It’s hitting the headlines plus spilling all over the social media landscape — the penchant of the President to accede to invitations of foreign governments for state visits purportedly for trade agreements, defense cooperation, investment opportunities, among others. Generally, they are in the realms of maritime security, economy, defense, bilateral ties, close alliances. 

There’s no other president who had done that in so short a period and practically for the umpteenth time as if he must not stop — in some sense — to do “crowdsourcing,” “forum shopping,” “signing in areas of cooperation,” et cetera.

His speeches, read on teleprompters, sound more like his travels are triggered by the need to bring into the country “bundles of joy” that the other countries have and that our development model grossly lacks or is in short supply of.

The scene and scheme of things could seem odd — one of a much less affluent, much less powerful nation blowing bubbles than getting down to brass tacks — in the minds of much more affluent economies such as United States, Germany, Czech Republic, Australia and Canada.

In broad strokes, no one should remotely doubt or discount the value that the President’s travels have so far achieved in terms of essentially “pledges” in the areas of border trade, regional stability, or investments by foreign governments or their captains of industry.

It’s this presumably massive “intake” that incentivizes FM Jr. to accept more invitations and do working or state visits to host countries. These foreign travels placate whatever public funds are used to sustain a large entourage of top bureaucrats who are billeted in the best hotels in the country of mission.

Forging accords, signing agreements or joint communiques, memoranda of understanding and the conduct of exploratory discussions in various spheres of cooperation (skilled workforce, OFWs, economic, defense, migration, shared commitments, partnerships) could be indispensable for development.

If the US can push to fruition its commitment of over $1 billion after its trade and investment mission to the Philippines, then well and good. The guarantee of about $4 billion in German investments in the Philippines in the fields of healthcare, information technology, agriculture and manufacturing should likewise be a shot in the arm if the same materialize.

Unless pledges are made to be broken at the first instance of otherwise restrictive challenges that executives of top German, US, Czech, Canadian companies might discover beforehand, then the good President’s foreign trips would have been for naught. Without clear roadmaps of the President’s development agenda, one wonders how discussions could proceed when leveraging for some comparative advantage. 

For even if the crippling provisions of the 1987 Constitution have all been relaxed through legislated enactments forged by both Houses of Congress over ownership by foreign nationals or alien governments, the fact remains that they cannot take them out of the country.

In other words, if the mountains cannot go to Muhammad, then Muhammad will go to the mountains. The enabling environment for investments of massive scale by top overseas companies becomes a mere pipe dream as long as corruption in high places, predatory electricity costs, monstrous traffic, wicked governance all continue to persist.

The objective to widen the overseas audience on the West Philippine Sea issue, the reason for a series of state visits abroad, could be self-defeating.  Perhaps, the President happens to embrace Franklin D. Roosevelt’s maxim, viz., “The more you travel, the more you realize that the whole world is one neighborhood.”

Speaking of neighborhood, China which claims to own the whole of the South China Sea has been called many names, especially when officialdom thought it wise to “blame and shame” this economic hegemon before the eyes of the world. The dubious scenario becomes one of establishing good relations with powerful nations but China.

Accompanying top bureaucrats run out of pages in their passports and costly travel expenses are charged against taxpayer money.  In the end, can the country’s future be outsourced?