Foreign policy begins at home
Ambassador Nelson D. Laviña’s critique (“Not really against Sabah,” (Letters, 5/21/13) on my commentary, “The case against Sabah,” (Opinion, 4/20/13) conveniently left out obvious features of the Western colonial powers during their early stage of expansion. That expansion, the product of the “age of discovery” that began in the 15th century, was made possible by the undeniable fact that England, and the pioneering colonizers, Spain and Portugal, already had the wherewithal (leadership, organization, technology, maritime resources, armies and arms) to move aggressively beyond their shores in pursuit of “gold and wealth”—animated by intangibles such as power, honor, principles, glory, missionary zeal, ambition, etc. In short, they had the “base” from which to move forward, for good or ill. They could not have done it (colonizing) if they were internally weak and purposeless. There is no need to quibble over these well-known historical facts.
That swashbuckling, (unabashedly) plundering age is gone forever. That’s why I underlined Singapore as an outstanding example of prosperity and social justice in modern times, despite its tiny size and absence of natural resources. I should also point out that Japan only sought expansion more than six decades after the Meiji era which, as we know, was the time the Japanese leadership showed its true greatness by abolishing the country’s feudal structure, thus ushering in the much-needed internal overhauling and modernization of society. The Japanese pragmatically and wisely put their house in order before entertaining any foreign objectives.
Laviña mentioned the considerable assistance Germany and Japan got from the West, particularly the United States that enabled those two nations to “rise from the ashes of World War II.” That’s an insult to the leadership, intelligence, dedication, discipline and scientific-technological know-how of both countries. While I strongly condemn the atrocities they committed during the last war, we must give their people ample credit for the quickness of their nations’ remarkable recovery. There are many examples of massive US assistance to underdeveloped countries which, half a century later, still remain “basket cases” and dangerous regional flashpoints. The short-list include Iraq, Egypt, and Pakistan. These countries got over $100 billion in US aid, surpassing both the entire European Recovery Plan (i.e., Marshall Plan) and economic-humanitarian aid for Japan over a comparable period, according to the US Congressional Research Report. But those three recipients have very little to show because the billions of dollars they got either were misused in unproductive projects or lined the pockets of a few.
Foreign policy—like charity—begins at home: We have to fix ourselves (read: our severely “damaged culture”) and the other ills of our country so that our neighbors will not be tempted to abuse us and take advantage of our hospitality. We can start by looking hard and long at ourselves in the mirror. Sweeping our problems and shortcomings under the rug won’t do us any good.
The Sabah dream of its ardent supporters can never become a reality even if the Philippine claim is vindicated by the UN International Court of Justice for the simple, unassailable reason that the most supreme court of all, the sentiments and views of the Muslim people of Sabah, will be overwhelmingly against being part of an unruly Christian Philippines, where they will face a bleak, uncertain future.
Narciso M. Reyes Jr. ([email protected]) was a journalist at the Manila Daily Bulletin and bureau chief of the Philippine News Agency in Beijing; first secretary/press and information, Philippine Mission to the United Nations; press attaché, Philippine Embassy in Jakarta; and special adviser to the ARMM regional director. He holds a master’s degree in international and strategic affairs from Georgetown University in Washington, DC, and is the author of the book “The God in Einstein & Zen.”
