Our foreign policy, it is really independent?

When I heard in the dawn hours yesterday that Martial Law was proclaimed over the whole Mindanao island, I thought of writing about the nuances of this legal order. But, news reports about the uprising of some Muslim sectors in Marawi City, which possibly served as the basis of proclaiming martial rule and the running commentaries by legal eagles on this constitutional issue ensued the whole morning yesterday that I deemed it wise not to add to the confusion my inputs.

Suffice it to say that if the president was pushed to issuing this fiat in the highest interest of our country, we need to rally behind him, support his actions and pray for his success regardless of our different political colors. Having said that, let me seal my lips on this issue, for now.

This administration of President Rodrigo RoaDuterte, is likely to give us the opportunity to understand deeper a constitutionally declared pursuit of an independent foreign policy than the combined regimes of five past presidents posterior to People Power. It is written in the 1987 Philippine Constitution that in our relations with other states the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity and the right to self-determination.

Let us try to understand the phrase "independent foreign policy"in a layman's context. To start, we shall consider independent to mean that we are free from any influence.It must be the freedom from any persuasion exerted by any other state.We craft a foreign policy that is not tainted with the designs of other countries or international personalities but rather aimed at achieving our national interest solely.

We remember that for a long period of time, our foreign policy jibed mainly with American interest. It was, to me, not bad. After all, we became an independent state, thanks to the courtesy of the TydingsMcDuffie and Hare-Hawes-Cutting Acts. Our fledgling state needed to survive under the shadow of USA. Were we not called "Little Brown Americans?" So, it was, for instance, in the best Philippine interest then that our leadership signed the Parity Agreement with the US under which treaty, Filipinos and Americans were supposedly equal in the exploitation of natural resources. The Pinoys could theoretically extract gas equally in American soil as if he were a US citizen as the American could do it here in our territory.

Economists would say that our economy became largely dependent on American investments because for years they dominated our markets.I do remember such consumer products rolling out of the factories of Colgate Palmolive (Phils.), Inc. Procter and Gamble, Philippine Manufacturing Corp, to name a few American companies. And I also remember that we were among the first Air Forces in Asia with American F-86 Saber jet planes.

It is thus acceptable that in several decades our foreign policy was not as independent as we should have. American umbilical cord was attached to it. If the USA and the Peoples' Republic of China were not the best of international friends, we, the Philippines, necessarily leaned more to the American side.

When President Duterte, took oath, we could discern a shift of preferences. He had harsh, seemingly infuriating words for American leaders but more openly he laid out amicable gestures to the Chinese officialdom. His bitter pronouncements have been increasingly aimed at America while he heaped praises for China. The foreign visits our president made were to PROC and Russia but he had not scheduled a trip to America. These and more are obvious signs of an unraveling Philippine foreign policy. Whether or not this is independent remains to be seen.