By contrast, 80 percent of respondents treated the supposed affront on RP sovereignty as more imagined than real. A good number of them even said they wish US troops would join the fighting instead of restricting themselves to mere training of Filipino soldiers. This, because the Abu Sayyaf is truly an international terrorist band, judging by its cross-border kidnapping of foreigners that thus merits international counterattacks.
Some expressed frustration with the failure of the AFP brass to lick the Abu Sayyaf not only in Basilan but also in Sulu. They felt so strongly about their support for US presence that they challenged the aged senators to go there and fight the terrorists themselves.
Does this mean that the younger generation is less nationalistic than their olds? That could be rushing to conclusions. But the fervor does reflect the age divide. Close to 20 percent of the population comprises Filipinos born before or during the War. They probably have a love-hate sentiment for America. They had witnessed or heard of American atrocities in containing Filipino insurgents in the 1930s, and felt the pain of colonial rule. Yet they also acknowledge America’s help, through MacArthur’s return, in driving out the Japanese invaders.
A big chunk of the remaining 80 percent, those aged 45 to 60, has no love-nor hate-lost for America, perhaps. They had joined rallies against a Marcos dictatorship propped up by US support, then moved on to call for the expulsion of US military bases in Clark Field and Subic Bay. Yet they also marvel at how the US Armed Forces had maintained the bases so well it was no problem to convert these into economic free zones. The first chance they get, they visit relatives and sights in California and New York.
Their children, those of the 80 percent who are in the teens to the 30s, grew up in relative peace. They probably see nationalism as a passé idea. They go around the world everyday through the Internet and feel part of the global community. Yet they are no less patriotic. They formed the bulk of the crowds who marched to EDSA and elsewhere in January 2001 to hoot out of Malacañang a corrupt President.
Yet one Perez (Vince) was confirmed in November, another Perez (Hernando) last week. Mar Roxas breezed through the CA wringer even earlier, along with Dinky Soliman, Simeon Datumanong, Raul Roco, and Nani Braganza. For, confirmation hangs sometimes on paperwork at CA committee levels, other times on the number of objectors. But most of all, depending on the intentisity of the objections, the willingness of Cabinet appointees to strike compromises.
The Alvarezes fall within the last category. Objections to them can be counted with one hand’s fingers, compared to those who have gone ahead. But though few, the objectors are fighting tooth and nail against them. And the two have chosen to draw the line. In their view, compromise would mean not accommodation, that’s usual in politics, but in surrender.
The only opposition left against Pantaleon Alvarez is led by the Manila International Airport Association of Service Operators (MASO). Its beef with him is his refusal to stop construction of the NAIA Terminal 3.
Composed of of caterers, maintenance firms, cargo handlers and security outfits at NAIA Terminals 1 and 2, MASO claims that Alvarez is driving them out of business. Once completed, NAIA-3 will become the premiere international terminal; NAIA-1 and -2 will serve only domestic and chartered flights. Operation of NAIA-3 will be handled by the builder under a Build-Operate-Tranfer contract signed during the Ramos administration and affirmed by the Estrada tenure after some revisions. MASO members will have to apply for subfranchises to do business in NAIA-3.
Alvarez maintains that they will have to bid for such subfranchises, for that is what the contract specifies in order to bring down the cost of airport services. He cannot stop the construction, for his job is to ensure its faithful implementation. Otherwise, he can be charged with dereliction of duty. Only a lawful court order can intervene, which MASO has failed to get. Besides, contruction was almost halfway through by the time he was appointed transportation chief in February 2001.
Alvarez laments that the MASO objection has overshadowed his other projects – mostly the upgrading of air and seaports, improvement of inter-island shipping, and expansion of telephone services in rural areas. Hardly recognized are his start of extension work on the light railway from Baclaran to Cavite, and the Metro rail line from Quezon City to Caloocan along EDSA. Often highlighted is the ground work at the NAIA-3 in 1996 by a private firm he used to own when he was not yet a Cabinet man.
The other Alvarez, Heherson, faces strong objection from a former subordinate who happens to be a congressman’s son. Alvarez had sacked Peter Anthony Abaya in October as head of the Environment Management Bureau, a post the latter had held since the Estrada years. He also charged him with grave abuse of authority.
Alvarez says that Abaya in early 2000 unilaterally had changed RP’s commitment to the Montreal Protocol of 1991. Under that international environment-protection pact, 167 signatory-countries pledged to reduce their use of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) over two decades down to zero by 2010. ODS include chloro-flourocarbons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform and halons commonly used as cleaning solvents and as cooling agents for refrigerators and air conditioners. Scientists have found the ODS to scrape and eat up the ozone layer around the earth that protects man, animals and plants from too much ultraviolet rays. and help speed up photosynthesis. They warn that a "hole in the sky" punched by excessive use of ODS is responsible for the entry of more ultraviolet rays; hence, the rise in world incidence of skin cancer and eye cataracts. It also led to global warning, the rise in temperatures that is destroying forests and melting ice caps in the North Pole and Antarctica. And it slowed down the production of phytoplankton on which fish fingerlings feed.
Abaya during his tenure raised by 75 percent the import ceiling on ODS, instead of reducing it each year as planned under the Montreal pact. For this, Alvarez said, the United Nations called the attention of the Philippines to the violation. On investigation, he found out that Abaya had inserted a footnote on the RP commitment on ODS, and from there issued the memo that allowed more imports.
Abaya maintains that Alvarez just doesn’t know how to count, and didn’t give him his day in court. Alvarez counters that he does know how to count, and cites seven instances in which Abaya and former Natural Resources Sec. Antonio Cerilles conspired to issue midnight environment compliance certificates (ECCs) to mines and real estate developers. One was the case of a power firm in Negros Occidental, whose ECC application was supposedly approved on Dec. 28, 2000, although the tracer showed it was received by Cerilles’ head executive assistant on Jan. 19, 2001. Another ECC was for a river rehabilitation in Marinduque, applied for at the height of EDSA-II on Jan. 18, 2001 and issued the next day without the usual 60- to 90-day yechnical review. The rest were ECCs similarly issued between Jan. 16 and 19, 2001, although applications were either received only a week before or reviews were only halfway through.
There’s another factor in the long delay of the confirmation of the two Alvarezes. They hold the most coveted positions in the Cabinet because of the authority they wield over comparatively wider areas of government concern. Some of their own allies in the administration are lusting for their jobs and are thus secretly encouraging the objectors. This much, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo admitted this week when she said certain Malacañang officials are lobbying for other candidates. She refused to draw up a list of replacements, though.