(In)security council

(In)security council | Daily Tribune

All the Philippine Presidents, before they served, were something else. They rose through the ranks, so to speak. Many used to be members of the House of Representatives, or of the Senate, or of the Cabinet, or were heads of local governments, or held other high government positions. Many had been all or many of these. These offices not only gave them a national profile that facilitated their elevation to the highest office of the land, but afforded them a wealth of wisdom and experience that they brought to the presidency.

Whilst head of state, these people were privy to information not available to anyone else, made decisions no one else could have made, and experienced things unique to being the one and only Chief Executive during their time.

This is why former Presidents have traditionally been tapped, after their terms, for at least two major advisory bodies: the National Security Council (NSC) and the Council of State. There the extraordinary wisdom and unmatched perspective they had acquired on affairs of the nation could still be put to good use. Besides, it is conventional wisdom that a newbie — even to Malacañang — could always benefit from the advice of those who came before.

It was thus foolhardy for the incumbent President to amend the executive order on the membership of the NSC in a move widely perceived — rightly or wrongly — as meant to exclude the sitting Vice President from matters of state.

There is a logical reason previous Presidents made the vice president a member of both councils which play crucial advisory roles in matters of security, foreign policy and important issues concerning the life of the nation. It is because the VP, being proverbially “a heartbeat away from the presidency,” must be kept in the loop so that in the event he or she has to suddenly take over, they can hit the ground running (sorry for the profusion of metaphors).

We get it — although many personally do not agree with it — that since President Marcos does not intend to die in office and in light of recent deep-seated disagreements with the Vice President, he may be eager to diminish her political clout by relieving her of important functions. But must the President remove former presidents from the NSC as well?

If the purpose was to becloud the fact that the Vice President was being singled out for political liquidation, it was both too obvious and clumsy at the same time. Whatever possessed Marcos’ advisers to think that the general public would not see through the ploy?

All that the President achieved — aside from disempowering the VP — was to throw out the baby with the bathwater (so to speak) by depriving the NSC of the counsel of three exceedingly able persons, three living former Presidents. To that extent, he has again squandered his political capital and credibility, both already badly battered by recent events, not the least of which was the budget he had just approved.

The President should never have lost sight of the fact that he was swept into office — notwithstanding more than four decades of vilification of the Marcos name — by the thought and promise given to the Filipino people of unity.

The sort of unity that takes the popularly received track record of the Duterte administration in crime, infrastructure and foreign policy, among others, and melding it with the high expectation of taking the same to greater heights within the context of a leader trying his best to restore the glory and luster of his father’s name.

The chance given to Mr. Marcos by the sovereign people was not only a million to one, but perhaps a billion to one. It would be a shame to waste it due to the insecurity of some of his counselors and people close to him who have other motives in mind.