 |
Dear Senator
First Published: Reflections - Philippine Daily Inquirer Publication Date: 14th July 1991 Author's Name: Father Shay Cullen, MSSC Dear Senator, The terms of a bases treaty will be agreed upon by the Philippine Government and the United States. Clark will be given up and Subic will be the main concentration and focus point of U.S. military power in the Far East. There will be more Air Force and Marine training, more noise pollution, more men, the commercial sex industry will rise from the ashes of Mt. Pinatubo and all the social and health evils will continue and multiply. Many senators were elected on a nationalist vote in the belief that they would put the interest of Filipinos first. Will the extension of the bases be really in the interests of the Filipino people or in their own interests? The future of the bases is in the hands of the Senate, will they approve or not? Some must be considering their options, just imagine the following interview . Reflections: Dear Senator, you are on record as being against an extension of the US Bases will you change your position and will this effect your re-election chances? First Senator: Politicians are expected to be flexible, to move with tides, to have shifting positions and adaptability, to be able to respond to changing circumstances and read the signs of the times. We are under great pressure. After all if I want to get the administrations blessings on my re-election bid I have to support their position of extending the bases. Well, we should consider the national Interest also, I suppose, but who can tell what that is? If I vote against a treaty extending the bases the US will financially support my rival and I will be out of office. what's the point in that? I will lose power, position and prestige not to mention the salary and the perks that go with the job and I can't protect the national interest if I am out of office, can I ? Reflections; The National Interest and your own interests are one and the same then? First Senator: Of course ! OOPs, er ..er I mean of course not, an extension of the bases will mean more money for us, I mean for the government that is, - to pursue the national interest of course. Reflections: Is money the only consideration ? First Senator : Cash register diplomacy is not our approach but money talks you know and its essential at election time, we cannot underestimate its power and the US can be generous when we play along. It's a time of great temptation and heroism too. But some of us senators on record against a bases extension are in a dilemma. If we go on the public record now as being for an extension we lose the nationalist vote and we will be called traitors and turn-coats by much of the electorate even if they are indifferent to the issue. They will never trust us again, and we might lose our seat also. Then if we stick to our anti-bases stand we will have the U.S. money and their Amboys to contend with in May 1992. You see we are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. Reflections; The Senate must ratify the treaty by September 1991 and the elections are in May 1992 how can your vote for or against the bases this September possibly make a difference to your re-election bid in 1992 ? First Senator; Well you see it's not all over with our approval or disapproval of a bases extension treaty this year. We can opt for a Filipino solution and do nothing, just debate it past the deadline. Then technically the bases have to go but the United States will claim they need a year to withdraw and then the newly elected senate will reach a decision in their favor. So I can can risk the ire of the pro-Filipino voters but I cannot risk the ire of the United States, can I? Reflections? What other options do you have? First Senator; I can privately assure the US of my vote for an extension and get their election assistance. I can then argue the issue past the deadline and get re-elected, then I can oppose any extension if it is expedient to do so. With the bases gone then we can get the real estate - I mean the nation will get the real estate. Or I can go for a base extension and say it is in the best interests of the nation considering the natural disasters and the state of the economy . Reflections: Is not this duplicity dishonorable and dishonest ? First Senator : This has nothing to do morality, this is politics. Reflections to Second Senator. Senator you are on record as being in favor of a extension of the bases, with Clark gone the social evils will concentrate in Olongapo and there will be more AIDS, child and women exploitation, thousands of abortions, more street children, broken homes, drug abuse and all the rest, is this not a important consideration not to have the bases extended? Second Senator; Of course it is, but it has to be balanced against the benefits to our economy, our business contractors make millions selling cheap labor to the base, the National Power Corporation does likewise selling electricity to the bases every month, that would be a great loss. The PLDT has a main international exchange in Subic that earns dollars. The nightclubs earn millions in foreign exchange besides San Miguel is a huge supplier to the bases, all of this has to be considered as part of the national interest. Reflections; How about the rampant and organized exploitation of Women and Children in the commercial sex industry, AIDS, abortion and other evils ? Second Senator; Just because I am for the extension of the bases please don't hold me responsible for the side effects, don't put that rap on me. These are deplorable evils but they happen everywhere, prostitution is the oldest profession, men will be men. Don't blame me for the irresponsibility of others. There are higher interests to think of, business, profits, all those jobs that will be lost. It's a matter of balance you see and above all its political. The moral issues don't enter into our negotiations, nor should they . Reflections; Clark has now closed and the inevitable has happened. The jobs there are already lost, Subic could go the same way, don't you think more jobs and money could be made by converting the facilities into commercially productive enterprises now and end many of the social evils, is that not better for the common good and the national interest ? Second Senator; for sure, but right now I have my shares in San Miguel and PLDT to think about.
Article viewed 334 time(s). Read more: |
