film WAG THE DOG, watched it twice. Many friends didn't get to see it and they're clueless to what's happening to this country. Yesterday, curiously, I went to a Globe business center to find out if Madame President meant what she said in her SONA address. I wanted to know for myself, because I've not been reading the newspapers and all the s_ _ t that's going on, if I should give Madame GMA my two cents worth of credibility. Ha-ha-ha! I now want to know if Madame GMA is trying to broker us to China or the US of A. Take your pick... Have a good day! Kit Soriano, (by email), Aug. 26, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to "Go, Beijing, Go!" (Aug. 12, 2008) Tony, please note that my brief comment on the article was dated a day after it was published. I could not have commented for the days following that. No "fiendish delight" on that, mind you. No doubt, and it can not be overstated that the Chinese 'have arrived' (the games simply but emphatically showed the obvious). BTW, Solar and the other foreign cables indeed also showed sprinkling attendance in some events. But of course the others, like basketball where the American "Dream Team" played, and the other popular sporting events were well attended and cheered. I'm sure all of us are looking forward to and expecting a dramatic closing rites where I hope the Chinese Olympic organizers will highlight the message of peace and understanding this world badly needs. Shalom. Ed Tirona, (by email), Aug. 23, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hello Sir Tony, There was a ticker tape report on the DZRH tv-radio on cable the other day stating that PGMA was 'dismayed' over the performance of our Filipino athletes in the current Olympics. I wasn't able to hear anything else about it on the tv-radio but I'm a bit upset with the news if she is truly 'dismayed' with the athletes. The nerve of her to even be dismayed. I don't have much to say about it because my mother taught me to keep quiet if I have nothing polite to say about someone so as far as PGMA goes, -no comment. But in a nutshell, she should be dismayed at how the Philippine. Sports Commission or whatever sports agency - handles the training of these Olympians (even if they haven't won anything) considering how squalid their situations are; that they personally have to look for sponsors to finance their training. There are a lot of sponsors when the date draws near but they only give equipment and uniform - what about the day to day expenses of these athletes? The vitamins etc they need to take? Mobility, food, allowances? Did she even stop to consider these things? You can't expect someone to perform well and up to par if there was no support in the first place. You don't tell a common house painter to make a replica of the Sistine Chapel armed only with a 4-inch paint brush and no paint, no ladder, no budget, not much training and then be 'dismayed' over the non-performance - what was she expecting? Pure talent? Even a diamond needs to be cut perfectly in order for it to show its real brilliance. Even with a 15Million pot for the first Gold medal - if this stupid government was willing to reward the first gold medalist with that much money - HOW COME they didn't finance their training in the first place, there's money to finance it anyway!!??? Plus, that kind of 'reward' cheapens the passion of actually winning an Olympic medal whether it be gold, silver or bronze. So if she's dismayed, the nerve of her to be dismayed. These people are not competing FOR her. Who the heck is she anyway to their day to day struggles? If this government wants Filipino Olympians - then they better put their money where their mouth is and help nurture these athletes from TODAY up to the time they leave for the next Olympiad. If they can't do that - then don't expect a gold medal even if you place the pot at 25Million. To our athletes, the mere fact you guys made it to Beijing is already great. Thank you for representing our country and doing your best. No matter what anyone else says - you guys are great! Best regards and God bless. Jenifer Xavier, (by email), Aug. 24, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to "Renegotiate" (Aug. 21, 2008) Dear Tony: The Supreme Court has ruled the MOA unconstitutional.(Actually, not yet. ACA) Therefore, that MOA no longer exists, being null and void ab initio. The next logical and practical step would be to renegotiate as you suggest. I join Benito Legarda in his suggestion that the GRP panel should be completely revamped. The new panel should be persons who are thoroughly conversant with the Philippine Constitution which contains provisions which sets clear limits on how far that panel can go without running afoul of the Supreme Court. The panel should take into serious consideration the suggestions that you have carefully made. It should also be made up of persons who are not cowed by belligerence or intransigence on the part of their opposite numbers in the MILF. While the panel should have for its goal the promotion of peace and order in the areas which are the subject of the negotiations, it should not make the mistake of gaining that goal at any price. Mariano Patalinjug, (by email), Yonkers, NY, Sept. 01, 2008 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, If the MILF (Moros) negotiated in bad faith, first time, second time, third time and many more time in the past, then you can be sure the same thing will happen again and again. For one thing, the MNLF group under Misuari believes, (sometimes) that they already have an approved agreement - the Tripoli Agreement - under the Marcos government. The ARMM which held its elections a few weeks earlier, is supposed to be the governing body that is in placed and now being recognized and implemented and seemed to be working, so far. Now, if another agreement is made with another group, this time with the Maranaos or the MILF, whom we now know is never satisfied with anything short of a "Separate Nation-State", and for the sake of argument, is consumated-- what will prevent the other ETHNIC GROUPS, e.g. Ilocanos, Tagalogs, Pampanguenos, Bicolanos, Visayans, Ilongos, Tirurays, Bila-ans, Zamboanguenos, etc, etc, etc . . .-- from demanding their own Nation-State? The Moros cannot claim that they are the first inhabitants in "these Islands" now known as the "Philippines", a duly constituted Nation- State. They may not have been Christianized or accepted western (ways) civilization, as their basic argument to their demands, but ancestors of other ethnic groups-the Malays were also already living in these Islands, or may have even been here ahead of them. Religion cannot be the basis for their claim. The history of peoples all over the world have to be "expurgated" from records of mankind before such claim can be accepted by any respectable society. Maybe they have their own norms which we are not aware of? Tell us, please? Jose Regino, (by email), Zamboanga City, Sept. o3, 2008 A Filipino citizen wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya, Several years ago, I attended a lecture of Prof. Nur Misuari at U.C. Berkeley upon the invitation of the late Prof. Cesar Adib Majul. In that lecture, I saw Prof. Misuari's genuine concern for peace in Mindanao. He complained that his efforts were hampered by inadequate funding from the national government in reconstructing the region and its failure to implement the 1996 peace agreement he signed with the administration of President. Fidel Ramos. Why complicate the lives of our people with MOA-AD when there is SZOPAD-SPCPD? We have an opportunity for a long and lasting peace in Mindanao waiting to be realized? The ball is now in President Arroyo's hands. It's her move. If I were President Arroyo, I will implement the current autonomy arrangement with Prof. Misuari's participation! Just imagine what he can do if the money for the current war effort is set aside for the reconstruction of the region! Needless to say that Prof. Misuari is the only one who can deal internally with the extremist groups and those "brothers" who betrayed him. This is a no -brainer! Efren Padilla, Ph.D. (by email), Hayward CA, Sept. 02, 2008 Professor of Urban Planning and Sociology, California State University, East Bay OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to [email protected]. Tony on YouTube in www.tapatt.org. To subscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. |