(Note: This article discusses prognosis of Stage 4 lung cancer. Anyone who has stage 4 lung cancer or is caring for anyone with lung cancer who may need psychological preparation should decide whether he or she wants to read any further.) 

I thought long and hard about writing you again because I did not want to give anyone the impression that I am hounding a cancer survivor. (READ: Dear Miriam Defensor-Santiago)

In truth, when you announced you had licked Stage 4 lung cancer barely 2 months after you announced you had it, I was certain you had been gifted with a miracle. Medical science cannot explain your cure. But I know that medical science has its limits, and that many things it cannot explain do happen to a select few. The majority of Filipinos who are Catholic call that a miracle.

Whatever others who do not have a religion or God might call it, I know the limits of medical science and chose not to make a comment. Notice that despite my desire to see a miracle or know whether I had missed out on a transformative new technology leading to rapid cure, I did not write you a letter and ask for your records. I understood that you do have your rights to confidentiality. Indeed I respected your confidentiality for an entire year and would have continued to do so if you had not chosen to run for president.

An expert’s opinion

But just so you know that I am not misrepresenting the science of it, and the political implications of that science, let me quote extensively from a classmate of mine in medical school who is an oncologist in the US, Dr. Ruben Sales Escuro. (Again, let me warn anyone who has stage 4 lung cancer or is caring for anyone with lung cancer that Dr. Escuro will be talking about prognosis and if you need psychological preparation you may decide to read no further.)

“Stage 4 NSCLC (non-small cell lung cancer) in the past meant distant metastatic disease including involvement of contralateral lung. However, recent changes in cancer staging guidelines now include malignant pleural effusion as Stage 4 (M1a). M1b would indicate distant metastasis. There is a subset of patients whose tumors are positive for EGFR mutation that may potentially respond to targeted therapy using oral kinase inhibitors such as erlotinib (Tarceva) or gefitinib (Iressa). Depending on the response, these patients have the possibility of achieving complete remission, the duration of which may vary from patient to patient. Some patients, however, may only achieve a partial response or stable disease. There is also a subgroup who would have progressive disease in spite of the treatment.

"I am careful about using the term 'cure' because, for most people, laymen and medical, the word implies that the complete remission is permanent. Unfortunately, a lot of the patients who initially achieve complete remission eventually develop recurrence and progression of their disease. A better term that is more accurate is long-term disease-free survival. The phrase usually means at least five years where there is no evidence of disease. There is certainly a huge concern about a person with this condition who is running for the highest office in the land after a remission of only a year.

"Once the disease recurs, the patient may experience symptoms or side effects from medications to control these symptoms (for example, narcotic analgesics to control the pain), which may impair his or her ability to make important decisions.”

Dr. Escuro adds in his exchanges with me that: "... you are just bringing up the concerns of an oncologist about someone with a very serious illness, running for president. That will not fly here in the US. It is almost like saying, 'Rely on my vice-president’.”

Let me assure you that Dr. Escuro is politically neutral. He certainly has no strong opinions about partisan politics in the Philippines.

I do hope this longer explanation assures you and your supporters that I do not merely wish to “make a scandal in your campaign.” I am sorry that my letter comes on the heels of your decision to run. But as I said in my first letter, it was your candidacy for president that tipped the balance between your right to confidentiality and the public’s right to know. (READ: #AnimatED: Public interest trumps privacy)

Human rights

The other reason I write you a second letter is that your response to my letter opened up issues regarding human rights and patient confidentiality. As a legal expert and a human rights advocate, I am sure you are as pleased as I am that our exchange led to a national debate and a learning opportunity on these matters.

But this is where our disagreement is sharpest.

In your response you mentioned that it was a violation of your human rights to compel you to release your record. Yet, I only made a request. A request that, if you had agreed to, would have answered certain pertinent questions without violating any right or law. Because Madame Senator, I am a private citizen with less governmental power than you have. Therefore I cannot compel you in any way.

You and I know that the main goal of human rights is the protection of the rights of the individual against the state. The original libertarians who proposed the earliest versions of human rights understood that an unfettered state was one of the greatest threats to liberty. They made made sure to limit the state’s power to compel an individual. Beyond this limited sphere of legitimate state action was a large sphere of individual freedom safeguarded by such rights as the right to freedom of speech, religion, of thought and expression, bodily integrity, safety in one’s home, etc.

In other words, one has to go a very long extra mile to accuse a single individual who has done you no violence, of human rights violations.

Under your reasoning your labeling my request as a human rights violation is tantamount to violating my own freedom of thought and expression. Surely I have the right to ask you these questions, tough as they are. Surely you have the right to refuse to reveal your records, as urgent as this may seem to me and the many who have agreed with me. What we are having, Madame Senator, is a principled difference of opinions, not an attempt to violate each other’s rights.

As you also know, no right is unlimited. Each right must be circumscribed by other rights and the rights of others. And I cannot over-emphasize that my request was made because I believe your right to confidentiality is now outweighed by the public’s right to know.

I would offer a compromise which I should have already stated in my first letter: release only those documents that go to the status of your lung cancer: diagnosis, treatment course, current status. Or if you prefer, I would even accept a medical certificate from any of your doctors that a cure has indeed occurred, although going  by Dr. Escuro’s expertise, you have not surpassed the 5-year period that qualifies as  “long term disease survival.”

Patient’s rights

For the sake of public information and a deeper understanding of patient rights, I need to point out that limited and voluntary releases of confidentiality are requested all the time and happen all the time. When we ask our doctors to give ourselves or our children “excuse slips” from work or school, this is only done upon our express consent.

When a psychologist or psychiatrist recommends family therapy, this cannot push through without the patient’s consent because many of the things that will be discussed with family members will be things said to the therapist in individual therapy.

There is also implied consent on the part of the patient when his or her case is discussed by a team of doctors. Otherwise the first physician, the attending physician, cannot reveal information to other members of the team.

As someone who has given free services to rape and battered women, I have often testified in court about my diagnosis, the course of their therapy, whether they were faking certain symptoms, etc. Without this limited release of confidentiality this would not be possible. But patients need to know that I cannot testify  for them, unless they wish me to do so. Certainly if a physician testifies against them, it is a violation of their rights unless on rare occasions that this is done with the consent of the patient.

All these instances must be made clear also so that people’s understanding of their rights is increased. Their right to confidentiality is not absolute and it is often to their advantage if people agree to release information.

The sanctity of hospitals

I must say I am also deeply bothered by your statement that I could request a release of your records from the hospitals which hold them. This is futile, because without your expressed permission, this is not possible.

Because many people take your word as gospel truth, I am worried about what this does to medical institutions. People must know that hospitals, clinics, infirmaries, lying-ins, etc. cannot reveal their records by the mere request of any citizen.

Consent is necessary. Let us not put any doubt in people’s minds that would make them hesitate to seek medical aid and confide fully to health personnel and institutions.

Compassion for survivors

The final reason I speak out is for the sake of compassion. 

Locally based oncologists have reached out to me because, since your declaration of cancer recovery, patients have besieged them asking for a cure (“magic pills”) for advanced cancer. But they do not have such a cure. This, to me, is utterly heartbreaking.

These heroic doctors have a very difficult job. They need to work with their patients to ensure that they stay in fighting form so that options can be discussed, decided upon and acted on. Just because a cure has not yet been developed does not mean people must give up hopes for remission or, absent that, therapies that will help the person be functional and stay comfortable for as long as possible. Many things can be done to ensure equally compassionate objectives like human dignity and psychological (spiritual) growth, no matter how long the patient has left.

But they cannot do this by denying what science tells us and encouraging false hopes and delusions. It would be counterproductive to these equally compassionate goals.

Another group of people who have reached out to me are those taking care of someone with stage 4 lung cancer or had taken care of someone who had passed. These people feel very strongly about the issue. The road they traveled to acceptance and peace was and is difficult. Somehow your statements seemed to say that they were wrong to accept the inevitable. That their resignation to the harsh truth, which is so necessary to their own strength and healing, was unfounded.

As many of those who deal with misfortune or have survived it will tell us, the real lack of compassion here is to pretend that life is always rosy or fair and filled with colorful miracles. Instead like all the great spiritual leaders and philosophers tell us, life can be harsh but that does not mean that it isn’t still beautiful and wonderful even to those given bad cards.

For all these reasons, I had the presumption to request you to show us the truth behind your miracle cure. For the same reasons I have had the temerity to write you again.

In my first letter as in this one, I write because I have always considered you a person worthy of being asked these tough questions. Questions about human rights and democracy, life and death, are not for the stupid or the cowardly.

If for some reason I have upset you despite my admiration and the best of intentions, then I ask for your understanding. – Rappler.com

Sylvia Estrada-Claudio is a doctor of medicine who also holds a PhD in Psychology. 

Gerry Lanuza, a sociologist at UP Diliman, recently claimed that the whole AlDub phenomenon can be likened to religion. Many netizens felt offended and in response, questioned the  integrity and academic merit of Professor Lanuza.  

I think many online bashers simply did not understand Lanuza's point. Aldub is an implicit religion insofar as out of it has emerged unprecedented fandom, community, and even commercial support.  

To state the obvious, Aldub is not a religion in its substantive sense. Inasmuch as she is Kalyeserye's moral center, it would be strange to imagine Lola Nidora as its high priestess, for example.  

But functionally, Aldub behaves like religion.  

The function of religion in the social life of many Filipinos lies in bringing us together and leaving us with an awe-inspiring feeling that we are one and called for a purpose.  

Sociologically speaking, the euphoria one feels in gatherings around Brother Mike Velarde or Pope Francis are not fundamentally different from those around Pacquiao and yes, Alden and Yayadub.  Such communal euphoria is referred to in sociology as collective effervescence.        

Consider this point too: That Aldub happened almost spontaneously is a resonant imprint of many other religions. World religions like Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism, before they became organized institutions, were spontaneous movements or communal gatherings around specific persons.  

But to me there is a bigger issue here – that Sa Tamang Panahon took place at the Philippine Arena. I admire Eat Bulaga for taking the risk in holding it here. But let me bet that even Tito, Vic, and Joey were not surprised that they filled the biggest indoor stadium in the world. Eat Bulaga, after all, is timeless.    

When Iglesia ni Cristo celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2014, I wrote that its Philippine Arena was a powerful declaration that it has arrived on the world stage. It is no longer a religion in the Philippines. It is a religion in the world. INC's Philippine Arena is an unmistakable statement of its attempt at religious worlding.

But Eat Bulaga's event last Saturday has effectively sealed the Philippine Arena as a statement of national and global significance. Before this event, the place was used primarily by INC for its special events. Most recent was for the premier of the movie Felix Manalo and the Dakilang Pamamahayag of Ka Eduardo Manalo.      

Sa Tamang Panahon has brought us together at the right time in the most symbolic of places – the country's biggest arena named after the nation itself. So is its symbolism still a monopoly of INC? Perhaps not anymore.     

Opium?

But there is an irony here.

To be sure, last Saturday's event will be in our collective memory for a long while. At the Philippine Arena, glamor, emotionalism, and other so-called Filipino values were brought together. And making the event doubly admirable is that Eat Bulaga is donating all proceeds to the construction of school libraries around the country.  

It demonstrates the power of implicit religion to pool our resources for public good.  

Such a shame though, if one thinks about it, that we need celebrities to make basic welfare possible in our country. This is a matter many of us take for granted. We take it for granted that entertainment performed in the most glamorous manner is our redemption. Politics in this country, after all, is entertainment.    

Yes, Aldub is an implicit religion that brings us together.

But any religion that does not compel us to question the fundamental issues of social life – maleducation, maldevelopment, corruption – is in Marx's terms, an opium of the people. We might be simply hallucinating. – Rappler.com

Jayeel Serrano Cornelio, PhD, like many Filipinos, is an AlDub fan.  He is a member of the Board of the Philippine Sociological Society and the Director of the Development Studies Program at the Ateneo de Manila University.  He is the author (with Dr Manuel Sapitula and Dr Mark Calano) of a forthcoming textbook on world religions published by Rex.  Follow him on Twitter @jayeel_cornelio.   

After days of fighting the scorching heat and muddy roads, our team finally reached the Agta community in an island barangay in Casiguran, Aurora — the area where Typhoon Lando first made landfall on October 18, 2015. While the team prepared the relief supplies for distribution, I saw a group of children seated on chairs in the middle of a damaged pavement. I was curious at what they were doing so I approached them.  

As I drew nearer, I saw pieces of roof all over the ground, a table set on a muddy patch of grassland, and books soiled and scattered everywhere. And as I moved closer to the children, I finally realized that I was standing in what used to be a community school.

When I said hello, shy eyes stared back at me. Suddenly, my attention was caught by the book that they were reading — a grade school English book that they were all reading together. I couldn’t help but feel mixed emotions upon such sight, because it is always amusing for me to see children like them enjoying reading, but not in a situation like this — under a roofless and wall-less classroom.

What further broke my heart was their response when I asked them why they were opting to stay under a shadeless coconut tree. Altogether, they replied: “Because we miss going to school.”

If not for Typhoon Lando, these children would have been in school today. Typhoon Lando has flattened hundreds of houses in Casiguran, Aurora, and community facilities like schools and classrooms severely damaged — leaving children and their families without access to quality education. 

These children need immediate assistance to help them recover from this calamity. Among others, they need temporary learning spaces and basic school materials, so that their classes could resume at the soonest possible time.

These children need us in situations like this — they need you. Help us bring the needed assistance to them. - Rappler.com

Jerome Balinton is the Emergency Communications Officer of Save the Children. He is currently deployed in Casiguran, Aurora as part of the organization’s humanitarian response. 

Save the Children is one of the first organizations to respond immediately after Typhoon Lando hit. Our staff on the ground are distributing kits containing lifesaving relief supplies for families in some of the worst-affected communities in Casiguran, Aurora, where the typhoon first made landfall. Relief supplies include water purification tablets so that people have safe drinking water, tarpaulins to serve as emergency shelter, basic household kits containing kitchen utensils, mosquito nets and sleeping mats, and household kits with soap, towels and toothbrush.

To know more about Save the Children's work for #LandoPH, visit savethechildren.org.ph/LandoPH 

How about cemeteries as a base for tourism? Yes, this question is legitimate. In fact, there is such a thing as ‘tombstone tourism’ and even a bigger concept termed as ‘dark tourism’.

‘Dark tourism’ is generally defined as tourism to places associated with death and disaster. Some people call it ‘thanatourism’ from the root ‘thanatos’ meaning ‘death’.

Cemeteries become tourist drawers on merits of their cultural, historical, as well as architectural value. Ghoulish as it may sound, cemetery tourism is a growing phenomenon around the world. Its popularity must come from everybody’s desire to trace their roots or pay homage to long-dead heroes and villains.

In Sapanta, Romania, the Merry Cemetery is a top tourist destination. Each grave site there is marked with  a brightly-colored tombstone that depicts either the person buried or a memorable scene from his/her life. London, England has the famous Highgate Cemetery, a haggard, Victorian-style cemetery built on the outskirts of North London. The final resting place of philosopher Karl Marx, a vampire was rumored to haunt its gates in the 1970s.

We are not wanting of sites like these in Iloilo. In fact, most travel writers from Manila and the rest of the country include cemeteries as part of their itinerary every time they visit the city and province of Iloilo. Realizing the importance of cemeteries, the Iloilo City Environment and Natural Resources Office  (CENRO) conducted an inventory of public cemeteries in all the districts to address congestion in its graveyards. I hope the next step is the beautification and restoration of these cemeteries.

Last week, my family went to San Joaquin, Iloilo’s southernmost town. It’s actually the hometown of my maternal grandmother. When lola was still alive, she would visit the town often. Now that she’s gone, we rarely go there since it’s quite far from the city. We are only forced to go there during important family occasions such as burials, weddings, and fiestas.

At first I didn’t want to join. When Nanay told me that they were going to attend the burial of her 2nd cousin, I changed my mind. For me, it meant visiting the famous San Joaquin Cemetery. I had visited the place a couple of times back then, but I was too young to appreciate its beauty and mystery. It’s my chance, I thought. Besides, the two-hour trip wouldn’t be much of a hassle since we would be using a private car.

When we reached the place, I literally jumped out of the car in excitement. The cemetery is located around a kilometer before the town proper if you’re from Iloilo City. Nanay and the rest of my companions remained inside the car because it was boiling hot outside. Armed with my ever reliable ‘bridge camera’, I ran towards the steps leading to the dome-shaped ‘kapilya’. Good thing, Sharlyn, my niece, followed me. Without her, there wouldn’t have been any photos of me in front of this imposing structure.

The Campo Santo of San Joaquin, Iloilo was built in 1892. The term ‘campo santo’ literally means ‘holy field’ and is used to refer to a cemetery. Its architecture is baroque, as evidenced by its entrance which is adorned by stone balustrades on both sides. On top of the gate is a life-size statue of Jesus Christ with arms stretched wide open.

The main feature of the campo santo is the mortuary chapel or capilla made of coral rocks and baked bricks. The structure’s red dome caps its classic elegance. It’s located at the center because it is where the dead is blessed before the actual interment.

My visit to the hauntingly beautiful San Joaquin Municipal Cemetery illuminates more than just mortality. In a way, it answered this childhood question: Will I live forever in a golden paradise, be reincarnated as a cat, or simply cease to exist? Cemeteries both fascinate and scare the daylights out of me. There in San Joaquin, I resolved not to flee from cemeteries, and not to flee from death itself. - Rappler.com

Paul Vincent Java Gerano holds a Master in Education (M.Ed.) degree major in English as a Second Language from the University of the Philippines. During his student days, he was awarded the ‘Most Outstanding Tourism Writer in Western Visayas’ by the Department of Tourism and the IWAG Award for his Outstanding Achievement in Campus Journalism by the Philippine Information Agency – Regional Office VI.

 After hesitating for years, the United States has finally decided to openly challenge China in the West Philippine Sea, deploying destroyers into the 12 nautical miles radius of Chinese-occupied land features in the area. Throughout the last two years, China has frantically built a sprawling "great wall of sand" across the Spratly (Kalayaan) islands, changing the facts on the ground without confronting any significant resistance. 

Utilizing state-of-the art technology, China has artificially reclaimed 20 times more land than all other claimant countries combined in the last four decades. China hopes that these construction activities will bolster its sovereignty claims (see Art.7 and 47, Paragraph 4 of UNCLOS) in the area and allow it to better project power against other claimant states. There is no moral, legal, and technological equivalence between China’s reclamation activities and that of other claimant states in the area. 

Given the massive power asymmetry between China and its smaller neighbors, only the United States has the wherewithal to challenge Beijing’s unremitting quest for maritime dominance in East Asia. And to the delight of its Asian allies, particularly the Philippines and Japan, the Obama administration is finally drawing a line in the sand, challenging China’s great wall of sand in one of the most vital Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs) on earth.  

On the surface, the US is simply engaging in routine operations to ensure freedom of navigation in the West Philippine Sea and beyond. It is easy to dismiss America’s latest move as calibrated saber-rattling to calm the nerves of anxious allies. 

A closer look, however, reveals the dramatic nature of America’s latest maneuver aimed at reining in Chinese maritime assertiveness. Like never before, America is directly challenging China’s sovereignty claims in the area, even if this carries the risk of heightened Sino-American tensions ahead of the APEC and ASEAN summits next month, if not potential clashes between American and Chinese armed forces. No less than the future of the Asian order hangs in the balance. 

Maritime Commons 

Despite all the advancements in technology and land-based infrastructure, about 90% of global trade is still carried through maritime routes.

The South China Sea is an artery of global trade, facilitating $5 trillion in international trade, $1.2 trillion of which is bound for the United States. It also serves as a key transit route for the bulk of the energy imports of major Asian economies such as Japan, South Korea, and China. Unlike the Persian Gulf, which is also a major transit point for hydrocarbon trade, the South China Sea is vital to the global food supply, accounting for as much 10% of world fisheries supply. Hundreds of millions of people across the region depend on the West Philippine Sea for their daily diet.

During his intimate retreat with President Barack Obama back in 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping boldly claimed, “The vast Pacific Ocean has enough space for two large countries like the United States and China.” Reinforcing lingering suspicions that he was perhaps calling for a Sino-American co-dominion in the Pacific theater, the Chinese leader proposed a “new model of great power relations,” where Washington and Beijing will effectively treat each other as peers with respective zones of influence in the area. 

To be fair, Xi’s proposal for a new regional order – what I have called Pax Chimerica – was based on an earlier joint statement between the Hu Jintao administration in China and the newly-installed Obama administration, which has framed Sino-American relations as “the most important bilateral relationship in the world.” 

The November 2009 joint statement between the two powers quite controversially stated, “The two sides agreed that respecting each other’s core interests is extremely important to ensure steady progress in US-China relations.” For Beijing, one of those “core interests” is safeguarding China’s territorial integrity and sovereignty claims, which have progressively expanded from peripheral restive regions such as Tibet and Xinjiang to Taiwan and, in more recent years, much of the South China Sea. 

Unlike other maritime superpowers throughout history, from Netherlands and Britain in early modernity to the United States today, China, however, is treating adjacent waters as an extension of its continental territory, its national “blue soil”. This is nothing short of a strategic coup against modern maritime international law, which, based on the works of the legendary Dutch legal philosopher Hugo Grotius, strives to ensure ‘open seas’ for the purpose of international commerce and peace. 

Law and disorder

Refusing to acknowledge China’s sovereignty claims over artificially-created islands in the area, the United States Navy’s (USN) guided-missile destroyer (USS Lassen) has pierced into the 12 nautical miles radius of Beijing-occupied land features on a regular basis. It is a move that is both urgent and risky, simultaneously carrying the promise of reining in Chinese maritime assertiveness and provoking a confrontation with Asia’s superpower. 

Though Washington has not ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), thanks to the intransigence of some members of the U.S. Senate, the USN observes the relevant provisions of the UNCLOS as a matter of customary international law. No wonder then, Washington has allowed Chinese military vessels to pass through its EEZ in the Pacific as well as 12 nautical miles territorial sea off the coast of its Alaskan territories. Together with its allies, Washington has undergirded freedom of navigation across the globe, securing the foundations of unimpeded international trade and maritime security. 

Although China is a signatory to the UNCLOS, it has repeatedly sought to impose restrictions on the entry and movement of foreign military vessels and aircrafts well beyond its territorial sea. And in clear contravention of UNCLOS (see Article 60), it has engaged in a sweeping reclamation activity across the Spratly chain of islands, permanently altering the nature of disputed features well beyond its EEZ and continental shelf.

Against the backdrop of the glaring gap between China’s actions and its legal obligations, the United States (a non-signatory to the UNCLOS) is, quite ironically, invoking UNCLOS as a basis to challenge China’s sovereignty claims in the area. 

On paper, the United States professes neutrality on the sovereignty claims of competing claimant states in the South China Sea. But its recent decision to conduct freedom of navigations operations – deploying surveillance vessels and possibly even reconnaissance aircrafts – within the 12 nautical miles radius of China’s artificially-created islands represents a de facto rebuke of China’s territorial claims in the area. 

The showdown 

The UNCLOS (Art. 18, Sec. 3, Part II) provides “continuous and expeditious” right for innocent passage for foreign vessels within the territorial sea of a coastal state. But this principle doesn’t apply to activities that are “prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State,” including “any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defense or security of the coastal State.”

In short, the UNCLOS doesn’t provide American military vessels the right to engage in surveillance operations within the 12 nautical miles of Chinese-occupied islands. China considers such activities as prejudicial to its interests. 

“There is no way for us to condone infringement of China’s territorial sea and airspace by any country under the pretext of maintaining the freedom of navigation and overflight,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry warned in response to America’s decision to conduct freedom of navigation operations within the 12 nautical miles radius of Chinese-held features. This means the United States is essentially challenging China’s sovereignty claims to these islands. 

China has been engaged in reclamation activities practically across all the features (Fiery Cross, Hughes, Cuarteron, Gaven, Subi, Johnson, and Mischief Reefs), under its control in the Spratly chain of islands. None of them are considered by legal experts as naturally-formed “islands” (see Art. 121 of UNCLOS), with at least three of them (Gaven, Subi and Mischief reefs) considered as low-tide elevations, which are not entitled to any territorial sea of their own (see Art. 60, Part V and Art. 13, Sect. 2, Part II of UNCLOS). 

Deploying freedom of navigation operations within the 12 nautical miles radius of these features doesn’t violate international law, since they were originally low-tide elevations. (This is why it is important to watch whether American will also challenge China in the Fiery Cross, the commander-and-control center of China’s activities in the area, which is widely considered as a rock that can generate its own territorial sea.) 

The duration, frequency, and depth of these operations will also determine China’s counter-measures. Beijing has a wide range of options to respond to America’s challenge. It could buzz American vessels with jetfighters, or/and deploy an armada of para-military forces backed up by conventional naval forces. The two powers have a wide range of sticks to stare down each other without triggering all out conflict. 

Historically, the USN conducts freedom of navigation operations away from the limelight. But this time is different, especially with the world carefully watching America’s next action. This also means that China’s leadership is bound to come under tremendous pressure to respond accordingly. This is a battle for leadership in Asia. – Rappler.com

The author teaches political science at De La Salle University, and is a regular contributor to Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative of Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington D.C. His latest book is“Asia’s New Battlefiled: US, China, and the Struggle for Western Pacific” (Zed, London). The article is partly based on his latest column for The National Interest.  

“It’s not always about sex. Some men just want to talk.”

I did not know what to expect when I set out to meet Gwen, but it was not the non-chalant declaration of her services.

Gwen is a PSP, a personal services provider. In simpler terms, she is a freelance sex worker. Gwen was referred to me by a friend, who is one of her clients.

I did not expect Gwen to be barely 5 feet tall, rounded on all edges, her sharp street-smarts casually dressed in t-shirt and jeans. Ok, so maybe our meeting in a coffee shop in Quezon City merited a more subdued outfit, I thought to myself.

 “Look, I know I’m not the prettiest PSP around. I’m short and chubby. But I know what I’ve got,” Gwen offered, as if reading my mind.

I leaned in closer thinking that Gwen would tell me some kind of mind-blowing sex tip that turns any man to putty between her legs. 

“I can talk,” she said. 

“I’m sorry?” I asked, uncertain what to make of her statement.

“I can talk,” she repeated. “I can carry a conversation. It’s not always about the sex. Some men just want to talk. And men are willing to pay extra for that,” she said, flipping her hair behind her shoulder.

Not exactly more cost-efficient, but for P2,500 to P3,000 for two hours maybe hooking up with a PSP was a sexier form of talk therapy. 

GFE: The Girlfriend Experience

It was from Gwen that I first heard about GFE or the girlfriend experience which her clients were more than willing to pay a premium for.

“We talk first. I ask him about his day and I listen. I call him ‘honey’ or ‘baby.' I treat him like he’s my boyfriend, not just a customer,” she said demurely nibbling the cookie she ordered with her coffee.

And when the clothes come off, Gwen puts on a performance of enjoyment and pleasure.

GFE is where the business transaction ends and the semblance of a relationship begins. But can’t men get the “girlfriend experience” from his well, girlfriend? Or from his wife?

Apparently not. Not that it mattered to Gwen. The relationship gap was a business opportunity she was willing to fill.

There is always the danger of familiarity, of getting attached, Gwen admitted. Especially for the men who see her on a regular basis, like once a week. The payment made at the end of an encounter resets the boundaries and douses any sort of delusion that the relationship will transcend the four walls of a motel room. 

“How do you know you’re the only one he’s seeing?” I asked her.

“If he sees me once a week, that’s P10,000 a month – at the very least. He can’t afford to keep more than one PSP and his wife.”

Accidental sex worker

Gwen got into sex work by accident. 

She was already looking for hook-ups online and was surprised when after one dalliance, the guy pumped cash into her palm, thanked her and bid her good-bye. Her initial shock and indignation quickly wore off when she counted the money. “I can actually make good money from this,” thought Gwen.

From brokering casual hook-ups, Gwen began actively marketing herself online to test the viability of this business. 

“I’m upfront about my looks, but even when answering inquiries, I make sure I sound professional. I invest time in answering questions and talking to prospects.” In the same way, Gwen also screens inquiries based on the way they text, phrase their questions or negotiate her asking price. “‘Pag medyo jologs, never mind.”

Pretty soon, she quit her day job working for a travel agency and focused on another kind of booking. 

“It (bookings) was beginning to get in the way of my work. Ora-orado kasi sila mag-book, pag may window, ‘yun na.” (They always book at the last minute. If there’s a window of opportunity, they have take it).

“The latest that a man can be with me is 8 or 9 PM. Beyond that, his wife or his girlfriend will come calling looking for him.” In Gwen’s business, 5pm to 7pm is rush hour. 

Just talk?

When the story of my interview with Gwen came out, several of my female friends reacted with incredulity. “What do you mean sometimes men just want to talk?”

It sounded like a fumbling excuse from an unfaithful lover who has been caught with his pants down. But since I first met Gwen, I have interviewed many other sex workers and they have all uttered a variation of Gwen’s revelation.

Whether employed in bars, working as independent freelancers, or internationally crossing borders and timezones for a rendezvous of the flesh, they have all said: It’s not just about the sex. 

What sex workers are also selling is a fantasy, an illusion of a life not bogged down with mundane discussions about bills, the drudgery of family gatherings and having to put up with each other’s friends. 

Monogamy brings security and stability. But its evil twin is monotony. The humdrum flatline that comes with living out life’s routines that bind us to the existence of another person.

Convenience? Non-liability?

A veteran sex worker will see it from a less utilitarian perspective. It is fornication with no strings, conversations without consequences, affection sans expectations.

It is not sex that she is selling. It is intimacy she is brokering.– Rappler.com

Today marks the 13th anniversary of my move from Manila to New York. I remember it like it was yesterday - from the tearful goodbyes of my friends and family at the airport, to the long haul flight from one hemisphere to another, to seeing the happy face of someone I loved in a crowd when I landed in JFK. 

In my excitement, I barely slept on the plane. I had black ink on my nose because my pen leaked as I filled out immigration forms in a rush, even if I had several hours left on that flight to complete them.

I was moving as fast as I could. I just spent 3 weeks with a visiting New Yorker in Manila. I reeled from her departure so I followed her to the US one month later with no concrete plan.

Except to arrive. And I did, straight into a pair of arms I didn't really know. We hugged at the airport terminal in a crowd of Indian families. She brought me a coat and was happy to take me home.

The first thing I noticed when we got out of the cab was the crisp fall air, the smell of leaves, trees, and burning wood. We lugged what I decided were my world's possessions inside two suitcases up three flights of stairs. In my new lover's bedroom were two dozen long-stemmed red roses, each bud the size of my fist. I was never a big fan of flowers but that was a good introduction to the super-sized nature of most things in a country I was invading.

Even the pigeons were obese. I noticed this when I sat in the park where I was no longer the tallest person but became part of a minority for the first time. I looked at the diversity of faces, skin tones, and outfits. I studied people's intonations and accents. I read up on every cultural and religious group I encountered so I would understand their every visible detail. I kept to myself, made myself scarce, studied and learned everything I could about my new surroundings, jobs, coworkers, acquaintances, and friends. I was determined to thrive.

I got used to tiny apartment living and its discipline of never keeping too much of anything for too long a time. I was homesick, calling my friends at odd hours when I was lonely just to speak Tagalog and to tell them how I was and what I was discovering. I learned how to use the laundromatand became amused at the ease of completing what for me used to be a three-day task. I tried to find the smells and flavors of home in the entrees and salads I was learning to eat. 

I learned to cook Filipino food as a matter of sentiment and survival. I was told that Lily's peanut butter was essential to my favorite kare-kare, but at a high cost from the distant Filipino store I found the slightly sweeter ones from the nearby bodega would do. I discovered that roasted rice need not be ground manually in a mortar, instead the assistance of a coffee grinder provided the texture I desired. 

During meals I would first close my eyes and pretend to be back home. I told my wife that the smell of sautéed onions and tomatoes in fish sauce is the smell of the Philippine kitchen. I told her stories about each meal I made and how it would transport me to a place and time that seemed so far away. I realized that as years passed we created our own stories instead.

I became used to rejection and not being recognized for my education and achievements back home. One day, I hopelessly walked into my eighth or eighteenth job interview where the Caucasian employer pointed out that we had the same University of the Philippines diploma and said, "I know what you know," and then gave me my first job.

I've learned about love - its highs, lows, and the changes and tragedies that come with age and the passing of years and a decade. I fought the pressure of hanging on to just one person in a country I didn't know, where I had to be taught to zip up my jacket, pull my shirt sleeves through my coats, tap the ice off my boots before going indoors, and dust my shoulders of snow.  

I've been lonely and terribly isolated; at times feeling like my whole move was a great mistake. I've failed at jobs and challenges and wished for a familiar face or a city where I could relax with friends and be myself.  Or at least yell out a crispy hybrid curse like "Ukinamshet!"

I've learned that missing the homeland doesn't mean being ungrateful for where you are, nor does it mean you want to move back home. Any love results in heartbreak of some kind, including the love of the place of your birth. Displacement has its own rewards and costs as well. 

It's been a long time since the nights where coming home without tears was considered a good day. They made up the months and years when I doubted who I was or if I would ever be good enough and recognized for my worth. It hasn't been easy and there have been times where it seemed that the only feasible option was to give up. But I didn't.

There must be some reward for holding on - to love, hope, and the small chance that tomorrow will be better. The next days were and have been better. I now have stable gainful employment, a healthy relationship, a loving family, and the right to live, work, and marry like any other person who is here. Through years of joy and difficulty I still have the same pair of arms and kind eyes to greet me at the start and end of each day. That has been the biggest blessing and probably the real reason I am still here.

Thirteen years later, I can finally say I truly have arrived. Happy anniversary to me! 

A big hug to all those with whom I share this journey. Whether you are at the beginning, middle, or end of it, we all have different stories. But our losses and longings are one and the same - that for a country we have lost and forced ourselves to find in pieces in our respective new surroundings, and the bittersweet notions we gain about what we consider home. – Rappler.com

How about we do this? Let our Marines attack the Chinese base now being built in the West Philippine Sea?

A friend of me suggested this impish idea in a conversation on several topics where we challenged each other to think outside of the box (one result of this was an essay on Manny Pacquiao). He added that the only way for the country to see if its mutual defense treaty with the United States will work was to go to war. Military treaties are, after all, agreed upon by allies to respond to two situations: prevent a war from happening and compel the enemy to sit down and talk, or else face the wrath of a unified, much stronger alliance. Alternatively, he argued, if the enemy is adamant about its claims, then the treaty's utility for both allies can be tested by going to war against this belligerent opponent.

That, he said, should be how we approach this problem with China. 

For it is that time again for the annual PH-US joint Balikatan exercises – that big dance where US and Filipino Marines work hand-in-hand to test their ability to work together. There is the beach assault by both forces, which are then followed by free range firing on an imaginary enemy involving helicopters and jets in support of combat maneuvers.  Non-military activities range from teaching US marines jungle survival (Youtube is full of videos of Philippine marines showing Americans how to drink water from a vine and prepare snake's meat) to the rebuilding of public school buildings and the paving of village roads by the resource-rich Americans. 

As these "military actions" play out, commanders from both sides go into spin mode and in press conferences repeatedly assure Filipinos that the alliance is strong and unwavering. The US commander repeats the pledge his predecessor made of how committed the US government is in defending Philippine national interests should external enemies threaten these. 

However, my friend maintained, how can we be assured that that promise will be fulfilled unless we place the allies in a situation of war? Hence, he suggested that our commanders veer away from the script and in the middle of the Balikatan exercise suddenly launch an attack on Chinese forces. "And let us see what happens?"

I asked him why this turn to the bellicose and his answer was – as expected – outside of the box: "The usual response of the communist groups, academics, and politicians is to abrogate the treaty, an end to the warmongering by the administration, and then accuse the latter of being a ‘puppet of US imperialism.'"

However, this has been found to be inadequate as slogans for popular mobilization. Almost always, the protests one sees at the US embassy over these treaties are pathetically small. Compared to the pickets, the lines for visa application or interview are longer! 

These are ineffective because they are used solely for propaganda purposes. These anti-treaty forces know that their "demands" will never get the Philippine and US governments to terminate the military agreements. They know that only a regime change – via revolution or a coup – can create the possibility of termination. So they develop this illusion that somehow, slogans like "Ibagsak ang imperyalismong Amerikano (Down with American imperialism)" or  "Rehimeng Aquino, tuta ng mga Kano! (Aquino regime, lapdog of the Americans!)" will draw the interests of "the people," and open their minds to recruitment. The truth is that no one among "the people" has any interest at all in learning more about these slogans.

And the status quo ante persists, argues my friend.

So instead of waiting for America to act, or whining at their doble cara, he suggests the Philippines take the initiative and confront the vastly superior Chinese ships in the shoal. The USS Lassen is already there, having approached China’s 12-nautical zone. The Philippines can send those used US Coast Guard Hamilton cutters to tag along the Lassen and then when the time is right, send a few volleys towards the shoal. Their pride will compel the Chinese to fire back. Question then is will the Lassen come to our navy ships’ rescue?

I would think so, insists my friend. US and Philippine Presidents and senior officials can confuse the public with their vague assertions, but on the field (in this case, the sea), commanders may obey orders but when crunch time comes and an ally is pinned down, there will be no question that the other ally would act. So I predict that the Lassen’s captain will retaliate in our behalf.

Once the firefight escalates, then we will really see how much the United States values the mutual defense treaty she signed with the Philippines in 1951. I asked my friend if the US will do so and his answer was curt: It will not.

This is an interesting idea that I will leave readers to mull over. – Rappler.com

Patricio N. Abinales is an OFW.

Amid the worsening traffic situation in Metro Manila, I together with fellow sustainability advocates, wanted to explore a form of mobility that’s been with us all along: walking, our first and most natural means of transportation.

Coming from different fields – art, medicine, journalism, education, business, tourism – we all have personally experienced the benefits of walking – as a form of exercise, as a practical and economical way of transportation, and as a way of seeing of the world in a different light. Thus we wanted to start a conversation about how we can make Metro Manila a walkable city, and felt that “walking the talk” was the best way to do it.

On Sunday, October 25, 2015, we walked the 21.3-kilometer stretch of EDSA, from SM Mall of Asia in Pasay to SM North Edsa in Quezon City. Starting at 5 am, the walk took us 5 and a half hours – including stops to rest, observe, listen, and talk to the people we encountered.

Here are some of the things I learned along the way:

1. There is no organized walking infrastructure. Sidewalks terminate abruptly, leaving the pedestrian unsure about how to proceed. And when they do exist, they are too narrow: in at least one section near Guadalupe, only a slim person can comfortably fit! Pedestrian lanes are also sorely lacking, misplaced, or absent where badly needed. There were areas where we didn’t even know where to pass, because there are no signs for pedestrians. For a 24/7 city, there are many sections, including overpasses, without lights, making those areas threatening, especially to individual walkers and women. And what of heavy rains and flooding? Surely in those instances, walking is even more precarious, if not impossible.

2. Pollution is really a major obstacle. The noxious air, the heat, and the noise are all forms of pollution that made the walk at times stressful. Our white shirts did not turn grey in the end, but the tissue paper did when we wiped off our faces. On a positive note, however, the trees along certain sections in Makati and Quezon City made a lot of difference in making the air breathable.

As a medical doctor, I see the potential of walking as a healthy activity (I burned around 1,500 calories during the entire walk), but we need to overcome the health risks involved – not just by wearing masks, but by making Metro Manila cleaner and greener.

3. Some pedestrians don’t follow the rules. While affirming pedestrian welfare, we saw – and do acknowledge – that pedestrians are also part of the problem when they do not follow pedestrian lanes and traffic lights. Any kind of advocacy should also focus on educating and disciplining the pedestrians themselves.

4. There are nasty drivers too – especially those who don’t respect pedestrian lanes. Once, I was nearly hit by a car that insisted on passing through the lane even when the driver saw that I was already crossing. I think we pedestrians should be very clear that the pedestrian lanes must be defended and respected. Ditto for sidewalks.

5. EDSA is built on an architecture of social injustice. Walkways are just an afterthought, like that overpass in Ortigas which isn’t even 6 feet in height. Billions are spent on our roads, benefitting those who can afford to have private vehicles, followed by those who can afford to take taxis and PUVs. 

Amid all these, EDSA is home to the homeless, a workplace for the unemployed, a treacherous walkway to those who cannot afford to pay for bus and MRT tickets. In a literal and figurative sense, the poor are marginalized, and the advocacy of pedestrian welfare must also take their predicaments into account.

6. We can make EDSA beautiful. One of my fellow walkers, sustainability advocate Cherrie Atiliano pointed out that walking is much more manageable – and interesting – if there are attractions along the way. Even the sight of children’s murals along Santolan were a welcome reprieve from the billboards and the makeshift stores of Cubao. Creativity and design have a big role to play in making the roads not just walkable and safe, but also beautiful and inspiring. 

7. Walkability should be "inclusive." One of the memorable sights we saw in EDSA was that of a man on a wheelchair, precariously being pushed on the highway itself as there was no sidewalk wide enough for him to pass through. Any attempt to make Metro Manila walkable should consider PWDs, the elderly, and also allow for bike lanes as part of "inclusive mobility."

8. EDSA is walkable. Metro Manila is walkable. Walking the whole EDSA may not make sense for everyday purposes, but Magallanes to Buendia was a nice, relatively clean segment with trees, and it was actually pleasant to walk on. Better yet, it took us just 30 minutes – even faster than driving the same route on a Friday rush hour! Realizing that you can actually walk some parts of Manila is an important first step in getting a “walking culture” started.

9. There is a popular demand for an advocacy to get people walking. Pedestrians comprise a majority of the population but because we have not imagined ourselves as a community, our interests have been sidelined. Yet the demand is clearly there, as evidenced by the social media attention our posts about the walk elicited. Hopefully, by organizing ourselves and speaking forcefully about this issue, we can get the government, the private sector, and all concerned to come together and work for a walkable Metro Manila. 

– Rappler.com

Gideon Lasco is a medical doctor, anthropologist, mountaineer, and environmental advocate. He is author of the hiking website PinoyMountaineer.com and the Tagalog-language health website Kalusugan.PH. The project leader of “Walk Manila," an initiative for walkability and pedestrian welfare, he is inviting people to join the conversation on how to make Manila a walkable city. Connect with him at @gideonlasco or www.gideonlasco.com

The phenomenal success of the long-running television noontime program Eat Bulaga’s “kalyeserye” has opened the floodgates of commonly held views on popular culture, now going viral on social media.

“Kababawan” is the most frequently hurled derogatory term at the show, and by “kababawan” is meant “shallow,” superficial,” “silly,” “no worthwhile content,” “vacuous,” “empty,” “hollow,” among other loaded terms. 

In the 1950s until the 1980s, such terms as “kabakyaan,” and “kabaduyan” were the operative words that further marginalized much of popular culture – the komiks, local television, Tagalog movies, soap operas, among others – as unfit for consumption by the privileged elite and the educated middle class who were as much obsessed with their own kitsch, mostly artifacts coming straight from the West and rendered in English.   

The indiscriminate usage of such terms, with their inevitable cluster of contradictory meanings and images, merely fans the flame of the ongoing and oftentimes emotional and contentious debates on “AlDub" – undoubtedly the greatest show on this side of the world, currently mesmerizing millions of people – and the show’s  “value” in a nation of 100 million in the grip of poverty, corruption, and ruthless use of power.

This is not the first time that the nation has seen such a massive and hysterical outpouring of emotions of hundreds of thousands of certified fans. 

Eat Bulaga stalwarts constantly refer to the number of tweets that breached the 20 million, the 30 million that has now gone over the 40 million mark. Nor can anyone fail to see the huge Philippine Arena – previously the site of the Iglesia ni Cristo gatherings – filled to the rafters, as 55,000 people followed the spectacle on the stage.

It was a colorful and almost breathless unfolding of everything that has sustained the show’s popularity – a medley of songs, jigs and dances, poetic language galore, characters in drag and their sidekicks in barong, and the ubiquitous and circuitous love story of a  “yaya (nanny)” now transformed into a modern-day Cinderella and her gorgeous love (the perfect image of the mestizo as lover in this colonial society), donning the creations of famed Francis Libiran, now finally allowed to fall into each other’s arms.

Huge early successes

The 20th century is full of such rapturous response to artifacts of popular culture. When the Tagalog novel was first introduced in the Tagalog-speaking areas in the 1900s, thousands bought copies of the newspapers that serialized the novels and later, the novels in book form.

The zarzuelas of the American period attracted droves of theater-goers. And so did the bodabil of the 1930s until the 1960s with the likes of Pugo and Togo, Katy de la Cruz, Bobby Gonzales, Matimtiman Cruz, Reycard Duet, among others, doing non-stop variety show – song and dance routines, circus acts performed willy-nilly – to the delight of the crowd at Clover Theater or Manila Opera House, or some makeshift stage during town fiestas, even in the postwar years. 

When Liwayway came into being in 1922, the readers took to the new magazine format – a mixture of novels, short stories, poems, and features – with enthusiasm. The likes of Fausto J. Galauran, Jose Esperanza Cruz, Teofilo Sauco, Teodoro Virrey, among others, became household names. 

The Tagalog movies of the 1920s and 1930s were box-office hits, as the fans were regaled by the new technology of the moving picture. This immense popularity would continue until the 1980s, and would make the likes of Carmen Rosales, Rogelio de la Rosa, Gloria Romero, Fernando Poe Jr, Dolphy, Nora Aunor, to name a few, icons of popular culture.  

In the postwar years, Don Ramon Roces further promoted the reading frenzy with the komiks and its Proteus-like ability to forever transform itself. The komiks introduced millions of readers to the adventures of Kenkoy, Bondying, Darna, Dyesebel, Roberta, Kalabog En Bosyo, Ang Panday, Maruja, Jack en Jill, Facifica Falayfay, Petrang Kabayo, the ill-starred lovers of Maruja and Bukas...Luluhod ang mga Tala, the persecuted heroine in Bituing Walang Ningning, Gilda, or Insiang, to name a few.    

Radio and its new technology was introduced in the 1920s but reached the peak of popularity with the mind-boggling success of the soap opera, penned by the likes of Lina Flor and Liwayway Arceo. People would make it point to be home in time for the daily dose of stories woven in such blockbusters as Gulong ng Palad and Ilaw ng Tahanan, or Dr Ramon Selga in the 1950s. 

The turns and twists in the lives of Luisa and Carding, Choleng, to name a few, held the public’s imagination in thrall, as hundreds of thousands of listeners lapped up the highs and lows of love and family life, themes that the zarzuelas, the novels and short stories, to name a few, had explored to the death!

With television offering a more intimate view of the world – visually and aurally – the public had another source of “libangan (hobby)” or “aliw (entertainment).”  Dolphy and Panchito continued to regale the public with their comedic talent through Buhay Artista, and Dolphy with Nida Blanca proved a formidable couple in John en Marsha, with Dely Atay-Atayan, the immoveable force, perpetually exhorting John, “Magsumikap ka (Work harder)!” and asking the family to stay the course in the face of life’s difficulties.

Countless teleseryes, mostly based on the old soap opera or Tagalog komiks and films, returned again and again to earlier themes and motifs – unrequited love, the persecuted orphan, the hero’s quest, the formidable battle between good and evil, the need for order – dished out and shaped by a heavy reliance on the didactic tradition. The recent show, Be Careful with My Heart that featured a nanny falling in love with the master of the house (as in Jane Eyre), still leaves a glow on the faces of the teleserye’s die-hard fans.  

Eat Bulaga through the years

The noontime shows, for their part, captured the younger audience; Eat Bulaga had its own unique charm years ago. These noontime shows were the modern variations of the bodabil, as earlier exemplified by German Moreno’s Sunday Extravaganza over DZRH. But along the way, Eat Bulaga had to create and test new formulas that deployed scantily clad dancers, a variety of contests, gags and lewd jokes that the program’s hosts, Tito Sotto, Vic Sotto, and Joey de Leon, and their sidekicks continually spewed out. 

The knowing and oftentimes leering glances, the lecherous smirks of the hosts were trademarks of the show for years – powerful men/hosts reveling in their authority in the program as they made fun of some contestants and even members of the audience.

Indeed, the question is: how did this noontime show – which critics admitted, hardly displayed any social orientation or even sought to inculcate values, and which peddled the lie that life is a long series of running gags, underhanded compliments, frenzied pursuit of money to be had – not because of intelligence, but through sheer luck, transform itself?

The program helped instill in the minds of millions that fame could be had by someone with a handsome face and a sultry figure, or the cute demeanor of a child star. How was this program able to come up with a narrative that the Catholic Mass Media Awards recognized for instilling traditional values? How did this show, the embodiment of “kababawan,” stumble upon a magic formula that now has millions in thrall?  – Rappler.com

(CONCLUSION: Part 2: The AlDub experience: Millions captivated)

The author has done research on various aspects of popular culture and has published the results of her research. She also taught interrelated courses on representations and images in popular culture as faculty of the Interdisciplinary Studies, Ateneo de Manila University.

(READ: Part 1: AlDub: Stumbling upon a magic formula)

How has the kalyeserye resonated with its fans of all ages and fans from various classes? 

Tons of words have been written trying to explain the show’s success.  What I propose to do is to demonstrate how AlDub is both a continuation of various traditions crystallized in earlier genres – both written and oral – and a deft utilization of more contemporary forms brought about by new technology. 

AlDub appears to be both an affirmation of some traditional beliefs and a subversion of traditional modes. It is a site where the audience discovers strands of continuity at the same time that it delights in radical disruptions through the systematic deployment of new media – split screen, dubsmash, multiple narratives rendered simultaneously – that problematize traditional concepts of mimesis or realism.

Originally, kalyeserye was a part of the program where Jose Manalo, Wally Bayola, and Paolo Ballesteros, plus hand and crew, traveled to a barangay where in the midst of much noise, boisterous laughter, and ear-splitting shouting, the cast delivered money and goods (from the show’s advertisers) to a lucky resident. 

The narrative, usually told by the lucky recipient, consists of a tear-inducing series of events revolving around bad luck, poverty, death and abandonment, and other stuff. This narrative occupies center stage in the greater unfolding narrative taking place in the vicinity, where the onlookers got their two seconds of instant fame.

This lengthy episode included games, contests, and prizes for the lucky few. While these almost frenetic series of activities went on, the audience in the studio remained witnesses, as the main cast in the studio conducted a dialogue with the outdoor cast and the recipient of the goods. One of the oldest storytelling techniques, this series of narratives within narratives make for compelling drama, and very often, moments of contagious laughter.

Begun only in July, the AlDub series features Maine Mendoza, an Internet sensation noted for her dubsmash, where she lipsynchs and oftentimes makes fun of celebrities. Young, attractive, and with a vivacious, bubbly persona, she sings, plays the drum, dances, and most importantly, uses her face and body to intimate various expressions and modes. She is the female version of the great English comic, Mr Bean, with his “rubbery” and malleable face, and of local comedians such as Dolphy who, through perfectly timed gestures with accompanying facial contortions, evoked fun and laughter.  

The persona from the Internet effortlessly entered into another world and became an instant hit. In the series, the “yaya” is seldom heard, as if in simulation of the grear art form perfected in the silent movies of the early years of filmmaking, and much earlier, in the European mime tradition. She lip synchs various songs – Tagalog and English – chosen as the situation demands.

Then there is Alden Richards, a contract player of GMA-7 who has been featured in various shows. He is a tall, handsome young man, whose mestizo features are made more attractive by his dimples. Like the yaya, he seldom speaks and communicates with her by writing notes for everybody to see. They interact through a split screen. Their physical interaction has been aborted variously, with Lola Nidora being the fearsome guardian.

This love story has unfolded with the audience drawn into the agonizingly protracted series of movements which has also turned them into delighted and often giddy voyeurs. This is a simple love story revolving around an age-old theme of unrequited love, an impossible situation that millions of stories have featured, where the readers or the viewers are pulled into the narrative as they follow, with bated breath, the ebb and flow in the tumultuous sea of love.

In AlDub, though, the tumultuous ebb and flow in the sea of love must be allowed to run its course (which means everything must pass, even love!), but before this happy ending, the path must be filled with obstacles that prevent the fulfillment of this love between the couple.

The fact that the yaya is a mere nanny, a foundling whose parents are unknown to her (there have been back stories) seems not to be a problem. Class, which matters in many stories (the komiks, films, teleserye), does not pose a problem in this narrative. The yaya is not to be despised because she occupies a lowly place in society. The formidable obstacle is Lola Nidora, a rich old woman, with a strange fashion sense, played by Wally Bayola in drag, who serves as the source of insights into love, relationships, family, fate, friendship, to name a few.

While the yaya wears the same costume, complete with a checkered apron, and Alden in shirt and pants, the 3 lolas are attired in fantastic, colorful, and laughter-inducing costumes – clothes that look like dusters bought in Divisoria, odd-looking gowns, floppy hats that are travesties of the hats worn by the aristocracy, over-the-top make-up – that the audience within and outside the kalyeserye seem to love, despite the dizzying clash of colors and mind-bending “aesthetics.” 

That they are men made to play the role of women is not a cause of concern; on the contrary their obviously male voice, enunciating words in the way that a homosexual pronounces words, is a huge part in the act. The audience is swept into a tide of action and words so riveting that a willing suspension of disbelief takes place.

AlDub’s debt to tradition

After centuries of the dominance of the oral tradition (in the folk poetry, riddles and proverbs of the pre-Spanish period), the didactic tradition (in the pasyon, in such works as Urbana at Feliza), the tradition first explored in Florante at Laura where Tagalog was mined for its richness and complexity in formal and rhetorical ways (as in the awit and corrido, and later in the old Tagalog novels and movies), the use of the bard or seer as a teller of tales and source of authority and wisdom in the community, the public has been trained to rely on a set of methods to make sense of “reality” through a set of conventions.

The teller of tales was seen in the anonymous poet, Balagtas, Modesto de Castro, and as late as the 20th century, the lovable grandmother Lola Basyang, the persona of Dely Magpayo, in Nagmamamahal, Tiya Dely, in Eddie Ilarde as the host of Kahapon Lamang, and currently Charo Santos in Maalala Mo Kaya? and Mel Tiangco in Magpakailanman. 

We have also seen the powerful tradition of certain great narratives of love, the need for order, the proper familial relationships in thousands of texts, the ability to accept such “different” characters as the homosexual and his weird acts (Dolphy is the homosexual who has a heart of gold), the miserable foundling, and the persecuted orphans (Cinderella and Mayang). Likewise, we have been witness to the violation of the dictum pertaining to the purity of genres (the tendency to mix comedic and tragic elements, the combination of fantasy and realism).

Thus, the public view of “reality” is not only conventionalized. As important is the fact that this view is mediated by a host of factors.  

In 2015, the audience sees and responds to what is unfolded on the screen through a series of codes and conventions already in place by centuries of listening and reading. The present is always shaped by the past.

What the individual sees on the screen is not “real” (although it is a fact that there has been some confusion between what is real and what is illusory), but a construct of the “real” through the use of conventions and modes to help the public make sense of the “reality” being projected on the screen. Television, which by its ubiquity is treated as a fixture in the house, like any familiar furniture, is the stage on which various but interrelated dramas are being re-enacted and received by the audience. It is also the technology that provides a daily recipe of aliw (entertainment) and aral (lesson).

Because television meticulously and constantly churns out this concatenation of apparently unrelated characters, images and impression, which to be fair, follow a certain narrative logic, the audience familiar with other texts can make sense of all these goings-on in a world turned upside down, where what seems is not what really is, where secrets galore have to be deciphered, where characters flit in and out of the narrative (Rianna, the “mother” of yaya, the suitor).  

What could be the reason for the relative ease with which AlDub’s millions of fans have responded to these sometimes unsettling and very often surprising and humorous twists and turns of events acted out by a host of strange characters? 

The encounter between the audience and AlDub has already been framed by earlier encounters and exposures to other komiks stories, soap operas, movies, teleserye, computer games, popular songs that have impacted popular consciousness, and have enabled the public to make sense of a chaotic life, even for a few moments. 

This is one function of popular artifacts: to help the audience, even for the moment, see some intelligible patterns based on their own dreams and expectations.

Put simply, AlDub has become a certified success among millions not because it stands out in the midst of similar shows (perhaps it does in terms of its difference with Showtime or Wowowee). It stands out because in the show we find the crystallization of the nation’s major literary and cutural traditions. Lola Nidora’s careful pronouncements of recurring lessons – “lahat ay magaganap sa tamang panahon (everything will happen at the right time),” “ang pag-ibig ay humihingi ng pagpapakasakit (love demands sacrifices),” “ang nakatatanda ay iginagalang (the elderly should be respected)” – are the contemporary version of lessons learned by our ancestors from Urbana at Felisa or Florante at Laura.

The desperate straits the lovers find themselves in allude to similar situations confronted by young lovers in countless works. The general confusion and raucous events in AlDub are a throwback to the rib-tickling and humorous situations in the older sinakulo (passion play), komedya and bodabil that also insinuated themselves in the comedies of Dolphy or Ariel Ureta. The generally heightened poetic diction of the old people appeared and infused life into the balagtasan, one of the most popular spectacle that attracted thousands of people.  

The unfolding of a narrative, episode after episode, in the street is a mode that goes back to the early sinakulo staged in the town streets, and reiterated in the narratives of the public flagellation and crucifixion during Holy Week, and even in the traditional Santacruzan in which are embedded an interrelated series of stories. This is public theater using the medium of television. Unlike the intimacy gained by a reader reading a novel in the privacy of her room, this street play is for public consumption, and the residents of the barangay, active participants in the story. Popular texts have been both participatory and celebratory for centuries.

This very public spectacle is defined by a particular environment. AlDub takes place not in gated communities, nor in the gleaming streets of Makati or Ortigas. True to its avowed mission of giving to those who have less in life (courtesy of the sponsors that have made the show possible), television’s version of a Santa Claus comes to a poor community, dispenses his largesse, generates goodwill and more sales for the capitalists, financing the manufacture of noodles, soft drinks, snacks, laundry soap, etc.

In other words, the primary audience has always been Manila’s impoverished population that, through the magic of television and commercialism, act out their fantasies, experience vicarious thrills, sneak into a world where difficulties are banished away with a magic wand or a change of heart!

As importantly, when local television and aspects of the Internet valorize many forms of violence, irreverent language, a toxic embrace of fame and fortune, vulgar and hurtful jokes, and uncritically embrace the values of individualism and secularism, pits the ego versus the community, greed versus social responsibility, short-lived affairs versus permanent relationships, among others, AlDub turns its back on these disturbing aspects of contemporary society. Thus, the emphasis on respect and chastity, on responsibility and the common good, on honesty and fidelity to vows, expertly woven into the narrative day in, day out.

And where popular works almost always feature the conflict between good and evil, AlDub does not really tackle this theme. Most of the characters in the narrative are good people with good intentions, except for the kidnappers of the yaya. The bad elements have been occasionally deployed to push the narrative and create more suspense. There is no Fernando Poe Jr here to slay monsters and mow down hooligans. There are no versions of Joseph Estrada suddenly appearing to wipe out murderers and rapists.

A world turned upside down

In this world turned outside down, there is much delight and plenty of surprises. 

Often loud and rambunctious, the kalyeserye is acted out with spontaneity and robust energy. Moments of stillness and reverie are rare, except when the yaya and Alden sing to each other. Self-contained, the world depicted in AlDub is both immersed in reality – the reality of makeshift houses, dirty kids, men in their undershirts and women in their dusters and shorts, on the one hand – and in a non-realistic universe, akin to the world in a dream/nightmare and fantasy.  

It is a space where the logic that defines the narrative is the logic of the emotion and of the imagination, those powerful faculties that allow the millions to partake of the experiences, burst out laughing, tear up at the sight of the lovers prevented from seeing each other, listen quietly as Lola Nidora provides a nugget of wisdom, feel a tremendous rush as the slightest gesture or expression of the lovers is interpreted, and assure themselves that in the midst of chaos, such rare commodities as peace and stability are still possible if only everybody would focus on doing good.

AlDub will die a natural death once it ceases to surprise, once its tremendous energy and creativity are dissipated, and once it becomes more cloyingly predictable. Right now, it continues to subvert traditional modes of television – reliance on half-naked girls, unalloyed sentimentality, uncaring and sometime brutal hosts, cute child stars following staid scripts, comedians who would rather hurl insults than crack genuinely funny and witty lines. Once it reformats itself to conform to the expectations of self-styled pundits and critics, and alienates itself from the people, mostly the dispossessed living in society’s periphery, it, too, will pass.

Does AlDub offer fantasy? Yes, it does. Is it escapist? Yes, it is. Is it a product of capitalism? Yes, as popular culture is determined by returns on investment. Are there unseen hands manipulating the narratives?  Definitely. Are there ulterior motives behind the program? Ask the producers.  

But for the moment, let the millions of Filipinos from all over the world enjoy this phenomenal spectacle, this delightful palabas (show), a mirror and a refraction of “reality” because it resonates with some of our deepest needs and aspirations that the familiar phrase “aliw at aral” convey. The program taps into our hidden longings for permanence, for perfect love, our quest for the numinous, deep feelings buried by the oppressive details and burden of everyday life.  

Turned on its head, “kababawan” becomes “kailaliman (depths).” In those precious but rare moments of stillness, the world is transfigured. – Rappler.com

The author has done research on various aspects of popular culture and has published the results of her research. She also taught interrelated courses on representations and images in popular culture as faculty of the Interdisciplinary Studies, Ateneo de Manila University.

The widely-anticipated decision of an arbitration body, formed under the aegis of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to exercise jurisdiction on the Philippines’ arbitration case against China represents a major victory for those who seek a semblance of rule of law in the West Philippine Sea. Interestingly, it happened shortly after (watch out for conspiracy theorists!) the United States deployed destroyers to challenge China’s illegal occupation of features across the Spratly chain of islands.

The Philippines has taken, as the Chinese saying goes, the first step in a journey of thousand miles to ensure coastal states base their claims on modern international law, not obscure claims to historical rights.Thanks to its impeccable and highly creative legal strategy, the Philippines managed to overcome a major hurdle that stood between the prevailing rule of jungle, on one hand, and the promise of rule of law, on the other, in the highly-contested South China Sea.

Though China has formally boycotted the arbitration proceedings at The Hague, and has vigorously argued against compulsory arbitration (under Art. 287, Annex VII of UNCLOS), the Arbitral Tribunal at The Hague has provided the Philippines an unprecedented opportunity to leverage the UNCLOS as a basis to resolve maritime disputes in one of the world’s most critical Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs).

A milestone

Since arbitration bodies under UNCLOS don’t have a mandate to address sovereignty-related issues, the Philippines astutely repackaged its complaint as a maritime delimitation/entitlements issue. This legal acrobatic was nothing short of a stroke of genius -- crafted by a star-studded team of renowned international lawyers carefully assembled by the Philippine government.  

China tried to procedurally sabotage the Philippines’ case by citing exemption clauses under the UNCLOS (see under Art. 9, Annex VII), questioning the competency of the Tribunal to adjudicate what Beijing describes as fundamentally sovereignty-related disputes, and argued that compulsory arbitration is premature since all avenues of conciliation haven’t been supposedly exhausted.

By unanimously voting in favor of exercising jurisdiction on the Philippines’ case, the Arbitral Tribunal effectively rejected Beijing’s efforts to sabotage Manila’s laudable legal effort. Despite China’s refusal to participate in the proceedings, the tribunal judges (under Art. 9, Annex VII) have proceeded with arbitration, but will (under Art. 5, Annex VII) continue to provide Beijing the opportunity to present its case through informal channels like, say, positions papers and statements by Chinese public officials. (So we could expect China to release another position paper on the jurisdiction verdict soon.)

In a 10-page summary, the judges argued that the Philippines’ case “was properly constituted” and that the Southeast Asian country’s “act of initiating this arbitration did not constitute an abuse of process [as asserted by China].”Reassuringly, it argued that “China’s non-appearance in these proceedings does not deprive the Tribunal of jurisdiction,” and “international law does not require a State to continue negotiations when it concludes that the possibility of a negotiated solution has been exhausted.”

In short, the Philippines was right to resort to compulsory arbitration, because negotiations with an intransigent China were going nowhere. The Tribunal, however, didn’t exercise jurisdiction on all of the Philippines’ arguments against China, opting to cover 7 items. But other items were left for either further clarification or further consideration since they “do not possess an exclusively preliminary character.”

So far, the Tribunal has exercised jurisdiction on the determination of the nature of disputed features (see Article 121) such as Scarborough Shoal as well as mischief, Gaven, McKennan, Hughues, Johnson, Cuarteron and Fiery Cross reefs; the environmental impact of China’s activities near Scarborough and Second Thomas shoals; and aggressive maneuver against Filipino vessels near the Scarborough Shoal.

Legal multiplier

Having overcome the jurisdiction hurdle, the Philippines has set an important precedence, which can be exploited by other claimant states against China. Based on my exchanges with leading Vietnamese experts earlier this year, my sense is that Hanoi has been carefully watching whether Manila can overcome the jurisdiction hurdle before seriously preparing a similar suit against China.

Now that the jurisdiction is cleared, at least on almost half of the Philippines’ arguments, we an anticipate what I call a “legal multiplier”, whereby other small claimant states such as Vietnam and Malaysia could also leverage the UNCLOS to defend their claims against a revanchist China.

Obviously, any prospective legal maneuver by other claimant states will be tailored to the specific nature of their disputes with China -- Vietnam, for instance, has disputed islands both in the Paracels and Spratlys -- as well as the texture of their overall relations with Beijing. Unlike the Philippines, both Malaysia and Vietnam are heavily dependent on China in economic terms, and none of them enjoy a treaty alliance with external powers like the United States.

But even if they won’t actually file a case proper, they can more credibly threaten China with doing so. This means that Beijing is confronting the prospect of multiple arbitration cases against its sweeping and dubious nine-dashed-line claims, which covers a huge chunk of the West Philippine Sea and much of the South China Sea -- an artery of global trade.

In the coming months, the Philippines will have to defend the merit of its arguments before the Arbitral Tribunal, while hoping that the judges will also exercise jurisdiction over its other (and more crucial) arguments, particularly with respect to the validity of China’s concept of historical rights, its aggressive posturing within the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and massive construction activities across the Spratly chain of islands.

Tag team

So far, the Philippines has a good chance of, at the very least, invalidating China’s sovereignty claims over land features such as Subi (close to Philippine-held Thitu Island) and Mischief (close to the Philippine-controlled Second Thomas Shoal and Reed Bank). The Philippines argues that since these land features were originally low-tide-elevations, they aren’t entitled to their own territorial sea and exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

Interestingly, America’s freedom of navigation (FON) operations close to Chinese-held features in the area is also predicated on the same argument.  For Washington, it has the right to conduct surveillance operations close to Chinese-controlled features such as Subi and Mischief reefs, simply because these are --- prior to their artificial transformation by Chinese reclamation activities -- low-tide-elevations that can’t be appropriated to begin with. (READ: US warship sails near islands claimed by China)

Unlike China, America isn’t a signatory to UNCLOS -- thanks to the intransigence of a vocal minority in the US senate, who refuse to ratify the treaty -- but it actually follows its relevant provisions as a matter of customary international law. And this is why America has allowed Chinese military vessels to roam its EEZ in the Pacific Ocean, even if China refuses to reciprocate accordingly.

In effect, the Philippines and America are acting as a tag team, one deploying its muscles to counter China’s dubious claims, while the other dispatching its best legal minds to highlight China’s contravention of international law.

Nonetheless, there is no room for triumphalist celebration. The Tribunal is also yet to exercise jurisdiction on more important elements of the Philippines’ case, particularly regarding the validity of China’s nine-dashed-line claims and doctrine of historical rights as well as its aggressive reclamation activities and posturing within the Philippines’ EEZ and the Spratly chain of islands. The Philippines, the Tribunal has announced, will have “to present oral arguments and answer questions on the merits of the Philippines’ claims and any remaining issues deferred from the jurisdictional phase.”

China has the ultimate option to ignore any unfavorable outcome, and double down on its ongoing efforts to consolidate its claims across the South China Sea. But the reputational costs, and corresponding diplomatic backlash, will surely undermine China’s soft power and bid for regional leadership. – Rappler.com

The author teaches political science at De La Salle University, and is a regular contributor to Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative of Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington D.C. His latest book is “Asia’s New Battlefiled: US, China, and the Struggle for Western Pacific” (Zed, London). An earlier version of this piece was published on Huffington Post.

For the first time in anyone’s memory, foreign policy and national security are poised to figure as major issues in the Philippine presidential election, scheduled for May 2016. Recent polls show Filipinos are worried about China and its aggressive stance in the South China Sea. They also fear that economic dependence on China could be leveraged to force concessions on the Philippines’ sovereignty. These are not unreasonable views, given that Chinese vessels now occupy Scarborough Shoal, just 140 miles from the Philippines’ northern Luzon Island, and that China’s nine-dash line nearly intersects with the Philippines’ Palawan Province. Filipinos are demanding that their leadership establish a credible defense posture for the country.

Other polls suggest a very close race among three leading candidates to succeed President Benigno Aquino III, who is limited to only one term under the Philippine constitution. The leading candidates are Senator Grace Poe, Vice President Jejomar Binay, and former secretary of the interior Manuel “Mar” Roxas II. The winning candidate will need to convince voters that she or he is committed to defending Philippine sovereignty.

That context is important for both Aquino and U.S. President Barack Obama, who are slated to meet in mid-November on the sidelines of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders’ Meeting in Manila.

For Aquino, the remaining months of his administration offer a legacy opportunity to institutionalize defense and national security mechanisms to protect the sovereignty of the Philippines. In doing so, he is politically aligned with the majority of Filipinos, who have welcomed his outspoken stand against Chinese diplomatic pressure and aggression in the South China Sea toward the Philippines. His administration’s decisions to seek clarity on China’s claims in the South China Sea at the United Nations’ Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague and to hammer out the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) with the United States are pillars of this effort.

The EDCA, which Manila and Washington signed in April 2014 and whose constitutionality is currently being questioned by the Philippine Supreme Court, would allow the stationing of U.S. troops, planes, and ships on Philippine bases on a rotating basis and involve significant U.S. capacity-building efforts for the Philippine armed forces.

Presidential visits have historically been action-forcing events. For Obama, this will be his last trip to the Philippines as president, and likely the last by a U.S. president for several years. The United States will hold presidential elections in November 2016, and a new president will take office in early 2017.

Therefore, Obama’s visit to Manila could be a recommitment of his rebalance to the Asia Pacific, underlining tangible support for the U.S.-Philippine alliance through serious investment in helping to modernize the defense capabilities of the Philippine armed forces through the EDCA.

With the visit less than a month away, the opportunity for the United States and the Philippines to roll out the EDCA and activate the U.S. funding vehicle—the Southeast Asia Maritime Security Initiative, which will allocate $425 million for the U.S. military to support the Philippines and other regional partners in maritime domain awareness and related military capabilities—may have passed. However, the two leaders still have the chance to institutionalize bilateral defense cooperation if the Aquino administration can see the EDCA moved out of the Philippine Supreme Court before the visit.

Many Filipinos wonder whether the United States would support them, under the framework of the U.S.-Philippines alliance, if another country attacked the Philippines. The answer to that question was clearly given in the significant efforts by both governments to negotiate the EDCA. That agreement also provides for careful respect of Philippine sovereignty and laws, as the U.S. military has no interest in re-establishing bases in the Philippines. Washington has signaled that it is committed to helping Manila develop a credible defense strategy and coordinating with other partners with vested interests in the maritime security and regional stability of the Asia-Pacific region. (READ: US to act in 'matter of hours' if PH sovereignty challenged)

If the Philippine Supreme Court can decide on the EDCA before mid-November, history can be made in Manila. Some argue that the court is attentive to political trends in the Philippines. If that is true, a reading of popular sentiment in the polls would give it every encouragement to move forward. The Supreme Court judges may also be awaiting a lower court’s verdict on the controversial case of Joseph Scott Pemberton, a U.S. Marine who was charged with the murder of Philippine transgender woman Jennifer Laude in October 2014. If the case is resolved soon, as expected, and in a way that most Filipinos see that justice is served, it will help pave the way for the Supreme Court to act.

The next step for Obama and Aquino in November should be alignment on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Aquino this month publicly called for the Philippines to join the next round of the TPP. That decision fits well within a national security strategy that recognizes that in Asia, economics is the foundation for real and enduring security.

During the APEC Leader’s Summit, Obama will convene with the other 11 heads of state from the original TPP member countries. That moment is the right time for Aquino to announce that the Philippines is committed to joining the TPP and to explain that doing so will drive economic development by having the world’s supply chains route through the Philippines, bringing the jobs, technology, and infrastructure that the country needs to continue its impressive economic growth into the next decade. In so doing, Aquino could give real momentum to efforts already under way in the Philippine Congress to amend economic provisions in the constitution that restrict foreign investments and participation in the Philippine economy. He would also signal to the other TPP countries that the Philippines is ready to join the pact.

Whether Aquino and Obama can make history and institutionalize these new levels of cooperation will depend on political leadership and strategic focus on both sides.

Some candidates running for president in the Philippines have called for closer relations with China, and underlined the need to “avoid confrontation” with China over the South China Sea disputes. Meanwhile, in the United States, some presidential candidates are running on platforms of protectionism, and recommending the country disengage internationally and build walls to limit new immigration.

Ultimately, these ideas will not win the day in Manila or Washington. But it is incumbent on Aquino and Obama to elevate the U.S.-Philippine alliance by activating the EDCA and bringing the Philippines to the top of the list of the next group of countries to join the TPP when they meet in November.

Mr. Ernest Z. Bower is a senior adviser and Sumitro Chair for Southeast Asia Studies at CSIS. Follow him on twitter @BowerCSIS. Mr. Conor Cronin is a research associate with the Sumitro Chair. 

This article was first published in cogitASIA and is being republished here with the author's permission.

"Past is past."

"Move on din pag may time."

We see these often on social media lately, usually with the Marcos’ loyalists endless narrative of utopia during Martial Law when no criminals roamed the street, goods were cheap and education was free – a complete contrast of what scholars, history books and thousands of witnesses have been passing down for decades.

It’s all lies, they tell us.

It’s all propaganda, they claim.

Yet many activists who opposed the dictator remain missing to this day. Is that also a lie? Decades have passed and we remain shackled by billion-peso worth of debts. Are these figures lies? In 2012, when the Congress implemented a law that seeks to help the victims of Martial Law, 75,000 people have come forward. Are they all black propagandists? (READ: '#AnimatED: Millennial, paano ka apektado ng martial law?')

I am not even surprised that a majority of the loyalists come from the north, the Marcoses’ stronghold. Ilocos they say, owes its success to the Marcoses, and the dictator’s son who is now running for the vice presidency, ought to do the same for the whole country.

Bongbong is the country’s hope, they say.

The Marcos family do not owe anyone an apology, a presidential aspirant says.

I will not argue against what the Marcoses have done for Ilocos. Most of the progress they claim are true. But to use this as an argument on why the sins of the Marcoses in the past should be forgotten is invalid, and even insensitive. (READ: 'Why Bongbong Marcos is good for Miriam Santiago' )

You cannot erase history, the same way you cannot bring back the dead.

Try explaining to those who suffered torture and abuse why the Marcoses do not owe them any apology. Try saying to the face of the families of those killed during the martial law that they should just forget about what happened for the sake of progress. Try explaining to wives who lost their husbands, parents who lost their children and children who lost their parents why they should just 'move on' when justice was never served and the culprits are still living in luxury and with so much power. (READ: '3 generations of Marcoses run for local posts in Ilocos Norte')

Move on? We’re not talking about some childhood misunderstanding. This is not one of those shallow narratives of heartbreak you see on your teleseryes. You are asking people to move over decades-old feelings of anger, grief and pain. You are telling families to move over a dark past that haunts them until this day. You trivialize their sufferings and make light of the atrocities they've seen. (READ: 'Marcos victims to file suit vs Bongbong, Imelda')  

The progress of the north that you claim to have now because of the Marcoses will not take back the pain that thousands of families have been through in the past. Those photos of high-tech wind mills and top-of-the-line infrastructures will not appease the grudge of the thousands who suffered in the hands of the dictator and his family. (READ: '#NeverAgain: Martial Law stories young people need to hear')

"Will I say sorry for the thousands and thousands of kilometers [of roads] that were built? Will I say sorry for the agricultural policy that brought us to self-sufficiency in rice? Will I say sorry for the power generation? Will I say sorry for the highest literacy rate in Asia? What am I to say sorry about?”

Answered the revered son to questions on whether he will apologize for corruption and human rights abuses during his father's regime.

“Nobody wants that to happen. These are instances that have fallen through the cracks,” he says referring to those who were ‘run over, not helped and victimized in some way or another.'

These are the words of an arrogant man who would stand by idly on the sight of impunity, and even see greatness in it. These are the words of a man who would gladly sacrifice lives for the sake of progress, and a room full of shoe. (READ: 'Bongbong Marcos knows what to apologize for' )

Let his words above sink in and see how you’re asking people to forgive a man who would not even apologize and calls the death and torture of thousands as ‘instances that have fallen through the cracks.’ And you expect us to believe you when you say ‘past is past’?

It’s not an issue of the son inheriting the sins of the father.

It’s about not letting someone who favors impunity be in power, or in this case, get even more power.

It’s about taking a stand. It’s about justice.

So to Marcos loyalists I plead, go and worship your idol, but don’t go telling us to ‘move on’. - Rappler.com

Don Kevin Hapal is a graduate of Aquinas University of Legazpi and is a social media producer at Rappler. The views expressed here are his own.

This piece was first published on X, a platform for you to speak your mind. Share your story on Rappler's X today.

For about 2 decades, a scourge from Indonesia has blown over to neighboring countries, especially Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines.

Like a yearly ritual, dark plumes of smoke rise to the skies, hide the sun and choke the air. Visibility drops forcing airlines to cancel flights. Pollution reaches a high, endangering our lungs.

The haze happens during the dry season when companies as well as communities burn whatever is left of the forests in Sumatra and Kalimantan and use the land for agriculture, usually palm oil. 

These “cemetery forests,” according to David Gaveau, scientist at the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) in Bogor, are peatlands which, in their natural state, canopied with trees, are fire-resistant. But laid bare, they become “extremely flammable.” All it takes is a few days without rain, Gaveau explains, for the peatlands to smolder; they generate much more smoke than the typical forest fires such as those in California and Australia. 

The haze has large economic and human costs but Jakarta has yet to harness firm and long-term solutions to the problem. One key here is to restore its denuded forests. (READ: Infographic: The Southeast Asian haze crisis)

Henry Purnomo, also of CIFOR, has proposed that after a designated period, timber areas that have been illegally converted into palm oil plantations should be returned to their previous state. Purnomo maps out details to make this policy work.

We should stop blaming Indonesia, President Aquino has said, but clearly it is the main actor here.  Instead, Aquino continued, we should do our share to help alleviate the situation.

Perhaps part of this is to acknowledge the corrosive effect the Philippines had on Indonesia’s forests. In the 1960s and 70s, it was our country that taught Indonesia how to log. 

During the Marcos years, logging was one of the main industries, a top export earner as the country quenched Japan’s appetite for wood. Indonesians looked up to us for the technology and, in partnership with Filipino businessmen, ravaged Kalimantan’s forests. 

Singapore, for its part, has taken the strongest position among the countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In 2014, it passed a groundbreaking law that allows it to go after local and foreign companies involved in illegal forest burning that causes severe air pollution in the city-state. 

The Transboundary Haze Pollution Act was hailed by the World Resources Institute as a “new way of doing business” and a move that “sends a powerful message” that those guilty will be held accountable.”

ASEAN can move in this direction to put pressure on Jakarta to strengthen law-enforcement, in the short term, and to apply policies that will address its land use and conservation needs. Otherwise, the annual haze season will continue to torment us. – Rappler.com

Philippines techpreneurs, take note.

During our recent Milken Institute Asia Summit held a few weeks back in Singapore, we shared several lessons from the US state of California that not just the Philippines but all ASEAN member states can build on if the region is to become a center of global invention and innovation.

As many Filipinos who have traveled east to visit or to stay in America know, California has been associated with the rewards of risk taking for decades, transforming backyard entrepreneurs into boardroom successes. Those California dreams of tech success have since gone global, capturing the imagination of would-be tech entrepreneurs everywhere, whether in Manila, Bangkok, Jakarta, or Silicon Valley.  

According to the non-profit Migration Policy Institute, which looks at migration trends, Filipino immigrants constitute one of the largest foreign-born groups in the United States. The Philippines has been consistently among the top five countries of origin since 1990, and was the fourth largest in 2013, making up by some estimates 4.5 percent of the 41.3 million total immigrant population in the United States. California is a prime destination, and could well also be a source of inspiration for Filipinos looking to make it big closer to home. 

The recent rapid growth of investment in Asia’s tech sector, which according to Tech in Asia has risen from $6 billion to $45 billion in two years, provides a real opportunity. But the key for the Philippines and all of ASEAN is not just a rash of investment in initial public offerings and hot tech stocks, but for country policymakers to foster an entrepreneurial ecosystem to create consistent levels of innovation.

Long-term success in tech typically includes the ability to not only improve on, but also to be the center of innovation. As increasing global competition and higher costs have brought several Asian countries into increased prominence in technology manufacturing, there is a strong desire by these nations also to take steps to nurture and boost their own home-grown innovations, risk-takers and successes.    

So what lessons does California offer up to the Philippines particularly as the Asean Economic Community comes into being? Here are three that we shared in Singapore through the Straits Times at our second annual Milken Institute Asia Center-organized summit. 

3 lessons

First, the Philippines must commit to developing great research universities – world-class institutes that will both train skilled individuals and advance the sharing of basic research andtechnology. According to the Shanghai Academic Ranking of World Universities, 2015, the United States is home to 16 of the top 20 world research universities.

Of those 16, an astonishing six are in California, ranging from Stanford University at No. 2, to the University of California, San Francisco, at No. 18. Three of the top seven are in the San Francisco area, two from around Los Angeles, and one in San Diego. Of the top 100 research universities, 11 are in California.

In contrast, Asia’s highest-ranking research university is the University of Tokyo at No. 21; no non-Japanese university in Asia makes the top 100. This situation is changing, and California-based universities know that they too cannot rest on their laurels. In the interim, in their desire for international students, US institutions, including many from California, also have educated some of the most successful entrepreneurs in Asia.

Second, the Philippines must embrace failure – not as an end, but as a means to success. Perhaps one of the most important lessons and strengths of California is the ability of its entrepreneurs to fail and try again. By some accounts, two-thirds of Silicon Valley startups do not last five years, failing ever to make it to an Initial Public Offering (IPO) stage. 

So, why do there continue to be so many startups? One reason is that, quite often, the same people who started one company are willing and able to try again. The ability to fail and learn is a significant factor in many companies’ successes in the state.

Even the more established firms, including Apple, Google and Intel, among others, have thrived in part by continuing to take chances on small innovators, who then made it big. At one point, Yahoo’s single greatest windfall arguably came from its stake in China’s e-commerce leader, Alibaba, and its second greatest, perhaps its joint venture in Japan.  

Third, the Philippines must move to innovate in the financing of start-ups. Risk taking cannot be left to entrepreneurs alone. By some accounts, up to 50 percent of all venture capital activity in the world flows through California. The access to significant investors at numerous different stages plays a significant role for California’s success in seeding tech innovation. The Philippines must take further steps to develop this resource, including policy and regulatory changes.

The Philippines' family entrepreneurs are a great asset, including across Southeast Asia. But a key to growth will be recognizing that while venture capital funds do involve personal relationships, they also involve assessing and taking risks with relative strangers. This is a marked contrast to basing investment decisions primarily on the longstanding family relationships that often work in Asia. This distinction is important. 

While many California companies would benefit from more long-term, patient investors, the reality is that before many California startup companies reach that stage, a significant funding gap exists. Into this so-called “Valley of Death” have entered a range of financing options and investors that go beyond “family and friends.” Southeast Asian nations should welcome and embrace this, too.

Even the most successful Asia start-ups have found it easier to access US capital markets to further their expansion. Alibaba’s blockbuster New York Stock Exchange IPO is one example.

In the US, there is a growing consensus on the value of promoting financial-market understanding and of working to expand access to capital, strengthen and deepen financial markets, and develop innovative financial solutions to the ongoing challenges to America’s sustained economic growth.

The tech sector remains a US success story that has gone well beyond any Silicon Valley roots. In recent years, we have seen how technology companies have moved south from Silicon Valley to our own Santa Monica neighbor – now nicknamed Silicon Beach. That same reinvention and expansion of America’s tech industry now has people rightly California dreaming, on both sides of the Pacific, including understandably in the Philippines. – Rappler.com

. 

In the midst of a campaign season, candidates are likely to declare that boosting tourism will be a key pillar of their development platforms.  Indeed, this would seem to be the patriotic thing to do – an affirmation that our country is just as beautiful as, and even, “more fun” than, the others. 

A conversation about how the Philippines has either improved its performance in tourism, or has much work to do in catching up with its neighbors, often focuses on international tourism arrival numbers.  Within the Southeast Asian region, the countries’ numbers would be:

While the Philippines’ international arrivals has grown at a respectable 8.2% annual rate from 2010 to 2014, analyses of its performance inevitably draw comparisons with Malaysia’s 27.44 million or Thailand’s 24.78 million international tourists, or that Vietnam and Indonesia have surpassed us, or that even Cambodia draws close to our total.

First, looking at these numbers should only be the starting point. 

A deluge of foreign tourists may seem like a blessing if we were to see this simply as a game of outscoring the others. But if tourism development is pursued in the name of economic development, the conversation should instead focus on the economic activity generated by tourism. “Tourism receipts” is an internationally accepted metric for this, and yet it is often drowned out by discussions on arrivals.  

Table 2 provides more detail to understanding the impact of tourism. Total receipts for the Philippines, in relation to its neighbors, have been growing at an impressive rate of 15.8% per year over the last five years. Also, receipts per tourist have grown significantly at 7.1% per year, while the rest of the region hovered at an average of 2.2%. 

It can be conceded that the country still has much to do in moving up from the bottom bracket in total receipts, but we now see that the Philippines is securing more receipts per tourist than even tourism powerhouse Malaysia. Cambodia’s threat of catching up now seems rather hollow. Crucially, this year, the country is on a trajectory to catch up to, if not surpass, Indonesia in receipts per tourist. 

Second, it bears emphasizing that some key factors affecting total arrivals are things that cannot be addressed by a marketing campaign. One factor is how some of these countries have become international airline and cruising hubs because of a long-term commitment from government to support the industry. A traveller may thus choose to turn a connection into a one or two night side trip. Tourists in Singapore, for instance, had an average length of stay in 2013 of just 3.48 days, reflecting its nature as a hub, while in the Philippines it was 9.6 days – clearly a destination in itself.

Another factor why some states do very well in total arrivals is the ease of traversing a land border (or a bridge) versus crossing an ocean by plane or ship. The top three sources of Malaysia’s arrivals (total 63%) are from Singapore, Indonesia and Brunei, countries with which its two halves share land borders, bridges, or short ferry connections. The Philippines’ top three, on the other hand, are South Korea, the United States, and Japan, accounting for 48% of the total, all requiring substantial travel (and cost) by air or sea.

Third, as a counterpoint to this emphasis on raw numbers, an increasing number of tourist destinations are in fact searching for ways to limit the number of tourists. Barcelona, in the face of large and occasionally rowdy tour groups, seeks to control the construction of new hotels. Iceland, after seeing tourist numbers three times larger than its own population, is studying how to regulate numbers to manage the impact on its delicate environment. Bhutan has imposed caps on the number of visas and hotel construction, and even imposed taxes on tourists in a bid to reduce the impact on its people and culture. World heritage sites Galapagos and Machu Picchu have strictly regulated the number of people to preserve the environmental and cultural value of the sites for future generations.

Careless focus on numbers

A myopia that looks only at total arrivals and receipts ignores the serious socio-cultural and environmental impacts of tourism. The careless focus on numbers, for instance, has led to the critical environmental condition of Boracay, and the plight of the Ati that claim the island as their own. But the use of numbers is also a tool that allow us to shed further light on the situation.

Boracay is merely 10.32 square kilometers in area. Yet it hosts over 28,000 official residents, and received 1.47 million tourists in 2014. With a conservative assumption of each tourist staying three days, this results in average daily population of over 40,000 individuals, creating in a population density of a major provincial urban center like Imus, Cavite or San Fernando, Pampanga. 

Yet this does not capture the peak load on the island on long weekends. Estimates have placed LaBoracay 2014 arrivals at 50,000, creating a population density on that weekend similar to cities or municipalities on the fringes of Metro Manila itself - greater than Cainta or Taytay, Rizal or Meycauayan, Bulacan, or similar to Cavite City.

And we have all these people, perched on a delicate coral reef marine ecosystem. Where does the waste – of the human, plastic, paper, and chemical kinds – all go?

Moreover, we have all these people, and the economic interests they represent, arrayed against the 200 or so individuals that comprise the Ati community of Boracay – a community that has called the island their home for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

Even the economic gains that are used to justify tourism development may prove illusory. A destination may be receiving foreign tourists, but they may be on tightly packaged tours where they book through agencies, lodge in hotels, are toured by guides, shop in stores, and eat in restaurants all owned and operated by their foreign compatriots. Very little of the tourist cash thus enters the local economy, but the environmental impact of their waste, and the social impact of disrespectful and even exploitative behavior, remains.

Our conversations should not focus on raw numbers, but the substance behind it. Truly supporting tourism growth, therefore, involves managing total arrivals in a way that the people and the infrastructure are ready for and can support and sustain that growth.

It will involve forward planning to develop programs that minimize environmental and socio-cultural impacts, while maximizing economic returns.  The Department of Tourism already has a National Tourism Development Plan that maps out this process, and the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority is prepared to facilitate investments toward developing sustainable tourism zones. 

But other government entities – from key departments to local governments – need to work with the tourism agencies in fulfilling their mandates, not just in hitting target numbers, but in developing the foundation that makes sustaining those numbers possible.– Rappler.com

Mark Evidente is President of TwoEco, Inc., a consulting firm specializing in tourism development.  He is both a lawyer and licensed environmental planner by profession, and a senior lecturer at the University of the Philippines’ Asian Institute of Tourism. He holds a masters degree in environmental management from Yale University, and political science and law degrees the University of the Philippines, and had worked with Sen. Dick Gordon in drafting the Tourism Act of 2009.

I was doing an inbox search and found a friend's email from 2005. Several paragraphs long, it was a description of her life with her girlfriend in Tokyo where they taught English to Japanese students.

In her letter, she went into detail from the size of their bedroom to the taste of the iced tea she liked to drink. She described their favorite students one by one, and then discussed how she felt about her job, her new city, and her relationship.

When I read it at that time, I didn't think there was anything odd about that letter. It was an ordinary letter similar to the snail mail letters we used send to and receive from friends who were far away.

But now that it's 2015 and our email inboxes contain not much more than work emails, online purchases and spam, a long eventful email such as that one from ten years ago stands out, because nobody writes personal emails anymore.

No more personal letters

Go check your inbox and see when the last time was that you got a long personal email. These days any messages from friends come by way of text or Facebook direct message. They are short, full of stickers and emojis, and usually await the recipient's reply or reaction before proceeding to the next paragraph. 

Sentence construction is not a priority in direct messages and chats. One does not identify an objective in chatting nor follow an outline of discussion in this medium.  Often it's just two people catching up, engaging each other or getting bored before one or both drop off for another activity without any conclusion to their communication.

I used to spend hours typing up long responses via email talking about my current state, an anecdote from the past, and wishes for the future. 

I minded my grammar and spelling, and never abbreviated as these letters were never typed or read on a mobile device. More often than not, I brought handwritten drafts to type in the internet cafe, cursing aloud when a long letter typed in a browser didn't go through, the browser or computer crashed, or worse – the power went out.

There were periods of silence between emails as internet access was only through desktop machines connected by wire to dial-up modems. There was a certain sound it made that made my heart beat faster at the prospect of another world waiting.  Between these connections, sentiments of happiness and sadness were saved, steeped, composed, and when it was finally possible - sent.

The writer of the long email then took a risk. The recipient was a captive audience who had no choice but to read and wallow in the email, or not at all. We carried what we wrote and read for weeks at a time until a reply was received or a situation was resolved. If it called for a longer real-time discussion, then a chat or a call would be scheduled.

Our emails didn't compete with Facebook walls and Twitter feeds. Emails were simply it. They were paragraphs of sentiments thrown to you the way paper letters took weeks to be sent and read.

Social media killed email updates

Social media removed the need for the individualized update. When people post photos of their day's moments and emotions as status updates, everything is seen in pictures and posts meant for the world. The long thought-out sentiment has ceased to exist. There is no longer introspection meant for private consumption. The description of an event or emotion has become unnecessary when a photo says it all.

With messaging and chat, waiting for a reaction to each line before proceeding removes the flow and construction of letter writing. As chat participants, we have mastered the art of the "OK" and "and then." We are experts in the use of various emoticons and stickers to show we're still paying attention (even if we're really not).

These days, if you get a long email you're usually in trouble. The person writing you must have something so important to say that he or she didn't want it to arrive piece meal via text or direct message. He or she decided to write, read, and re-read something before sending. Funny how that used to be the only way we communicated only a few years ago.

Forwarded emails are also now a thing of the past, with our gullible titos and titas now plastering our Facebook walls with their false health claims and online hoaxes instead. If we want to show a friend what we received via message or text, there's always the screenshot.

If not for our desk jobs, we would probably lose our email skills as well, but when was the last time work emails weren't to-do lists that are just a burden to sift through at the start and end of each day?

The lost art

I've lost the friend I mentioned earlier through logistics and she has no access to social media or even the Internet.  I wonder how she would be in all her eloquence in this world where personal expression is available to all and always within reach.

I used to get love letters via email. They contained long-drawn sentiments I drowned in, analyzing word choices and phonetic value, spending days and nights dwelling on preserved sentences from their senders. Now there are just stickers – cats, dogs, bears, and even cartoon characters carrying hearts. There are proclamations of love all over Facebook along a picture of flowers, chocolates, or even a photo from old times past.

I miss the days when the sentiments were mine to keep, to live and relive. I miss the privacy afforded by a letter reserved only for my eyes. 

Now we run the risk of writing emails that will be tagged #TLDR (too long, didn't read), if it even gets as far as deserving a reply. It's also become uncommon to receive an email that starts with a "Dear (name)," salutation.

I recently received a "professional" request via email from a supposed writer I didn't know who didn't capitalize a single letter or even address my name at the start. Call me old-fashioned or inflexible to modern ways of communicating but I still feel I deserve actual words and sentences, punctuation, proper grammar, and sentence construction – especially when being solicited by a stranger. Guess if I bothered to respond to that.

In the end, personal emails will probably go the way of paper letters in that it will be reserved for the purists who still appreciate the art. Even Facebook retired their name@facebook.com email addresses they once designed to integrate outside emails with their direct messages. As many as 59% of teenagers have stopped using email altogether, considering the medium too formal, lengthy, and unnecessary when texts and chat messages are the norm.

Does that mean only the old-timers will continue to use email along with the 2 million people still using dial-up? I hope not, because there are still people like me who would love to read long storied emails from a friend or lover instead of just seeing online purchase receipts in our inboxes every single time.

Do you enjoy personal emails? Or do you think they are now obsolete? – Rappler.com

Since we are all waving the flag these days – against China, against Grace Poe, against the Moros – let us look closer at the motivations for this unprecedented rise in jingoism.

With China, there is hardly any argument: The superpower has decided that it owns a huge chunk of the Pacific Lake and that includes our territory.

It is the sideshow to this anti-China sentiment that is more alarming. F. Sionil Jose decided to go on a racist rant, demanding that Tsinoys declare whose side they will be on once war erupts. A good many followers of the bookstore owner followed suit and for a while, our countrymen and women who happened to have Chinese lineages were put on the defensive. However, that fizzled out, and it is good.

The signing of an agreement creating a Bangsamoro entity as a way of consolidating a peace process that is now moving forward, had also drawn the worst of many Filipinos' anti-Muslim sentiments. Not much has changed since a Pulse Asia survey for the 2005 Philippine Human Development report revealed that 47% of Filipinos "think Muslims are terrorists or extremists" and another 44% believe that Muslims "harbor hatred toward non-Muslims."

Its rival, the Social Weather Stations, found a much lower percentage: 33%-39% of Filipinos showed "latent anti-Muslim bias." After the BBL passage and the Mamasapano massacre, it would be interesting to see if these percentages remain. Which I doubt they will.

Religion is what mainly drives this anti-Muslim attitude, but it is also sustained by the view of many Christian Filipinos that Muslims are an inferior group compared to them. The reasons abound: from their being prone to violence (amok!), their economic backwardness (look how poor their provinces are!), their refusal to abide by the law (smugglers, pirated DVD dealers!), to, of course, a long history of enmity and war (a dead Muslim is a good Muslim!).

Lost in all this are the nuanced lives of those in the war zones – from the overlapping
kinship networks that make it difficult to ascertain who is MILF, BIFF, Abu Sayaff, or why army soldiers and policemen readily team up with these rebels when their clans and kin are imperiled, to the fusing of national fidelities with regional economic mindsets (legal and illegal), to the ad hoc truce between AFP and MILF commanders, both knowing that no one wins in the long term.

Instead of have anti-Moro jingoism in the capital. It is a marvel to watch the MILF deal patiently with the arrogance of national Christian (kuno) leaders and this resurgence of anti-Muslim sentiments in Manila and elsewhere, stoked by politicians who want to score points to enhance their standing, and who see an opportunity to cover up their lack of program and principles.

And then there is Grace.

The senator has been hounded by narcissistic pundits, public intellectuals and politicians over her real citizenship. Americans even had chimed in berating the senator for being cavalier and instrumentalist when she changed back to Filipino.

This shift into legalese by people who are more at home with backroom negotiating, negotiating with and buying votes, and when problems worsen, terrorizing voters, and political grandstanding represents a hypocritical mindset.

As I've pointed out way back, there are two threads that are at play here, but Poe's critics wish people just to believe one: that they are doing an honorable thing in "exposing" Poe as unqualified for the post because she is not constitutionally Filipino. They then place her opponents alongside and try to convince people that these politicians are more worth their time and vote, for they are, and remained, Filipinos.

The echo here is Manuel L. Quezon and his declaration that he would rather see the Philippines run like hell by Filipinos than heaven under the Americans. This political chest-thumping animated the Nacionalistas and their supporter, but in a sense, Quezon was right. 

By the second decade of colonial rule, Filipinos had taken over the patronage and spoils system that the Americans introduced and promoted. And while there were attempts by reformists like Leonard Wood and others to reverse the tide and stop the patrimonial plunder of the state by Quezon's supporters, it was too late by then.

The Filipinos were already in control of the colonial state. Americans in the metropole orchestrated an anti-corruption campaign against their former prodigy that Quezon just turned to his political advantage.

This is what Poe's "nationalist" opponents are also trying to say. Yes, Bongbong, family, and cronies stole $15 billion from us, killed and tortured thousands, and never admitted the conjugal dictatorship that destroyed our society. Yes, the Vice ran Makati like it was Little Italy and yes, Mar will remain a son of the alta sociedad (high society) and worry very little about the plebeians. Yes, they all have warts, but dammit they are Filipinos!

Indeed under Quezon, the Filipino elite ran the state like hell, but those who suffered this secular damnation were not them. It was the people. The old man will be happy to know that his legatees will continue what he and his allies started. – Rappler.com

Patricio Abinales is an OFW

Two years after Typhoon Yolanda (international name: Haiyan) made landfall in the Philippines, recovery and reconstruction are well underway. We have learned many lessons – and are still learning – from the Yolanda response, and from how other countries have handled post-disaster recovery.

These valuable insights can help decision-makers tasked with implementing recovery to address emerging issues and strengthen resilience to future disasters – especially at a time of rising disaster risk and increasingly frequent extreme weather events. Through monitoring, evaluation, and knowledge sharing, these policies and practices can be altered as necessary to fit changing circumstances.

A key to coping with the aftermath of a disaster the scale of Yolanda is to draw on the knowledge and experience from within the Philippines and from other countries – in this region and beyond – which have had to respond to disasters.

This was an overriding message from the recent Regional Knowledge Forum on Post-Disaster Recovery hosted by the Asian Development Bank. Despite differences in institutions, budgetary resources, and the nature of disasters faced, there are common elements to each and every recovery process.

These comparisons help to put our own post-Yolanda experience in perspective. In Indonesia, following the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, efficient relief operations helped to elevate expectations – ironically creating the potential for dissatisfaction when transitioning to the recovery phase.

Heru Presetyo of Indonesia’s BRR Institute, the agency tasked with rehabilitation and reconstruction, told the post-disaster recovery forum that: "Year two [after the event] is the most difficult. This is the year when expectations are high and recovery is slow."

Clearly, managing expectations is crucial. This can be done through effective communications, which should be consistent, comprehensive, and coordinated. A robust system to monitor progress is needed to enable effective communication about recovery. Without it, conflicting messages and directions can lead to confusion rather than clarity.

The second takeaway from post-disaster recoveries is that inadequate local capacity is common to almost all of them. Large-scale disasters can easily overwhelm local authorities. From damage assessment and recovery planning to implementation and monitoring, local government units may lack the technical and financial capacity to even make a successful start to the recovery process.

Technical assistance

Even large jurisdictions with plentiful resources often find it challenging to cope with the devastation wrought by a large-scale disaster. At our post-disaster recovery forum, the experience was compared by Scott Davis, who was involved in the rebuilding from Hurricane Sandy in 2012, to drinking from a fire hose when you’re at your weakest and with a thousand rules for how to do it.

Delivering well-targeted abundant technical assistance that addresses capacity needs will help matters, particularly if it creates a cadre of local experts capable of rebuilding lives, buildings and institutions with no effort spared.

Empowering local authorities is crucial, as reconstruction can’t be piecemeal. Schools, hospitals, and livelihoods must be re-established to new standards of resilience. Jobless survivors need to be taught new skills – like how to turn an idea into a small business. Indeed, businesses need extra support on issues like accessing finance to re-establish markets and supply chains when disaster strikes.

A third lesson is that business as usual isn’t enough when results are needed quickly on the ground after a disaster. Instead, efficient implementation should prioritize simple project designs and procurement processes, streamlined disbursements of financial assistance, and capable partners to implement project activities. Making this happen demands strong leadership, effective coordination, and the flexibility to adapt to changing priorities and needs during implementation.

Pre-existing policy problems are exposed and amplified by disaster. But this can be an opportunity to address these issues and build back better in terms of policy. Some particularly challenging policies in a recovery setting are demarcation of no-build zones in hazard prone areas and involuntary settlements, and low-cost financing for housing and livelihoods to help households and small businesses recover.

Accumulating and sharing knowledge gained during recovery on these and other issues will inform better policies that can become building blocks of future resilience.

Finally, the most important lesson of all is to deliver support quickly, and in a way that strengthens – not weakens – government institutions. The importance of coordinating closely with the government cannot be overstated. Development partners like ADB should take their cues from the government, aligning their financing assistance with its assessments and recovery plans.

Yolanda – like all large-scale disasters – was a tragedy, but it was also a learning opportunity to do better moving ahead. By heeding lessons now, we can save lives and improve living standards and livelihoods in the future.

Richard Bolt is the director of ADB’s Philippines Country Office