Duterte arrived too early/too late
THE FORMER mayor of Davao called by 16.6 million Filipinos to a command performance as President of the Philippines may have been thrust into big power theatrics too early – or too late.
Watching Rodrigo Duterte taking on the role, one sometimes pities the 71-year-old probinsyano learning to dress his part, to keep in step and salute honor guards, to combine sense and substance in his speeches, and master a million other details of the presidency.
Sometimes one gets the feeling Duterte is not ready for his speaking part so he covers up by throwing expletives, and improvises when interacting with his opposite numbers in the region and other global actors.
After a four-day visit to China to make friends and mend fences, Duterte left Tuesday for a three-day trip to Japan. There, he will possibly look at the other side of the coin shown him in Beijing, knowing that Japan is an ally of the United States and nemesis of China.
He had his baptism of regional politics at the recent summit in Laos of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, at the side of which he nearly tangled with US President Barack Obama after exchanging fire with United Nations and European Union leaders over human rights.
He is hypersensitive to criticisms of his bloody (4,000 killed in nearly four months) campaign against narcotic traders and users.
Did Duterte arrive on the national scene rather late? Assessing the pagbabago, the Herculean reformation, he now has to work on, one wonders how easier – and less wrenching – would solving the problems be had he arrived sooner. Japan guessing Duterte intentions
DUTERTE’S reputation has preceded him to Japan – as indicated by the silly but valid question “Will he chew gum in front of the emperor?”
Other questions – mostly about his dressing and demeanor – are minor compared to speculations about Duterte’s diplomatic inclinations. Such questions are fair, considering how he has dragged his nation of 101 million toward Communist China and away from its old ally the US.
Japan is naturally curious, if not anxious, to know how Duterte regards its neighbor, a vital part of the strategic arc facing China that goes down the South China Sea to the Philippines whose leanings now seem to be cloudy.
Or will Tokyo attempt to mend the worn-out fabric of Phl-US relations? With his anti-US utterances being met by critical reactions and reports of a possible politicoeconomic backlash, will Duterte soften up?
There are no indications that he would. Before leaving Manila, Duterte even took time to again hit Americans, calling them “gago” (fools). If US businessmen are not happy, he said, all they have to do is pack up.
Instead of speculating, Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida told reporters he would ask Duterte what his intentions are. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will also ask, he added.
Arriving in Tokyo on Tuesday, Duterte disparaged the US and the European Union during a packed reception at a hotel, where he received a rousing welcome by Filipino residents.
The AP reported: “In Japan, where formality and politeness are highly valued, some are worried about Duterte’s rough side, particularly when he meets Emperor Akihito on Friday. Japanese TV has shown him apparently chewing gum at public occasions.
“In footage of a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Duterte walked in with his hands in his pockets and chewed gum during the handshake and a signing ceremony.
“When he makes a courtesy visit to the emperor, his behavior could have a major impact,” senior lawmaker Itsunori Onodera said Sunday on TV. Duterte often doesn’t button the top of his shirt, wears jeans and has been seen without socks.” Marcos set legal basis before moving
WE continue our occasional Q&A on the Permanent Court of Arbitration award on a case filed by the Philippines against China. It is based on our exchange with Mario E. Valderrama, founder and first president of the Philippine Institute of Arbitrators. His answers were edited to fit space.
Q: Does the Philippines own the reefs in the West Philippine Sea?
A: Another misconception is that Phl owns the reefs in WPS. Reefs are part of the seabed and are not capable of ownership by anybody. And, contrary to popular belief, another state (China in this case) may make use of reefs if doing so would not unduly interfere with Phl’s exercise of its economic rights.
China’s development of Mischief Reef, however, is of such magnitude that it interferes with Phl’s exercise of its economic rights. Even then, such development is not necessarily unlawful. China can do it if Phl gives consent. This is why the Tribunal faulted China not because it developed Mischief Reef, but rather because China did not get the prior consent of Phl.
When we talk about Phl’s territorial waters (also its EEZ) as provided by UNCLOS, note that Phl should first establish its baseline, provide the measurements and have it approved by the UNCLOS authority. As far as I know Phl has yet to establish its baseline. Q: Does proximity translate to ownership? A: No. It is said, on the point, that President Marcos knew the law. When he claimed the Kalayaan group for the Philippines he put people on them. Then, he annexed the islands to Palawan. Thereafter he issued a decree claiming them. The premises: there were no claimants (which was wrong -- the claimants were China, Vietnam and Taiwan), plus proximity and for defense.
Most lawyers are familiar with the Isla de Palmas (Miangas) arbitration case which the United States (Philippines) lost in 1928. Miangas is nearer to Mindanao than to the Netherlands East Indies (now Indonesia), the occupier. The arbitrator held that mere proximity was not an adequate basis for a claim to land.
***
ADVISORY: To access Postscript archives, go to www. manilamail.com (if necessary, copy/paste the url on your browser’s address bar). Follow us on Twitter as @FDPascual. Email feedback to fdp333@yahoo.com