How can the world respect us when we’re acting like wimps?

I read yesterday that Tourism Secretary Dick Gordon said he hopes to attract more tourists, "even Americans", for this "Visit the Philippines Year". Sorry, Dick, but the Americans are going – not coming.

This is not because they dislike the Philippines, but because United Sates citizens all over the world have just received an advisory from the US government that they must now consider themselves at risk. Through American embassies and consulates in endangered areas, and this includes the Philippines. US citizens have been issued "evacuation plans" and "schedules" in case of an emergency, particularly "war".

Even if US President George W. Bush still has to deliver his "State of the Union" message to Congress and the American people today, this is an indication that the US is gearing for war in Iraq, probably even without a United Nations mandate.

On the other hand, Mr. Bush – unless he is self-delusive – surely realizes that even the most patriotic Americans are hesitant over going to war all by themselves – and certainly view, despite Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s deriding of Germany and France as the "old Europe", the defection of Paris and Berlin from their side as both irksome and worrisome. The Baghdad issue is useful, in one sense: It has brought to the fore what Western Europe and the US have long tried to sweep under the rug in the pursuit of NATO unity. This is the fact that the so-called "Western Alliance" is badly frayed. Western Europe’s resentment and, okay, envy of America is becoming more evident by the day. Bitter words are now being expressed which, in the end, will not be easily recalled.

Despite his tough stance, Mr. Bush knows that his Republican Party’s one-vote majority in the Senate is precarious, and he still has to court the Democrats in both houses to secure a bipartisan consensus – which is by no means assured – not just for "war", but for the equally thorny problem of the state of the economy (which is very shitty) and other issues closer to home such as the reform of Medicare and Medicard, i.e., state-subsidized health care for the poor and the elderly.

Then there is the touted $574 billion tax-cut by which Bush hopes he can kick-start the floundering economy into recovery – to head off the real possibility of a double-dip recession.

Let me come back to my old argument. In my estimation, at this uncertain stage (with unemployment running high and industry in the doldrums), America needs a war. This may sound a callous thought, indeed, and no American leader, Mr. Bush least of all, will dare say it outright: But that’s the long and short of it.

As for "Old Europe", Adieu, France! Auf Wiedersehn, Germany! Already, Rumsfeld is talking about support from the countries of a "wider" Europe, of Central and Eastern Europe. Do these nations, in American eyes, then represent the "New Europe"? If so, history has made a full spin. These are the countries of the Warsaw Pact, which once confronted America with hostility and belonged to the Soviet Bloc. Indeed, for its own reasons, Moscow itself may yet emerge as a stauncher ally of Washington DC than the latter’s erstwhile comrades-in-arms in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

It has been truly said, in the past, that there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies, only permanent national interests.

The truth of that most Americans, shrugging off their complacency, worsened by their surprising ignorance of geography (despite two World Wars), are belatedly beginning to realize.

It’s time we, for our part, realized that, too.

* * *

My attention has been drawn to the fact that no sooner had 122 Chinese "poachers" held in the Palawan provincial jail been released with virtually just a slap on the wrist by a Palawan RTC judge last September than 38 more Chinese fishermen-poachers were caught and are now in the same provincial jail.

I suspect that the original 122, and the newly-incarcerated 38 are only a tiny portion of the hundreds, even thousands perhaps of Chinese ravagers who intrude yearly into our coastal waters, and steal our fish, turtles, corals, and otherwise "rape" our marine resources with impunity. The fact is that our Navy and Coast Guard seem neither to have the will nor resources to intercept these intruders – and our government is too cowardly and too accommodating to keep them in jail and punish them in the manner that they deserve.

By our cravenly behavior, we’ve made the Philippines appear internationally as "scared" of Beijing. How then can we get on our high horse over the Spratlys, which we call our Kalayaan islands, but which the Chinese claim to be their Nansha islands? If we can’t even protect our own Tubbataha Reefs, which are more extensive and rich in marine life than Australia’s vaunted Great Barrier Reef, how can we defend our claim to the Spratly’s? Susmariosep! And to think we’re still aspiring to obtain one of the soon-to-be-vacated temporary seats in the United Nations Security Council! Why on earth do we entertain such a vaulting ambition, when we can’t even "secure" our own archipelago?

* * *

No less than one of our most respected ecologists, and a Philippine UNESCO commissioner, Dr. Miguel Diño Fortes, has voiced his protest at the release of the 122 Chinese poachers.

Dr. Fortes, who's a professor at the Marine Institute of the University of the Philippines, may even elevate his complaint, we hear, to the world headquarters in Paris of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which has been inquiring about how the Tubbataha Reef is faring since those reefs are supposed to be one of the five "Heritage" sites in the Philippines proclaimed by that international body to be guaranteed maximum protection.

Since President Macapagal-Arroyo has been invited by UNESCO Director-General Koichiro Matsuura to deliver the Opening Address at the UNESCO plenary session and general assembly in Paris next September, what will she say when she addresses that distinguished assemblage representing most of the member-countries of the UN?

I suggest that the President make sure that the 38 poachers we now have in custody don’t get away with the same light treatment the earlier 122 received. We have to send a message once and for all to all poachers and pirates: "No more, Mr. Nice Guy. Those who violate our waters and try to grab our resources will regret it."

Can we do this? Somehow, I’m not sure. Thus far we’ve shown ourselves to be a nation weakened by selfish politics and petty considerations, endless deal-making and compromising, too ready to sell even our country down the river for personal gain.

How can GMA even speak of a "strong Republic"? She caved in to the Chinese, and so did our Speaker Joe de Venecia, who now wants to fast-track amendments in the Constitution to re-invent our form of government into a parliamentary system. Will such a change reform our morals? Give us backbone, instead of jawbone? Make us more patriotic? We’d only have the same old TRAPOS still running the show – a carnival sideshow at that.

* * *

Dr. Fortes, I’ll have to explain, is properly identified as a professor of Marine Science at the Marine Science Institute and coordinator of the Environmental Science Program, College of Science, of the UP, with at least 20 years of experience as a coastal and wetland ecologist.

He is a member of 15 technical advisory bodies, both foreign and local, as well as a member of editorial boards and "referee of manuscripts" for five international scientific journals. He has received 18 major awards, including the UNESCO Chair and two other professorial chairs, the International Biwako Prize for Ecology for East and Southeast Asia and Russia (1995), Outstanding Young Scientist of the Philippines (1987), Outstanding Alumnus of the UP (Ecology and Environmental Science, 1996), and numerous foreign and national grants and fellowships. In 2001, he garnered the Hugh Greenwood Environmental Science Award for his outstanding contribution to the development of that field in the Pacific region.

In short, Fortes is no fly-by-night expert or "pretender", but knows what he is saying.

Here’s what he says: "The Philippine government shames itself with a pathetic excuse of wimp diplomacy by expediting the release of 122 foreign fishers ... detained at the Palawan provincial jail simply to please a visiting Chinese official. This act represents a gross disrespect of our own laws, a skewed sense of priorities and a dangerous policy towards foreign abuse of our sovereignty."

Them’s fighting words – and I say, bravo to Fortes, while I concur with him.

How long will we continue to act in such a disgraceful manner? C’mon, GMA. Let’s be strong – at last.

What was the supposed "trade-off" for our laxity towards those 122 poachers? An "anticipated" $100 million loan from China to help us build our railroad. The 140,000 domestics and OFWs now working in Hong Kong, a SAR of China? Not only are our workers in Hong Kong now facing cruel cuts in salaries, but they’re going to be heavily taxed, we hear.

* * *

Let’s review what those 122 Chinese poachers did. The Chinese were arrested in three separate incidents, all in Palawan, the first group at the Tubbataha Reef National Marine Park and World Heritage Site, Cagayancillo, on January 31 and February 1, 2002. The next batch was nabbed in Balabac on February 7, and the third batch again in Cagayancillo on May 12. Confiscated from their fishing vessels they were manning were marine turtles, corals, live fish, explosives and poisonous substances.

Those apprehended in the Tubbataha marine park aboard four fishing vessels were charged with poaching under Section 87, Republic Act 8550, a.k.a. the Philippine Fisheries Code. They were also accused of gathering rare and endangered species (Section 97, RA 8550).

Those nabbed in Balabac were charged with poaching and for fishing with explosives and the use of poisonous substances (Section 88, RA 8550). Those on board the vessel caught in Cagayancillo were sued for poaching. According to Fortes, the two cases filed against the last group of fishers were dismissed by the provincial prosecutor, a dismissal which was subsequently appealed.

Poaching, under Section 87, is punishable with a fine of $100,000 in addition to the confiscation of the fish catch, fishing equipment and fishing vessel, and an administrative fine ranging from between $50,000 to $200,000. But here’s the interesting part: Fishing or the taking of rare, threatened or endangered species is punishable by imprisonment of 12 to 20 years and/or a fine of P120,000, forfeiture of the catch, and cancellation of the fishing permit. Yet, our government compromised. Complained Dr. Fortes: "Allowing these detained poachers to plead guilty to the most minimum form of criminal punishment is a veritable mockery of our laws!"

Moreover, Fortes pointed out, EIGHT of the 122 poachers were repeat offenders. In short, they were previously caught by our government and released, yet came back to poach again. That’s what will happen: Those cretins will return to poach and poach again!

* * *

Remember that disgusting incident when then Secretary of Justice Hernando B. Perez was visited by Chinese Ambassador Wang Chungui last September 20, who demanded the release of the 122 Chinese fishermen? Perez told the press later that Wang had grown furious when he (Perez) refused to release the detainees without their entering a guilty plea and paying the prescribed $50,000 fine.

Wang had shouted at him and banged his fist on the table, Perez said. The DOJ Secretary announced he was seeking the diplomat’s expulsion and his declaration as being persona non grata for this act of insulting a Cabinet minister in his own office. Subsequently, however, specifically only five days later, Perez withdrew his call for Wang’s expulsion!

Why this surprising turn-around? Perez obviously had been told to shut up, lest relations between Manila and Beijing kuno be soured. Who told him to shut up? Was it the President?

This was long before the unfortunate Nani Perez got himself accused in the so-called "bribery" case. Alas, poor Nani is gone, while the smirking Chinese Ambassador Wang remains. When will the next table-banging affair take place?

The dispute between Perez and Ambassador Wang had occurred shortly after China’s Legislative Chairman (and former Premier) Li Peng visited Manila on September 12-15 and pledged to "strengthen ties". The fawning manner in which Chairman Li Peng had been received presaged the compromise on the jailed poachers. It’s fascinating to note that Perez was "pressured" to grovel just before the arrival of Chinese Defense Minister Chi Haotian for a four-day "goodwill visit".

If you want to know, kowtow is a Chinese word — and that’s precisely what we did: Kowtow to them.

The DOJ and the Department of Foreign Affairs let it be known that the 122 ought to be dealt with less . . . er, stringently.

In any event, Puerto Princesa’s Regional Trial Court Judge Perfecto Pe released the 122 Chinese on September 27. The fine of only $50,000 was imposed. Even though the payment of this, and the $2,000 fine per individual had not yet been paid, the prisoners were let go. (Is it true that the amounts mentioned were paid later? This has to be verified.)

Palawan Governor Joel Reyes wanted to keep the men in custody until all the fines were paid, but an aide told us yesterday that the governor could not do so because he feared he might be declared in contempt of court.

As for the "confiscated" fishing vessels, I requested a count yesterday. The word came from the governor’s office that three out of the five ships were at anchor in Puerto Princesa Bay under government confinement, but two had sunk. Had they "sunk", or had they gotten away?

Anyway, that’s the unhappy story. I hope we don’t end up, instead of being hailed as a "strong Republic", sneered at by the world as a Republic of Wimps.