THERE is a good chance that the House of Representatives passes Rep. Rufus Rodriguez's House Bill 7352. Roughly this calls for revisions of the 1987 Cory Constitution through a constitutional convention (con-con). It may be noted that amendments and revisions come in three modes: people's initiative (PI); consultative assembly (con-ass), preferred by the Senate counterpart, chaired by Sen. Robinhood Padilla; and con-con. PI is out of consideration as this mostly refers to specific amendments. The other two call for revisions.

Con-ass, the preferred mode of Senator Padilla hews close to the desire of the Senate to input directly into the constitutional revisions. Although it has been touted that only the economic provisions are to be revised, once the 1987 Constitution is touched, all bets are off. There is the temptation to go for structural-political reforms. The vested interests will get into the act, to protect and enhance their prerogatives. The oligarchy and the political dynasties that have been riding herd on the economic and political life of the nation will continue to influence the changes in the constitution.

Con-ass vs con-con

Con-ass will involve the members of the Senate and the House jointly revising the Constitution. But with political dynasties and allies of the oligarchy dominating 80 percent of both houses, the finished product could be highly flawed. Also, protection of the Senate's status is their priority. Note that in the American presidential-federal system, two senators are voted each by the states; thus, their Senate is composed of 100 senators. The mongrelized version was adopted by the Philippines where 24 senators together with the president of the Republic are elected universally.

The third option, con-con, as proposed by Representative Rodriguez could be the better alternative, provided a combination of elected delegates is balanced with the appointed 50 percent chosen delegates. The reason behind this is a pragmatic reading of our election system. Most of those that will be elected delegates would be the moneyed ones, members of political dynasties whose clans and family interests take precedence. The Rodriguez argument behind the chosen appointed constitutional experts is that the marginalized sectors — who could never afford to win an electoral campaign, can counter and balance these dynasts — and give the progressive agenda a chance to be debated.

Economic provisions

Both houses of the legislature and even the President himself has signified that only the economic provisions in the Constitution need revisions. The series of columns I wrote was an attempt to present a case against this myopic appreciation of what ails the country. Our basic argument is that the systemic anomalies embedded in the three Philippine Constitutions (1935, 1973 and 1987) are the root causes and that the current initiatives to revise the Constitution are simply applying remedial treatments to the symptoms. Thus, revisions of only the economic provisions will merely be applying palliatives. And more dangerously, this will give a false sense of accomplishments — pagbabago, a patina of reforms, cosmetic changes — while the underlying systemic anomalies remain untouched.

1987 Article XII

Both the Senate and House are in agreement that Article XII of the 1987 Constitution contains restrictive economic provisions that prevent foreign direct investments (FDI) from pouring into the country. Representative Rodriguez and Senator Padilla are one in pronouncing that the 60-40 percent ownership provisions on Sections 2, 10 and 11, respectively, on land ownership, on investments and on public utilities, discourage foreign investors to build business in the country.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that over the years, the inability of the Philippines to attract FDIs are mainly why we are now where we are — the tailender among the economies in Asia; when we were No. 2 to Japan, post- World War 2. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (central bank) data show an accelerated dismal drop of FDI pre-pandemic of 23.2 percent decline in 2022 compared to 2021 and 76.2 percent drop year-end 2022. Senator Padilla was quoted as saying that the country needs "drivers of growth including opening up the economy to more FDI."

The Foreign Chambers of Commerce, champions of market economy and of globalization, simply want the removal of all economic provisions in the 1987 Constitution and regulate industries via laws passed by Congress. The all-encompassing proviso to be inserted in the revised constitution of 2023 — "unless otherwise provided by law" or "as may be defined by law" to "each and every one of the [new] economic provisions" — simple, elegant, beautiful and dangerous.

To digress, this phrase has already been inserted in many provisions of the 1987 Constitution. A glaring example is the constitutional provision banning political dynasties — an evil in the political structure of the country that allows a monopoly of political power within a democracy.

Article II, Section 26 provides that "the state shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law." Our Congress, composed of 80 percent dynasts, refused to enforce the constitutional ban through that phrase "unless otherwise provided by law." Perhaps, we need to examine clearly whose interests are being served.

Clearly revisions of the 1987 Constitution can't be confined only to the economic provisions — and more particularly, can't be left to the current Senate and House alone. Indeed there are progressive and right-thinking senators and congressmen but the centuries-old political system and our method of governance have so perverted our concepts of democracy, republicanism and sense of justice that we should be wary of who will tinker with our saligang batas, the Constitution.

Constitution of 2023

The ideal compromise in these constitutional revisions may be to disallow the members of the Senate and House to tinker with the Constitution via the Robinhood's con-ass. On the other hand, Rodriguez's con-con may be the right path provided the following compromises are put in place:

Allow a universal election for delegates, but disallow ex-members of the two chambers, the party lists and their relatives up to a certain degree of consanguinity from running as delegates. We don't want dynasts to be part of their own restructuring. It is oxymoronic!

And in this hybrid con-con, who does the appointing of the 50 percent delegates? The president could appoint but these people must be known qualified experts in the constitution making or at least those recommended by organizations and men and women of probity; NGOs, civil society, academe, political parties, fellowship of business, professionals and community leaders, like the Rotary, Jaycees and Lion's Clubs, etc.? The devil truly is in the details. So far, the Rodriguez committee hasn't been clear on these.

And more importantly, after the new constitution is ratified, the delegates who authored the new constitution of 2023 should be prevented from running for any elected office for a prescribed period.

The crafting of this new constitution on the carcasses of the old constitutions runs full circle. Marcos pere once attempted it in 1973, which his nemesis then proceeded to abrogate, fashioning the 1987 document. Both failed. The 2023 Constitution could be BBM's legacy, finally healing the wounds of the past, but more importantly, thrust the country toward where it should belong. Among the developing economies in Asia.

Fourth of 5 parts

THE past three parts of this five-part series were discussions on the endemic defects of Philippine society overarching our constitution contributing toward misgovernance, regulatory capture of government institutions resulting in massive corruption, rent-seeking, impunity, and all sorts of social injustices.

These deficiencies permeate the unitary-presidential model imposed by our American colonialists although theirs is a federal-presidential system. We adopted all these in the 1935 Commonwealth Constitution.

This fourth part is a rationale for the revision of the 1987 Constitution adopting a parliamentary-federal model as an alternative to our decades-old anomaly.

Features of the presidential-unitary

(Excerpt from conference overview: "Pursuing federalism," Taguig City, June 10, 2016)

What we have now is a unitary-presidential system where our local government units (LGUs) are subordinate to the dominant national central government headed by the president. This subservience to the presidency and highly centralized authority perpetuates dependency and reinforces a traditional patronage relationship.

In theory, we have the classic separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers, with the president the head of state and government; both houses of Congress, entrusted with powers to make laws; and the supreme and lower courts to interpret the laws.

But in practice, this power partitioning is characterized by gridlock between the Senate and the presidency, particularly when both come from opposing political parties. Also, since the senators are likewise elected nationwide, they are disposed to challenge the presidency at every turn claiming equal status by virtue of their election by similar constituencies.

Recurring elections

One great source of "ingrained corruption" is the very expensive nationwide elections where the president, vice president and senators are predisposed to recoup their expenses and accumulate for the next election. Anecdotal evidence suggests that over the decades, the priority of central authority with the presidency at its core was to serve the interests of those that put them in power, the local political dynasts and the oligarchy, putting in the backburner the country's most pressing problem: stark poverty and widening wealth gap between the "haves and the have-nots."

Central authority also dictates planning and programs for the communities are a top-to-bottom approach, divorced from the realities on the ground; and impairing gravely the decision-making process. Critical revenues directed centrally and collected locally are invariably expensed from the top, detached from the actual needs below.

This is our dysfunctional unitary system of government. The president as the central authority is supreme and may or may not delegate or devolve powers to the LGUs where the majority of our people live and where problems originate; perforce, the solutions will not come from among them.

Parliamentary government

Under our proposed system, governance is improved with the fusion of the executive and legislative functions in a unicameral parliament. Here, the president assumes a separate role as head of state, symbolic and ceremonial with a fixed term of five years. The prime minister, elected from among the parties of parliament, becomes head of government with a parliamentary majority. This eliminates gridlock — thus hastening the passage of legislation and subsequent implementation of laws, enabling the government to effectively address the immediate and urgent needs of the citizenry.

It also provides a replacement for an incompetent and corrupt prime minister through a parliamentary "no-confidence vote" toppling the government triggering a general election. This is in lieu of the current highly partisan and divisive impeachment process.

With a majority government, it is possible for parliament to fulfill election promises without the stalemates that are the bane in a unitary system when political parties are unable to come to an agreement.

Both government and opposition political parties can advance their agenda by going through discourse, rigorous debates and deal-making — the main instruments for passing laws.

As government ministers are members of parliament (MPs) themselves enjoying a majority, they do not face much difficulty in getting their programs through parliament. Confrontation and instability are thus minimized.

While the Council of Ministers as a body is responsible to the prime minister, the individual ministers are also responsible to parliament for their respective acts of omission or commission. To survive, they must remain "clean." It is in the interest of the opposition, being the watchdog of the government, to expose corruption and inefficiencies; the reason for the "shadow government" — the opposition monitoring every move of government presenting their own alternative version of laws, policies and implementation processes.

There is a lot of flexibility in the parliamentary system to cope with changing situations and emergencies. It can easily adapt itself to any new reality. As Neville Chamberlain failed to lead Britain during the Second World War, he was replaced by Winston Churchill as British prime minister.

Political parties and party-lists

Parliamentary system is also known as "party government," as the political parties have ascendancy over personalities and because of the pivotal role of political parties in parliamentary elections, governance, and public administrations.

Unfortunately, almost all of the political parties in the Philippines are structured in a manner that hew close to the centuries-old patronage system where because of a paucity of ideological perspectives and politicians bereft of moral compass anchored on patent expediency, they jump from one party to another — a uniquely Filipino phenomenon known as "political butterfly."

A unicameral parliament is composed of elected members from the parliamentary districts, plus a party-list chosen on the basis of "proportional representation" by the political party and allocated to marginalized sectors — labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous people communities, differently-abled, etc. Constituting 20 percent to 30 percent of the total number of MPs, they are not fielded separately from the majority and opposition parties. Our current party-list system has been perverted to accommodate local family dynasties and the oligarchy.

We need political party system restructuring as collective vehicles to gain political power in parliament and where members adhere to a set of principles and strategies written in a platform unique to that party.

A federal system

Eventually after establishing a parliamentary system, we shift from unitary to federal government where the LGUs share powers with the central (federal) government as equals with powers defined and agreed to in a written constitution which can only be changed or altered by mutual consent of both.

We want to shift to a system with clear division of authority between the national government (federal) and the regional governments (states/Bangsa). Federalism aims to establish a democratic system that recognizes the rights of each region to govern itself and pursue its own agenda of progress and development consistent with the national interest. It will run its own affairs and decide its own destiny without interference from the national government.

In most federal republics, the federal government normally is responsible for national defense and security, foreign affairs, currency, money and coinage; and powers granted to it by the constitution. All other powers not belonging to the federal government are retained or given to the states.

It is worthwhile noting that Rep. Rufus Rodriguez, House chairman of the House committee on constitutional amendments, has conducted public hearings and with the overwhelming support of 301 congressmen authored a bill to revise the Constitution through a constitutional convention.

Next week, March 22: Compromises on the constitutional revisions

Third of a series

LAST week's Part 2 was a short treatise on the political dynasty and its antecedents from our historical and political cultures. Today's column is a discussion of its twin evil, the oligarchy, and their symbiosis. An appendage, the party list, deserves special treatment, as this was an anomalous adaptation of the 1987 Cory Constitution emanating from the desire of the newly installed regime to translate the EDSA People Power Revolution into "empowerment" of the people.

The oligarchy

(Excerpt from "Political dynasty handmaiden to oligarchy," The Manila Times, Aug. 5, 2020.)

"In the Philippine setting, the oligarchy as defined refers to some large private multi-businesses whose wealth can be traced back to the Spanish colonizers. Some sources of wealth are gifted to families from Catholic friar lands for their services to the Crown. Growing over time, this wealth is passed on to the next generations. Many of these businesses started as monopolies continuing to the present time. But many indubitably grew out of sheer hard work by founders gifted with talent and the ability to convert opportunities into wealth creation. But to exist, survive and flourish over time, they needed to acquire and possess political power to protect their economic clout. In the present context, political power is acquired through a legitimizing process of elections — handed down by our American mentors under the umbrella of democracy and all its appurtenances. And the political dynasties have this as their singular expertise."

(Excerpt from "Can the oligarchy and political dynasty be obliterated?" TMT, Aug. 12, 2020.)

"The oligarchy is a multifaceted class, and the term is by no means neutral. Political science practitioners and political economists oftentimes differ in their definition and clarity of interpretation. I have adopted the contemporary definition as used by ordinary citizens, which in most cases is colored by their politics and heavily weighted by their acuities and biases. It can be vituperative and, at times, benign or even uplifting. Some popular definitions describe the nature of the oligarchy as a power structure that allows members to accumulate economic and political clout, influencing governance directly or indirectly and distorting functions and policies for their benefit, to the exclusion of the rest of society. This complex power structure invariably is a composite of privately owned and controlled multiple large businesses involving allies or adjuncts in elective and appointive positions in government manning captive regulatory agencies. The latter describes aptly the special class of mostly elective officials, the political dynasts capable of passing on their political clout and entitlements to family members over generations.

I have often maintained that individual families or personages composing the oligarchy, which in contemporary parlance are also interchangeable with 'Filipino family business elite' are not all enemies of the people. I cited some members of the Filipino business elite going back to the American and Spanish regimes. 'These people are the risk-takers, with long-term views, pioneers in industries that need big capital and managerial talents — where government is incompetent to tread into.'

What is unconscionable are those of the same elite that suck the bone marrow of the Filipino, using their wealth to corrupt public office holders. At this level, a macabre partnership is forged between the financiers and bankrollers with those who seek political power using the tools of democracy and republicanism — the legitimizing process of elections and general suffrage. This synergy between the business elite and elected government officials is the systemic twin evils hovering over our democratic space — anchored by traditional political practices. At this point, the lines are blurred as to how economic and political power are exploited and utilized. The biggest myth being propagated is the singular notion that there are good and moral oligarchs and political dynasts. There are none! A fine distinction has to be drawn at this point. True, there are 'good and bad' business people, as there are 'good and bad' politicians. But the very concept of the oligarchy and the political dynasty as power structures embedded in the body politic safeguarded by our laws is abhorrent. This unwanted offspring borne out of an incubus of an anomalous forced marriage of the Filipino culture with that of 300 years of Spanish influence, and 100 years of American imposition of their distorted ideals of democracy and republicanism, underlined by the untrammeled practices of the free market economy, must be aborted."

Intertwining and symbiosis

(Excerpt from "Political dynasty handmaiden to oligarchy," TMT, Aug. 5, 2020.)

"This marriage of interests between the oligarchy and political dynasty blurs the line between economic and political power accumulation, resulting in several phenomena with grievous consequences.

First, encroaching directly into the political mainstream, political parties are either created or captured. Cases in point: The Nationalist People's Coalition, or NPC, founded in 1992 by the late Eduardo "Danding" Cojuangco Jr., now under successor Ramon Ang, has five senators and 33 congressmen and countless local government executives. The National Unity Party, or NUP, chaired and funded by business tycoon Enrique Razon Jr., has about 36 House legislators. Billionaire Manny Villar, a former senator, has captured the Nacionalista Party (NP). His wife Cynthia is a sitting senator, among four other NPs, with son Mark, erstwhile public works secretary under Duterte, and daughter Camille, members of Congress, plus 35 others."
Party list

The second phenomenon is the travesty of the party-list system. Originally a political innovation patterned after European party-lists to give a broader voice to the "non-political" sector of society — the farmers, fisherfolk, labor, peasants, etc. — the purpose of which was to democratize the Lower House of Congress which had been co-opted by the oligarchy and the political dynasties. What was meant to allow one-fifth of the Lower House greater democratic representation was instead perverted by the oligarchy and the political dynasts by installing family members as party-list representatives. Today, the party-list has become an adjunct to the twin evils of Philippine politics — the oligarchy and the political dynasties.

It may be recalled that the original party list concept was a structure suited to a parliament where a parliamentary majority of adversarial political parties determines the government of the day. It was therefore imperative to build ideologically diverse political parties that cater to the collective aspirations and hopes of the citizenry — with the voiceless segment of the populace given a voice through the party list — but within the ambit of the major political parties, the ruling majority, and the opposition. Thus, the traditional ideological divide of, conservatives (Republicans), progressives (Democrats), labor, leftists, etc. — not a single-issue party list with eclectic proclivities: Agimat, Kontra Brownout, Mocha (Mothers for Change), Marvelous Tayo, Tutok to Win, Ako Musikero, and a host of inane acronyms.

Politics in the Philippines as a family business is thriving. Even the former president, catapulted to power under a populist resurgence, has created his own. Daughter Sara, erstwhile city mayor, now vice president; son Sebastian, former vice mayor, now mayor; and another son, Paolo, congressman. All come from one city, Davao. BBM has a senator for a sister, a son for a congressman, the speaker of the House for a cousin and various relatives in local government units (LGUs).

Next week, March 15: The unitary-presidential system and alternatives

Second of a series

PART 1 of this series sought to enlighten BBM on the fallacies of his contention that only the economic provisions in the 1987 Constitution are defective that need fixing, directed toward enticing foreign direct investments (FDI). It is our thesis that bad governance hinders the inflow of investments — trumping all economic provisions. We further argued that these defects are simply symptoms, not the root causes. A cursory historical review should give BBM a glimpse of political patronage as central to what ails our system of governance.

Additionally, the late professor Jose "Pepe" Abueva citing Gunnar Myrdal's book, Asian Drama, depicts the Philippines as a "soft state" and a "weak nation," arguing that it is unable to apply the law equally to all its citizens. Our institutions are captives of the oligarchy, and they serve mostly their own interest, the few rich allies and powerful politicians. Our leaders failed to unite and inspire our diverse peoples as a nation.

Another eminent Filipino constitutionalist, former chief justice Renato Puno, viewing political patronage from another angle, refers to dysfunctional democracy as its progeny: "I like to stress the failure of our electoral system to excise the virus of the politics of patronage that has infected our so-called elections ... xxx ... This vicious politics of patronage has allowed few oligarchs and bosses to rule us from colonial times to post-colonial times and their rule has brought us nothing but a facade of democracy, its mirage but not its miracle."

Parts 2 to 4 of this series will draw excerpts from this columnist and various literature by many progressives and even the conservatives in this country, disclosing the systemic defects of the 1987 Constitution that prevent our political leadership from emancipating us from the clutches of poverty, impunity, moral decay, contempt for law and authority, etc., leaving our country in the dust behind our progressive neighbors. It is often touted that shortly after World War 2 the Philippines was economically second only to Japan (after America rehabilitated the former enemy). Today, we find ourselves behind the leading tiger economies of South Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and even Vietnam — that was itself devastated in an internecine war in the late 1960s. We aren't in a pissing contest with our neighbors. It is simply a demonstration that our constitution is the main hindrance to our achieving what others have done these past eight decades.

Political dynasties

Excerpts from my column ("Political dynasty handmaiden to oligarchy," The Manila Times, Aug. 5, 2020) could be relevant for BMM's discernment on political patronage as the root cause from which political dynasties sprung forth.

"Prior to the arrival of Spain, the islands of the Philippines were composed of settlements and villages called barangay with no central government. The barangay, the autonomous component for basic governance, was headed by a datu with a few hundred kindred individuals composing a stable sociopolitical unit.

The 300 years of Spanish colonization, introduction of a bureaucracy and influx of the Catholic Church hierarchy evolved a semblance of centralized government eroding the preeminence of the datu — the equivalency of rajah, hari or lakan of the ruling class — on top of the social order.

Antecedents

The Spanish colonial regime eventually converted the polity into its instrument for governing the territory, collecting taxes, keeping the peace — now all in the name of the Spanish crown. The bond between social classes maharlika and maginoo (the nobles) to the freemen and slaves were balanced on the padrino or patronage system, primitively feudal but a perfectly working arrangement before its nature was transformed over the centuries by Spanish and later, by American influence.

It was the imposition of another system of governance piggy-backed on this traditional bond that began to alter the character of the rulers and the ruled. The Philippines was America's first colony ever, and this baby step at colonization was a trial-and-error stage. For instance, America, whose people pride themselves on their individual freedoms, injected "Western concepts" of democracy and republicanism, particularly the idea of representative government, bypassing the cultural, political practices and roles of the datu and maharlika.

American tutelage

The concept of a "Filipino aristocracy" never was subscribed to by the Spanish colonialists nor by the Americans, effectively dismantling the concept. But the cultural imprint of centuries of clan interrelationship was indelible, where the clan heads/patriarchs/patrons were expected to perform their old traditional roles. Thus, they had to provide protection and even livelihood to their clansmen. The patrons therefore had to accumulate the wherewithal, wealth and political power to perform these obligations and tasks. And thus is a clan/family simply driven to preserve its prerogatives, its wealth and power — patronage politics at its barest.

America introduced alien institutions like the three co-equal branches of government, further complicating traditional governance. Yet, what was structurally imposed was a far cry from the American system itself. Instead of a federal structure, suitable to diverse clans proliferating in the islands, a unitary system of government headed by a president was instituted. But the most glaring defect of the presidential system is that this became the embryo upon which patronage politics was centralized, nurtured and dispensed from.

When we claimed full sovereignty from America after the Commonwealth period, the traditional patronage system was structurally ingrained as a systemic anomaly buttressed by the Constitution of 1935. Thus was bequeathed to our Philippine presidents the role of the top patron reaching its apex during the Marcos years. Marcos Sr. elevated patronage politics, practiced to perfection during the martial law years where "crony capitalism" came into our political lexicon. To hold on to power, patrons and padrino could dip their dirty fingers into the public coffers — thus a new subspecies of the oligarchy appeared in the glossary, "kleptocracy."

And in our presidential system, where the president — the most powerful position in government is elected at large — is expected to provide the resources for an expensive election campaign. This opens an aperture for the oligarchy and the moneyed elite, which was coming into its own, to influence the outcome. And we can only speculate at the quid pro quo this capture of political power entails.

And this goes down to all levels of elective positions. Today, political patronage has become more pervasive fomenting corruption. Our electoral processes for instance are the overarching environment upon which political patronage incubates. Paradoxically, democracy cannot exist without elections; except that in our culture, we managed to debauch the same.

With the constitutionally mandated term limits of elective officials, the desire for continuity in office easily morphs into a deviant model of "public service as a private business," becoming a strong impetus toward the perpetuation of this power base — thus the need for the patron/clan head to pass this on to wife, husband, children, or relatives. This assures the family control over its portion of the local government unit, seeding public elective or appointive positions of power with blood kin. Thus, the flowering of "political dynasties." ("Presidential system, patronage politics and political dynasties," The Manila Times, March 28, 2018.)

Next week, March 8, 2023: Political dynasty, party-list and oligarchy intertwine

First of a series

THIS is not meant to disparage BBM but his latest statements may not have been thought out well, reflecting a lack of discernment on his part at best, or at worst, just simply mouthing the advice and opinion of his sycophants who benefit from the status quo.

I refer to his assertions that Charter change is not a priority. His administration's economic agenda can be pursued without amending the Constitution. Accordingly, the sentiments for pursuing Charter change stem largely from the perceived need to amend only the economic provisions of the Constitution — and nothing else!

This reflects largely the dissonance among his allies in the legislative branch. Rep. Rufus Rodriguez, of the House Committee on Constitutional Revisions, is now conducting public hearings, while his counterpart in the Senate, Sen. Robinhood Padilla, asserting his prerogatives, declared: "...I will pursue my own advocacies, with or without the President's support..."

This is an erroneous shortsighted notion that only the economic provisions preventing the free flow of foreign direct investments (FDIs) is what is wrong with the Constitution. Ergo, the rest of the Constitution is fine. And by extension, the political patronage that is the core of our systemic anomalies in governance is fine. Political dynasties protected by the Constitution are fine. The election system defined by "goons, guns and gold" is fine. That government institutions are captives of the oligarchy is fine. BBM fails to see the umbilical cord tying the country's economy with its political structures. BBM needs to go deep into how the economy, politics and political structures intertwine.

Thus, this multipart series on political economy, an abridged compilation of my articles over the years similarly written for past presidents — GMA, PNoy and the Deegong. FVR wrote seminal positions in his countless books. Perhaps BBM can step back and kindly look at the ideological and historical perspectives that the Centrist Democrats (CD) have been advocating over the decades — and give him a point of reference. BBM is our president and deserves to look at the various ideas and concepts that he may agree or better yet, that clash with his own — the better for him to arrive at a working synthesis.

Historical perspective

Mr. President, if you study your immediate history well, you might get a glimpse of the nuances behind the crafting of the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions. Your father fashioned the 1973 martial law Constitution revising the 1935 Commonwealth Constitution. This 38-year-old document featured a unitary-presidential system establishing a "political order based on democratic principles of representation, accountability and the rule of law" — cherished American ideals transplanted into our Constitution. Many provisions were identical to the 1789 American Constitution notwithstanding the glaring fact that the US is a federal system. What was imposed by our American colonials is a mongrelized version of theirs — one with inherent political structural infirmities: presidential-federal form with our president and vice president possibly coming from different political parties; and senators elected nationwide similar to the president, creating a possible area of ego-conflict. And a highly centralized authority based in the capital region with provinces and local government units subservient to the center; among others.

Ferdie Macoy understood only too well these systemic perversions and opted for a parliamentary system of government but with a bizarre twist — installing himself as the premier/president and Cesar Virata as prime minister, with a subservient parliament quaintly named the Interim Batasang Pambansa.

When his nemesis booted him out along with the 1973 Constitution, Cory came out with a half-baked 1987 Constitution which almost put in place a parliamentary system — similar to your father's. But for one vote, it retained the presidential form. In her desire to expunge any vestige of the martial rule, she came up with a constitution which is more anti-martial law than pro-Filipino.

In haste, the framers irresponsibly allowed a proliferation of political parties neglecting to delete the provisions on the "party list," a concept that should have been an appropriate adjunct to a parliamentary system but not to a unitary-presidential one. This encouraged the proliferation of hundreds of single-issue political parties, a cacophony of petty interests led by petty despots, a bane for good governance. Complications of politics and the political structures dominated both Ferdie Macoy's and Cory's constitution — not simply the economic provisions.

Political patronage — the basic evil

Mr. President, the economic provisions in our Constitution stem from the type of systemic structure that remained unreformed since the 1935 Commonwealth Constitution. The unitary-presidential system jealously guarded by these constitutions is the embryo upon which patronage politics is nurtured. For almost 100 years the system flourished feeding upon the least desired facet of Filipino culture, the desire for and dependence on a benefactor from the datu and sultan, heading a clan, to the Spanish patron looking over the indios, to the American "big brother," morphing into the Philippine president, the "father" of the people...

The 1973 martial law Constitution simply validated patronage politics during his earlier administration and practiced this to perfection during the martial law years where "crony capitalism" entered our political lexicon. To hold on to power, "patrons and padrinos" were allowed to dip their dirty fingers into the public coffers and dispensed them to the chosen electors — thus a new subspecies of the oligarchy was born, and another word appeared in the glossary, "kleptocracy."

Subsequent practitioners of this sordid art of political patronage, chiefly Presidents Erap and Gloria paled in comparison to the masters — the "conjugal dictatorship" of the Marcoses — but the two former presidents did a good job as acolytes, honing the practices further.

Today, political patronage has become more pervasive and has fomented corruption. Our electoral processes for instance are the overarching environment upon which political patronage incubates. Paradoxically, democracy can't exist without elections; except that in our culture, we managed to debauch the same.

Politicians, whether "wannabes" or incumbents, spend millions of pesos to gain the support of their constituents. As a result, a major consideration of the elected public servant is to recoup their investments through all sorts of "rent-seeking activities," leakages in public funds and outright corruption — to the detriment of society's development and public good.

And in our presidential system, where the president is elected at large, he is expected to provide the wherewithal for an expensive election campaign. This opens an aperture for the oligarchy and the moneyed elite to influence the outcome. And we can only speculate at the quid pro quo.

With the constitutional mandated term limits of elective officials, this deviant model of "public service as a private business" becomes a strong impetus toward the perpetuation of this power base — thus the birth of powerful political dynasties.

To assuage the progressive allies of Cory, her Constitution allowed the passing of a provision, a constitutional ban on "political dynasties" but with a killer adjunct — "as may be defined by law" — allowing Congress to refuse to follow through with implementing provisions — simply because this provision is against Congress' interest. Congress is 80 percent chock full of dynasts.

Next Wednesday, March 1, 2023: Political dynasties

THIS is a cautionary tale of corruption in the highest levels of government spanning two administrations, BBM's and the Deegong's. The dramatis personae are two actors, possibly unrelated, strangers to each other but operate here in the Philippines with dubious credentials but well connected. Both are Chinese nationals with tentacles encompassing the bureaucracy, members of Congress, the Senate and key LGUs and men in uniform. They employ similar modus operandi, working with not-so-obscure Filipinos with sterling contacts, with skills to hobnob with branded names, shunning the limelight except for the customary photo-ops with decision makers, the right politicians and more importantly the relatives of those at the seat of power — Malacañang. These public snapshots are critical, perhaps as evidence of a sort of intimate relationship for the benefit of their principals in China, useful tools for extortion. The two Michaels, Yang and Ma, are both experts at leveraging these optics.

This column resuscitates one of the biggest anomalies in the past administration that entangled powerful people at the time of the country's biggest tragedy — the pandemic. Now, corruption has again reared its ugly head threatening this regime unless cut off.

Michael Yang

When Covid-19 struck in early 2020, government rushed in to introduce grandiose-sounding laws — the Bayanihan to Heal As One (and Two) — by granting the president emergency powers. These laws were altogether an appropriate and worthy response. But as always, the devil is in the details. It allowed the primary tools for corruption: negotiated bids on contrived tender failures and sleight-of-hand funds transfers — with leakages somewhere in between; employing obscure patsies "backed by the powerful."

The Senate saw its role and Sen. Richard "Dick" Gordon, chairman of the Senate blue ribbon committee, latched into this gold mine of corruption issues that could sink the Duterte regime, and propelling him to reelection. Whatever the motivations, the Senate hearings ran on for months on end exposing the sordid side of the Deegong's watch. It did no good for his reelection, but Gordon did the right thing. As reported in my columns, the hearings disclosed instances of incompetence and criminal acts. To be fair, the Deegong has not been implicated directly, but it was unfortunate that Duterte in his naïveté elected to fight the Senate on its constitutionally mandated role. He admonished his cabinet against appearing before the blue ribbon, to refuse to cooperate and, if held in contempt and incarcerated, assured them of "ways to get them out." The Deegong bit more than he could chew. The Constitution is unequivocal on the Senate's prerogatives.

What came out of these hearings were a series of shocking testimonies proving that the undercapitalized (P625,000 paid-up) Pharmally Pharmaceutical Corp. (Pharmally) bagged P8.68 billion in government contracts with a zero track record. The paper trail led to financial transactions that indicated the Chinese perpetrators, along with their local business partners and bureaucrats, may also have been conduits of drug money laundered through these transactions. Heading this cabal was Duterte's "economic adviser" Michael Yang, a shadowy mainland Chinese figure known by many labels — consultant, facilitator, bagman, pagador, or locally, bugaw (pimp), depending on the package offered and bought.

Timeline and rogues' gallery

– August 2019 — Christopher Lao, an obscure lawyer, allegedly Sen. Bong Go's stooge (SBG denied this vehemently) was appointed undersecretary at the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).

– Jan. 2, 2020 — Undersecretary Lao is transferred to the DBM Procurement Service (PS-DBM). (Secretary Windel Avisado, castrated, resigned as DBM head.)

– March 16, 2020 — The Government Procurement Policy Board released a resolution incorporating face masks and PPE into common use supplies.

– March 27, 2020 — The Department of Health started transferring funds to the PS-DBM, presumably illegally.

– April 16 and 20, 2020 — PS-DBM under Lao, bought overpriced surgical masks from various suppliers.

– April 2020 to June 2020 — Lao awarded to undercapitalized Pharmally Pharmaceutical Corp. contracts worth P6 billion plus; the contracts that PS-BDM awarded to Pharmally reached more than P8.7 billion as a result.

– June 2021 — Lao resigns. Offices of favored companies closed — addresses unknown.

Michael Yang got away scot-free. He is probably back in China, enjoying his millions.

Michael Ma

Last January 23, the House Committee on Ways and Means started a hearing on the anomalous skyrocketing prices of onions which was blamed, among other things, on the smuggling of the same from China. Rep. Horacio Suansing, Jr. of the second district of Sultan Kudarat, summoned Bureau of Customs personnel and a couple of people to this hearing. What is noteworthy is the participation of another Chinese, a certain Michael Ma. Apparently, his company First Tech Machinery Philippines has been importing equipment for farmers' use since 2016. What is particularly curious is that this seemingly obscure Chinese man has for his business partner and company vice president, Martin Araneta — the first lady's younger brother. Nothing wrong with that. But it seems that the company now known as China Philippine Unified Enterprise Inc. (CPUE) has its former executive, a certain Franz Imperial, now an appointed undersecretary in the Office of President. Again, there is nothing wrong with that!

In the website of the CPUE are dozens of photos depicting Michael Ma in the company of BBM, the first lady and other dignitaries at Davos. Again, nothing wrong with that! Because of these photographs and the names of these important people coming out in the House committee investigation on smuggling and various nefarious acts, the first lady's name has been unfairly dragged in the muck. These innuendos are par for the course with the Marites in social media. But the continuation of the hearings scheduled for January 30 were suddenly canceled, with the acquiescence of the House Speaker, Martin Romualdez — the first cousin of BBM. Now, there is something wrong with that! How can one get at the truth without this hearing? A pall of suspicion in effect will be hanging over the heads of these powerful personalities, not least the sibling-in-law of BBM — and by inference his wife.

And a corollary to this which complicates matters is a newspaper report that a popular Philstar columnist, Ramon Tulfo, may have been sacked "...after posting on Facebook that Martin Araneta, LAM's younger brother, was allegedly involved in "smuggling onions in the piers." (Kit Tatad, The Manila Times, Feb. 3, 2023)

These insinuations of the first lady's involvement in any of these is not the raison d'etre of this article. I don't think she herself is corrupt. I have never met the first couple, and I'm sure they don't know me from Adam.

But the issue here is BBM's stand. "Now that I am the one in command, there should be no more corrupt practices. We will run after them (corrupt officials) ... Instead of directing themselves against the Marcoses only, I mean kung meron akong corrupt na kamag-anak, eh di lalabas ang pangalan niya, but not only us. Lahat," he said.

Fair enough! And this will redound ultimately to good governance and the rule of law that is supposed to differentiate him from his father, the Deegong and past presidents?

I believe you, Mr. President! Now the ball is in your court.

IN 1945, World War 2 ended and another war began. This was not a shooting war — it was the Cold War, a period of geopolitical tension involving erstwhile allies, the United States and the Soviet Union, now competing for hegemony. This rivalry divided the world roughly between the Western and Eastern blocs, classified by their ideological and political moorings; the former championing the capitalist free market economies and the latter, the socialist-communist planned economies.

This rivalry became more intense impelled by two approaches. The first was the nuclear arms race resulting in each accumulating enough weaponry to annihilate each other and the planet several times over. This gave rise to the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) which posits that "...any use of the nuclear arsenal by any attacker against a nuclear-armed defender with second-strike capabilities, would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender." Except as a threat, this took the nuclear option off the table in pursuit of world hegemony,

There were no actual battles between the two protagonists; nevertheless proxy wars were conducted by their respective allies — the Korean War in 1950-1953 and the Vietnam War in 1959-1975. But these engagements threatened to escalate transforming the Cold War into one reprising the past two world conflicts. With uneasy trigger fingers, any miscalculation could result in the unthinkable. This was demonstrated by the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis edging the world to the brink of nuclear war and the still classified Able Archer War Scare of 1983 — described as "the last paroxysm of the Cold War."

The second overarching approach was subsidiary to the MAD doctrine. This was verbalized by American strategists with the conundrum: How can America and the Western bloc's ideological-political interests be advanced without causing armed conflicts and mass casualties?

Thus, Cold War confrontations shifted to the clash of economies employing methods less deadly than the nuclear option, though nonetheless as disruptive to the world's equanimity.

CIA and the secret wars

Originally the pursuit of American interests in other countries were crude schemes of employing spies and secret agents to foment instability in unfriendly countries. In some instances, they would instigate coups, followed by elections rigged to ensure a more agreeable regime. They made use of extortion, threats and whatever else was necessary to advance America's aims. But being representatives of the US government, these clandestine operations to destabilize governments would be deleterious to America's image once exposed.

A case in point was in 1953. CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt Jr., grandson of the 26th US president Theodore Roosevelt, organized a successful coup in Iran that toppled the government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. The goal was to regain unrestricted access to Iran's oil reserves. The CIA was exposed as the instigator.

US foreign policy

To distance the US government from these nefarious acts of regime change, a paradigm shift was necessary. They changed tactics (or did they?). The US and its Western allies thus started to apply their economic clout as a blunt instrument of foreign policy. The weapons of choice this time was the use of massive debt as leverage to promote US interests around the world, aligning countries with the US and the West.

Third World countries, particularly those in Asia, South America and Africa were just too eager to develop their economies preconditioned on free trade agreements with America and the West; the transfer of technologies and more importantly the injection of capital for investments, some of which were used to line the pockets of despots, politicians and the bureaucracy. Countries were enticed to accept more and more economic aid/capital/debt, beyond their capacity to absorb and repay from complicit multilateral organizations like the World Bank.

This weaponization of debt necessitated the participation of financial institutions, lobbyists, business conglomerates and multilaterals under the aegis of what was to be called the American corporatocracy (AmCorp). An adjunct to this amorphous entity are the "economic hit men" (EHM) — the more sophisticated substitutes for the old CIA spies and secret agents. These were the new "James Bonds," private contractors, employees, consultants and corporate representatives of AmCorp who are sent abroad to deal with governments, local politicians and the local oligarchy.

I quote from one of the celebrated EHM, John Perkins, a former American Peace Corps volunteer, who wrote a book The Confessions of an Economic Hitman a 2004 New York Times bestseller (now on its 2016th edition). The EHM was to respond to a corollary question — "How do you get rid of uncooperative rulers while keeping their countries and their resources under your control — without sending in the Marines?"

The EHM is dispatched to the developing economies to deal with political leaders and the decision makers for the sole purpose of achieving America's political, economic and military goals. "His job was to make massive loans seem like a good idea — loans that would leave countries deep in debt and vulnerable to US influence."

As these private companies are not paid directly by the US government, the terms of the loans granted the developing countries guaranteed the private companies would get rich — with the EHM getting their share of the loot. This AmCorp networks connect corporations, banks, lobbyists, etc. proving to be a powerful vehicle for corruption targeting like-minded politicians and businesses owned by the local oligarchy. The EHM's repertoire include bribery and money laundering, attractive to Third World corruption culture.

An important feature of the dealings of the corporatocracy is that they are mostly transacted in the higher levels of government and remain largely in the shadows.

These massive debts, mostly with onerous conditions, in effect tie down these emerging economies to the apron strings of US and Western businesses making them richer and the rest of the world poorer. The World Bank and other multilaterals' studies show that 70 percent of the world's population now live in countries where economic inequality has increased over the previous 30 years.

Rise of the Eastern hegemon

China, while nominally part of the Eastern bloc, charted a different course for itself. After Deng Xiaoping released the backward country from its ideological prison and opened its markets to the West, its economy flourished, rivaling the US, with its trajectory towards parity achievable in the 2030s. Upon the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, presaging the end of the Cold War and creating a vacuum, China emerged as the Eastern hegemon. And it has developed its own method of economic influence and foreign policy — its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has already entombed into its web many countries in Asia. BRI is the Chinese version of pressing massive debts on developing countries needing capital with onerous terms (see TMT article of Feb. 1, 2023, "BBM's travels and new bromance with China"). And no doubt, it has its own version of the EHM through its own Chinese corporatocracy — using tools of corruption as an extension of Xi Jinping's foreign policy.

These initiatives merely reflect how US and Chinese foreign policies enable corruption in client countries in a modern concept of imperialism. And this is what BBM faces today. We want him to succeed badly but — Cuidado!

I WILL not begrudge BBM's traveling all over with his barkada, the latest of which was to Davos with an entourage of 70, including several two-faced businessmen prominent in financing the People Power Revolution that booted the Marcos père out. But then again, it is the nature of the beast to kiss the ass of the powerful. And they are critical components in BBM's rebranding of the Marcos name to the international community, which could be the underlying purpose of these sorties.

His gallivanting — seven trips in 8 months ostensibly seeking investments from abroad — would be forgiven if he can truly get foreign direct investments (FDI) to flow in. Reportedly, he got pledges from Jakarta ($8.50billion), Singapore ($6.54 billion) and China ($23 billion). But China's pledges are suspect. We had similar ones during Duterte's presidency when he vouchsafed fealty to Xi in that famous "I simply love Xi Jinping" trip to China in 2018, conceding our negotiating advantage on the arbitral tribunal ruling that negated the nine-dash line, and the subsequent humiliation our fishermen suffered, prevented from fishing on their traditional fishing grounds in the West Philippine Sea. Our country lost its collective hymen, with nothing to show for it in return.

And now we have another president declaring a naive foreign policy — "friends to all, and enemies to none"; touting another set of pledges. We lost our virginity during Duterte's watch. This time around, it's rape.

This article hopefully reorients BBM on the political economy of his travels and the cost/benefit of his relations with China. This is not to belittle BBM's grasp of economics and foreign relations, having imbibed some sort of expertise during his stint at Oxford and Wharton.

Belt and Road

These pledges are China's come-on to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), one which likewise enticed Duterte despite some counter-voices in his cabinet. BRI was Xi Jinping's bold foreign policy scheme launched in 2013 with China underwriting billions for infrastructure development in countries along the old Silk Road or Silk Route linking Europe to Asia. This ambitious plan was China's middle-finger gesture to the United States and the West that there was a new kid in the block presaging the rise of a hegemon in the East — using its economic and financial clout. This coming out was a turnaround to the architect of modern China, Deng Xiaoping's dictum to "hide our capabilities and bide our time; never try to take the lead." This time, the BRI was Xi Jinping's attempt for China to claim global leadership as the world's second largest economy.

The Duterte-Xi Jinping bilateral cooperation produced agreements amounting to $24 billion as part of the maritime Silk Road — although the Philippines was really nowhere a part of the old Silk Road. We don't exactly know if these pledges were delivered. (For the curious, the Old Silk Road was a network of routes when China opened trading with the West in 130 BC until 1453 AD, when it was closed by the Ottoman Empire.)

Stark lessons learned

By 2019, China had 3,000 BRI projects with 68 countries. These were an easy way for China's state-owned enterprises (SOE) to secure contracts abroad. Massive capital flowed to partner countries in the form of loans. Eventually these resulted in unmanageable debts. An added enticement to BRI partners in securing loans is China's "no strings attached" model, unlike the loans from the West that were conditioned on extraneous terms — human rights, environmental concerns, pollution footprints, etc. China's loose stipulations are suited to the psyche of developing countries' corrupt bureaucracies — just like the Philippines.

A case in point is the Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka. With unethical practices, mismanagement and corruption, even the interest on the $8 billion loan remains unpaid. China converted this into a debt-for-equity swap with a 99-year lease for China to manage the port. China now has a foothold on the region — not unlike what the US had with the Philippines at Subic.

Malaysia had the audacity to cancel a $23 billion rail and pipeline deal with China after Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad in 2018 attacked it as a "new version of colonialism." Even the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), touted by both China and Pakistan as a flagship project, had to be renegotiated with a $6 billion bailout from the IMF.

PH economy under BBM

Now, seven months into his term, BBM may lay claim to some successes although many of these are derivatives of Duterte's policies. But the recent sugar crisis is solely BBM's — attributable to the hoarding and procurement scandal that resulted in the resignations of the officials of the Sugar Regulatory Administration (SRA) and the eventual firing of the executive secretary. And now another problem in the agricultural and food sector, symbolized by the shortage and inflated prices of the lowly onion, should give the footloose traveling president second thoughts about his continued tutelage of the agricultural department. As things are perceived, he is either incompetent as aggie chief or as president or both. Either way, he needs to give up the former and leave this to some real agriculture expert.

But despite his presidency, surprisingly, things seem to be looking up. Latest multilateral pronouncements identified the Philippines as one of the 10 newly industrialized countries. It seems that our economic growth is outpacing many developed countries and are among the five Asian "risers in the coming decade," including our neighbors — Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.

But the Philippines' $100 billion annual exports comparatively lack economic similarities with the other four with annual exports along the range of $200 to $400 billion. But one thing going for us are two distinct advantages: the OFW remittances that stabilize our balance of payments and growing our external reserves, and more importantly, the service exports — the business process outsourcing (BPO) industry. Ours has emerged to be the world's largest, competing with behemoth India.

However the multilaterals have decreed further that unless we loosen our anti-FDI provisions in our constitution, we may not be able to catch up in fulfilling our potential. A menu of reforms has been suggested. One is to ease environmental restrictions on mining. We sit atop billions of dollars of copper, nickel, cobalt, gold and iron. Another is to rethink our policies on joint ventures in the WPS for oil and gas. And encourage more competition in the domestic markets by continuing to break monopolies. We did well with opening the telecommunication industry but allowed cronies a stake in. And more importantly, reform the bureaucracy where corruption is endemic, applying the rule of law. But drastic reforms on easing constitutional limitations are a sine qua non.

Overall, we have one huge advantage in the long run over the other industrializing economies. Our education system with the biggest budget is excellent but our demographics are superior. We have the lowest median age, 24.6 years, compared to Malaysia, 28.5; Indonesia, 30.2; Vietnam, 30.5; and Thailand, 37.7.

Perhaps BBM may dwell on these points while en route to another exotic place. Or, he may just have to grow up, jettison his barkada and hunker down to business.

JUST recently, one of the more qualified Cabinet members was sacked by the President. Speculations are rife as to what triggered this singular act: from appeasing the restive military in the wake of the Duterte law that fixed the tenure of senior generals to the call for courtesy resignations from 953 PNP officials, to the recent demise of Joma Sison, the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) founder, and the need to expiate the Dutertes, particularly Sara who had her eye on the defense portfolio and therefore in lieu of it, the reinstatement of the Duterte generals — all fueled by "Marites" and conspiracy theories.

But those who appreciate the workings of this government and Malacañang politics know better. For the military mindset overarching the country's security, defense and foreign affairs, and more importantly the Philippine patriarchal social system where men hold positions of dominance, Clarita Carlos is simply an outsider. And she's a strong woman, complicated further by a quick and smart mouth attached to a sharp mind, period! Such combinations are anathema to the machismos encircling BBM. Women broke the glass ceiling in a couple of departments. Not at the National Security Council (NSC). That's military turf.

The NSC

Carlos, the only woman to head the NSC, advised the President on security and foreign policy issues. It is a collegial body chaired by BBM himself, with other Cabinet members, congressmen, including those invited by the President as members. Carlos as the director-general headed the secretariat providing technical support to the council proper. The members fancy themselves as alter egos of BBM, which in essence they are, except with bloated appreciation of their own.

It is unfortunate that national security, protection of the country's sovereignty and territorial integrity are deemed exclusive proprietary tasks of the military. Carlos' impeccable qualifications include a stint as president of the Philippine National Defense College, where many of these generals, admirals and colonels pass through as her students, perforce creating for her a wide network. But a stronger adhesive binds these senior uniformed men forged in the fields of the Philippine Military Academy. Carlos is simply not one of the boys.

Thus, from the very start, she was the interloper. With her enthusiasm and academic joie de vivre she hit the ground running. An independent woman of modest means and bred for 56 years in the jaded halls of the academe, she was a tyro to the arcana of political bureaucratic life with still unsharpened political talons required for the rough and tumble world of real-politique.

It did not help her cause that even before warming her seat at the NSC, she dove right into controversy at the National Task Force to end Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-Elcac), the Duterte anti-communist creation. Although Carlos was right in urging the NTF-Elcac to desist from"red-tagging" as that militaristic approach to counterinsurgency "never works" — this was a big no-no!

Her earlier off-the-cuff pronouncements redefining security to include, food, environment and incongruously "bamboo-planting," enthusiastically egged on by allies in social media, were seen as an attempt to expand her turf encroaching into other line departments' concerns. This fueled suspicions that Carlos was transplanting her perceived UP leftist-liberal mindset to the clearly rightist environment of the NSC.

Then the knives came out. In mid-July, a letter written by NSC employees was sent to the President containing a menu of grievances: Carlos populating the upper echelon with her former top UP students, bereft of credentials; employing one known in the intelligence community as a Chinese asset and a security risk; Carlos was accused of delegating too much to these acolytes now cloaked with authority and power, upsetting the cultural and collective personality of the organization. But BBM had her back — at least, for now.

Carlos ascendancy

BBM, who was never academically predisposed, did not know Carlos. At that notable presidential debate at SMNI. Carlos' questioning about how each presidentiable, as future architects of Philippine foreign policy, would treat Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) alliance was the turning point.

Most respondents were unfamiliar with the topic at hand. Norberto Gonzales, who could have excelled having once been NSA himself and onetime Defense secretary, mumbled with a short 50-second answer.

The rest were off-tangent, except for BBM, who was given leading follow-up questions from Claire, an excellent professor applying faultless classroom manners — inadvertently giving him some slack and a leg up.

This non-debate was forgettable but not Carlos who was impressive in her role as moderator. She ruled the roost, primed her feathers showcasing her wide knowledge and expertise and perhaps the only person who understood and grasped the concepts of foreign policy, defense and security, exposing the wannabees' illiteracy. It was a Claire Carlos show! Her subsequent post-debate presence in mass and social media invested her with star quality, setting her squarely in BBM's sights. But hubris, nonetheless.

Implications for BBM

Today she's out, a victim of presidential whim swayed by decisions taken in reaction to realities he should have been in control of but wasn't. Consider these Keystone Cops scenarios.

BBM in August 2022 fired AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Andres Centino and installed Centino's PMA '88 classmate Gen. Bartolome Vicente Bacarro. Three-star General Bacarro was slated to be given the first fixed three-year term, but couldn't due to the still active floating four-star General Centino, retiring only on Feb. 4, 2023 after Gen. Bacarro's own retirement. Instead, five months later, BBM fired Bacarro and reinstalled Centino.

The reason for this revolving chair is the Duterte-era law RA 11709 prescribing a fixed three-year term for senior military officials, discontinuing the decades-long practice allowing AFP chiefs to serve shorter terms of months, accommodating their seniority.

But the law was to take effect in April 2023 — after the retirement dates of General Bacarro, but before General Centino. The Defense department officer in charge Jose Faustino Jr. was not consulted. He resigned. BBM then appointed retired general Carlito Galvez as Defense secretary.

It is known in some quarters that Galvez was not happy with Carlos as NSC. Replacing her with retired Gen. Edurdo Año, a former Duterte AFP chief and interior secretary, was a no-brainer. Whatever the reasons, Carlos was no match for the Duterte generals back in the helm of the country's security and defense portfolio.

The cabal's alibi that all these appeased the grumblings in the ranks, including Carlos as collateral damage, is frivolous, yet BBM unsurprisingly wryly corroborated: "Secretary Carlos, I think she found that position to be a little bit political. Kasi hindi talaga siya sanay sa ganon at she is an academic, a retired academic." As a sop, she was offered to head the Congressional Policy and Budget Research Department (CPBRD), a minor post. Bruised and beaten, she was loyal to the boss, to the end.

With the Duterte generals back at the helm, the conspiracy theorists and Marites are having a field day. In social media, "revolutionary government and junta," ideas that waned during Duterte's closing years are back in fashion. Perhaps the son of a dictator, who loves to spend time abroad with his barkada, may need to hunker down and be more serious in his governance.

THERE is a rebellion brewing in China. No guns, weapons and armaments of war. No actual fighting and skirmishes, and no blood flowing in the streets. There are no leadership structures; no single spokesperson articulating their demands, hopes and aspirations. There are no written manifestos and demands made on government. The rebels are China's youth.

Chinese youth is simply giving up. Their rebellion is unique as it started as gimmickry in social media, an online fad. They even have a name for it — bai lan, or let it rot! It is perceived principally as a rebellion directed at the Chinese Communist Party's (CPP) governance. It has disturbed and worried the CPP that President Xi Jinping had to make a direct and personal appeal to the youth reminding them that they are the hope of the fatherland. And the CPP came out with palliative policies that proved to be just that — ineffective.

But bai lan is basically the youth saying "no" to the system. On a personal level, they are saying, "I will not cooperate. I don't like to try my best. My personal interest and happiness come first." The rest — let it rot — bai lan!

From Mao to Deng

The antecedent is decades in the making, going back to post-World War 2 China: its founder Mao Zedong and his insane idea of catching up with the developed world. He and the CPP fashioned an elaborate tool to forcibly exploit the agricultural and industrial sectors to catapult China to economic growth from 1958 to 1962 with the touted Great Leap Forward. Instead, this resulted in the bankrupting of China, mass starvation and famine. This was followed by his Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, from 1966-1976, a 10-year campaign to re-instill revolutionary fervor in the younger generation, purging the CPP of bourgeois elements and capitalist leanings. The rural areas suffered the brunt of this debacle.

Not until the demise of Mao and the emergence of Deng Xiaoping in 1978 did China institute the open-door policy allowing FDIs and launched a series of market reforms transforming China from an isolated impoverished state to what is currently the world's second biggest economy. From 1978 to 2013, the economy grew by an astounding annual rate of 9.5 percent. During these salad days, Deng let loose the Chinese entrepreneurial drive that would later compete with the world's number one — America.

These reforms saw millions of its citizens lifted from poverty and elevated to middle-class status. China became the globe's manufacturing hub. Within the context of a socialist system, an injection of capitalist principles, anathema to Mao's original precepts, China opened to the world and its economy exploded. Deng Xiaoping on the use of capitalist principles within a socialist universe was encapsulated in his quote: "No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat; as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat."

Around this time too was the start of the great migration of the youth from the rural areas to the cities in search of good education, higher-paying jobs, and better living conditions, concentrating on the megalopolises of Shanghai, in the eastern coast; Beijing, in the northeastern part; Guangzhou, in southern China; Shenzhen, another port city; and Chongqing in Central China on the Yangtze River, among others.

Policies that backfired

Before the start of China's economic resurgence in 1979, faced with an exploding population — a poor country with 400 million annual births — the CPP instituted drastic measures which could now be seen as a knee-jerk reaction. The One Child Policy in 1980 distorted on a massive scale China's demographics resulting in the population getting older and less productive while birth rates have dangerously plummeted. The average replacement of less than 2.1 kids per family was untenable. "Elders who witness China's exponential growth expect children to continue their high expectation to get good education, high paying jobs and continue building a better life for family and country."

This policy ran counter to the cultural predisposition — Chinese parents preferred boys, thus a mismatch in male to female ensued, producing 70 more men than women. Culturally too, the Chinese dream has always been burdened by the three mountains — education, health care and housing. The third component is critical for making a man more suitable for marriage. Chinese demographics distorted all these.

Real estate prices, a substantial component of marriage desirability, skyrocketed, going beyond individuals' salaries, making it impossible for the youth to buy in. The past years saw a Chinese real estate bubble. Behemoth developer Evergrande Group, the poster child for China's economic calamities, went on a debt frenzy, building more apartments and using unfinished properties as collateral for yet more debt and more empty apartments — in a Ponzi scheme that is just about to fall on itself.

As the situation deteriorated, the CPP didn't do substantially anything to salvage the economy. Chinese youths couldn't get good high-paying jobs and couldn't' afford real estate. A pall of uncertainty has descended. Even among the highly educated youth, where additional income is earned through private online tutoring — the CPP crackdowns in August of 2021 eliminated 3 million tutoring jobs creating a black market in tutoring. These tutoring job options for highly educated graduates benefit wealthy families, giving their children a leg up in Chinese society, pricing out the poor.

Lockdowns, zero Covid protocols

Then the second phase of Covid hits. The CPP instituted a zero-Covid policy. In 2020, when Wuhan occurred, China did well, ahead of the curve in lockdowns and virus-spread mitigations, incurring only less than 150,000 deaths (China's figures are suspect), compared to the US and the world's millions. But 2022 was different. The spike in Covid mutation resurgence and CPP's declaration of a utopian zero-Covid protocol with its brutal lockdowns killed businesses and stifled any economic bounce-back. Reportedly, China's slumps since May 2020 in imports/exports contraction cost $45 billion in GDP monthly.

Bai lan inexorably gained traction among the youth. The CPP understood social immobility and lack of opportunities as causes for a despondent attitude of bai lan. Back in August 2021, Xi launched his "common prosperity campaign," purportedly to level the playing field. Its main objective was to narrow the wealth gap between the rich and poor, making China's progress inclusive.

China should have opened its economy more with policies to attract high-tech foreign companies, to absorb China's highly educated youth with high-paying tech labor. Instead of opening the economy further, it did the opposite. It went into a pissing game with the West for an expanded global trade and looked inward into its inequities. Xi Jinping in an attempt to reel in Chinese billionaires, elites and majority of the tax sector, cracked down on big tech and large companies and monopolies; destroyed Jack Ma as an example and humbled billionaires; putting fear in hordes of foreign companies. Overnight millions more jobs disappeared — feeding into the youths' conception of bai lan.

The perfect ingredients now haunt China, particularly its youth; massive 20 percent unemployment; real estate bubble; disparity in the sexes; a bleak future and overall despair.

So, bai lan! Let it rot!