'BAGONG PILIPINAS' AND THE CONSTITUTION
A COUPLE of weeks ago, I sat down with some young political science majors from a leading Philippine university. They wanted to see if President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.'s "Bagong Pilipinas" (New Philippines ) was anything like his late father's "New Society" in the 1970s. Or vice versa. It is a most interesting inquiry, but what drives the sudden high academic interest in it and how they picked me for it, I just could not say.
A new generation of intellectuals and political leaders has taken over the country, and so many scholars could have responded to their query, but they decided to pick on me.
I was happy to answer some questions about the New Society but begged off when it came to "Bagong Pilipinas." I did not know enough about it. From 1969 to 1980, I was Marcos Sr.'s press secretary, presidential spokesman and minister of information. With Marcos' full support, and assisted by a host of dedicated volunteers, I ran the information program of the New Society. That was more than 40 years ago before any of these students were born. I have since transitioned to the Senate where I served as Senate majority leader to six Senate presidents, and gone back to journalism and publishing where I continue to write books, essays and articles.
That probably allows me to speak about Marcos Sr.'s New Society, but not about Marcos Jr.'s "Bagong Pilipinas." I supported Marcos Jr. for the presidency but have no attachment whatsoever to his "Bagong Pilipinas" or to his foreign policy. I'm still trying to discover what makes "Bagong Pilipinas" more than a handy slogan and what hidden attributes in it are "bago" ("new").
What troubles me is that for all intents and purposes, our Constitution is virtually dead, and "Bagong Pilipinas" has not been able to prevent it. This seems to be the biggest thing that is "new." Constitutional provisions concerning national sovereignty are being violated at the highest level with total impunity; impeachable offenses are being shoved under the rug by a complicit Congress that does not want to disrupt the cycle of crime and corruption governing the state.
As a result, "Bagong Pilipinas" may be poised to support a US war against China in defiance of the Constitution that 1) mandates an independent foreign policy; 2) renounces war as an instrument of national policy; 3) declares the Philippines as a nuclear weapons-free state; and 4) prohibits foreign bases, troops or facilities in the Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and if Congress so requires, approved by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national referendum held for that purpose and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting state.
As a next-door neighbor to China, with overlapping maritime claims in the South China Sea, we cannot avoid occasional disagreements and misunderstandings in the interpretation of our territorial boundaries in the vast waterway, which remain ill-defined. But we cannot allow external third parties, especially those who are not even part of the region, to try to blow up these petty incidents into a possible cause of war for the benefit of those who want to see the whole South China Sea explode into cataclysmic violence.
So far, no weapons of war have been used, and no casualties have been reported in the water-cannoning incidents between the China and Philippine Coast Guard vessels in Ayungin Shoal (Second Thomas Shoal). But these have been consistently hyped by foreign propagandists as instances of Chinese aggression. As I have suggested in an earlier column, why can't the Philippine Coast Guard respond with water cannons whenever the Chinese coast guard trains its water cannons on them during their resupply operations at the BRP Sierra Madre in Ayungin Shoal? Better yet, why can't the two coast guards agree to stage a mock battle involving water cannons under certain conditions?
The proposed play is in imitation of the celebrated 1962 French film, "La Guerre des Boutons" (The War of the Buttons). In this film, the children of two rival French villages engage in battle with each other, cutting off the buttons, shoelaces and underwear of the guys they capture and sending them home in that condition to get them into trouble with their parents. The only risk here is that the two coast guards, instead of becoming fierce adversaries, could become "playmates" and friends.
What I'm saying here is that instead of using the coast guard incidents to escalate the tension, "Bagong Pilipinas" could begin exploring ways and means of expanding the opportunities for rapprochement between the two neighbors. Promoting play in place of war, as in "La Guerre des Boutons," is one way of doing it. Making sure the Constitution is strictly followed, according to its letter and spirit, to govern our relations with other nations is the best way of doing it in a grand manner.
As I said, I had to apologize to the young students that I could not say much about Marcos Jr.'s "Bagong Pilipinas." But I do wish Marcos Jr. every possible success. If he can but reaffirm the constitutional mandate of an independent Philippine foreign policy, renounce war as an instrument of national policy, reaffirm the Philippines' self-designation as a nuclear weapons-free state, and renounce the US military sites under EDCA (Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement) as a naked violation of the Constitution, he would be demonstrating beyond words that "Bagong Pilipinas" is not just a propaganda slogan but a living and breathing reality.
2024-05-07T17:50:49Z dg43tfdfdgfd