Why presidential visits

Reading the accounts of President Duterte’s visit to India along with the nine other ASEAN leaders on the occasion of the commemoration of the ASEAN-India relations and India’s Republic Day, it would seem to indicate fruitful gains on both security and economic fronts – that is if they are realized. Past history has taught us to discount the gaudy numbers of business deals trotted out during such visits. It is even harder to realize fervent wishes on the security front. President Duterte himself acknowledged that there has been a lot of talking, but little action particularly on issues like maritime security and terrorism.

That said, I think it is a visit that is a long time coming, and from the Philippine and ASEAN perspective represents a welcome option to their economic and foreign policy over which China has cast a lengthening shadow. India is perceived as a benign power in the region and a natural ally in assuring freedom of navigation along the routes between ASEAN, the Middle East and Europe.

India is now the third largest economy in the world in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). It is a world leader in IT and business services, and among the top five global producers of pharmaceuticals. It has the second largest population in the world and although per capita income is low, it has a large middle class which by sheer numbers alone – one estimate places the number at 500 million and counting – makes it a major consumer market. But that is if India sheds off at a faster rate its import-substituting, protectionist policy. Exports aside, both the President and Trade Secretary Lopez, however, report promising Indian investments in pharmaceuticals, information technology and renewable energy.

On the security front, President Duterte made a pitch for an ASEAN-wide arrangement with India to combat piracy and terrorism, ranging from intelligence sharing to joint patrols a la Horn of Africa. The President also discussed purchase of military hardware. India has been forthcoming in calling for freedom of navigation in the South China Sea where currently 55 percent of its trade passes through. India has conducted naval patrols and Indian companies have participated in oil exploration activities in the area. It has its own issues with China in the Indian Ocean, which through investments in infrastructure has secured political influence and physical presence in Sri Lanka and the Maldives much to India’s discomfort. In seeking India’s support, the President has wittingly or unwittingly gained a counter balance in ASEAN’s effort to seek a solution to the South China Sea conundrum. The mutual desire to enhance relations make good business sense, but also makes smart geostrategic sense.

So if this visit demonstrates how useful face-to-face meetings with foreign leaders can be, I am still perplexed at the President’s recalcitrance at accepting the EU’s invitation to visit Brussels for a similar gathering of ASEAN and world leaders. He said he will not go there if he is just going to be insulted over his anti-drug war. As I wrote earlier, he may be barking up the wrong tree and will waste a golden opportunity to sell the country’s advantages to the 51 global leaders gathered there. India may hold promise for the future as an economic partner, but here we have the EU who is currently our fourth largest trading partner with surplus in our favor, the largest foreign direct investor (supporting over 500,000 local jobs) and the fourth largest provider of development. Moreover, the EU has recently announced that it would continue to provide GSP+ treatment to the Philippines despite earlier concerns voiced by observers that it would not do so because of concerns about EJK and the restoration of the death penalty. What clearer indication is there that they are our beneficial partners?

They say that Donald Trump being a businessman used to getting his way, was unprepared for the kind of criticism, push back and ridicule he has been getting when he became president. He has responded with truculence and hostility. The same is being said of President Duterte, who was Davao City mayor for 22 years and was also used to getting his way and brooked no criticisms. The phrase often used for such leaders is “thin-skinned.”

I recall accompanying former President Fidel Ramos to a speaking engagement during an official visit to the Netherlands. On his way to the speaking venue he was greeted with a hail of vituperations ostensibly for his anti-sedition campaign, no doubt inspired by Utrecht Pinoy exiles. Unperturbed, Ramos calmly delivered his speech and impressed his hosts with his equanimity. President Duterte should learn to be thick-skinned and overcome personal pique, if the good of the nation is at stake such as this opportunity to sell the country’s advantages to global leaders in Brussels despite his concern that he will get a hostile reception. I doubt he will get a chilly official reception, which even his new good friend Aung San Suu Kyi, was spared from when ASEM last gathered in Naypyidaw. I continue to hold hope the President will change his mind and go to Brussels.

Ayala Avenue: Dog lovers beware

There is an apartment strip from Urdaneta Apartments to Tuscany inhabited by tenants/residents who own and treat dogs as family. On a daily basis, the owners or their maids walk them on Ayala Avenue. I understand dogs are now forbidden from that strip mainly because they “befoul” the sidewalks. This may seem rather harsh considering that major cities like London have done just fine. I suggest two solutions: 1) Building administrators should meet and be taught how to manage pets within the apartment and outside. They can have such a session leader with, among others, Jojo Isorena of Better Dogs. 2) In turn, owners and their maids should be told that they must pick up dog litter with newspapers or eco-friendly bags which Ayala and/or appropriate authorities can make mandatory and subject to a fine.

In Metro Manila there are developers/retailers who own pet stores who can sponsor similar pet care and behavior sessions. Public parks could be the appropriate venue like Ayala Triangle. Lastly, I question the authority of whoever told maids and others of this new prohibition. Who is the authority issuing such a rule: Is it APMC, MACEA or Makati police or is it individual building administrators? I hope somebody reacts to this column. Please send your comments to rrr.romulo@gmail.com