‘Adobo’ diplomacy

Call it “adobo diplomacy,” or “special lumpia relations.”

Visiting US President Barack Obama charmed the Malacañang crowd Monday night when he mentioned that even before he set foot in the Philippines, he already had a taste of Filipino food, the aforementioned adobo and lumpia, courtesy of White House Fil-Am executive chef Cristeta Comerford.

Now he can say that his culinary boundaries have broadened, because he also had a taste of lapu-lapu in pili crust, lobster kilawin or ceviche, ginataang gulay or vegetables cooked in coconut milk, and prime rib prepared inasal-style at the welcome dinner. For a sweet ending, he was served coconut-lychee ice cream served alongside a mango-macapuno strudel, a showcase of coconut-based cooking and the famous, unparalleled Philippine mango.

Too bad Michelle Obama, who is trying to get Americans to eat healthier and patronize backyard gardens, wasn’t with her husband on this visit. It would be interesting to find out what she thought of the nutritional value of the food served not just in official banquets or during fiestas but in typical Filipino homes, on ordinary days.

I wonder what she would have thought of the “typical” family meals, with the most popular or common fare, according to a national nutrition survey, being fried fish, sautéed vegetables and fried egg. No lumpia or adobo here.

And dog? Obama, it’s said, is the only American president to have eaten dog meat, courtesy of his Indonesian stepfather who introduced him in his youth to exotic meats like dog, insects and snake in an effort to acculturate him.

Does his taste for the exotic give Obama a special understanding of the issues and aspirations of Third World peoples, especially in this corner of the globe? Does he have a better understanding of hunger, malnutrition and poverty than a typical politician subsisting on steak and potatoes? Does diet determine destiny?

* * *

Leftist activists tried their darndest to paint the Obama visit in the familiar colors of colonialism and patronizing, unequal relations.

But the tibak need only watch footage of the welcome given to Obama by mostly Malacañang employees lined outside the main hall to realize the futility of their protests. There these ordinary Pinoys were, eagerly holding out their hands to be shaken by the visiting American leader, even as their own boss P-Noy stood off to one side, smiling bemusedly at this display of Filipino hospitality and friendliness.

True enough, in the run-up to the Obama visit, Social Weather Stations came out with findings that over 80 percent of respondents looked favorably on the United States and on Americans. Coincidentally, a multination survey revealed that Filipinos top all other nationalities (including Americans, who came in third) in their approval of the US government.

I’m sure Chinese propagandists, and their ideological supporters, will sneer at what they consider neocolonial servility. But don’t they just envy such effortless diplomacy, the easy trust and likability that America enjoys among Filipinos, despite the ups and downs of our official relations?

Maybe it’s an amalgam of Hollywood, “Fun with Dick and Jane,” the hegemony of American pop culture especially TV, and our own colonial fondness for fair skin and hair. But Filipinos’ love for all things American cannot be dispelled simply by rallies and marches, papier mache effigies, and grim and determined shaming. I think it’s time progressive elements mounted a culture war of their own, winning public approval as much with honey as with vitriol. Anger is powerful and compelling, but it is hard to sustain and is, in the end, unattractive.

* * *

Still, it is a little disappointing—to put it mildly—that after all the buildup, the assurances (at least on our part), the anticipation, the United States has come up with a less than bracing declaration of support for the Philippines in its confrontation with China.

Our two countries and peoples may enjoy “special relations,” something that every American leader harps on whenever PH-US ties come up, but in the scheme of things, national interest still prevails.

And American interest, it seems, depends on keeping an even keel with its relations with China. Aside from economic ties, trade relations and the need to preserve a huge potential market, balance-of-power considerations demand mollifying China and curbing its more militaristic tendencies.

We may have decades of shared experiences and political commitments, and enjoy a common bond of culture and language, but we are not a strategic player in America’s global positioning. P-Noy and his administration are right in asserting our patrimony and sovereignty in the face of China’s aggressions. But in the coming confrontation—armed or diplomatic—we need to determine, first of all, where our own national interest lies.

* * *

Chinese leaders may look askance at the recently-signed defense agreement allowing an escalation of US troop and armed presence on our shores. But we have to rue the outcome, too. Reports say the Philippine side in the talks felt let down by the less-than-full-hearted commitment showed by the Americans when it came to rushing to our aid in case the conflict with China heats up.

And here we were assuming that the Kano had our back, that when push came to shove, they would automatically take our side, choose friendship over advantage.

Let’s learn a lesson from this. It’s all very well to break bread and break out in song, to be convivial and comradely. But when it comes to pursuing own strategic interests, nothing but our country’s good should be taken into consideration.