Translate

Showing posts with label mendicancy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mendicancy. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Culture of mendicancy

 
 
San Francisco-based Filipino American lawyer Rodel Rodis wrote in the Philippine Daily Inquirer issue of September 18, 2012, that overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) are responsible for promoting a culture of mendicancy among their family members and relatives who rely on their dollar remittances. This article must be read, not because Mr. Rodis has enlightened us or written something worth our time, but for his shallow and misplaced ideas so we may purge them out of our thinking.
 
The world doesn’t need charlatans like Mr. Rodis. He masquerades as a concerned Filipino patriot (as co-convenor and leader of the US Pinoys for Good Governance, USP4GG), yet looks down on his poor Filipino compatriots who leave their homeland to support their families.
 
Mr. Rodis highlights two documentaries which depict and describe why Filipinos are going abroad to work. But he misses the main storylines of these two films and instead pushes his own false thinking that OFWs are making our society a population of mendicants, people living on handouts and charity.
Filipino workers line up the sidewalks in Hongkong during their day-off. Photo courtesy
of  Kabayanmark Images. Click link to view "Destination Anywhere" by Vanguard,
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7rVibDsWKo&feature=fvst 
The first documentary, “Destination Anywhere,” tells us why millions of Filipinos have gone to work overseas to provide for their families, such as expenses for their housing, clothing, health care, education of their children, and other personal needs. However, the film did not fail to mention that OFW remittances have reached about 20 billion dollars every year, a statistical fact that keeps the Philippine economy afloat.
 
The second documentary, “Mendicant Society,” however, is more critical of the economic conditions that drive Filipinos to work abroad, and the changes—both the misery and triumphs—they have brought upon their families and the society as a whole.
 
Why Mr. Rodis should conclude that OFW remittances promote a mendicant culture befuddles the mind. For one, his observation is outside the scope of the two films and is a very dismal characterization. Dollar earnings of millions of Filipinos abroad continue to shore up the country’s economy. Former Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has recognized OFWs as the country’s new heroes for their remittances, buying properties, and creating businesses. OFW remittances represent 13.5 per cent of the country's Gross Domestic Product. The economic managers of the current administration of President Benigno Aquino III have also credited the contributions of overseas workers to the country’s economic stability.
 
Next to Mexico, the Philippines is the second largest exporter of labour. On the average, 2,500 Filipinos leave the country each day to work abroad. Ten per cent of the population of the Philippines, or nearly 8 million Filipinos, are overseas workers distributed in 182 countries over the world. A large proportion of remittances come from women who are the majority of overseas Filipino workers, mostly domestic helpers and personal service workers.
 
Most overseas Filipino workers are skilled workers who take on unskilled work overseas, thus a brain drain on the country, particularly in the health and education sectors. There are not enough jobs in the country to employ a fast-growing work force. So, new graduates and unemployed workers choose to go abroad even if the result is underemployment, or in some cases, exploitation of labour.
 
A government that has failed its people should be responsible for the exodus of overseas workers. Work overseas has become the only alternative for many Filipinos to escape from the claws of poverty. Those who criticize overseas workers, such as Mr. Rodis, for subsidizing the living expenses and consumer excesses of the families they left behind fail to recognize the real root of the problem.
 
It’s the economy, stupid. Provide people with opportunities to work and earn a decent wage to support their families and they will all stay. There’s no place like home, but when economic conditions make life miserable, these will drive people to search for opportunities outside. Instead of faulting overseas workers for their remittances, blame the government for relying on foreign remittances to keep the economy afloat.
 
The World Bank has observed that the Philippines has been too distracted by the excellent performance of remittances, making the government complacent in addressing its fiscal deficits and low productivity growth. Foreign remittances were so huge, according to the World Bank, they accounted for more than twice the foreign aid the Philippines received. Remittances were also slightly larger than the country’s electronic exports, making Filipino workers the largest export commodity.
 
Migrante International has also recognized that the Philippines’ biggest exports are overseas Filipino workers and will continue to be for as long as the government relies on a labour export program as the centrepiece of its economic plan. Overseas employment is not the effective solution to the underemployment problem, or to the lack of jobs.
 
Without basic industries and with a backward agrarian economy, the Philippines will forever be unable to absorb a growing labour force. This situation drives Filipinos to migrate and work overseas, and the continuing export of cheap Filipino labour has turned these workers into modern-day slaves.
 
Those who criticize OFWs for turning their families into a society of mendicants should read the stories of exploitation of Filipino labour overseas, the cases of OFWs on death row and those beheaded in Saudi Arabia, the abuses and rape of Filipino nannies by their employers, and the unfair labour practices and working conditions most of these workers have to bear.
Repatriated Filipino overseas workers arrived from Lebanon conflict. Photo courtesy
of  IOM International Organization for Migration. Click link to view "Mendicant Society"
trailer, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAFLEc8_rp0
Overseas Filipino workers have been neglected by the government, yet their critics who accuse them of creating a culture of mendicancy fail to see the full impact of the government’s labour export program, not just its contribution to the Philippine economy but in helping their families survive as well. OFWs and their families have also borne the brunt of separation, which is not healthy for children who are growing up without their parents around.
 
Ultimately, development depends on good economic policies, not in viewing overseas employment as a substitute for economic growth. Foreign remittances from overseas workers can also be tapped for domestic investment, but the government must first have sound economic policies and create the opportunities for investment This appears to be the better thinking rather than placing the onus on OFWs for creating a society of mendicants.

Monday, April 16, 2012

National hubris


 

The standoff in the South China Sea is exposing the true colours of Filipinos, at least those who still shamelessly cling to America for help in times of threat to our country’s sovereignty. I’ve read an opinion posted in my alumni e-group which says that as much as we want to break the American influence upon us, there is no one who can really help us but America.

Here I am referring to the Philippines’ territorial claim over the Spratly Islands which is also contested by five other nations that straddle the South China Sea. In fact, the Philippines has stopped calling it the South China Sea and would rather have it called the West Philippine Sea. I’m not very sure we can rename a sea without the agreement of other countries which have referred to that sea by its name on the map for a number of centuries.

Ownership of the Spratly Islands is highly debateable and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) according to many legal scholars has no meaningful provision that could settle the sovereignty claim between the disputing countries. The effective alternative to establish territorial sovereignty is occupation and permanent settlement, which is exactly being done in small efforts by China, the Philippines and Vietnam, and of course, by oil explorations to the extent possible without military harassment. Presently, these countries have military reinforcements in the South China Sea to protect their territorial claims while all the rival countries are attempting to solve the impasse by diplomatic means.
U.S. decommissioned BRP Gregorio del Pilar ship enroute to the Philippines from
 Alameda, California to help the Philippine Navy patrol the South China Sea. Photo
 courtesy of  Bytemarks. Click link to view "The South China Sea: Troubled Waters,"
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEbIv2ZxKuI&feature=related
The Philippine government has been the most vociferous in seeking American military support. To date, it has received a decommissioned naval vessel from the United States to help in reconnaissance and maritime patrol. In a meeting with the South Korean president recently, Philippine President Benigno Aquino III has also asked his counterpart for aircraft, boats and other military hardware to help the Philippine military in its territorial dispute with China over the Spratly Islands. Obviously, the other countries which also have territorial claims to the Spratly Islands are relying on their respective military resources.

Compared with the other countries, the Philippines does not really have an effectively functioning navy or the significant equivalent of an ample military force that could protect its territorial claim. Hence, why it has been unabashedly making overtures to the United States government for help.

China has fleets of submarines, frigates, and destroyers and, much recently, an aircraft carrier. Vietnam also has a number of submarines, like Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia. In addition, Thailand has a small aircraft carrier.

The Philippines has one of the longest, and perhaps, the deepest harbours in the world where a strong navy can thrive. Subic Bay used to be the refuelling and repair station of the U.S. Seventh Fleet. But the American government was only interested in establishing military bases on Philippine soil for use of its military rather than in helping the Philippine government develop a self-sufficient military infrastructure for defence purposes. Even the moribund mutual defence treaty between the United States and the Philippines provided no concrete assurance that the U.S. would come to the defence of the Philippines when threatened by foreign invasion.

When the military bases were closed after the termination of the agreements between the U.S. and the Philippines, the U.S. government found an alternative to keep its presence in the Philippines as part of its military campaign against terrorism. Now the U.S. government has deployed its special forces to help the Philippine military combat the local communist insurgency and Moslem separatists in Southern Mindanao, both considered terrorists by the United States. Through a Visiting Forces Agreement, both the U.S. and Philippine military have conducted joint exercises in waters close to the South China Sea, in a way reinforcing the territorial claims of the Philippine government to the Spratly Islands.
Philippine Navy Special Forces on training exercises with U.S. Special Forces in
South China Sea. Photo courtesy of LightAj.
The barefaced idea, however, that only the U.S. government can help the Philippines in its territorial claim to the Spratly Islands is only promoting dependency on a foreign power and entrenching the historical subservience of the Philippines to its former colonial master. This Philippine mendicancy shows we’re willing to fight foreign aggression tooth and nail to preserve our sovereignty but we’ll allow American intrusion anytime. It’s not that there’s no other country which can help us, it is that it is only the United States which can help us.

Even before the Americans took the Philippines as its first colony on the eve of the twentieth century, the country’s national hero Jose Rizal had already predicted the coming of the Americans based on his reading of the observations by a German traveller named Feodor Jagor. Jagor was already prophesying the commercial growth and industrial development in America and it was just a matter of time for the nascent U.S. power to claim its share of colonies in the world.

Since the Americans established its foothold in the Philippines, it has always been based on its permanent economic and military interests in the region, never for altruistic reasons. The unequal treaties, between the two governments, whether economic or military, were always lopsided in favour of the U.S. government. Contingents of Filipino soldiers were sent by the Philippine government in Korea and Vietnam to fight along with American soldiers the creeping communist powers north of these two countries. The Philippines also sent troops to fight with Americans in Iraq. In return, the U.S. government has been providing foreign assistance, mostly money and decommissioned equipment to the Philippine military. Where the financial assistance actually went will not surprise anyone given the pervasive corruption in the country.

The Visiting Forces Agreement between the Philippines and the United States gives an excuse for American troops to be involved in the fight against the communist insurgents and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. There are even talks between the two governments for the re-establishment of U.S. bases in the Philippines, and with the South China Sea being part of America’s pivot foreign policy, military bases in the Philippines would again be on the front and centre of American presence in Asia and the Pacific.

There is today a growing consensus among European nations to end their dependency on American military protection. This is highly inconvenient to U.S. President Barack Obama who needs all the help he can get, even from small allies, if only for political reasons. With the fall of the Soviet Union and America’s decision to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has found itself without a clear goal and a common enemy. Postwar Europe has always tended to fall in line with Washington’s security policies, and this is what kept NATO going since 1949.

A military alliance like NATO without a clear common enemy is almost impossible to maintain. Europeans are now realizing that the only solution to their military problems is to reduce their dependence on the United States and take greater responsibility for their own defence. With the Americans being less and less able to be the world’s policemen, European governments are struggling to define their common interests which are unlikely to be best represented by a seemingly endless war with the Taliban or Al-Qaeda.

At the same time, the Americans have also realized the need to refocus their foreign policy and military strategy to confront the rising threat of Chinese hegemony in Asia and the Pacific, which explains why the U.S. considers the South China Sea as vital sea lanes to its navy and for commercial and trade routes. The military exercises between the U.S. and the Philippine military have also concentrated in protecting oil rigs in the South China Sea, obviously in anticipation of Chinese aggression.

While European nations and other countries for that matter are beginning to see the folly of dependence on American military protection, the Philippines is a rare exception. Military dependence on the United States is a very clear policy of preserving the historical subservience of the Philippines to its former colonial master. Already without a strong national culture because of too much American influence on the values and habits of Filipinos, losing one’s national pride in exchange for military consideration is not a hard bargain to make. It’s probably much easier for the American government to mobilise Filipinos to join the army to fight the Chinese in the event of a confrontation in the South China Sea than asking Americans to risk the blood of their soldiers without the solid backing of their citizens.

The subservient attitude of Filipinos to American interests is almost like a national hubris, a basic precondition of Filipino-American relationship. Where the American flag goes, so there goes the Philippine flag, too.
American sailors on Rest & Recreation with Filipino girls in Manila. Photo
courtesy of  Chris Koerner
Some militant members of the Philippine Congress, and they are just a miniscule few, have cautioned against bringing the mighty U.S. army to the South China Sea conflict. Theirs is the most honourable position every Filipino should take: to assert sovereignty and territorial integrity over Philippine territorial waters but not allow any foreign country, be it China or the United States, to exploit our waters and its resources for their economic, military or hegemonic interest.

Our record of mendicancy only proves that as a nation we are not capable of self-government. When foreign aggression confronts us, we always tend to cry on the shoulders of the U.S. government and ask for help. In foreign relations, we have never learned that there are no permanent friends, only permanent interests. The U.S. has waded its feet on the South China Sea conflict because it gives them the reason to re-establish their hegemony in the region, and we are aiding and abetting the Americans to achieve their goal against our patrimony and national interest.