Another lord for a vassal,
A new-found peon for a master,
And still, a renewed struggle for an enslaved
(Notes on Xi Jinping's visit,
of Duterte looking at China "positively" despite seeing Philippines falling on China's "Debt Trap", and the people's struggle for genuine domestic development and non-alignement)
Since 1946, the Philippines has been a vassal country of the "free world" despite its bitter memories.
With its existing agreements such as those from the United States, Japan, Australia, and other developed countries, the Philippines, still snared by the illusion of development, end rather encountered massive debts to be paid, if not willing to offer concessions most of which as controversial in character like mining, logging, and in utilities which benefit the foreigner and its domestic "partner" such as the oligarch and the bureaucrat; if not getting contented on secondhand defence materiel as a form of military assistance also based on the existing agreements signed especially those from the United States.
But with the continuous rise of China as an a contender of the United States, it uses both its economy as well as its military might as a showcase of their brand of "socialism" which is based on "Chinese characteristics."
This "socialism", as today's Chinese taketh pride of, was actually driven by Deng Xiaoping's pragmatic statement "seeking truth from facts", as it adopts elements of market economics as a means to foster growth, of political reforms in an attempt to curb corruption, while retaining the power of the communist party as it's consolidator; from this, Chinese development steered in an "attempt to reach socialism's advanced stage after 100 years" (citing Zhao Ziyang's statement) through accommodating foreign investments, streamlining the bureaucracy, modernising the industry and the military, all in accordance to "developing the primary stage of socialism" (citing Jiang Zemin's statement).
Quite "amazing" isn't it? In observing Chinese domestic development, it's dirigism, and its willingness to offer economic aid to underdeveloped countries, That since the past decades China's statement has been dealt with development than revolution, of economic reform than class struggle, of seeing businessmen as communist party members, making Yasheng Huang describing it as "Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics."
And now with the visit of Xi Jinping in the Philippines, China attempts to offer sweet deals with it's potential vassal, whose leader, assuming to be as "anti-western", looks for an alternative different from his predecessors.
Pragmatism gone wrong?
As expected, Duterte is seen by his supporters as a pragmatic kind of leader. Known for his statements and gestures, supporters would say that it is a "necessary" move as he tries to woo the people with things unlikely or controversially to happen such as desiring for order even it requires immense bloodshed; it is not surprising tho, for knowing that with words like development, inclusion, and stability be it's words, Duterte, like those of his predecessors tries to accommodate each and every sector although it end preferring a particular sector aligned with his "vision".
And when it comes to foreign relations, he doesn't care the controversy thinking that his independent foreign policy as rather driven by his indifference if not assuming to be "anti-American" like those of his past statements assailing former president Obama and therefore looking at China's Xi or Russia's Putin as ideal examples of leaders and its countries as potential sources of aid. Otherwise, he's just looking what he thinks as necessary even it is controversial such as cultivating relations with a growing and developing China.
As expected, Duterte is seen by his supporters as a pragmatic kind of leader. Known for his statements and gestures, supporters would say that it is a "necessary" move as he tries to woo the people with things unlikely or controversially to happen such as desiring for order even it requires immense bloodshed; it is not surprising tho, for knowing that with words like development, inclusion, and stability be it's words, Duterte, like those of his predecessors tries to accommodate each and every sector although it end preferring a particular sector aligned with his "vision".
And when it comes to foreign relations, he doesn't care the controversy thinking that his independent foreign policy as rather driven by his indifference if not assuming to be "anti-American" like those of his past statements assailing former president Obama and therefore looking at China's Xi or Russia's Putin as ideal examples of leaders and its countries as potential sources of aid. Otherwise, he's just looking what he thinks as necessary even it is controversial such as cultivating relations with a growing and developing China.
However, in actuality, it seems that his pragmatism turns out to be just plain capitulation. By using the alibi of independent foreign policy, it turns out to be a hollow rhetoric as he favors interests if not being indifferent as Duterte himself obviously has no interest in foreign relations, let alone some trade agreements and non-intervention in international affairs.
But come to think that with of Xi Jinping trying to woo it's new vassal, and Duterte, in aligned with his pseudo-"independent" foreign policy looks at China thinking as an alternate partner, regardless of the latter's desire to impose its dominance, beauteous words like "All-Round Cooperation", "Enhancing Dialouge", or even "Peace and Amity" between two nations been heard throughout, no matter how obvious China's desire for hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region, with all its trade wars, saber rattling, and war preparations.
And just like the United States, China appears itself as a "better" trade and investment partner. It seeks to provide the Philippines with its excess capital, and thus trying to pressure the country with agreements which favourable to them- provided with loan grants, investments, and various forms of concessions that obviously making the country dependent on their mercy. Obviously, Duterte and his camarilla wanted to see his "Build Build Build" into it's complete fruition, and therefore China will provide that "developmentalist" regime some of its surplus steel and cement, or even it's workers to support every infrastructure project such as bridges, roads, flyovers, airports, anything enough to appear the government as "promoting development" even it is in fact debt-driven.
Remember, over the past two years, China has moved more quickly to further strengthen its economic presence in the country. Its official development assistance has shot up to $63.5 million last year from $1.5 million in 2016. Foreign direct investments from China grew at a faster rate reaching $1.043 billion in the first two years under Duterte, close to 85% of its total FDI over six years under the previous Aquino regime ($1.231 billion) and more than that ($825 million) under Arroyo’s nine-year reign.
From this, Duterte's "pragmatic" moves is as same as his predecessors trying to accommodate both the Americans and the Chinese. The two been offering sweet deals while the one being offered kept on choosing which as sweeter; but behind these sweet or sweeter deals lies a bitter truth. For again like the Americans, China's quest for hegemony involves both hard and soft moves such as economic manouvering to those of military action- and from a leader who once said about planting his flag while riding a Jetski over the disputed islands of Kalayaan and in Panatag shoal, end rather "cowed" with himself as being excessively servile, playing the vassal to the Chinese overlord.
Illusion-filled papers over shoals, rocks, and beaches
And in speaking of the disputed islands of Kalayaan and in Panatag shoal, the Chinese, as it entices Duterte and his camarilla with sweet deals, is busy reclaiming every isle, every rock, every shallow seabed, enough to create their own base for their naval operations and even to justify further their expansionist agenda in the southeast.
Just like many years ago, the Chinese quest for controlling the seas meant a threat to its neighbors be it the Viets, Malaysians, even the "other Chinese" themselves for by using both its naval power and its engineering feats, reclaiming the disputed seas, what more of possibly turning into land hath made the Chinese quest for hegemony in Asia really possible.
But for the regime, its pseudo-pragmatism obviously meant indifference in regards to the issue. As said earlier, Chinese investments and assistance grew till enough impossible for a vassal to pay those debts and loans;
If they truly recognise the matter why not insist the Chinese the limitations of every agreement, or is the regime assuming to be "busy" in its domestic issues and choosing not to assert its claim for the sake of hot flow of cash and various forms of aid in its economic projects? Where is the armed forces on the time Chinese naval patrols harass fisherfolks in the once pacific seas, or are they prefering internal security such as fighting rebels whose patriotism is far greater than theirs? No offense but in a regime choosing to be subservient using the words peace and friendship, no matter how it appear wrong in the eyes of its subjects those unequal agreements it tries to appear "just" and "right" given its "economic possibilities"- even at the expense of inch of a country's property, its sovereignty.
For sure expect debates and continuous protests in the streets and in the legislative halls because of this, of comments and countercomments in social media, what more of shallow responses and harassments from diehard fanatics whose love of their leader is as if love to the nation.
If most protest out of patriotism,
Then how about the other 'anti-Chinese'?
Then how about the other 'anti-Chinese'?
(Or again, the hysteria remains at-large)
On the other side of the anti-Chinese opposition, there are those whose reason be something as more than just fighting for their country but rather driven by their favorite cold war nostalgia.
For groups like those of Ely Pamatong, as well as some of the "conservatives" and even "liberals" alike, their statement against the Chinese would be something more than just defending sovereignty: for them it is plain anticommunist sentiment the way they romanticise both Korean and Vietnam war as battle between good and evil, of Taiwan as the "Free" China, of "Tiananmen Square Massacre", and clinging to the idea that the mainland, whether it appears to be as capitalist, still as "communist".
For groups like those of Ely Pamatong, as well as some of the "conservatives" and even "liberals" alike, their statement against the Chinese would be something more than just defending sovereignty: for them it is plain anticommunist sentiment the way they romanticise both Korean and Vietnam war as battle between good and evil, of Taiwan as the "Free" China, of "Tiananmen Square Massacre", and clinging to the idea that the mainland, whether it appears to be as capitalist, still as "communist".
Subjective isn't it? However, very few of them, if not none at all of these are "patriotic" despite expressing dissent on the issue. They would rather still clinging to the idea that the United States will always be the best partner in defence and in economic affairs, no matter how unequal the agreements it may be but still closer to their view throughout decades of being its neocolony. Thus, to use Dugin's terms, it made the Philippines an "Atlanticist" in the Far East, stubbornly trying to upheld American and other "free world" interests in the face of the "Chinese meance", "yellow peril", or anything referring to "communist" China even in this modern-day setting. But did one hear about self reliance? Again, very few would dare to.
But in fairness to them, they heed the statement of U.S. Vice President Mike Pence that they should be careful in dealing with the Chinese in order to prevent getting trapped by debts if not looking at much better economic partner like the Koreans or the Japanese. Pence is somehow quite concerned about countries such as the Philippines be likely to be fallen into that debt trap China hath preparing, but to think that the United States as trying to flex its muscle in pursuit of maintaining interests in the disputed region, it is obvious that its domestic allies such as these people, will insist the importance of every treaty, every agreement, every piece of paper signed by both U.S. and Philippine representatives; if not exploiting the hysteria such as what is presently encountered.
Same old peonage, hypocrisy, nonsense
At present, the Philippines continues to embark in its one-sided, oligarch-bureaucrat oriented "development", and insists that "it needs all the help it can get" no matter most of its funds rather end going to ones pocket. Whether it comes from the Americans or the Chinese, the ones who benefit aren't the people as what the system spoke throughout in Malacanang or in the Congress, but themselves as every agreement meant concessions even meant to bleed the country dry, if not deprive the people it's will to development on it's own- let alone cultivating land, but for the needs of the market.
But in fairness to them, they heed the statement of U.S. Vice President Mike Pence that they should be careful in dealing with the Chinese in order to prevent getting trapped by debts if not looking at much better economic partner like the Koreans or the Japanese. Pence is somehow quite concerned about countries such as the Philippines be likely to be fallen into that debt trap China hath preparing, but to think that the United States as trying to flex its muscle in pursuit of maintaining interests in the disputed region, it is obvious that its domestic allies such as these people, will insist the importance of every treaty, every agreement, every piece of paper signed by both U.S. and Philippine representatives; if not exploiting the hysteria such as what is presently encountered.
At present, the Philippines continues to embark in its one-sided, oligarch-bureaucrat oriented "development", and insists that "it needs all the help it can get" no matter most of its funds rather end going to ones pocket. Whether it comes from the Americans or the Chinese, the ones who benefit aren't the people as what the system spoke throughout in Malacanang or in the Congress, but themselves as every agreement meant concessions even meant to bleed the country dry, if not deprive the people it's will to development on it's own- let alone cultivating land, but for the needs of the market.
By applying the same method of economic colonialism, China, like the United States, will keep the country backward, agrarian, and dependent to entrenched interests. With the agreements no matter how controversial or developmentalist it could be, every loan offered makes a country it's debt slave like those from its creditors like the IMF-WB, the Asian Development Bank, and others.
And to think that the Philippines remains a semicolony and military stronghold of the United States, the Americans continues to view China as its rival, especially in it's intensified trade war and challenging its political and military domination- and the Philippines, whose agreements with the United States continues to be "in force", diminishes it's own attempt for an independent foreign policy.
But come to think of this, in seeing Duterte, a frustrated "pragmatic" willing to sell its country out to China while being subservient to the United States, this meant a double-sided betrayal of Philippine national sovereignty. For sure everyone heard about his "jetski" statement, but then the regime has kept silent as the Chinese built its military bases over the disputed isles and by accepting the agreements regardless of its consequences; while on the other hand, he has allowed the Philippines to be used as a springboard by the U.S. for building up their military presence in the South China Sea through its Operation Pacific Eagle- with Washington seeking to "defeat the continuing insurgency" and to secure the interests of multinational corporations. Speaking of that "insurgency", Duterte’s failure to uphold Philippine sovereignty has raised the possibility of armed hostilities within Philippine territorial seas and is now leading the country right into the middle of an inter-imperialist conflict to the detriment of the Filipino people.
At present, what the Filipinos should realise is that the county should stand on its own. In fact, this criticism isn't limited to those of defending one's sovereignty, but also to oppose China being a social fascist pretending itself as communist. By selling-out to China while still being subservient to the U.S., the Duterte regime is committing a double-sided betrayal of Philippine national sovereignty.
By seeking truth from facts, every Filipino can afford to expose and oppose the inaccuracies brought by an unjust regime; and by serving the people and the need for cooperation amongst sectors, it will secure its country's national sovereignty, genuine democracy, and building a progressive and just society.
And from this, the Filipino people, especially those truly driven by patriotism, must resist China’s efforts to impose its imperialist power on the Philippines, be it economic, political, and even in military affairs. By opposing the unequal agreements and its offerings of onerous and high-interest loans, this kind of opposition means to oppose which are set to railroad on the people’s livelihood, taking away ancestral lands and despoil the environment, fatten the bureaucrats as it favors Duterte’s cronies, and give China control of key resources, public utilities, and services.
Besides that, the Filipino people must also actively demand the immediate dismantling of Chinese military bases in the disputed islands of Kalayaan and in Panatag shoal, an end to the interdiction of Filipino fishermen, recognise Philippine territories under the UNCLOS, and to assert a policy of active peace and non-alignment through a genuine independent foreign policy, and to urge fellow Asiatics to declare the disputed seas as a zone of peace and neutrality.
But despite all these actions, of appeals and mobilisations, hope this patriotic call doesn't end to anti-Chinese interventionism, but also to demand an end to American interventionism. If one wishes a country that is peaceful, then a call for unity to demand an end to Sino-American saber rattling should be; after all, of what is an independent foreign policy if the regime is kowtowing both to Uncle Sam and Fu Manchu? Of keeping the country weak and mendicant in exchange for those papers? The United States's existing agreements with the Republic of the Philippines continues to enact and even reinforced with new amendments; if not seeing pro-Yankee secretaries and military officers clinging to the delusion that the regime, be it Republican or Democrat-led, will continue to keep firm in its interest in the Philippines no matter how its sleeping dragon neighbour offers sweeter deals such as what Duterte and Xi signed in every piece of paper.
Thus, alongside scrapping those from the Chinese such unequal economic and military treaties such as the Mutual Defense Treaty, the Visiting Forces Agreement, the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), and other forms of economic deals which actually meant more debts and unjust concessions are meant to be abrogated. From there, will make a once-neocolony be actively pursue in its independent direction, of active self-reliance, of will to take just agreements with neighboring countries, and to build a better, resilient society.