The Long View: Caught in the act

The Long View
Caught in the act

By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 22:43:00 11/29/2009

THEIR TRACK RECORD AND THE EXTENT OF their preparations for conducting the massacre in the town named after themselves suggest the Ampatuans had the methodology of mass murder down pat and fully expected to make it difficult for anyone to prove they did it. But they weren’t able to tidy up the scene of the crime.

The question I keep asking myself is, why?

The plan may have been ambitious, but there seemed little reason why it shouldn’t go off without a hitch. Since the Mangudadatus hoped a combination of respect for tradition and the presence of media would enable them to formalize their challenge to the Ampatuans, the Ampatuans decided to call their bluff, regardless of the large size of the Mangudadatu convoy. Days in advance, that now-notorious backhoe trundled off to the planned liquidation site, even as the PNP and AFP declined to provide security to the doomed convoy, which proceeded down a highway past checkpoint after checkpoint that failed to notice anything was amiss.

This paper’s very own correspondent, who was supposed to be part of the press contingent covering the Mangudadatus, sensed something was afoot when alerted by the manager of his hotel to the recent departure of motorcycle-riding lookouts. These lookouts would have torn down the highway, past those checkpoints, to inform the killing team the convoy was en route, and quite possibly, to the site where the backhoe was in place in order to dig pits big enough to dispose of both bodies and vehicles. Neither the AFP nor PNP, for obvious reasons if one assumes both services were in the pockets of the Ampatuans, noticed all this activity when throughout the country, the military and police keep an eagle eye on anyone riding around on a motorcycle and regularly harass motorcyclists.

GMANews.tv’s timeline of events says the massacre and the disposal of the bodies took place between 10:30 a.m., the time Genalyn Mangudadatu called her husband to tell him their convoy had been intercepted, and 3 p.m., when Philippine Army units (responding to a call they claim to have gotten at 11 a.m.) arrived on the scene. After being stopped, the convoy was diverted to the scene of the actual killings, a journey of half an hour or 2.5 kilometers from where the convoy was first halted.

Then the massacre took place. The actual murders were estimated to have taken about an hour to carry out (hence the last distress signal was a 12 noon text message sent by journalist Noel Decena to his brother, Joseph, saying their situation was “critical”). The ditches were dug. Whether dead or dying, the members of the ill-fated convoy and others who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time were dumped in. Everything was going to be literally covered up.

Here’s where it gets very curious. The AFP, which had suddenly gotten very energetic after PA units were alerted at 11 a.m., sneaked up to within a kilometer of the mass graves when the killing team apparently got wind of the approaching army units. They had to flee, leaving not only unburied corpses and bullet-ridden vehicles, but also the backhoe that made retrieving the buried bodies and vehicles that much easier and which itself tagged the Ampatuans as the likely perpetrators of the mass murder.

The call made by the doomed wife of Esmael Mangudadatu is generally viewed as the act that ruined the well-laid plans of the Ampatuans. But they would have been blamed by the aggrieved family anyway, and as we now know, the Ampatuans were prepared, in turn, to blame the MILF for the massacre. Had they had enough time to tidy up, as it seems they fully expected they’d be able to do, they would’ve had no problem sticking to their story as the Mangudadatus, the media and everyone else engaged in a protracted search for a convoy that seemingly vanished into thin air; even if the freshly covered pit had been found, it would have taken time to dig up what had been buried.

What ruined things was the appearance of the Philippine Army, not stealthily enough to actually catch anyone in the act (though soldiers later said they heard the backhoe’s engine rumbling and could see smoke belching from it), but preventing the tidying-up operation from being completed. Reporters on the ground haven’t detailed the route taken by the PA units during the four hours it took from initial alert to arrival on the scene (whether it was remarkably fast or remarkably slow) but the end result turned the tables on the Ampatuans, who’d viewed themselves as overlords with the national government thoroughly subordinated to them.

Instead, they’ve had to sacrifice Andal Ampatuan Jr. to the authorities, as the administration plays good cop, bad cop, with Gilbert Teodoro Jr. anointing the Mangudadatus and the President and the interior secretary insisting the only Ampatuan they have a problem with is the one in custody.

The Ampatuans themselves have hunkered down for an extended siege, protected not only by their battalion-strength private army, but their extended political and clan network of supporters and subordinates. New York Times correspondent Carlos Conde says he is developing a story concerning the Mangudadatus, now the anointed of the Frankenstein coalition, and who are preparing to topple the Ampatuans and in the process entrench themselves as the new overlord of their fellow warlords. Where once Esmael Mangudadatu had no children in office unlike Andal Ampatuan Sr., now he is preparing to run one of his sons to replace him, even as he himself seeks the governorship.

It will be a bloody business in Maguindanao come May 2010. Not least because it’s probably sunk in, by now, that the Ampatuans’ power had become so unprecedented as to require elimination: the old balance of power with Manila on top must be restored. Whoever wins—Teodoro’s anointed Mangudadatus or the President’s friends the Ampatuans—the winner is PaLaKa.

The Long View: Shattered talismans

The Long View
Shattered talismans
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 21:23:00 11/25/2009

IN A NATION WHERE THE POWERLESS HAVE few options, the least useful being to try to out-goon, out-gun, and out-spend those who possess a plenitude of these things because of political office, the lack of an effective sword against provincial warlords is compensated by the use of three shields: womankind, the media, and lawyers.

Whether it was nuns clutching rosaries or schoolteachers or simple mothers braving the massed ranks of the military or goons, peaceful, non-violent resistance has often called on womankind to stand up to gun-wielding tyrants, on the assumption that one of the few things thugs respect are unarmed women. Then media have been summoned, time and again, to cast the harsh glare of publicity on the vulnerable, in the belief that goons and murderers prefer to operate in the shadows and will slither back into the darkness the moment the cameras show up on the scene. And for those who have guns, goons, and gold, lawyers on the side of the powerless offer the possibility of the legal system securing a semblance of justice and protection for the rights of the defenseless, the weak, and the persecuted.

All three shields were shattered in Maguindanao, and with a ferocity that should make us all take pause if these shields will ever be as useful in warding off wrongdoers as they once were. For the unspoken assumption was that all three shields derived their power from the power of public opinion: No official, however ruthless, the thinking went, would ever dare to dismiss the power of public opinion, because the story of our country is littered with the ruined political careers of strongmen who once thought they could defy public opinion, for it is the real high court in a country where even the Supreme Court has proven how craven courts of law can be.

Public opinion is howling with anger over the mass murder in Maguindanao. For once the nation has united where once only the lonely voices of Moros could be heard. And perhaps this outrage means everyone will take a look at their surroundings and see the extent to which warlords have not only survived, but flourished, under the present dispensation.

The administration’s response has not only been true to form, but instructive. First, it tried to downplay the mass murder as an “incident.” Then it tried to pass the buck, from the Armed Forces of the Philippines to the Philippine National Police. Then it focused on shielding President Macapagal-Arroyo from culpability even as she tried to put a lid on things by imposing a state of emergency on the locality to keep media at bay and buy time. The administration has resorted to collusion, instead of action, because this is the only option for one that has assiduously courted allies such as the Ampatuans who are needed more by Manila than they need national officials—itself an unprecedented state of affairs (formerly warlords ruled the roost in their provincial domains but were firmly subordinate to their national patrons).

Provincial warlords displayed utter impunity before, the difference being that they reached a point where their sense of impunity led to their destruction.

In 1951 Time magazine described Negros Occidental, then the second most populous province in the Philippines, as “a well-run little police state and its Mussolini was Governor Rafael Lacson.” A subsequent 1954 article detailed the governor’s methods: “The province’s 200,000 voters did as Lacson bade and so did the underpaid farm workers. If anyone stepped out of line in Negros Occidental, he answered either to the planters’ private armies or to Lacson’s own bullet-hard, radio-equipped constabulary. In 1949 a few foreign correspondents flew in to inspect this little dictatorship; Governor Lacson turned them right around and flew them out. Occasionally, a charge of rape or murder against Lacson reached the court but nothing ever came of it.” Until, that is, someone challenged Lacson’s power: Moises Padilla dared to run as an opposition candidate for mayor of Magallon. Time tartly reported that Padilla lost, “of course,” and went on to describe the Lacson machine’s revenge: “That night Lacson’s uniformed bully boys picked him up and took him on an impromptu road show. They toured from town to town beating and torturing Padilla, displaying him in a public square while one of the boys announced: ‘Here is what happens to people who oppose us.’ Once Padilla saw his mother and managed to mumble: ‘Communicate Magsaysay.’ But when Magsaysay reached Negros Occidental, he found Padilla’s body, broken and dripping blood onto a police bench with 14 bullets in the back. Lacson smiled easily: ‘Shot dead in an attempt to make his getaway.’”

The older generation knows what happened: Magsaysay demanded of President Elpidio Quirino that he suspend their partymate, Lacson, or else he would quit. An investigative team was dispatched. Charges were filed. Then the case dragged on and a frustrated Magsaysay ended up bolting his party and defeating Quirino in the 1953 election. In 1954, finally, Lacson was convicted of murder.

Today, it seems to me the public knows no one within the administration is capable of doing a Magsaysay.

Ninoy Aquino’s, Cesar Climaco’s, and Evelio Javier’s murders (1983-86) all accomplished what Padilla’s killing did, which was to solidify outrage against official thuggery. Yet all these were individual assassinations. The Maguindanao mass murder was not only the liquidation of scores of individuals. It was a smashing of the talismans the vulnerable and powerless clutch when daring to confront the strong. Every warlord will be keenly watching to see if an infuriated public will topple the Ampatuans, who believe they are untouchable. To confront them, after all, by force of arms, is to confront them on their own terms, where they literally call the shots.

Mass murder in Maguindanao

The President and Zaldy Ampatuan in happier days, courtesy of Newsday

Back on September 7, 2009 in my column A necessary provocation, I pointed out the integral role warlords play in the ruling coalition. Just a week ago, as a photo in Uniffors shows, the Ampatuans were lionized by the ruling coalition. Now comes a mass murder in Maguindanao that is making people wonder if the Palace can stonewall or damage-control things enough not to endanger its political calculations for 2010 and beyond. Mindanews, which should be everyone’s first stop when it comes to anything Mindanao-related, reports it as Ampatuan massacre: 46 bodies recovered:

But aside from the members of the Mangudadatu family, the two lawyers and the estimated 30 journalists who joined their convoy, Dangane said they recovered the remains of several employees of the National Economic and Development Authority in Region 12, city government of Tacurong in Sultan Kudarat and several other civilians.

“They happened to be there (at the highway) and the suspects also held and later killed them,” the police official said…

About a hundred armed men reportedly held and later killed the members of the Mangudadatu family and the two women lawyers and journalists who accompanied the Mangudadatus on the way to the Commission on Elections provincial office in Shariff Aguak, Maguindanao to file the certificate of candidacy for Maguindanao governor of Buluan Vice Mayor Ismael Mangudadatu.

The suspects, who were tagged as hired guns of the Ampatuan family, initially stopped the convoy in Barangay Saniag at around 9:00 am and brought them at gunpoint to the vicinity of barangays Salman and Malating, which is about 10 kilometers from the national highway.

A back hoe allegedly owned by the provincial government of Maguindanao was reportedly used in burying some of the victims.

Dangane said they found the abandoned heavy equipment Tuesday morning positioned near the scattered remains of some of the victims and a cliff that appeared to be freshly filled with soil at the vicinity of Sitio Masalay, Barangay Salman in Ampatuan town.

One of the earliest commentaries on the massacre was penned by Inday Espina-Varona, Who will protect us from our protectors? It is a powerful indictment:

Today’s outrage brings this country closer to failed state status, and not just because of the number of persons killed. What is truly chilling about today’s tragedy is, that the alleged perpetrators were not just excitable henchmen of a local politician — in this case, Shariff Aguak Mayor Andal Ampatuan Jr.

The perpetrators, according to military reports, included not just the mayor and his men but also practically the entire local police force, para military forces and senior police officials.

One hundred men; that’s the equivalent of a company in the military. One hundred men; it’s no wonder that journalists who tried to follow up the carnage could not get a word out of anyone.

Anyone includes the top officials of the Philippine National Police (PNP) in Camp Crame.

Even as media was getting the names of those killed, even as the mayor of Mangadadatu told television reporters about how his wife called him to report being waylaid, even as Major General Alfredo Cayton of the 6th Infantry Division and Armed Forces of the Philippines spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Romeo Brawner Jr. confirmed that the 21 bodies had been recovered in Ampatuan town at around 4:30 p.m., the Public Information Office of the PNP continued to insist they knew nothing of the incident.

We have heard the usual statement of condemnation from Malacanang. They might as well condemn themselves.

The Ampatuan clan played a major role in the fraud that marred the 2004 elections; the fraud that allowed President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo another six years in power; the fraud that many of us chose to ignore because the alternative was another outsider-actor in Malacanang.

Maguindanao was where they tried a shutout of Fernando Poe Jr — a zero vote. Maguindanao, as the Hello Garci tapes told us, played a big, big role in ensuring Mrs. Arroyo’s continued hold in power.

Five years since that election, Ampatuan can strike at will, almost reassured of impunity because, after all, nobody ever got punished for the fraud of 2004. On the contrary, many elections officials and military officers implicated in the fraud reaped promotions and other rewards.

Now we are told the government is about to place the entire Maguindanao under military and police control. God help us all, because with protectors like these, we don’t need enemies.

Aside from ritual noises from the administration, the official response continues to be cautious and more focused on press releases than actual executive, military, or police action.

Today’s Inquirer editorial, Warlords, proposes viewing the mass murder in Maguindanao in the context of warlordism as a national and not just local affliction, and, as also pointed out in the Lede Blog of the New York Times, that warlords are a creation of the central government. Moros themselves insist warlordism is a fairly recent phenomenon, even entrenched dynasties in the 1950s and 1960s did not go around with enormous, gun-toting retinues. Warlordism, according to them, resulted from the rebellion in the 1970s and the government’s decision to buttress the armed forces with armed gangs under the command of allies.

The editorial also looks at the things that make the Ampatuans both similar to, and different from, other regional warlords. Warlord impunity is nothing new; but the scale and ferocity of the atrocity are unprecedented; and that can’t be divorced from the Ampatuans themselves enjoying unprecedented levels of power and influence in the ARMM. The editorial says they are unique in that they do not need whoever is the Palace occupant to anoint them as the supreme warlord; for the first time Manila needs them more than they need Manila.

The mass murder presents a problem for the administration, but also, an opportunity. The President proclaimed a state of emergency in Maguindanao and two cities, effectively putting a lid on things. The only problem is, no one seems to have any doubt who the mastermind of the massacre was. The only question, then, is whether the President and the two officials in the front line of handling this situation -Defense Secretary Norberto Gonzales, with a purview over the armed forces, and Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno, with authority over the national police- can maneuver things so as to pacify public opinion without making a mess of things, politically, for the administration and its political coalition.

More than whether the President can wriggle her way out of the tight embrace of the Ampatuans, there is something that makes me believe that this is a watershed event.

The old province of Cotobato over the years had been gerrymandered (split in 1966 to produce Cotobato and South Cotobato; in 1973 Cotobato divided in three: Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat, and Cotobato) so that now, the Ampatuans have Maguindanao (itself divided in two in 2006 with the creation, later declared unconstitutional, of Shariff Kabunsuan) as their fiefdom and the Mangadadatus, Sultan Kudarat. The two clans, according to an Inquirer report, had a falling out over the Mangadadatus showing signs of preparing to challenge the dominance of the Ampatuans and then blocking the creation of a new municipality, Adam, from territory the Mangadadatus controlled.

The Mangadadatu clan going into the 2010 elections, seemed on the verge of forming an alliance with the Liberal Party, and worse (in the eyes of the Ampatuans) was mounting a challenge to their dominance. My understanding of the dynamics of politics in the region based on recent conversations with a resident of the region is that this was less significant in the short-term (the Ampatuans being so entrenched at present, they can stand on their own, with or without being anointed as the Palace choice) but potentially troublesome in the medium-term, specifically, in terms of the 2013 midterm elections.

To be affiliated with the Liberals, for example, in 2010, regardless of success vis-a-vis the Ampatuans, would put the Mangadadatu first in line to be the official candidate of the Aquino administration (if elected in 2010 of course) in 2013, the traditional path to dominance in the region. Both for itself and in terms of its usefulness to the ruling coalition in 2010, the Ampatuans showed every sign of being unwilling to tolerate any sort of challenge: the usefulness of the Ampatuans to national officials lies in their delivering votes lock, stock, and barrel to their national allies. The reputation of the clan -fierce, uncompromising, and ruthless, even for warlords- was such that Toto Mangadadatu himself, whom one can assume is no slouch when it comes to the realities of power, coming from an entrenched dynasty himself, knew prudence was the better part of valor in pursuing his challenge to the Ampatuans. Rather than file his candidacy papers himself, he sent his wife in a caravan to do so on his behalf.

Those unable -or unwilling- to fight fire with fire, who cannot or will not confront warlords and high officials on their own terms -because the powerful have all official and unofficial venues for the redress of grievances in their pockets or because, even if on par with a rival, one is unwilling to call that rival’s bluff- have relied on three antidotes to violence: womankind, the media, and the law.

All three manifested themselves in the decision to send that ill-fated caravan to the Comelec office. Mangadadatu sent female relatives: “Buluan Vice Mayor Ismael Mangudadatu’s wife Jenalyn, his sister-in-law and currently Mangudadatu town Vice Mayor Eden, their youngest sister Bai Farina and his cousins Zorayda Bernan, Raida Sapalon and Rowena Ante Mangudadatu,” as reported by Mindanews; and the lawyers sent to accompany them were women as well: Connie Brizuela and Cynthia Oquendo, who were also slain. Among the conventions that govern clan and political-related violence in the region, is that women, children, and the elderly are off-limits as targets.

And then, there was the media, including both national and regional reporters and correspondents: the glare of publicity and attention is generally considered enough to make even the most hardened of warlords take pause. And, indeed, the story was a big one: the colossal might of the Ampatuans actually facing a challenge.

All three -women being off-limits as targets of political or clan violence; media’s ability not only to cover stories, but to guarantee, in a sense, safety for those who bring their stories forward; and of the law, both in terms of the Mangadadatus pursuing a perfectly legal objective -filing candidacy papers- and of lawyers themselves as persons not to be targets, ceased to matter when the massacre began.

Consider the consequences, and the implications of defying these conventions: more so, if the Palace proves incapable of exacting anything more than a token stab at imposing law, order, and meting out justice in the case of the Ampatuans.

As it is, the President’s proclamation of a state of emergency has put a lid on things; while everyone not on the side of the Ampatuans must calculate the costs of defying their might. And that includes the national government and specifically, the ruling coalition.

Can the ruling coalition expel the Ampatuans from their ranks, as some members have proposed? And if so, how long will it take? What government lawyer will dare a proper investigation, what judge will dare try any potential cases? Can the Department of the Interior investigate and discipline the police, including policemen suspected of participating in the mass murder, and can an armed forces that by the Mangadadatus’ account, declined to secure the national highway on which the doomed caravan was traveling, uphold discipline when Mindanao has been used as place to exile units considered potential threats to the administration itself? Even if the politically-useful thing would be to unleash the armed forces on the Ampatuans if they resist -but so far, the government has been rather diffident in taking up on their expressed willingness to undergo questioning- what would that mean, in terms of the elections?

In many ways, it’s an impossible situation for the administration and all its flailing about shows it. As Mon Casiple points out,

The key elements to watch out for in the next days to come are: 1) if the AFP and the police disarm the armed Ampatuan clan and arrest, charge, and actually convict the perpetrators of the massacre; and 2) if more incidents happen that would portray a nationwide breakdown in peace and order.

It is no secret that the ascension of Mr. Norberto Gonzalez to the Defense portfolio, if only as an acting secretary, has caused apprehension because of his penchant for unconstitutional suggestions on how Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her Malacañang gang can remain in power. The recent sporadic bombings in Metro Manila and this Maguindanao incident are not related, or are they?

Readers may be interested in the following background material.

The first concerns the Ampatuans themselves, from VistaPinas and a satellite photo of the Ampatuan mansion, to the 2008 report, Amid the fighting, the clan rules in Maguindanao. As for Zaldy Ampatuan who had visa problems entering Los Angeles last May, here’s an interview by Carol Arguillas as republished in the blog of Inday Espina-Varona (2007):

Q: I noticed along the way there has not been a single GO poster. So this is definitely a TU country?

A: Actually, Maguindanao province is an extension of the home province of Her Excellency, PGMA (President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) which is Pampanga. Here in Maguindanao, considering that we have 20 mayors unopposed, these 20 mayors are allies of the administration, even those areas with opponents – Pagalungan and Talitay – the opponents are all allies of the administration.

Q: So this is definitely 12-0 here?

A; Basically ganon ang mangyari pero iba ang sabihin ng 12-0. Ang meaning kasi ng 12-0 sa amin dito is yung first 12 candidates na boto ay in favor of Team Unity yung Opposition makakuha from 13 down to the last.

Q: Can you say the same of the provinces of the ARMM

A: Actually in the other provinces of ARMM — in Basilan, considering that the opponents are influential – Gerry (Salapuddin) and the wife of Governor (Wahab) Akbar, the two parties are allies of the administration. In Tawi-tawi, Gov Sahali and opponent, Rashidin Matba, in Sulu, we have Gov Benjamin Loong. He is running for reelection against Sakur Tan and Nur Misuari. All of these candidates are supporting the Team Unity ticket of the administration. In Lanao del Sur, all the four candidates there for governor support Team Unity.

Q: So more or less, considering ou have one of the biggest regions in Minda

A: We have 1.3 million voters.

Q: Which can make or unmake the national candidates?

A: Palagay ko hindi gaano pero malaking factor dito sa Mindanao na makakuha ng majority of votes yung ticket ng Team Unity.

Q: But what about those criticisms that within the ARMM, because of the Hello Garci

A: Well we cannot prevent the opinion of the opposition. Considering we are a democratic country, they can campaign. What is important is we can rectify the negative impression that here in the ARMM, there is cheating.

Q: So this election will prove it?

A: Yes. Because the people will speak

Check out Placeholder on the senatorial results for Maguindanao in 2007. There’s Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4 and Part 5 of PCIJ’s “Why you should doubt the Maguindanao electoral results.” There’s this report by the late Alecks Pabico, The Maguindanao vote: Working ‘miracles’ again in ARMM? While Nicodemo Ferrer, of throwing the Bible at Ang Ladlad fame, makes a cameo in Bedol punishment seen as ‘insufficient’.

Earlier, in 2004, you can compare the ability of the Ampatuans (Maguindanao) and the Mangadadatus (Sultan Kudarat) to “deliver” votes. In 2005, Yvonne Chua wrote Working ‘miracles’ in Mindanao:

On June 2, the President is heard asking Garcillano about the reported mismatch between the COCs and SOVs in Basilan and Lanao. She was assured, “Yung ginawa nilang magpataas sa inyo, maayos naman ang paggawa eh (The upward adjustment they did for you was all right).”

Four days later, she placed another call to seek assurance that the election forms in Maguindanao were consistent. “Hindi naman ho masyadong problema sa Maguindanao (Maguindanao isn’t much of a problem),” Garcillano said.

Official results would show Arroyo winning convincingly in Maguindanao. On May 28, 2004, however, losing Maguindanao gubernatorial candidate Guimid Matalam filed a petition before the Comelec seeking a declaration of failure of elections in 25 of the province’s 27 towns because of alleged electoral fraud there. According to Matalam, the fraud included having election returns prepared even before voting began at 7 a.m. on May 10, 2004 and ballot boxes never being brought to precincts.

At least 37,000 residents of Maguindanao are also being investigated by the local Comelec office on charges of double registration.

Annexes to Matalam’s latest petition explain how multiple voting occurred: Comelec had approved the clustering of precincts before May 10. But on election day, some of the clustered precincts were unclustered, resulting in extra precincts. The voters’ lists in the original and extra precincts contained a number of similar names. In addition, the extra precincts were issued a separate election return and certificate of canvass at the municipal level. After election day, the unclustered precincts were reclustered and the election returns combined and certified by election officers.

This apparently took place not only in Maguindanao, but also elsewhere in ARMM.

In Asia’s Changing the landscape of politics in the Philippines and From the Philippines: Impunity, Apathy, and Human Rights gives an overview of warlordism and political murder in the country as a whole.
Here are some readings on conflict among warring clans in Mindanao. A whole cluster of relevant articles are linked to in PCIJ’s Putting Maguindanao in context. Similar articles are linked to in the Lede Blog of the New York Times.
In Asia has several extremely informative articles: see From the Philippines: Definitive Reference on Clan Feuding in Mindanao Published ; while From Mindanao: Clan Feud Ceasefire presents a case story of a succesful end to a vendetta (see other examples in In the Philippines: Conflict in Mindanao). And there’s Ridomap, which provides an overview on political and clan violence and provides informative maps.

There is the effect political murders have on society and public opinion. A case that comes to mind is the murder of Moises Padilla: see the 1951 and 1954 Time Magazine stories. And also, the stories of the murders of Cesar Climaco in 1984 and Evelio Javier in 1986.

See also Filipino Voices.

The Long View: Good Frodo and Evil Gollum

The Long View
Good Frodo and Evil Gollum
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 23:28:00 11/22/2009

IN book two of “The Fellowship of the Ring,” Celeborn, elven co-ruler of Lothlórien, speaks directly to the readers as much as to the Fellowship when he counsels, “Do not despise the lore that has come down from distant years; for oft it may chance that old wives keep in memory word of things that once were needful for the wise to know.”

Chances are you’ve read or watched “The Lord of the Rings,” Tolkien’s saga in three volumes of how a reluctant hero is tasked with destroying a Ring of Power as a squabbling alliance of Hobbits, humans, dwarves and elves backs him up and fights titanic battles against the evil Sauron and his gruesome dark hordes. The epic is about Good and Evil, and how individuals can be one or the other, or even both, depending on the circumstances.

Some months ago Jim Paredes quipped that Noynoy Aquino is like the reluctant Hobbit hero Frodo Baggins, and that all those flocking to his aid and assistance are like the motley cast of characters that comprised the Fellowship of the Ring.

Tolkien the narrator observes of hobbits, as much as of men, of people in books as much as of people in real life, that “There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow.”

In Book Two, the message is amplified in an exchange between Gimli the dwarf and the elf Elrond, representatives of races that do not like each other but now allied in a common quest, yet the two still disagree on how to approach the physical and even moral perils of their quest.

“Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens,” the action-oriented Gimli starts off. Elrond the jaded elf replies, “Maybe, but let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has not seen the nightfall.” Gimli counters, “Yet sworn word may strengthen quaking heart,” only for Elrond to pragmatically respond by saying, “Or break it.” This is the eternal conflict between purists and realists.

At a time when there’s a general desire to see righteousness reign in our politics, there is too great a danger of self-righteousness intruding its discordant voice, insisting, on one hand, on impossible standards for individuals while ignoring the need for a common cause to confront the greater danger. This is the danger of pride substituting for true conscientiousness.

Quite early on in Book One of “The Fellowship of the Ring,” in the second chapter, the reluctant Frodo and the wizard Gandalf discuss Gollum, the deranged previous holder of the Ring of Power from whom Frodo’s uncle, Bilbo, had taken the ring; throughout the saga Gollum represents the problem of Frodo the Good, requiring the at times sincere, and most other times, deceitful, assistance of the generally Evil Gollum.

From the very start, Frodo thinks it’s a bad thing to have to engage the help of bad people and tells Gandalf, “He deserves death.” Gandalf’s answer is instructive, laying down a theme that will persist to the end of the saga, as he repeatedly counsels the members of the Fellowship of the Ring against the perils of confusing the righteousness of their cause with the pride of self-righteousness.

“Deserves it! I daresay he does,” Gandalf agrees; but adds, “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. I have not much hope that Gollum can be cured before he dies, but there is a chance of it. And he is bound up with the fate of the Ring. My heart tells me that he has some part to play yet, for good or ill, before the end; and when that comes, the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many—yours not least.”

Tolkien repeatedly returns to this theme of redemption—whether partial or complete—for the bad, or the merely confused, a possibility that should temper the self-righteousness of characters themselves fully capable of departing—temporarily but at times, disastrously—from the path of righteousness. Pride, he perpetually points out, feeds the divisions self-righteousness creates and which harms Good and promotes Evil.

As the elf Haldir of Lórien, responding to the bickering and simmering tensions between allies, points out in another chapter of Book Two: “In nothing is the power of the Dark Lord more clearly shown than in the estrangement that divides all those who still oppose him.”

Gandalf himself, in Book Three, returns to the basic lesson Haldir propounded: “We are all friends here. Or should be; for the laughter of Mordor will be our only reward, if we quarrel.” Something he returns to again, much later on in Book Five, where once again self-righteousness has provoked discord and to which his reply is, “Let us remember that a traitor may betray himself and do good that he does not intend. It can be so, sometimes.”

Hope is what enabled Good to conquer Evil—for at the heart of hope is the humility to give all a chance to help fight Evil, without sneering at motives. A humility based on belief in redemption for those who once served Evil. Frodo could not do it alone, he needed help; help came from all quarters and much of it tainted by mixed motives as shown by the thoroughly bad Gollum.

Every character wrestled with the dilemma of fighting for Good yet being confronted by Evil, internal and external. Hope subdued pride, humility fostered unity and trust in Good allowed individuals as well as kingdoms to conquer the Ultimate Evil, Sauron.

As the fair elven Galadriel had told the impatient dwarf Gimli in Book Two, “I do not foretell, for all foretelling is now vain: on the one hand lies darkness, and on the other only hope. But if hope should not fail, then I say to you, Gimli son of Glóin, that your hands shall flow with gold, and yet over you gold shall have no dominion.”

The Long View: Back to the future

The Long View
Back to the future
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 20:32:00 11/18/2009

The Long View: Comelec lays down case for persecution

The Long View
Comelec lays down case for persecution
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:14:00 11/16/2009

Platform time begins on November 30

In Hi’s and hello’s in three stages, I wanted to point out that there are different stages in a presidential campaign, and that we’re transitioning from one stage to another, namely from the first to second stages of the campaign.

First stage: Introducing Yourself and Making Friends: potential candidates put themselves forward for consideration by the public in its capacity as the body politic that constitutes the membership of political parties (Anytime from May 10, 2007 to Oct. 20, 2009)

Much as Filipinos followed the American presidential contest, and are in some ways more familiar with the American system than our own, the equivalent period in the United States was the far longer period during which various potential candidates first set up their exploratory committees, and then began participating in the debates and fora leading up to the more formal elimination rounds known as the party primaries.

There have been proposals to establish some sort of primary system here at home, the problem is such proposals always come too late: and they must necessarily come too late because the law -written by by politicians with politicians’ requirements during elections in mind- rigidly prohibits an extended and public selection process.

My personal view is that the 90 day period provided by law for campaigns is far too short, and is a case of being penny wise and pound foolish, the short period meant to encourage economy in campaigns. To my mind it accomplishes the opposite, as campaigns have to frenetic, and, considering the large size of the electorate, it’s superficial because only a few, key messages can be drummed into the public consciousness during the campaign.

Still, the law is the law, and much as it may not make total sense to the public, it makes sense to the candidates, fortified as their understanding is, by legal precedents. Basically, the law simply states that if a candidate does not formally file candidacy papers, he or she is not yet a candidate, and therefore, not bound by the law when it comes to punishable violations of the Omnibus Election Code.

Since this is the introductory period, prospective candidates are trying to accomplish several things, going into the period when they’re expected to formalize their affiliations and form teams to contest the elections. There’s no leader where there aren’t any followers, and what candidates are trying to do is to prove they’re serious contenders for the presidency and vice-presidency. They do this by manifesting interest in the position, by touring the country, by getting commitments from individuals and groups, and accumulating a campaign kitty or at least, the resources to attract future donations.

They also have to start speaking out on issues and proposing themes in the hope they’re attractive to the electorate. As it stands, with the period for putting together, revising, and formally adopting, party platforms still ongoing, it’s well to remember that there have been opportunities aplenty for the candidates to be asked their views on the issues, and for these opinions to be scrutinized.

In fact, considering that most of the leading contenders are not only in the Senate, but ran for the Senate in 2007, there’s an underutilized resource available to the public for comparing where the candidates of today stood, in terms of the issues in 2007, which can help gauge if they’ve remained consistent, or have evolved or devolved since then: the Podcast interviews conducted by Inquirer.net of senatorial candidates in 2007, which were provided online. These interviews are particularly useful because they weren’t limited by time constraints, candidates could talk as long or as briefly as they pleased.Francis Escudero Podcast Transcript Benigno Aquino III Podcast Transcript

Manuel Villar Jr. Podcast Transcript

So it’s not as if there wasn’t a starting point for vetting the candidates.

And as the introductory process continues, and the current ideas, the points of view, of the prospective candidates start accumulating, to the point that the public, in turn, starts deciding, not on who to vote for, but who to consider.

And they can begin comparing and contrasting the opinions of prospective candidates -whether these opinions, in turn, provide the basis for a real campaign, comes later, when presidential aspirants, for example, woo and secure the support of potential running mates, and potential tandems, in turn, lobby for, and are lobbied to embrace, individual senatorial candidates to form a ticket.

Here are examples of comparing and contrasting the public statements of the prospective candidates:

Presidential Views ANC Face to Face With LGU Champions
The above being a comparison of their answers during the ANC Local Government Unit Forum.
Presidential Plans

And putting together the statements of an individual candidate to get an idea of the various statements of the candidate on the issues:

BSAIII Policy Pronouncements 10-31-09

And the above being a comparison of the answers the prospective candidates gave during their profile interviews with Che-Che Lazaro.

But to a certain extent, the above are useful only in getting to know the candidates, but it’s premature to demand of them, their party platforms considering they couldn’t formalize their party candidacies until last October: and with their party candidacies comes the whole panoply of the campaign, from veep to senatorial slate.

Not to mention maintaining the strange -because not really in keeping with reality- and formal distinction between aspiring to a nomination and being a bonafide, nominated, party candidate.

The law on campaigning kicks in when candidacies are formally filed, yet to be a candidate, one usually goes through the complete staff work of party affiliation, and then endorsement. This then brings us to the second stage of the campaign.

Second stage: Formalizing Alliances, by means of Party Conventions and Nominations

Part I: the adoption of potential candidates as the official candidates of particular parties or coalitions for the purpose of forming slates to campaign for votes from the electorate at large (Oct. 21-Nov. 19, 2009)

Conventions aren’t what they used to be (see The NP Convention Story, 1953): contests in which party delegates engaged in balloting to determine who’d be the standard bearer. Still, candidates need to be anointed by parties, as the parties provide the legal personality required by law for many aspects of electoral process. Conventions are the means by which not just presidential and vice-presidential tandems, but senatorial slates, are unveiled and deemed closed.

October 21 The Joint Convention of the Partido ng Masang Pilipino and PDP-Laban in Plaza Moriones, Manila, adopting Joseph Ejercito Estrada and Jejomar Binay as presidential and vice-presidential candidates, during which they announced of their common platform, was the first convention to take place, on the first day allowed by law.

Unfortunately, beyond news reports, I haven’t found the platform online.

November 15: on or before this date, the Nacionalista Party Convention will take place.

The Nationalist People’s Coalition is widely expected to enter into a coalition agreement with its mother party, the NP, by providing Senator Loren Legarda as the veep running mate for Senator Manuel Villar Jr., who will be formally adopted as the Nacionalista standard bearer.

I ran into Gilbert Remulla a couple of weeks ago, and at the time, he said the Nacionalistas were engaged in finalizing their party platform; it’s reasonable to assume that the Party Convention will include formally ratifying that platform.

November 16: Liberal Party Convention, adopting Senator Benigno Aquino III who announced his intention to run for the presidency on September 9:

And Senator Manuel Roxas II who accepted Aquino’s offer of the vice-presidential slot on September 21:

As official candidates of the party. However, there’s likely to be another, less formal activity in which a broader coalition will manifest its adopting the tandem as its candidate, but whether the LP will update its existing platform, or retain it, while the coalition in turn adopts a broader platform, remains to be seen. As it is, Aquino by all accounts has been deeply involved in the meetings of various clusters tackling a coalition platform.

November 19 Lakas-Kampi CMD Convention in Manila’s Philippine International Convention Center (originally slated for November 12 in Cebu City, but moved because of the Pacquiao fight and the wooing of Gwen Garcia for the veep slot failed), following earlier events:

It started with the President’s presiding over the unification of Lakas-CMD and Kamp (setting forth the campaign direction of the administration “for the next thirteen months”) on May 28; the National Executive Committee meeting on September 16 announcing the intention to adopt Sec. Gliberto Teodoro as party standard bearer:

Then followed by the President’s relinquishing the party leadership to Sec. Teodoro; and today’s announcement by Interior Secretary Puno that former OMB Chair Edu Manzano will be the running mate of Teodoro (squelching speculation that Ceb Gov. Gwen Garcia or Lipa City Mayor Vilma Santos or Senator Miguel Zubiri were contenders for veephood).

Teodoro has been reported as having practically single-handedly produced the NPC Party Platform when he was a member of that party; while the PaLaKa has a platform, it’s probable that together with the anointing of Teodoro as the president’s chosen successor, a new party platform will be unveiled as well.

As for Senator Francis Escudero, no longer affiliated with a party, his decision on whether to seek the presidency or the vice presidency or continue in the Senate is strictly his own.

Part II: The filing of certificates of candidacy (Nov. 20-30, 2009)

This is when individual presidential candidates, vice-presidential candidates, and senatorial candidates, then form teams; and it is here that platforms become essential, as they document the basis for unity of those who’ve decided to campaign together as a ticket. Their basis of unity in turn becomes the basis for campaigning for the votes of the electorate.

So conventional wisdom seems to be the following slates: Aquino-Roxas (LP); Estrada-Binay (UNO); Teodoro-Manzano (PaLaKa); Villar-Legarda (NP-NPC) with Escudero as the wildcard for the presidency or vice-presidency.

Break Time: The Long Hiatus (December 1, 2009-February 8, 2010)

After the filing of candidacies comes what’s expected to be the Long Hiatus from November 30 to February 6, when all sorts of prohibitions kick in.

In the past, the convention period would have been in January 2010, followed by the campaign period itself; but because of automation, the convention period was moved up, which introduced the rather nonsensical prohibition on doing anything, on the part of the candidates, for two months.

So what prohibitions might kick in? On things deemed to constitute either an “election campaign” or “partisan political activity.”

Section 79 of BP 881 defines “election campaign” or “partisan political activity” as “An act designed to promote the election or defeat of a particular candidate or candidates to a public office.”

This includes the following prohibited acts from the period of the filing of certificates of candidacy by November 30, until the official campaign begins on February 6, 2009:

1. Forming organizations, associations, clubs, committees or other groups of persons for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign for or against a candidate;

2. Holding political caucuses, conferences, meetings, rallies, parades, or other similar assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any campaign or propaganda for or against a candidate;

3. Making speeches, announcements or commentaries, or holding interviews for or against the election of any candidate for public office;

4. Publishing or distributing campaign literature or materials designed to support or oppose the election of any candidate; or

5. Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or support for or against a candidate.

However, the following acts are not included as offenses during this period:
1. Reporting by newspapers or radio or television stations of news or news-worthy events relating to candidates, their qualifications, political parties and programs of government;

2. Commentaries and expressions of belief or opinion in respect of candidates, their qualifications and programs and so forth, so long as such comments, opinions and beliefs are not, in fact, advertisements for particular candidates covertly paid for;

3. The posting of decals and stickers on “mobile” places, whether public or private, is allowed;   
4. Holding political conventions or meetings to nominate their official candidates within forty-five days before the commencement of the campaign period.

Furthermore, with regards to the conduct of candidates, according to a ruling of the Supreme Court (Penera vs. COMELEC) it is upon the filing of his/her COC, that a candidate can thereafter be held guilty of premature campaigning for purposes of disqualification. It’s upon the filing of his/her COC, that a candidate explicitly declares his/her intention to run in the coming elections and is governed by the rules on campaigns.

And so, based on the above, much as the forced break from campaigning is inconvenient to the candidates, it presents a golden opportunity for those interested in scrutinizing platforms, to engage in public discussions about those platforms.

This is the period when Platforms ought to be expected and really, the earliest when they can be produced: therefore the demands for platforms prior to the convention season and the filing of candidacies betrays ignorance of the process. Even in the United States, voters, in their capacity as members of political parties, selected candidates not on the basis of formal platforms by the candidates, but rather, as a result of debates; for it’s only with the formal adoption of candidates by the parties that the conventions also produce the platform under which the party and its candidates campaign. Indeed, the choice of candidate has a direct influence on the party platform.

As I’ve pointed out, our political practice is more oriented towards coalitions; and the coalitions, too, require time to hammer out a common platform as the basis of uniting to support specific candidates. The broader the coalition, the longer and more complicated the consensus process required to arrive at a platform becomes.

So you cannot have a platform if you are a leader without followers and the association of leaders and followers is the party or coalition; and that coalition or party has to coalesce before it can unveil its platform.

Third stage: Parties and coalitions, their candidates, campaign among the electorate, to obtain their votes on election day.

Part I: Feb. 9, 2010: National campaign period for candidates for the presidency and vice presidency, the Senate and party list begins.

Part II: March 26, 2010: Local campaign period for candidates for House seats and provincial, city and municipal positions begins.

This is when the entire party or coalition slate, national and local, gets to campaign, and it’s a pretty short period all things considered.

Part III: May 8, 2010: Campaign period ends.

May 10, 2010: Election day.

The Long View: A wedge of Chiz

The Long View
A wedge of Chiz
By Manuel L. Quezon III

Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 23:49:00 11/04/2009

Conference Notes: Generation 21: Asia Pacific New Leaders Dialogue

Background

The inaugural gathering of Generation 21: Asia Pacific New Leaders Dialogue from October 30 to November 1 in Jakarta,under the auspices of Modernisator (an Indonesian nonprofit organization) and Asialink (of the University of Melbourne), with McKinsey & Company. Chairmen were Sid Meyer of Asialink and Dino Ptti Djalal of Modernisator, who also works closely with the President of Indonesia as his spokesman (participants received an autographed copy of his book, The Can Do Leadership: Inspiring Stories from SBY Presidency).

There were three of us Filipinos there: myself, Zainudin Malang, who blogs as Moro Views on Bangsamoro Affairs, and Enrique Gonzalez, and representatives from most of the members of Asean: Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Burma, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor Leste and Vietnam; plus the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia.

The whole-day, mainly recorded for television session, operated according to several themes with guide questions we were expected to answer.

Session 1: (originally, 21st Century Context) Generation 21: Change and Challenge

Topic 1: Change

Veronica Pedrosa, on Al-Jazeera: the ability of a news organization like Al-Jazeera, to reverse the flow of information, from East to West instead of West to East as previously monopolized by BBC and CNN, could only have happened in the 21st Century. Always and everywhere the compelling urge is, “we have to be better than them.”

Q. (instant survey of group) Are you optimistic or pessimistic concerning 21st Century prospects?

89% Optimistic

11% Pessimistic

Pessimists: e.g. Too few resources poured into change.

Optimists: e.g. potential Tipping Point for Copenhagen.

Discussion on China: faces changes in three fundamental respects

-resources, requiring sourcing from region and elsewhere

-tensions on fringes and impact on peace and stability

-defense modernization and impact on region

Q. How will 21st Century Asia-Pacific fundamentally differ from 20th Century?

My thoughts: If the 20th Century was about establishing nation-states, preoccupation in 21st Century will be the viability of failing or failed states. Then ,the question of increasingly blurred national boundaries; and of vassalage to regional Great Powers.

Q. What do you think will be the most important trends?

-Ideas.

-Innovation.

-Enterprise.

-Not politics: more action.

My thoughts: A commonly discussed dilemma is technological skill versus fostering creativity. Can be expanded to representing the Asian dilemma: creativity versus stability, or the problem of creative destruction that fostering creativity leads to, versus desire for social harmony in Asian societies.

Chairman’s remarks: Dino Patti Djalal

Question facing Asians today is to find the capability to turn imagination into reality.

1. Tools and Opportunity: Do we know it, can we capitalize on it, seize it?

2. We are in an amazing century: Where do you locate yourself? Consider China 50 years ago, where it is at present, where it will be in 50 years. Where do you locate yourself? As individuals, societies, where are you going?

Asean perspective: Surin Pitsuwan

Surin Pitsuwan is the Secretary-General of Asean.

Says we must talk about creating a Middle Class rather than democracy or human rights: both come in the wake of the emergence of broad and enduring Middle Class.

Points out the West adopts and adapts Eastern culture: e.g. using meditation to clear the mind in order to be able to control more (resources) while the Eastern attitude is different in wanting to live with nature.

My thoughts: questions confronting Asean are questions that indicate regional and national identity crisis. Regional crisis in terms of the continuing relevance of Asean as Western hegemony gives way to more traditional hegemonies of Confucian/Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic hegemonies. National identity crisis in terms of nation-states challenged by cultural communities that transcend political borders. Increasingly mobile communities will lack sense of community/belonging; an absence of concentration leads to failure to achieve and maintain social consensus.

Topic 2: Threats

Q. What is the top threat facing Asia-Pacific in the 21st Century?

-”Existential threats”: rising sea levels, demographics.

-Multipolarity: adopting 20-40 year view, greater threats, less stability. Strategic differences over: energy; security; water.

-Economic growth: Even as economy will grow from 67-70 trillion to 00-400 trillion in 40 years, population can only grow 1-2 billion more (demographic pressures).

Burma comment:

1. Rise of Terrorism

2. Transboundary pollution

3. Infectious diseases.

Japanese comment: threat of chronic diseases, especially lifestyle diseases. e.g. Asians are genetically predisposed to develop diabetes: India-China looking at 400 million diabetics. Requires investing in managing/solving diseases.

Armed Conflict

Q. Group survey: Will you be impacted by armed conflict?

Will be impacted: 52%

Will not be impacted: 48%

Anadin comment: The task is improving relations within nations. How the Philippines as a Catholic country deal with larger Muslim nations like Indonesia if it cannot deal with Muslim minority?

Indian comment: Conflict arising from forgetting an increasingly permament underclass. Notes use of stones, bones, arrows to express resentment and seize resources. Noticeable trend away from begging for alms to seizing goods from the affluent. A problem arising from removing hope.

Topic 3: Globalization

Q. Group poll: Can we achieve zero poverty this century?

Achievable: 43%

Not achievable: 57%

Theme of Social Business: business to change the world. Focus on the social objectives of business to eliminate poverty.

Indonesian comment: Example of Indofoods consigning noodles, keeping track of consignees by means of fingerprint and Identity Card. Consignees gained income opportunity.

My thoughts: Raises lack of a viable identity card system and suggests porous nature of the concept of legal identity in the Philippine context.

Indonesian comment: Development is about more than MDG’s and GDP. Increasing dependence on technology actually leads to more poverty. Even doling out money won’t eliminate poverty because losing forests, culture, is a kind of poverty.

Keynote: Kishore Mahbubani

Singaporean diplomat, author of Can Asians Think? “We have millions of brains but never use them.”

1. Challenges we face unprecedented in 3,000 years.

Vertical versus Horizontal Axis:

While there is an ongoing unprecedented shift in power from West to East, the West remains the strongest. But the shift is taking place, the Western era of dominance being 1820-2050, when China and India will resume their pre-1820 status of being the world’s largest economies. Yet resurgence of these nations represents new tensions, conflicts, and rivalries.

The world before globalization can be described as humanity on 192 different lifeboats.

The world after globalization can be described as humanity in 192 different cabins on the same ship, but without the vessel having a captain or a real crew to care for the passengers.

Proofs of this lack of global leadership:

a. Financial Crisis (panic in Davos)

2. H1N1 (near-instant spread)

3. Terrorism

4. COP10 (individual countries cannot solve climate change crisis)

These are challenges on a magnitude never seen before by humanity.

2. Why Western leaders cannot provide the leadership needed

Give the West credit for creating (post World War 2)  the most benign world order the world has ever seen. The lowest point in suffering in human terms. However, the global institutions established by victorious Allied powers post 1945 -IMF, WB, Security Council, Media- remain dominated by the West when what is needed is structural reforms.

3. Why Asia has to do it.

The concept of one person, one vote, in a world in which the largest populations are in China and India, represents a nightmare scenario to the West.

In terms of democracy and human rights being coupled as a qualification for global leadership, the obvious solution is in terms of global democracy which would question this Western-centric coupling.

If no one provides global leadership, the chance of providing that leadership in the future will diminish.

Session 2: (originally: Challenges and Opportunities) Change and Challenge

Topic 4: Climate Change

Boiled down their problems to this: How to simplify a complex problem for easy communication to stakeholders to galvanize action.

-Explain the gain.

-Who will be the first to jump?

-Simplify the solution: explain how it helps the common goal.

Topic 5: Education

Pondered whether the key problem was Access or the Quality of Education. Decision: Quality is the problem facing Education.

Solution is to focus on the quality of teachers:

1. Improve recruitment: government must focus on recruiting the best products of higher education to continue in a career in education (Indian government adopting this policy).

2. Upfront and continuing training (student-centric).

3. Assessment process and performance criteria.

4. Salaries: industry-competitive, performance-based.

5. Reputation for teaching: high-profile campaign to enhance the reputation of teaching.

6. Develop school leadership.

Topic 6: Business and Entrepreneurship

They boiled down their problems to this Challenge: What are the constraints on entrepreneurship?

a. Cultural: (bias towards professions) Lack of emphasis on science/technology

b. Educational: (not enough promotion of risk-taking) Stigma of failure too strong

c. Capital (hard to source) Risk-averse

And formulated this Response: Entrepreneurship must be valued.

-Role models must be provided at all levels of society.

-Risk-taking must be taught in the educational system.

-Microfinance must be encouraged.

-role of the Rule of Law: can either stifle or enhance entrepreneurship.

Korean proposal: the role of government is to create social safety nets for the stigma/risks of failure for entrepreneurs not to come at the price of their families. If there is Witness Protection (Law) there should be Failure Protection (for entrepreneurs).

Australian comment: Countries need to identify their hub of innovation rather than betting on everything.

Australian comment: Economy is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Environment.

Indonesian Investment Ministers comment: Gvernment spending on R&D needed in Asia.

Filipino entrepreneur’s comment: The banking system in SEA geared to funding big corporations. Government has to provide access to capital to entrepreneurs. Requires government intervention.

Australian comment: Do you trust your governments to pick winners?

Filipino entrepreneur’s response: GFI’s have the capacity to pick winners on the microventure level and SME level (SPFG and PHILEXEM doing well).

Indonesian Investment Minister’s response: Caution required as there’s the ability of government to crowd out competition; the wanton creation of subsidiaries leads to unfocused and wasteful proliferation of government enterprises; another problem in the private sector is the tendency of families in family-controlled corporations to exclude non-family.

Topic 7: Economic Growth

Boiled down their problems to this: What kind of growth? Equality now versus assuming inequalities were price to pay for growth before.

-invest in logistics and infrastructure to give accessibility to the poor. Infrastructure also includes social infrastructure: tax reform; improving labor standards.

-private sector involvement through reforms: good bankruptcy law; good corporate restructuring laws (actually forms of social safety nets).

-how to turn Asians (who are savers) into consumers.

-fostering Social Enterprises.

-China, Japan, Korea will not engage in Free Trade with each other but insist on it, individually, with Asean.

My observation: Western (NZ, Oz) hostility to state intervention in business while most Asians know limits of intervention but are more comfortable with state intervention (Western opposition is in terms of general principls; Asians merely suspicious because of past practice).

Malaysian comment: focus on economic growth has to be rephrased into economic well-being.

Topic 8: Arts, Media, and Culture

I was in The Arts, Media, and Culture Cluster.

We boiled down the problems at hand to the following: Balancing universal access and diversifying content.

-Arts must be integrated into basic education as they are helpful in fostering creativity and independence.

-Community media needs to be encouraged

-Experimental spaces must be encouraged to keep culture vibrant and evolving

Problems raised:

-homogeneous international entertainment media vs. local culture, arts.

-state promotion of consensus vs. conflicting urge for minority expresion

-lowest common denominator entertainment vs. tendency to tune out of civic participation. ”Bollywood is the buttered chicken of India: the lowest common denominator.”

-the need for universal access to technology

-media: as conveyor of what to whom?

Country-specific questions:

Malaysia: advertising promotes tabloidism online.

Indonesia: bill to control the movie industry dangerous attempt at control.

South Korea: convergence in media misunderstood by media players, it is actually simply producing data in different types available to the consumer. Online media leads to problems of networking promoting rumors and speculation. Government has focused on providing access to Internet.

India, China: in terms of film, culture, arts, propaganda vs. “pure” entertainment.

India: question of preserving heritage in a changing world: as middle class expands, it rejects traditional culture and adopts consumerism. The Indian diaspora has become the repository of traditional culture.  The danger of preserving culture in amber to preserve it but inadvertently turning it into dead or fossilized culture.

Timor-Leste: danger of media is that instead of conveying positivity, creates differences, conflict with the mainstream.

Cambodia: media is still at basic level of development (radio is real mass media), has to be more responsible; growing divide between basic mass media in provinces and more technologically advanced (Internet) in urban areas.

Philippines: media, in terms of creating content, has to be aware of the crucial role it plays in building communities, both national and regional.

Indonesia: cultural diffusion is an opportunity for elites; there is an Indonesian bias against speaking English, it is tantamount to being Westernized; is this tenable?

Thailand: younger generation has lost interest in history (because state promoted); media lacks nuance.

Topic 9: Achieving Success: Tony Fernandes of AirAsia.com

He left the music industry because of piracy.

1. Make sure you have the right product. (e.g. no one had a budget airline in this part of the world)

2. People: your biggest asset.

-discover the potential in your employees.

3. Create an environment for innovation.

-”You can’t be a CEO unless you’re prepared to go down to the ground.” Didn’t want belt loaders for cargo previously hand-hauled into cargo compartments even after new fleet of airbuses were two inches higher than previous planes; but as he engaged in doing a shift as a bag-carrier once a month, he personally discovered the change really did require belt loaders.

-”Departments are the big killers of organizations.”

4. Spend money on branding and marketing.

-Companies don’t spend enough in Asia; businessmen want responses/results too quickly for marketing.

5. Think local first, regional second.

-”We have to create our own heroes, our own content.”

-don’t think just Asia or India.

6. Create a succession plan, don’t overstay.

-”When I go I won’t be Mentor or Senior Anything.”

Mantra: Believe the unbelievable; dream the impossible; never take ‘no’ for an answer.

Points raised in Q&A:

-Leadership dislikes: fear of failing the people (employees)

-Leadership counts when you have bad news and you can still keep morale up.

-In Asia, homogeneity is an obstacle to innovation.

-In terms of Asia societies being risk-averse, conservative, and how to spark creativity: the answer is in the educational system and how it responds to creativity and innovation. Sport, Art and Culture are crucial, they foster expression and creativity.

Session 3: (originally: Leadership) Adaptation and Transformation

Australian PM Rudd: Region has five of the largest militaries; future of the region will be fluid.

How will regional economies relate/benefit from emerging China-India megaeconomies?

What are the models for Asian business? Examine the increasing role of Islamic Banking since 2007 Crisis.

Singaporean economist’s comments: We are headed for a perfect storm:

1. conflict

2. increase in natural disasters

3. end of US hegemony creating vacuum in leadership

Topic 10: Lessons Learned and Advice

Session 4: Dialogue with the Vice-President of Indonesia

Quoting Friedman: The 19th Century was the era of competition among nations; the 20th Century was the era of competition among multinationals; the 21st Century is the era of competition among individuals.

G20 now includes representatives of all the major civilizations.

Innovation and creativity are the keys to global survival.

1997 political crisis in Indonesia revealed weaknesses in society: even if you satisfy the basic needs of citizens, they will aspire to higher-participation in democracy.

What is needed is to put in place the pillars of a working, democracy: quality in terms of officials working better, in terms of law and order, and in terms of education for the public.

An integral part of the legal system includes anti-corruption mechanisms and institutions.

Better social welfare for basic education and health.

Session 5: Vision for 21st Century Asian Leadership

Distinction needs to be made between managers (technical) and leaders (who articulate a vision and inspire commitment to that vision).

Indian comment: Quoting Mahatma Gandhi, “By being selfless you assume leadership.”

South Korean comment: Contrasting Confucian tradition (“we are not allowed to tread on the shadows of teachers”) with Western pursuit of questions together instead of hierarchically.

My thoughts:

1. The need to find ways in hierarchical societies to involve others in a problem-solving thought process.

2. The Confucian need to adequately define terms is revalidated as increasingly technocratic management may be using same terms as rank-and-file but neither has the same definition of those terms.

3. Increasing focus on leadership ignores “followership,” the need for leaders to articulate shared goals to unite leaders with followers.

Q. What action will you take after this Conference?

Consensus was: to share stories from this conference as a means of imparting broader perspective.

Indonesian closing comment: “We must begin a pandemic of positivity.”

Themes

I identified these themes as the ones that kept surfacing throughout the public and private discussions among the participants:

Creative Destruction vs. Social Harmony:

Technological Skills vs. Creativity:

Technological Proficiency vs. Imaginative Insurgency:

Timeless Societies vs. Global (Cosmopolitan) Elites from Asia:

Vassals vs. Partners:

Wealthy vs. Dispossessed and Confused:

Establishing Nations vs. Failed States:

Other views and sideline discussions

One of the Singaporean representatives also blogged about her experiences over at Sylvia Lim’s Blog.

Singaporean banker: (On the current economic crisis) this is a question of morality and requires going back to basics. The solution is Western Management under Asian Values (Asked further on what Asian Values are, ventured they are”soft but meaningful values”; asked for specifics, responded with) A long memory is as an Asian Value, that is why the effects of the present crisis weren’t so devastating, we’d all learned our lessons from the 1997 Financial Crisis, banking, governments, the public had learned and cleaned up their books. (On Lee Kwan Yew) he views Singapore as a corporation; the composition of the state is incidental to the pursuit of the ambitions of that state. (In response to my question of alienation of younger Singaporeans who want to migrate). (In response to what are the ambitions of Singaporean state?) 1. To be a financial center for the region; 2. To be a trade hub for the region; 3. To be the necessary Middleman between the United States and China.

Chinese entrepreneur: (Responding to my recounting Singaporean view) That is an odd ambition to have, because it is an inevitable urge to eliminate the middleman as soon as possible.

Malaysian MP: We in UNMO lost majority for first time since independence because we lost capacity for empathy for minorities.

Cambodian: Garment industry has received heavy investments from China; reason is preferential concessions given to recovering war-torn countries like Cambodia, allows access to European markets; even with current economic crisis market share has been preserved because Cambodia careful to maintain labor standards to retain access to European markets.

Korean MP and media tycoon: Crucial to continued healthy profits has been the use of newspaper brand to establish English-language schools and English-language immersion camps abroad; has proven highly profitable.

Books recommended by delegates during the conference

You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train by Howard Zinn

Men In White: The Untold Story of Singapore’s Ruling Political Party by Sonny Yap, Richard Lim & Leong Weng Kam

From Good to Great by Jim Collins