Searching for common ground

‘Sobra na, tama na, palitan na!’ was Cory Aquino’s battlecry. Millions of Filipinos responded to her call in sufficient numbers to bring about a People Power revolt. “Oust the dictator, restore democracy” was the common ground upon which a rainbow coalition was cobbled. A just cause and a credible leader --- these were the two salient factors that spelled the success of the yellow revolution.

What is the just cause and who is the credible leader that could unify our country today?

Today’s “just cause” is good governance. Nine years of a regime that flaunted its misuse of power and authority is more than enough. Graft and corruption have seeped through the entire bureaucracy. Our country’s competitiveness continues to slip further. Even without a global financial crisis, our economy is unable to grow at a pace that would meaningfully alleviate widespread poverty. The Philippines has one of the worst income distribution patterns in these regions. Decades of collusion between traditional elites and bureaucrat-capitalists who dominate our economic and political life have marginalized the lives of the teeming millions who populate the bottom of the pyramid.

But there are many presidential aspirants and an even more dizzying array of political parties that are wooing popular support behind candidacies and advocacies. Who among them is the most credible, the most competent and the most deserving?

That was the same dilemma facing Cory Aquino as she pondered on how to bring about a peaceful transition in 1992. Eventually, she chose General Fidel Ramos, her trusted ally through seven (he claims there were nine) coup attempts over other allies like Ramon Mitra, Jovito Salonga and (erstwhile Cabinet member) Miriam Defensor Santiago. Ranged against them were two opposition stalwarts, namely, Eduardo Cojuangco, Jr. and Imelda Marcos. Allowing Imelda to return home proved to be a brilliant move as she neutralized Danding Cojuangco’s vaunted vote-getting prowess. Somehow, Mr. Ramos succeeded in winning over the most number among the Edsa and Cory faithful to pull off a squeaker over Madam Miriam.

Take your pick among the announced presidential wannabees (in alphabetical order): Joseph Estrada, Bayani Fernando, Loren Legarda, Jamby Madrigal, Fr. Ed Panlilio, Mar Roxas, Gilbert Teodoro and Manny Villar. Bring in Noli de Castro, Francis Escudero and Dick Gordon. And, of course, Noynoy Aquino’s name surfaced after his mother’s death and funeral.

In three months (by end-November), we will know for sure who among them will eventually pursue their avowed or imagined dreams for the presidency. Meantime, we should start a process of discernment that would enable us to make an informed decision.

I recall that in 2004, I chose Raul Roco over the two leading aspirants, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and Fernando Poe, Jr. I chose Mr. Roco because I believed he was the best qualified I chose him despite the widespread belief that he could not win because I refused to choose “between the lesser of two evils” which was the way the choice that year was framed by conventional wisdom.

In 2010, I believe the choice must be based on who is the leader who can build on common ground and unify our nation behind an agenda of good governance for economic prosperity and global competitiveness. To be credible and acceptable, such a candidate must have both competence and character. Two competencies are essential: leadership ability and managerial expertise. Leadership ability means the ability to rally and unify our people.

Managerial expertise includes the administrative ability to manage the complexity of our political structures and processes. Cory Aquino had superior leadership ability and an acceptable level of managerial expertise. What she lacked in the latter she more than made up by choosing her people well, despite the challenges posed by the diversity of the rainbow coalition that supported her.

Using Cory Aquino as the standard, it may be difficult to find another candidate that could pass the character criterion. Integrity is used alternatively to denote the quality of wholeness, congruence, or consistency in thought, word, and deed. What made Mrs. Aquino stand out was that she was pure of heart --- a trait that may be nearly impossible to find among the present crop of aspirants. I believe our people want a leader they can trust and believe in.

But we must also recognize that these are different times and that the national mood --- while being similar in some respects to Edsa Uno --- is not exactly the same as the sentiments that prevailed in 1986. Yes, there is an outpouring of affection for President Cory and there is a growing outrage over the malpractices of her present-day successor. But there is a multiplicity of possible choices --- not just one clear choice. And the time of reckoning is near. Realpolitik will soon set in and pave the way for the emergence of the eventual contenders.

Do we want the return of a previous President who sees the election as a path to personal vindication? Do we want young --- even if inexperienced --- leaders who are offering themselves as fresh alternatives? Do we want to consider the standard-bearers of two traditional parties --- Liberal and Nacionalista --- who are projecting themselves as reformists of our age? While the case for change is all too evident and palpable, the jury is still out on who will lead the change. Let the spirit of President Cory guide us in our process of discernment.

Carrying on Cory’s Mission, Part II

Beyond petitioning for her sainthood, proclaiming her a national hero, naming major highways, streets and schools after her, how do we, as Filipinos, carry on the mission of President Corazon C. Aquino?

Cory ‘magic’ is alive and well. More than a week after her death, thousands still flock to her grave. Her funeral procession that took about nine hours brought out Filipinos into the streets, chanting her name and creating seas of yellow ribbons, shirts and graffiti.

Beyond magic, there’s spirit. President Cory’s death has become a unifier and a healer of wounds. Bongbong and Imee Marcos summoned enough grace to condole with the Aquino children; Ballsy and other close relatives received them warmly after Kris acknowledged over national TV the sincerity of the Marcoses. Even Erap Estrada whom she helped oust via the People Power route after the breakdown of his impeachment trial hailed her as the greatest postwar Filipino leader. Arch rivals Ateneo and La Salle agreed to honor her memory when they clashed at the UAAP. Militant civil society groups joined the AFP and the PNP during her wake and funeral.

Indeed, no other national leader has proved capable of unifying a broader and deeper rainbow coalition of diverse segments of Philippine society. Who will take on the cudgels of leading this coalition in the post-Cory era? Senator Noynoy Aquino appears to be a natural choice. Immediately after her mother was buried, he has been endorsed for either President or Vice President, but he has simply said, “Thank you, but I’ve not really thought of that yet.”

If we are to truly honor President Cory’s memory and carry on her mission, we should commit ourselves to making our democracy work and strengthening its institutions. First, we must choose our leaders well. Second, we must support the leaders we elect in building a structure of good governance. Third, we must make sure that good governance and its principal elements --- namely, people’s participation and vigilance, transparency, and accountability --- is nurtured and sustained over the long-run.

So who are the leaders who exemplify the Cory spirit? President Cory succeeded in tapping a worthy successor who was eventually elected and also proved to be a capable leader: General Fidel Valdez Ramos. But after he stepped down, the hero of the masa, Joseph Ejercito Estrada was elected by a big margin, especially because 60% of those who voted against him split their votes into at least three candidates.

Now that Mr. Estrada is making a high-profile comeback, it is well worth asking: Is he a worthy carrier or promoter of President Cory’s legacy? With all due respect, I would have to answer this question in the negative. President Estrada had his time; he was elected to the highest office but proved unworthy of the people’s trust. Tinimbang siya, nguni’t kulang. (His worth was assessed, and he was found wanting.)

Who among the present crop of possible presidential candidates is capable of building a structure of good governance?

The President of the Philippines is one of the most powerful sovereign leaders. S/he is clothed with awesome power and authority. Whatever she lacked in administrative experience, President Cory more than made up for it in terms of her integrity: indeed, she was pure of heart. This is why she was a faithful public servant who never flaunted nor abused her power. We should hold our presidential wannabes to high norms of public conduct.

As we look back at the glory days of the Edsa People Power revolt, we lament the fact that many of the people that she tapped to serve during her watch have since built their own dynasties and become latter-day traditional politicians (trapos), not unlike those that served with the Marcos dictatorship. In honoring President Cory, are we willing to denounce and reject them even while they claim to be core members of the yellow brigade?

There are also up-and-coming new-generation politicians who are styling themselves as the Filipino counterparts of US President Barack Obama. Their primary credentials are youth and a fresh image. Do they have sufficient competence --- and more importantly, do they possess the moral strength --- that will enable them to overcome the odds of inexperience stacked up against them? Barack Obama was elected because he was a most credible advocate of change, not being a Washington, D.C. insider like Hillary Clinton or John McCain. Moreover, he won the support of a strong political party that he also led in reclaiming a majority of both houses of Congress and the 50 state governors’ houses.

The ‘Obama wannabes’ in our midst do not have the backing of a strong institution like the Democratic Party. They are simply high-profile celebrities who have achieved name recall through continuous media exposure. Unlike then reluctant candidate Cory Aquino, their aspirations for higher office are not anchored on a strong moral force.

It seems to me that, realistically speaking, we have a few viable options --- and none of them even comes close to President Cory’s sterling qualities. But this should not deter us from making an intelligent choice. Moreover, we should become even more determined that we, as citizens, will henceforth become actively involved in politics and public affairs. We should be more vigilant and watchful. We should never allow those whom we elected to abuse their power or to enrich themselves at the expense of our impoverished and marginalized countrymen.

Like President Cory, we should stand up and be counted. Let our voices be heard over radio, television and newspapers. Let us flood the internet with expressions of affirmation for those who serve well and denunciation of those are unfaithful to public trust. Let us volunteer to serve and share our time and talents in building a stronger democracy in our land. Let us work vigorously and pray hard. Selflessness, faith and courage were President Cory’s three virtues and gifts. Let her be our shining beacon of inspiration.

Carrying on Cory’s mission

She unified our nation to summon enough courage to overthrow a dictator. She sought to heal the wounds of division and conflict, even in the face of hostility and aggression from those who did not believe in her. She was a steadfast advocate of vigilance in the defense of freedom. She spoke the truth and urged us to live by it. And as she lay in her deathbed, she made us realize that in prayer there is wisdom, grace and redemption. Such is the enduring legacy of Corazon Cojuangco Aquino.

In just over a month --- from the time she checked into the hospital for the final phase of her lingering battle against colon cancer --- her spirit has once more energized and transformed the Filipino psyche’. When we knelt to pray and witness the Eucharist in the healing masses that were celebrated for her, we rediscovered the power of faith: faith in the Almighty and faith in ourselves.

Indeed, she was our rallying point. She also guided us like the North Star, enabling us to reflect on the essential lessons of life and death. In the process, she inspired us to re-connect ourselves to the place of inner wisdom, and to re-affirm that we have the capacity to regenerate and transform ourselves --- as we did after the death of her husband Ninoy in 1983 and during our national epiphany at Edsa, circa 1986.

In 1983, we first tied the yellow ribbons of hope to await Ninoy’s return from exile. When he was brutally murdered, she echoed his credo --- “The Filipino is worth dying for” --- and transformed it into an a battle cry of hope: “The Filipino is worth living for.”

In his homily at the requiem mass before her remains were moved out of La Salle, Tarlac Bishop Florentino Cinense urged us in his homily to turn grief into purposive action. Let’s tie these yellow ribbons in our hearts to remind ourselves that we need to nurture hope and optimism for the future of our beloved homeland. Let President Cory’s happy memory inspire us to step up and declare that, indeed, each of us is willing to be responsible for shaping a better life and future for our country.

No more whining and carping. No more finger pointing and chitchatting. No more pining for what-could-have been. No more sayang and puwede na. Enough of complacency and mediocrity. Enough of the playing-victim syndrome.

Recall that after more than a million Filipinos signed up to urge her to lead the fight for the restoration of democracy --- and after fervent prayer and discernment --- she took up the challenge joyfully and rekindled hope in our hearts.

Indeed she was the embodiment of courage. Corazon is Spanish for heart; couer is heart in French and is the root word of courage. To be courageous is not really to be fearless. It is to have heart, it is to love and have affection, it is to dare to care and share. Her authentic act of courage and daring was to willfully care for our country and people. It was to share her God-given talents, even at the cost of great personal sacrifice.

President Cory also taught us another dimension of courage: it means to have faith, to believe in an Almighty and merciful God who lovingly holds us in the hollow of His hands. Her bone-deep credo: work as if everything depends on your earnest efforts, then leave the rest to God.

What can we do to honor the memory of President Cory? What can we do to carry on what she believed in and taught us to believe?

Paano natin itutuloy ang laban ni Ninoy at Cory? (How can we carry on the fight of Ninoy and Cory?)

We begin with ourselves. I will be the originator of initiatives to help others, the author of stories of caring, the volunteer and the worker.

I will believe that God created me to be good and to do good. I will harness my God-given talents and abilities. I will share what I know with others. I will reach out and extend a helping hand to those around me who need my help and encouragement. I will join my loved ones, friends, and neighbors in building communities of sharing and caring.

I will look beyond myself. I will be willing to make sacrifices, to endure inconvenience, maybe even suffer some pain, to do what it takes to make a difference, and to enable those living in the margins to swim in the mainstream of social opportunity.

Corazon Aquino was a gentle and happy crusader. She was a prayer warrior. She stormed the heavens with faith and fervor. That is how she weathered and hurdled tremendous challenges. That is how she triumphed over adversity. That is how she led us from the darkness of dictatorship to the brightness and warmth of freedom.

And then, while standing on terra firma, she respected her fellow human beings, and made ordinary folks feel special by treating them extraordinarily well. That is how she touched our lives: by connecting with us in a way that conveyed an authentic sense of solidarity and human bonding.

She wielded tremendous power: no, not the power and authority of the highest office that she occupied. She wielded awesome power: prayer power and people power. In the same manner that she moved millions of Filipinos into action, we now need to move ourselves to action.

Ninoy and Cory showed us the way. They fought the good fight and finished the race. Now it is up to us to continue walking in the path of goodness and light.

President Cory, hindi ka nag-iisa. Mahal ka namin, President Cory!

Mrs. President Cory: ‘Ina ng Bayan’

During the First Quarter Storm of 1970, I joined the parliament of the streets in denouncing the Marcos regime. I spent a lot of time outside the classroom where I thought I learned a lot about the real conditions in Philippine society. The Marcos regime was so well-entrenched that it remained in power until it was overthrown by the Edsa people power revolt in 1986.

In late 1989, I received an appointment letter from the Office of the President of the Philippines regarding my designation as an Undersecretary at the Department of Agrarian Reform. This was upon the recommendation of then Secretary Miriam Defensor Santiago. More than a year later, I found myself working at the President’s office itself as Head of the Presidential Management Staff and Deputy Executive Secretary after former Congressman and erstwhile Transportation and Communications Secretary Oscar Orbos became Executive Secretary.

How I made it from Mendiola and Plaza Miranda to Malacanang seemed to be such an impossible dream. But it became a reality only because Corazon C. Aquino became President.

As I write this piece, I join millions of Filipinos who are praying that God ease her pain as she wages a courageous battle against cancer. More than two decades ago, she led our country and people in excising a social cancer --- the Marcos dictatorship --- and restoring democracy to our blighted land.

I believe I speak for people of my generation when I say that she is an authentic leader and hero of our times.

In Good to Great, Phil Collins tells us of the type of leadership required for enabling an organization to make the quantum leap into greatness: “Compared to high-profile leaders with big personalities who make headlines and become celebrities, the good-to-great leaders seem to have come from Mars. Self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy --- these leaders are a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. They are more like Lincoln and Socrates than Patton or Caesar.”

Even as President, Chief Executive and Commander-in-Chief, Mrs. Aquino maintained a simple demeanor. When I first met her, she welcomed me with a ready smile and made me feel at ease working with her. One of my duties was to serve as Cabinet Secretary. Every week, my staff prepared the working papers for weekly Cabinet meetings. I would brief her on the agenda about an hour before the start of such meetings. She presided over such meetings with grace and ease.

She was a stickler for punctuality. She made it a point to be at least half an hour early for all of her appointments. “The least I can do is to respect other people’s time,” I recall her saying. This is so unlike other Presidents’ (of countries and companies) well-known practice of flaunting their high position as an alibi for letting people wait on them.

When it came to dealing with matters brought to her attention, she always acted promptly and decisively. Matters requiring Cabinet members’ action were quickly referred to them and they were expected to act expeditiously and report to her what they had done.

Contrary to public perception, she was street-smart and savvy in political affairs. Recall that she chose Fidel Ramos over Ramon Mitra as her candidate for President despite the latter’s edge in political experience. Although this decision alienated some of her followers, history has proven her right. The Ramos presidency ensured the continuity of Mrs. Aquino’s democratization initiatives as well as the institutionalization of good governance programs.

Despite unfounded insinuations about Kamag-Anak, Inc. (in reference to her close relatives’ alleged involvement or undue interest in government deals), she was untainted by the stigma of graft and corruption that has been the bane of every President’s administration.

She was also a tough and resilient crisis manager. No other President (not even Marcos) had to deal with as many coup attempts and local as well as global threats --- including a major earthquake, a volcanic eruption and the Iraq-Kuwait war. Yet she demonstrated remarkable grace under pressure and kept our nation safe and intact through it all.

What set apart Corazon Aquino were the virtues of quiet leadership as defined by Harvard Professor Joseph L. Badaracco Jr.: restraint, modesty and tenacity. He wrote: “Notice that these are quiet, everyday virtues. None is readily associated with heroic leadership…undaunted courage, charismatic personality, willingness to sacrifice everything, noble passions, or unwavering commitment to a cause.”

Challenged by denizens of the deposed regime, she exercised remarkable restraint, and even agreed with her then defense secretary’s (Mr. Ramos’) decision to punish AFP renegades with ten push-ups. Her modesty --- humility is the more apt term --- is legendary. She never truly enjoyed being in the spotlight, and was never inclined to display the pomp and pageantry of her lofty office.

And yes, she was, indeed tenacious in her defense of democracy and freedom. Contrary to Prof. Badaracco’s depiction, she was unwaveringly committed to strengthening the democracy she fought so hard to bring restore. When Mr. Ramos mounted a charter change initiative late into his term, she rallied the people to take to the streets anew. Immediately after it became apparent that the incumbent President used her vast powers to win the 2004 reelection, she lost no time in asking her to step down even if she herself had been among those who helped install Ms. Arroyo in January 2001. In 2006, she even went to the Philippine Marines headquarters in Fort Bonifacio and called on the people to protect Col. Ariel Querubin and other officers who were expressing their dissent against their Commander-in-Chief’s alleged anti-people policies. This gesture earned her the ire of some sectors, but she remained unruffled and steadfast in asserting that we must remain vigilant in warding off all threats to our freedom.

Indeed, as her speechwriter (and now Makati Congressman) Teodoro Locsin, Jr. once wrote, she has made yellow the color of courage. She showed all and sundry that even a simple housewife could lead a people’s movement to overthrow a seemingly powerful ruler because theirs was a just cause. We identify ourselves with her because she selflessly heeded the call to serve at a most critical point in our country’s history.

We honor her because she made us proud to be Filipinos. She is Inang Bayan (motherland) and Ina ng Bayan (mother of the nation) personified. As she struggles in a painful personal battle with a dreaded disease, she evokes our respect and admiration as we recall how she as President once led us --- and how as a former President she continues to lead us --- in a continuing crusade to bring honor and dignity to our beloved country.

Eliminate Wall Street, out with phantom wealth

“Livid Democrats”, the New York Times reported earlier this week, moved to reclaim some $165 million in bonuses given by AIG to its executives after successive injection of federal bailout funds to the ailing giant insurance firm. David Korten, author of the newly published book, Agenda for a New Economy, writes a stinging indictment against Wall Street as he advocates its elimination:

“Efforts to fix Wall Street miss an important point. It can’t be fixed. It is corrupt beyond repair, and we cannot afford it. Moreover, because the essential functions it does perform are served better in less costly ways, we do not need it.” Then, in a tone that resonates with “livid Democrats” and others who are outraged by the continuing insensitivity of the likes of AIG’s senior management team, he continues:

“Wall Street’s only business purpose is to enrich its own major players, a bunch of buccaneers and privateers…who walk away with their fees, commissions and bonus packages and leave it to others to pick up the costs of federal bailouts.” He adds: “Even more damaging than the economic costs are the spiritual and psychological costs of a Wall Street culture that celebrates greed, favors the emotionally and morally challenged with outsized compensation packages, and denies the human capacity for cooperation and sharing.”

If Dr. Korten’s comments read like today’s editorials and opinion columns, it is because his book is fresh from the printing presses. His book-writing project began on the night of November 24, 2008 with an objective to launch on January 23, 2009 or just after President Barack Obama’s inauguration. The book launching was timed to coincide with his delivery of a keynote address at a national theological conference sponsored by the Trinity Church that is located right in the heart of Wall Street.

David Korten, who earned both his MBA and PhD degrees from Stanford University, taught for more than five years at Harvard and served as Harvard’s adviser to the Central American Management Institute in Nicaragua. He then left US academia in the late seventies and moved to Southeast Asia where he lived for nearly 15 years, doing a stint with the Ford Foundation and serving as Asia regional adviser on development manager for the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Eventually he “broke with the official aid system”, casting his lot with Asian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and concentrating on capacity building for civil society organizations. He spent considerable time in the Philippines and Manila.

In the course of being a development manager in this part of the world, Dr. Korten realized that “the United States was actively promoting --- both at home and abroad --- the very policies that were deepening the crisis” and that “if there were to be a positive human future, the United States must change.”

Wall Street is not just the location of the New York Stock Exchange that is the virtual epicenter of global capitalism. Dr. Korten uses the term to refer to “the institutions of big finance and the captive corporations that serve them.” He describes Wall Street’s modus operandi:

“It has perfected the arts of financial speculation, corporate asset stripping, predatory lending, risk shifting, leveraging, and creating debt pyramids. Maximizing financial return is the name of the game. Successful players are rewarded with celebrity, extravagant perks and vast financial fortunes.”

Main Street is the counterpoint to Wall Street. He describes it as “the world of local businesses and working people engaged in producing real goods and services to provide a livelihood for themselves, their families, and communities…Achieving a positive financial return is an essential condition for staying in business, but most Main Street businesses function within a framework of community values and interests that moderate the drive for profit.”

Dr. Korten points out the essential difference: Wall Street produces “phantom wealth”; Main Street creates “real wealth.”

He traces Wall Street’s obsession with phantom wealth to the Edmunds fallacy, named after John Edmunds, a finance professor at Babson College and the Arthur D. Little School of Management. Dr. Edmunds wrote about “Securities: The New Wealth Machine” in Foreign Policy, a respected professional journal, where he extolled the virtues of “securitization --- the issuance of high-quality bonds and stocks” that has become “the most powerful engine of wealth creation in world’s economy.” From a slow, incremental process, wealth accumulation accelerated to the extent that (as of 1997 when he wrote the article), the total value of financial securities had ballooned to more than a year’s worldwide output of goods and services.

This preference for securities became a fascination --- and eventually an obsession --- not just among investment bankers and securities traders but also among finance ministers of leaders of countries. Dr. Edmunds wrote: “The new approach requires that a state find ways to increase the market value of the stock of productive assets…An economic policy that aims to achieve growth by wealth creation therefore does not attempt to increase the production of goods and services, except as a secondary objective.”

The denizens of phantom wealth began jacking up the value of securities through hype, bluff and bluster, creating the internet or dot-com bubble in the 1990s and the real estate bubble of the 2000s. Meantime, the outsourcing of jobs to low-wage economies in order to reduce costs and further increase stock prices decimated production of real goods, further thinning America’s industrial base.

The Federal Reserve, Dr. Korten points out, “allied with the U.S. Treasury Department and Wall Street banks to give the creation of phantom wealth priority over the creation of real wealth.” This is what gave impetus to the subprime mortgage boom that was built on overvalued assets and deceptively rated as “triple A”. He laments “Federal bailouts to save overleveraged financial institutions when the bubble bursts represents another resource allocation distortion.”

Dr. Korten’s agenda for a new economy spells out six criteria of economic health. He envisions a new economy that would: a) “provide everyone with the opportunity for a healthy, dignified and fulfilling life; b) bring human consumption into balance with Earth’s natural systems; c) nurture relationships within strong, caring communities; d) honor sound, rule-based market principles; e) support an equitable and socially-efficient allocation of resources; and f) fulfill the democratic ideal of one-person, one-vote citizen sovereignty.”

Such new economy requires the elimination of Wall Street, the rejection of all forms of phantom wealth, and upholding the primacy of Main Street where real wealth is created by communities of people who care for their earth, for each other, and for the long-term well being of humanity.