Political theater entertains but ignores very real issues

PLENTY of things these days are not what they seem. That certainly applies to the debate between President Rodrigo Duterte and retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio as well as to the West Philippine Sea and related issues.

To begin with, “debate” is a misnomer in this case. The verbal challenge between President Duterte and Mr. Carpio is merely political theater. The debate, which was doubtful to happen even before the President backed out, was certainly entertaining. But it is hardly the type of discussion needed to polish our foreign policy and national security agenda.

There ought to be a serious discourse on the disputed-territories affair. People should understand the issues, which have been distorted by propaganda waged by the parties involved.

As we have said many times in this space, the issue is not about the Philippines and China per se. The main players are the United States and China, a superpower and rising power, respectively, competing for control of a strategic spot on the global map.

From that geopolitical lens, states like the Philippines are merely supporting actors. We do not intend to belittle our homeland, but we point out this fact to underscore the need for a truly independent foreign policy that focuses on our national interests. You can bet that the Americans and Chinese are dead set on pursuing their respective interests.

As such, China becomes defensive when Americans invoke “freedom of navigation.” The Chinese probably interpret that as “containment.” And when the Chinese hear Filipinos bring up the mutual defense treaty with the US, their suspicions that Filipinos are American puppets are probably reinforced.

Of course, China also puts on its own show. For instance, its foreign policy is reflected in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) slogan, “Community of Common Destiny for Mankind.”

Despite its claim that the slogan is intended to bring about shared peace, stability and more equitable distribution of global wealth, the CCP often uses its significant economic, military and diplomatic sticks to coerce nations to acquiesce to China’s demands. The CCP’s disregard for other countries’ interests and sovereignty is not the type of common destiny the international community should allow.

These are just some of the points that a proper debate should discuss. And a good strategy to use in a debate begins with understanding the other side, rather than simply insisting on what we want. To quote Stephen Covey, the late advocate of effective habits, “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.”

Tainted

As for Mr. Carpio, it does not seem hard to figure out what he wants. And it may have something to do with the 2022 elections.

Of course, it will be impossible to confirm, until later, if he will run for office. But last March, the retired justice joined a group that bills itself as a pro-democracy coalition. Mr. Carpio and other convenors vowed to offer a better lineup of candidates than those who will be endorsed by President Duterte in next year’s elections.

That initiative adds political color to Mr. Carpio’s broadsides against the President. The retired justice’s motives for focusing solely on international law, referring to the arbitration ruling that affirmed Philippine sovereignty over our claims, become suspect.

Mr. Carpio fails to mention that the arbitration ruling does not order China to leave the disputed area or anything of that sort. Still, the arbitration ruling is not worthless, as President Duterte has said. But what exactly is enforceable?

Mr. Carpio seems to be embellishing the decision, and for what reason other than perhaps political gain? He ignores the fact that the issue is as much about international law as it is about geopolitics.

Remember, too, that our claims over parts of the West Philippine Sea, which is known elsewhere as the South China Sea, are challenged by countries other than China. They include Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia and Indonesia. Obviously, none of them draws attention like China.

So again, a real debate has much to uncover. But the verbal combat reported in the news and ridiculed in social media memes is only good for laughs.