US at the crossroads
America’s friends and foes alike are waiting, with bated breath, for the results of the US elections, particularly for president. While there are more than 30 candidates for the presidency (including a “Legal Marijuana Now Party”), the battle is mainly between the Republican Party’s Donald Trump and the Democratic Party’s Hillary Rodham Clinton.
A Clinton victory would mean the United States finally getting a woman president, years after so many countries, including the Philippines, have had theirs.
US election watchers should include Filipinos who just had our own elections in May. The elections mark a critical junction, crossroads, for both countries in terms of our national and international policies.
Within the first 100 days of his presidency, President Duterte distanced himself from the United States, declaring he would continue to steer us further away from America and to build instead stronger ties with China (and in the future, also with Russia)—all part of the rhetoric of crafting an independent foreign policy.
These statements have caused anxiety among Americans and Filipinos, and the tight presidential race in the United States has not helped. The stock markets have been bipolar (mainly depressed) as business people try to figure out what might happen next. So simply having a winner will calm down nerves, even if for a short while.
Filipino-Americans
Besides our colonial past (and neocolonial present) with the United States, there are still many ties that bind us. Let’s start with Filipino-Americans. According to the 2010 US Census, there are some 3.4 million of them, including the undocumented or illegal, referred to sometimes as TNT (tago ng tago or “hiding and hiding”). Also, millions of Filipinos depend on remittances from these Fil-Ams, and who knows how many Filipinos there are waiting, hoping to migrate to the “Promised Land”?
A Clinton presidency will mean friendlier immigration policies, possibly new amnesties or concessions for illegal migrants, and a small increase in quotas for refugees, mainly Syrians. But “friendlier” is only relative to Donald Trump’s proposals; Clinton will likely still get stricter with immigration in the long run as she continues Obama’s policies during the last eight years, policies which have been criticized as being too slow in helping legalize undocumented migrants.
Trump has been more explicit in his almost racist opposition to immigrants, talking about how they take away jobs from Americans and how many of them are terrorists. He has targeted Mexicans, proposing to build a wall along the US-Mexican border; so his threatening posture might seem distant for Fil-Ams.
In fact, working class Filipino-Americans might be drawn to Trump’s rhetoric about corporate America strangling the middle class, and Clinton being a stooge for big business. Never mind that Trump has evaded income taxes despite his being worth billions of dollars.
Trump also espouses a more isolationist stance for the United States, economically and politically, which appeals to Americans who blame their problems on political and trade alliances. Trump’s camp did identify and capitalize on a growing fissure in their country caused by widening inequality; and whoever becomes the next president will have to address the discontent here, whether class-based or, increasingly, racially-based. Whether they like it or not, Fil-Ams, and their dependents back here in the Philippines, will be affected.
All that may seem to be US domestic concerns but the health of the US economy affects the world. China watches, too, with concern because of their exports to and investments in the United States.
China dislikes Hillary Clinton who is seen as being hawkish and likely to continue Obama’s policy of maintaining a strategic Asian “pivot”—with the Philippines playing a major role—to counteract China.
Trump, on the other hand, has said he is willing to overlook Chinese reef-building in the area in exchange for better trade conditions between the United States and China. It’s a transactional style that is more similar to Duterte’s.
With Duterte becoming friendlier to China, we might well expect the new US president—Clinton or Trump—taking an active interest—perhaps, even intervening (in a Clinton presidency) in our affairs. In trying to craft an independent foreign policy, Duterte and his advisers will have to tread waters (figuratively and literally, the West Philippine Sea and South China Sea) very cautiously, and that is where I have the most apprehensions: Despite our close ties with the United States, we do not adequately understand American politics and politicians. We are on even more unfamiliar ground with China and Russia, both of which may as well be in another planet.
Wars
Note that in our part of the world, it is not just disputes over the West Philippine Sea that are causing tensions. Looming even more ominously is the threat from North Korea with its long-range missiles. The tension there involves several players: China, Japan, South Korea and, again, the United States.
Beyond East Asia and Southeast Asia, the United States is at the crossroads, too, with so many flash points in its foreign policy. Like the Chinese, Russia does not like Clinton. The Clinton camp has accused the Russians of hacking and leaking out information used to smear Clinton.
The many wars in the Middle East and Africa will be challenging to the next US president. In the last few weeks, in between news on the US elections, we keep getting reports about major military offensives in Iraq and Syria, signs that smoldering “small” wars are flaring up.
What does all that mean for Filipinos? Every time the newscasts feature a new crisis, say a new terrorist attack, I wonder if a Filipino is among the dead, wounded—or stranded. We are everywhere and, therefore, affected by all these wars, many of which are raging with strong US involvement.
Before this day (Wednesday, Philippine time) ends, we should be able to look with more certainty into the future. . . even if that certainty might be about uncertainty! A Clinton win would suggest more continuity, more “business as usual”; a Trump win would plunge the United States, and the world, into another waiting period that would last up to Jan. 20, 2017, when the new US president is sworn in.
RELATED VIDEO
