Welcome President Obama to the Philippines, we need more investments & trade, not just arms & alms

Welcome Pres. Obama, we need more investments & trade, not just arms & alms

I'm inspired by the people I meet in my travels--hearing their stories, seeing the hardships they overcome, their fundamental optimism and decency…They make me want to work to make the world a little bit better. --- Barack Obama

            Welcome to the intellectually brilliant, eloquent and well-intentioned U.S. President Barack Obama to Asia’s most fun-loving country the Philippines. I urge Obama to please prioritize promoting more American investments, trade and tourism here, not just rosy speeches and effusive photo-ops, not just free U.S. military access to our archipelago, not just aid, not just more sales of military weapons.

It is sad that not many of our politicians realize that the true bulwark of national security and the best foundation for our democracy is a vibrant, self-reliant and globally-competitive Philippine economy, not just more new warplanes or ships.

Image above of President Barack Obama sourced from en.wikipedia.org

            President Obama’s desire for a strategic pivot (or “rebalance”, as the White House has seemingly renamed it after supposed panic and complaints from close allies in the Middle East and Europe) to Asia should hopefully be more vigorous economically, not just on the diplomatic, military and political aspects.

Help nudge our leaders to push economic democracy

I hope pro-poor President Obama can nudge our political leaders to push more decisive socio-economic reforms such as a Theodore Roosevelt-style anti-trust law and Senator Grace Poe’s Freedom of Information (FOI) bill. How can our economy be truly dynamic if it is agriculturally semi-feudal and industrially oligopolistic?

Also, on April 22---Earth Day, ecological champion Senator Loren Legarda and director Brillante Mendoza launched a riveting documentary on the destruction of the priceless marine biodiversity in our many coastal areas where millions of the rural poor live. I urge Obama to give technological and financial aid to our environmental projects, especially since logging, mining and other huge extraction of our natural resources grew under U.S. colonial rule and mostly by the multinationals.

Despite the gitzy malls and many new condominiums in our cities, we in Philippine society still have a long way to go economically. True, we’re politically an American-style constitutional democracy, but not yet an economic democracy.

In fact, it was a tragedy that U.S. colonizers had failed to implement agrarian reform and end feudalism in the Philippines the same way they did in postwar Japan under General Douglas MacArthur. I recall reading that MacArthur once even said that if he were a Filipino, he’d most likely have been a Huk rebel in the 1950s.

True, we’ve enjoyed investment-grade ratings upgrades and high economic growth rates, but the benefits have not yet trickled down fast enough. The small and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs) are still not yet very energized. I hope the civil libertarian Obama can nudge our leaders to push inclusive economic growth and help make the Philippines a true economic democracy with a broad-based middle-class.

U.S. once helped build up Philippine economy to No. 2 in Asia

Image above of USA and Philippine flags sourced from finestflags.com

Before at the residence of then U.S. Ambassador Kristie Kenney, I told her that in our ethnic Chinese family’s over two centuries here in the Philippines---including the Spanish colonial era, the brief interlude of Japanese military occupation and the post-war decades of independence---family elders say that the half-century American colonial period witnessed the rise of the Philippines into Asia’s second richest and most developed economy. Can the U.S. again more vigorously support the Philippine economy with preferential import tariffs, more investments and tourism?

            This need for stronger U.S. economic engagement with Asia should hopefully be uppermost in the agenda and priorities of Obama during his trip. We in the Philippines have received the least amount of economic aid, investments and trade from the U.S. compared to the three Asian countries Obama is visiting such as America’s former World War II foe Japan, South Korea and even Malaysia which used to be led by harsh U.S. critic ex-Prime Minister Mahathir.

More USA investments & trade with ex-foe Vietnam than ally Philippines

Image above of overlapping USA and Vietnam flags sourced from flamenkitaviajera.com

Even Vietnam, another war foe which even dealt the United States its first ever military defeat in history, has in recent years amazingly received more American investments, aid, trade and tourists than we here in the Philippines despite our “special relations”, our being the only former U.S. colony in Asia, our being staunchest U.S. ally since World War II, our fluency in American-style English as well as our having better U.S.-style legal and accounting systems here.

According to the U.S. Embassy in Manila: “The United States is among the Philippines’ top trading partners, and it traditionally has been the Philippines’ largest foreign investor… The stock of U.S. foreign direct investment in the Philippines exceeded $5 billion.”

In January this year, a firm identified with America’s prominent Rockefeller family announced a massive new investment in Vietnam. Rose Rock Group, a Rockefeller family-backed alternative investment management firm, said it shall help develop a $2.5 billion residential and hotel project in on the south-central coast of Vietnam.

This Vung Ro Bay development shall cover 200,000 square meters (2.15 million square feet) and to be developed with Vung Ro Petroleum Co. This huge undertaking will include 350 marina berths, hotels of over 760 rooms, 4,300 residential apartments, 100 townhouses and retail shops.

            On bilateral trade, the U.S. Embassy in Manila said: “The Philippines was the United States’ 33rd largest export market in 2012 and its 35th largest supplier. Goods exports totalled $8.1 billion; goods imports totalled $9.6 billion.” Two-way trade between theU.S. and the Philippines totalled US$17.6 billion. In comparison, bilateral trade volume between former enemies U.S. and Vietnam in the same year 2012 totalled US$ 24.890 billion dollars.

            President Barack Obama, let us substantially expand bilateral economic relations between the Philippines and the U.S. and help in our war against poverty.

Why our Philippine sovereign claim to Spratleys totally different from the Senkaku/Diaoyu isles dispute of Japan/China

I think the territorial disputes of the Philippines and Japan versus China are totally different cases, and shouldn’t be lumped together as the same or even similar?

Japan Prme Minister Abe meeting Philippine President Aquino in Manila, image below sourced from interaksyon.com

I think it is in the best national interest of the Philippines to pursue our sovereignty claims on their own merits and not to mix them altogether with the controversial Senkaku/Diaoyu isles dispute between Japan and China which has totally different historical and political dynamics?

I believe our Philippine territorial claim is stronger and has better chances than Japan's historically controversial claim, and that we in the Philippines can still have much better economic as well diplomatic ties with our traditional friend China than Japan can have with its traditional historic foe China too. 

Why?

First, I believe the territorial claims of both China and the Philippines---also those of Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam---are only recent or modern-day claims in the 20th century only?

In China’s case, their Nine-Dash Line claim was---I think---formulated a century ago by then Republic of China (ROC) regime? We in the Philippines have made our territorial claims to the inhabited isles of the Spratleys first with Admiral Tomas Cloma’s personal and private claims of "Freedomland" or what is now called Pag-Asa which President Marcos got from Cloma for the Philippines?

China's Nine-Dash Line claim was done in the early 20th century, the 1898 Treaty of Paris with Spain selling the Philippines to the United States, and our 1935 Philippine Constitution doesn't indicate the Spratleys, so my point is, these uninhabited isles in Spratleys are modern-era claims by the different claimants of Asia and considered by almost all as “disputed territories”?

Admiral Cloma commemorative postage stamp, imaged sourced from philippinephilatelist.net

Image below is Admiral Cloma's flag for his self-proclaimed "Free Territory of Freedomland", sourced from en.wikipedia.com

Second, in the case of Japan’s claim on Senkaku isles, those were deemed historically part of China during the Qing Dynasty which Japanese military war and colonization annexed in the late 19th century along with its takeover of Taiwan in 1895, so historically in the perspective of the Chinese nation, those isles are the Diaoyu isles which they believe rightfully belong to China. 

The issue of the Diaoyu/Senkaku territorial dispute is sensitive due to the history of Japanese military aggression in China which climaxed during World War II, and therefore it is prudent, wise and better for us in the Philippines to not lump ourselves and our own Spratleys sovereignty claims together with the age-old wartime grudges and conflicts between Japan and China, especially that Japan is now led by a hawkish political leader?

New York Times columnist and 2-time Pulitzer Prize winner Nicholas D. Kristof wrote on September 19, 2012: "I’ve had a longstanding interest in the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands, the subject of a dangerous territorial dispute  between Japan and China. The United States claims to be neutral but in effect is siding with Japan, and we could be drawn in if a war ever arose. Let me clear that I deplore the violence in the recent anti-Japan protests in China:  the violence is reprehensible and makes China look like an irrational bully. China’s government should rein in this volatile nationalism rather than feed it. This is a dispute that both sides should refer to the International Court of Justice, rather than allow to boil over in the streets. That said, when I look at the underlying question of who has the best claim, I’m sympathetic to China’s position. I don’t think it is 100 percent clear, partly because China seemed to acquiesce to Japanese sovereignty between 1945 and 1970, but on balance I find the evidence for Chinese sovereignty quite compelling. The most interesting evidence is emerging from old Japanese government documents and suggests that Japan in effect stole the islands from China in 1895 as booty of war. This article by Han-Yi Shaw, a scholar from Taiwan, explores those documents. I invite any Japanese scholars to make the contrary legal case." Below is a link to his blog on this issue

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/the-inconvenient-truth-behind-the-diaoyusenkaku-islands/?_r=0

We have had over 1,000 years of friendly relations between the Philippines and China, therefore any territorial disputes can be a disagreement between old friends? On the other hand, China---similar to the Korean nation---has age-old and bitter war memories with Japan which therefore complicates their territorial disputes on a totally different level and dimension, so their territorial dispute is a disagreement between former enemies?

Isn't it strategically prudent, pragmatic and wiser for the benefit of our immediate and long-term national interests in the Philippines to not be lumped together or in the same light as Japan, in the consciousness of China's leaders and people?

Image below of the disputed Diaoyu or Senkaku isles between China and Japan, sourced from cananewslibre.com

I am posting these ideas here, in response to the news today, which I am sharing below:

 

Philippines, Japan leaders hold talks over China disputes

By MYNARDO MACARAIG   July 27, 2013 11:10am

Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe met President Benigno Aquino on Saturday as the Philippines sought to boost cooperation over growing territorial disputes with regional rival China.

The meeting comes as tensions have steadily risen between China and Japan, which accuses its growing neighbour of sending an increasing number of ships to exert its claim over unpopulated Japanese-controlled islands in the East China Sea.

The Philippines has also charged that China has used assertive means to exert claims in the conflict-riven South China Sea.

The first visit to Manila by a Japanese leader since December 2006 highlights the growing strategic partnership between the two Asian nations who were bitter enemies in the World War II era, officials said.

"Japan is one of our two strategic partners (besides the United States). Certainly, it (Abe trip) would be a significant visit from a strategic partner," Aquino's spokesman Edwin Lacierda told reporters ahead of Abe's arrival late Friday.

Foreign Department spokesman Raul Hernandez said the territorial disputes will be discussed by the leaders.

Japanese Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera, who visited the Philippines last month, said the two countries would cooperate "in terms of the defence of remote islands... as well as protection of maritime interests".

Political scientist Rene de Castro of Manila's De La Salle University said the growing proximity was helping both nations overcome bitter World War II memories.

"As a liberal democracy, we recognise that Japan right now, is totally different from the Japan of World War II" when it occupied the Philippines, de Castro told AFP.

Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario, in an interview with the Financial Times last year said Japan would be a "welcome" counterbalance to China's rise.

The hawkish Abe has pledged to loosen limits on the military in Japan's pacifist, post-war constitution and stand up to China over their East China Sea dispute.

Abe's government pledged in February to provide 10 patrol boats to the Philippines, which is rushing to upgrade its antiquated navy and coast guard.

China seized the Scarborough Shoal, a South China Sea outcrop just 230 kilometres (140 miles) east of the main Philippine island of Luzon, last year after Manila backed down from a lengthy stand-off.

This year the Philippines has complained about the presence of Chinese navy vessels near Filipino-held Second Thomas Shoal in the Spratly islands. - Agence France-Presse

Philippine President Noynoy Aquino's new challenges in last 3 years in power

Philippine President Noynoy Aquino's new challenges in last 3 years in power are the following:

Image below of President Noynoy Aquino, sourced from asiasociety.org



1. Spread the fruits or benefits of fast economic growth to the poor masses, the middle-class, to small and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs)

2. Structural and even constitutional reforms to really woo substantial direct foreign investments to the Philippines

3. Accelerate infrastructure projects, especially the horrible airports

4. Institutionalize anti-corruption efforts and reforms

5. Stabilize and enhance Philippine foreign relations beyond just being traditional and strategic ally of the United States and Japan, in order to boost and diversify Philippine diplomatic and economic ties with other nations most specially ASEAN neighbors, the rising new economic superpower China, and other countries.

Iage below of Philippine map, sourced from mlit.go.jp

In our democracy in the Philippines, we should hear the other side of the truth and not just the propaganda of the Malaysia politicians and government. True democracy is free debate and free flow of informations. Let us listen to the Princess Jacel Kiram, daughter of the Sulu Sultan and their claim to Sabah in behalf also of the Philippines too.

Let us listen and tell others about this TV interview by Boy Abunda, details below.





(Image below of Princess Jacel Kiram talking to media in front of a photo of her father the ailing Sultan of Sulu, sourced from todayonline.com)



I received this news from ABS CBN Broadcasting Corporation on Pricess Jacel Kiram to be interviewed by TV host Boy Abunda:

PRINCESS JACEL KIRAM SPEAKS UP ON SABAH STANDOFF IN "BOTTOMLINE."

Amid the much heated battle between the camp of Sulu Sultan Jamalul Kiram III and the Malaysian government for the ownership of Sabah, Kiram's daughter Princess Jacel will bravely take the spotlight this Saturday (March 9) in "The Bottomline With Boy Abunda" as she shares her thoughts and opinion about their fight for their rights on the land that they call home.

What is the truth behind the allegations that someone is providing them funds for the standoff?

Why did they not follow President Noynoy Aquino's call to come back in the Philippines to talk about the problem?

Are they ready for the possible outcomes of their plan to conquer Sabah?

Don't miss the 2012 Golden Screen TV Awards Outstanding Celebrity Talk Program "The Bottomline With Boy Abunda" this Saturday, 11:30 pm, after "Banana Split."

***

(Image below of Princess Jacel Kiram and her father the besieged and ailing Sulltan of Sulu, sourced from globalbalita.com)

KARAPATAN NG PILIPINAS SA SABAH, TATALAKAYIN NI PRINCESS JACEL KIRAM SA "BOTTOMLINE."

Sa gitna ng lalong umiinit na alitan sa pagitan ng kampo ng Sultan ng Sulu na si Jamalul Kiram III at ng gobyerno ng Malaysia kaugnay ng isyu ng pagmamay-ari ng Sabah, matapang na haharap ngayong Sabado (Marso 9) sa "The Bottomline With Boy Abunda" ang anak ni Kiram na si Princess Jacel upang ibahagi ang kanyang saloobin kaugnay ng ipinaglalaban nilang karapatan sa lupang na itinuturing nilang tahanan.

Ano nga ba ang katotohanan sa mga paratang na may nagbibigay ng pondo sa kanilang pagpunta sa Malaysia?

Bakit nga ba hindi nila pinakinggan ang panawagan ni Pangulong Noynoy Aquino na bumalik ng Pilipinas upang pag-usapan ang problema?

Handa na nga ba sila sa mga maaaring mangyari sa kanilang planong pagsakop sa Sabah? Makiaalam sa mga isyung panlipunan at huwag palampasin ang 2012 Golden Screen TV Awards Outstanding Celebrity Talk Program na "The Bottomline With Boy Abunda" ngayong Sabado, 11:30 ng gabi, pagkatapos ng "Banana Split."

Congratulations to South Korea's first ever woman leader! She will show the world that women can be as gutsy and visionary as male politicos! Best wishes to the people of dynamic South Korea.

Can President Park Geun-hye help rein in or nudge reforms in hostile neighbor North Korea? Can she also persuade the political leaders and people of Japan to not embrace rightwing politics and come to terms with Japan's controversial colonial past like postwar Germany did, in order to help build a brighter future for East Asia? I personally have high hopes and great respect for South Korea's new leader.

(Photo below from reuters.com)



(Image below sourced from forums.allkpop.com)





Here's a news report from Reuters news agency:

Park Geun-hye wastes no time in addressing Japan and North Korea

First woman president takes tough line while promising to spread wealth more evenly

Friday, 21 December, 2012, 12:00 am

 

Reuters in Seoul

• 

Park Geun-hye bows to the nation yesterday. Photo: AP

South Korea's president-elect, Park Geun-hye, used her first major speech yesterday to warn of the risks posed by a hostile North Korea and also fired a political shot across the bows of Japan's incoming prime minister, Shinzo Abe.
Speaking after a visit to the national cemetery, which included a poignant homage at the graves of her assassinated father and mother, the country's first woman leader pledged to spread wealth more evenly.

Park has said she will hold talks with North Korea and resume aid to the isolated and belligerent country, but only if it abandons its nuclear weapons programme. The impoverished North launched a rocket last week that critics said was a test for technology that could be used for a long-range missile that could one day carry a nuclear warhead.

"North Korea's long-range missile launch showed how grave the security reality is that we are faced with," Park said a day after her convincing election win.

She will take office in February and signalled she would continue outgoing Lee Myung-bak's tough line on territorial claims that Japan has on South Korea.

South Korea says Japan, which has similar disputes with China, has not come to terms with its harsh past rule of Korea. Japan says it has paid compensation for the slavery issue and has apologised.

"I will try to work for greater reconciliation, co-operation and peace in Northeast Asia based on a correct perception of history," she said, in an apparent reference to the conflict with Tokyo.

Park, 60, will replace fellow conservative Lee after his single five-year term ends. The slightly built and elegant Park grew up in Seoul's presidential palace during the 18-year rule of her father, Park Chung-hee, who took power in a military coup in 1961.

Park on Tuesday called for national "reconciliation" and pledged again to share wealth more evenly, but offered no clues about how she would implement policies. She is likely to face protests from South Korea's vocal left, angry at the rise to power of the daughter of a man they believe was a repressive dictator.

"This will be a tremendous burden on her ability to govern," political commentator Yu Chang-seon said of Park's heritage. "It effectively means that she could be in direct conflict with half of society ... The first six months will be key."

Balanced & independent foreign policy possible for the Philippines?

When can the Philippines have a truly independent foreign policy, neither pro-USA or pro-China, but first and foremost pro-Philippines in strategic priorities, orientation and mindset?

I wish to share a recent opinion column by the outstanding newspaper columnist Conrado de Quiros:

 

There's the Rub column

Very foreign policy

By Conrado de Quiros

Philippine Daily Inquirer

10:23 pm | Tuesday, November 20th, 2012

A couple of things are happening in our part of the world that say much about us. One is Barack Obama’s visit to Burma (Myanmar) and the other is our breaking up with Asean and going it alone in our approach to China.

First, Obama’s visit to Burma or, more to the point, his nonvisit to the Philippines: Several observers have made this out as a snub to us. The reasoning goes: Obama is hopping from Thailand to Burma to Cambodia, the last where a regional summit is taking place. Surely, he can drop by Manila, if only for a day, just to say hello to an old and loyal friend? It costs so little and pays so much. That he’s not doing it can only mean a snub.

Well, if it’s a snub, it’s not undeserved. The Fil-Ams were the odd man out among the immigrants in the United States, going for Mitt Romney over Obama, and not without racial, or indeed racist, overtones.
What has he got to be grateful to Filipinos for?

But that’s presuming that’s how their thinking goes. Which only shows how our thinking goes. Taking things personally, particularly in foreign policy, is in fact not an American pastime, it is a Filipino one.

The specific principle, or cultural value, that underpins our foreign policy is “may pinagsamahan” and its corollary, “walang iwanan.” To begin with, our foreign policy rests only on our relationship with one country, the United States. Everything pivots around it. The principle of may pinagsamahan says we’ve gone through a great deal with America, we’ll remain together through thick and thin. And the principle of walang iwanan says we won’t abandon America and America won’t abandon us—mutual defense or magkasangga all the way.



Of course the sentiment did not just arise spontaneously in our minds, though it has taken on a self-perpetuating ferocity there; it was cultivated. Not least by the mythology of “I shall return,” which resonates with walang iwanan. And not least, too, by the mythology of Bataan and Corregidor, with its images of Filipinos and Americans fighting side by side to the last man, even though most of the Americans made off in ships in the night with Manuel Quezon and Sergio Osmeña in tow, and the Filipinos ended up making the Long March.

Unfortunately for us, the sentiment is completely one-way. As seen in the cruel fate our veterans have suffered in the hands of their presumed comrades. Obama’s nonvisit to the Philippines is by no means surprising. At the very least, why should he bother with a people that can be counted upon to be there all the time, however shabbily they are treated, they may sulk for a while or indulge in tampo, but they’ll get over it fast? At the very most, why should he bother with a country that doesn’t really matter in Asian affairs, the current focus of America’s attention, which matters only as a repository, or suppository, of US bases in their various guises?

Which brings me to P-Noy’s disagreement with Asean.



On the face of it, it seems a very principled stand in the face of provocation by Cambodia. P-Noy took issue with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen when Sen announced that Asean had agreed not to “internationalize” its territorial disputes with China and would instead confine negotiations between the bloc and China. No such agreement had been reached, P-Noy expostulated, and he himself would continue to speak out on a global stage on it. “The Asean route is not the only route for us,” he declared.

That is all very well, but what exactly do we mean when we say we will continue to internationalize the dispute and speak on a global stage? If we mean that we will bring it to the attention of the United Nations and to the international adjudication bodies, then we are well within our rights. If we mean that we are going to make our beef known to, and appeal to the sense of justice of, the countries in wider Asia, Europe, and the other continents, then we are well within our senses. If we mean that we will continue to try to conscript America into our cause, specifically by getting it to speak loudly and unequivocally on our behalf, then we are well on our way to perdition.

The last in fact was what Sen was referring to when he said Asean had agreed not to internationalize the territorial dispute. It was a reference to our attempts to drag the United States into the fray. Inside looking out, or from our perspective, it’s Cambodia that looks like the odd man out, showing exceptionally slavish devotion and submission to its master, China. Outside looking in, or from the perspective of our Southeast Asian neighbors, it’s we who look like the bearded fool of the world, showing exceptionally embarrassing devotion and submission to our not-so-former colonial master, America.

(Cambodian leader Hun Sen)




(The logo of ASEAN)





(Flag of China at a parade in Beijing)




What route apart from the Asean, the one group that speaks for our immediate neighborhood, the one organization that binds our part of the world, the one bloc several of whose members have a territorial dispute with China, do we have? Surely we can continue to press our viewpoint within Asean? Surely we can try to get the rest of Asean on our side? Surely we can stand in solidarity with Asean and present a united front against China?

I don’t know how effective that would be. I don’t know how far it will dissuade China from its territorial ambitions. But I do know it is better than magsumbong kay Sam, which will produce nothing and only cost us more—not least in territory for US servicemen to run around. I do know it will dissuade our neighbors from continuing to think of us as a nation that never gained independence, that remains wrapped and trapped in the mental cocoon of being “sandal sa pader.” I do know it will help to get our neighbors to treat us a little more seriously.

I do know it will help to make our foreign policy less foreign—to us.

US naval ship arriving tomorrow Nov. 19 on "routine port call"

Seriously: What connection of USS Gridley ship, 1898 Battle of Manila Bay & Bugs Bunny cartoon?

My Comments:

I believe the U.S. government statement that these naval ship visits to Manila and other Asian ports are truly "routine port calls" to sailors and other navy personnel their much-needed rest and recreation as well as for naval exercises.

It is also my analysis that President Barack Obama's announced strategic policy shift called the so-called "pivot" is also essentially a military move, which seeks to bolster American military presence and strategic influence in the world's most economically vibrant region of Asia.

Hopefully, USA shall continue to act as a stabilizing force in Asia, and not unnecessarily or mistakenly provoke any misunderstandings with other powers in the region. USA military presence can and should be a stabilizing force in Asia, nothing more.

USA just needs to communicate more with other Asian powers to allay any misunderstandings. In fact, China, the East Asian dragon economies and ASEAN have in the past decades flourished economically due partly to the stability ensured by USA military presence in Asia as long as there is mutual respect, mutual trust and nonstop open communications with all powers.

Ideally, I believe the ASEAN region should in the long-term be a nuclear-free, neutral and demilitarized region focused mainly on economic prosperity---not a battleground for rival superpowers.

Thanks to USA diplomats for sending me this news:

USS Gridley to Arrive in Manila Bay

Manila, November 18, 2012 --- USS Gridley (DDG-101), an Arleigh-Burke Class Destroyer, will arrive in Manila Bay on Monday for a routine port call which the United States embassy described said "highlights the strong historic, community, and military connections between the United States and the Republic of the Philippines." 

The USA Embassy added: "This visit will allow the ship to replenish supplies as well as give the crew an opportunity for rest and relaxation."

The USS Gridley DDG-101 is part of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and is homeported in San Diego, California. 

Interestingly for the Philippines is this tidbit of history---The naval ship is named for Captain Charles Gridley, Commander of the USS Olympia who was famously told by Admiral George Dewey to “fire when you ready, Gridley” in the historic Battle of Manila Bay during the Spanish-American War.

That "Battle of Manila Bay" episode in history started America's role as new colonial power, colonizing the Philippines and subduing the Philippine revolutionaries fighting for independence then under the leadership of President Emilio Aguinaldo.

The Philippine revolutionaries were already winning their war of independence against three centuries of Spanish colonial rule, when the then rising USA intervened militarily, conquered the Philippines and subsequently suppressed Filipino rebels still fighting for self-rule in the Philippine-American War.

In fairness to the United States, it was American colonial occupation which helped transformed a formerly backward, agricultural Spanish colony into Asia's second wealthiest economy next only to Japan in less than half a century of American rule. It was under the Americans that the Philippines had Asia's best public schools, pioneer stock exchange, modern mining and other industries. A lot of ultra-nationalists may be morally right in criticizing America's suppression of Philippine independence, but it cannot be denied that USA colonial rule had modernized the Philippine economy to its golden years.

(Capt. Charles "Steve" Gridley)





This a view of Capt. Gridley, Cmdr. Lamberton (Gridley's eventual replacement) and Lt. Rees, aboard USS OLYMPIA

According to the USA Embassy, no media availability is planned during USS Gridley’s short visit to Manila Bay.

By the way, another tidbit of information---Charles Gridley is best remembered as the Captain of the USS Olympia, made famous when  Admiral George Dewey chose Gridley's USS Olympia as his flagship in the Battle of Manila Bay  and Dewey gave the famous order, "You may fire when you are ready, Gridley."  

For kids and the youth, remember this similar line from the various Looney Tunes cartoon shows with this same line was regularly shouted  by Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck?

British author Dr. Martin Jacques lecture on Nov. 19 (Monday) at 1 pm at the Intercontinental Hotel Manila in Ayala Avenue, Makati City, Metro Manila, The Philippines. Topic: The Rise of China as Superpower and how the World should adjust to this phenomenon (Note: Please read Philippine Star columnist Billy Esposo's piece on Dr. Martin Jacques below after this news)

The Philippine Star newspaper is one of the sponsors of this lecture, so it must be good! Join & tell others.

            British economist, Cambridge University graduate and scholar Dr. Martin Jacques, author of the global bestselling book “When China Rules the World”.

Dr, Martin Jacques is a columnist for Britain’s The Times, The Sunday Times, The Guardian and New Statesman. He is visiting fellow at London School of Economics Asia Research Center, visiting professopr at Japan’s Aichi University, at China’s Renmin University and a visiting fellow at the Asia Research Institute of the National University of Singapore (NUS).

Martin Jacques will deliver a lecture with the same title and on how the rest of the world should adjust to this new phenomenon of a rising China. His lecture will be on November 19, Monday, starting at 1 pm at the Hotel Intercontinental in Ayala Avenue, Makati City.

Among the reactors in the lecture will be Filipino experts on China like the Emmy award-winning journalist Chito Santa Romana.

The Philippine Star is one of the sponsors of this lecture.

National Bookstore and Powerbooks will also sell Dr. Martin Jacques’ bestselling book, and there shall be an autograph-signing session at Hotel Intercontinental on November 19.

For inquiries about the lecture, text or call 09175373051.  

Below is a column by Billy Esposo of the Philippine Star about this British author and scholar:

China to overtake the US sooner than you think

AS I WRECK THIS CHAIR, By William M. Esposo

Updated August 1, 2012 - 12:25am The Philippine Star

 

Martin Jacques, the author of the book “When China Rules the World”  is also an economist and columnist of the Guardian and New Statesman.

He recently spoke before a TED Salon in London (link: http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_jacques_understanding_the_rise_of_china.html  about how China  is going to overtake the US sooner than most people think.

What Martin Jacques had outlined in his lecture is of great importance to us Filipinos who are caught in the big geopolitical power game between the US and China. Per Acting Foreign Affairs Secretary, Albert del Rosario, we will continue our “sole strategic partnership” with the US.

Jacques narrated that even before the Western Financial Crisis Goldman Sachs had already projected that the Chinese economy will soon surpass that of the US and that in 2050 the Chinese economy will be double the size of that of the US.

Citing BNP Paribas projections, Jacques stated that the post-crisis date when China overtakes the US is now 2020. “China is going to change the world in two fundamental respects. First of all, it’s a huge developing country with a population of 1.3 billion people, which has been growing for over 30 years at around 10 percent a year,” Jacques said. He added: “Never before in the modern era has the largest economy in the world been that of a developing country, rather than a developed country. Secondly, for the first time in the modern era, the dominant country in the world — which I think is what China will become — will be not from the West and from very, very different civilizational roots.”

Jacques cited the “widespread assumption in the West that, as countries modernize, they also Westernize.” He said: “This is an illusion. It’s an assumption that modernity is a product simply of competition, markets and technology. It is not; it is also shaped equally by history and culture. China is not like the West, and it will not become like the West.”

To understand China, Jacques suggests that we should not apply conventional approaches and Western yardsticks. He offered three building blocks for understanding China.

Civilization and not nation State

Jacques asserted that China is not really a nation State. Jacques said: “what gives China its sense of being China, what gives the Chinese the sense of what it is to be Chinese, comes not from the last hundred years, not from the nation state period, which is what happened in the West, but from the period, if you like, of the civilization State.”

He amplified: “I’m thinking here, for example, of customs like ancestral worship, of a very distinctive notion of the State, likewise, a very distinctive notion of the family, social relationships like guanxi, Confucian values and so on. These are all things that come from the period of the civilization State. In other words, China, unlike the Western states and most countries in the world, is shaped by its sense of civilization, its existence as a civilization State, rather than as a nation State.”

Jacques cited two profound implications of being a civilization State, rather than a nation State, as follows: “The first is that the most important political value for the Chinese is unity,” the maintenance of Chinese civilization. He recalled how Europe had fragmented after the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire and had remained divided ever since. “China, over the same time period, went in exactly the opposite direction, very painfully holding this huge civilization State together,” He added.

The second implication that Jacques cited was that China will naturally evolve into a single civilization with many systems, with Hong Kong as a good example.

Different conception of race

For his second building block, Jacques said: “The Chinese have a very, very different conception of race to most other countries. Do you know, of the 1.3 billion Chinese, over 90 percent of them think they belong to the same race, the Han. Now this is completely different from the other world’s most populous countries. India, the United States, Indonesia, Brazil — all of them are multiracial. The Chinese don’t feel like that. China is only multiracial really at the margins.” He added: “A history of at least 2,000 years, a history of conquest, occupation, absorption, assimilation and so on, led to the process by which, over time, this notion of the Han emerged — of course, nurtured by a growing and very powerful sense of cultural identity.

Jacques cited a down side of this conception of race — “They really believe in their own superiority, and they are disrespectful of those who are not.” He mentioned the Chinese treatment of the Uyghurs and the Tibetans.

The State is a patriarch

Jacques cited the Chinese State as his third building block — highlighting how State and society are viewed differently in China compared to the West. He said: “Now we in the West overwhelmingly seem to think — in these days at least — that the authority and legitimacy of the state is a function of democracy. The problem with this proposition is that the Chinese State enjoys more legitimacy and more authority amongst the Chinese than is true with any Western State.”

Per Jacques, the State in China “enjoys a very special significance as the representative, the embodiment and the guardian of Chinese civilization, of the civilization State. This is as close as China gets to a kind of spiritual role.” He added: “for 1,000 years, the power of the Chinese State has not been challenged. It’s had no serious rivals.” Jacques noted that the Chinese views the State as “the head of the family, the patriarch of the family.”

Cautioning the West about their arrogance and ignorance, Jacques explained that East Asia is where a third of the world’s population lives and it is the largest economic region in the world. He added that: “people from East Asia, are far more knowledgeable about the West than the West is about East Asia.

Jacques added: “What is happening is that, very rapidly in historical terms, the world is being driven and shaped, not by the old developed countries, but by the developing world. We’ve seen this in terms of the G20 — usurping very rapidly the position of the G7, or the G8.”

He warns of two consequences. The first is that the West is rapidly losing its influence in the world. The second is “that the world will inevitably, as a consequence, become increasingly unfamiliar to us, because it’ll be shaped by cultures and experiences and histories that we are not really familiar with, or conversant with.”

“For 200 years, the world was essentially governed by a fragment of the human population. That’s what Europe and North America represented. The arrival of countries like China and India — between them 38 percent of the world’s population — and others like Indonesia and Brazil and so on, represent the most important single act of democratization in the last 200 years. Civilizations and cultures, which had been ignored, which had no voice, which were not listened to, which were not known about, will have a different sort of representation in this world. As humanists, we must welcome, surely, this transformation. And we will have to learn about these civilizations,” Jacques said.

We are indeed entering the China century. The big question that must be posed is this — why is our foreign policy still glued to a sole strategic partnership with the US?

*      *      *

8 reasons why we should all support Israel in Gaza crisis now, also support peace for Palestinians too.



Why?

1. Israel is a stabilizing force in the Middle East, it sincerely seeks long-term peace and respects the co-existence of all races and religions in harmony.

2. Israel is a catalyst for economic development and free enterprise ideals in the Middle East. Israel supports anti-poverty efforts. One of the root causes of Palestinian discontent is poverty, let us support Israel and help the whole region win the war against poverty and other social problems.

3. Israel is a vibrant political democracy, despite being practically in a state of war and constantly under siege.

4. Israel is a vanguard nation in the global war against terrorism and extremism.

5. In the present crisis, evidences show that Hamas forces in Gaza have been shooting hundreds of rockets into Israel indiscriminately and attacking civilians, therefore the military acts of Israel are for self-defense.

6. I believe the vast majority of Palestinian people want peace, an independent nation and economic security, not constant warfare caused by extremist or militant elements or terrorists. Let us support Israel in its longstanding and unending quest for peaceful co-existence with Palestinians.

7. For Christians worldwide, God said in the Bible that we shall be blessed if we support the Jewish people.

8. Last but not the least, let us support long-term peaceful settlement of the problems between Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East, by promoting mutual trust and respect, tolerance for all religious faiths.

Please share your opinions below in the comments section? Share this blog post to other people too?




The news report below is from Newsmax:

Santorum: Obama Must Support Israel on Gaza

Thursday, 15 Nov 2012 09:21 PM

By Todd Beamon and Paul Scicchitano

The United States should support Israel in any assault against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum charged on Thursday in an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV.

“We should support our ally in its ability to defend itself. Israel is defending itself against repeated attacks,” Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator and chairman of Patriot Voices, told Newsmax at Restoration Weekend 2012 in Palm Beach, Fla. “There have over 850 rockets fired this year.

“Imagine if Mexico was lobbing rockets into El Paso and Tucson. We would be outraged. We would immediately tell them to either stop or we are going to go into there and clear out those areas that are beyond government control – and do it for them. That is exactly what is going on in Israel.”

Earlier on Thursday, Palestinians battered Israel with more than 200 rockets in the heaviest fighting in four years, killing three people as Israel pressed a punishing campaign of airstrikes on militant targets across the Gaza Strip.

Three rockets targeted Tel Aviv, setting off air-raid sirens in bold attacks that led Israel to signal that a ground operation was imminent. At least 12 trucks were seen transporting tanks and armored personnel carriers, and a number of buses carrying soldiers arrived.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said he had authorized the army to call up as many as 30,000 additional reservists for possible action.

Fifteen Palestinians also have been killed in two days of shelling.

Israel and Hamas have largely observed an informal truce for the past four years. But in recent weeks, the calm unraveled in a bout of rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza and retaliatory Israeli airstrikes.

“The Palestinian Hamas, in Gaza, and in the West Bank, they are very, very clear that they do not believe in Israel’s right to exist,” Santorum told Newsmax on Thursday. “They have never recognized their right to exist. They are doing everything they can to create tensions, knowing that the vast majority of the world is going to support the Palestinian cause, as they do in the United Nations.

“This is a test of whether this president, because America has been alone in the world in supporting Israel – post-election – is willing to stand up for Israel,” he added. “I am hopeful that the President will pass that test, but certainly if you look at his record over the past four years, he has been the weakest friend to Israel than Israel has ever had in the White House.”

Story continues below the video: