Connect with us

Commentary

Fake sovereignty issue

Published

on

So, what was all that huffing and puffing over the reported “dire” joint oil and gas development deal inked last week between China and the Philippines all about?

“These critics should all stop pretending to be patriotic when they are far from it by way of their inconsistent stance on similar issues in the past.

Shouldn’t all these critics be red in the face knowing that their verbal attacks against the Duterte government were all without basis, such as giving up Philippine sovereignty to China and falling into a debt trap and other dire warnings?

Of course not, not even with Justice Antonio Carpio, fierce critic of President Duterte’s pivot to China, making it appear as though the President is on the brink of giving away our sovereignty over our territorial waters, even when under dispute, if not the entire Philippines to China.

Carpio finally admitted the oil and gas development deal that the two friendly countries forged is merely “an agreement to explore solutions.”

“The MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) does not cede away anything. We do not give ground, and we should be vigilant. It’s just an agreement to explore solutions,” he told reporters at the sidelines of a forum.

Carpio, who is on the shortlist of the Judicial and Bar Council for the top post of the Supreme Court, even went further. He said that he is firm in his determination to fight for the Philippines’ sovereign rights to the West Philippine Sea (WPS) even if his resolve stands in the way to his possible appointment as top justice.

“But I also cannot change my position because we have to defend our sovereign rights in the West Philippine Sea. That’s the duty of a Filipino,” he added. As a justice, Carpio should keep silent. When he retires, he can make public his stand.

It doesn’t end there. He still warned that China could one day order its Navy to enforce its sweeping claim to most of the disputed WPS.

It is strange that Carpio, who was then an official of then President Fidel Ramos, said nothing even when Ramos, after a visit to Malaysia, called for establishing a consulate in the disputed territory that historically belongs to us, since this would be no different from the Philippines virtually having given up its Sabah claim and sovereignty to Malaysia.

Malaysia is in 100 percent actual possession of Sabah. So, why the silence then and the dire warnings today over Philippine sovereignty being lost to China?

It’s not the first time either that a joint oil exploration deal of sorts with China was inked under then President Gloria Arroyo or Ramos. There was nothing of the hue and cry heard today from these same critics over these MoU Ramos forged during his presidency.

Carpio’s kin, the well-known practitioner of selective justice and eternal protector of the yellow President and his allies, former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, went too far, virtually accusing the President and his government of “treason from within” in relation to the disputed sea with China.

“As a justice, Carpio should keep silent. When he retires, he can make public his stand.

Morales came up with Cicero’s quote in a bid to sound intellectual, saying that “A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive

treason from within,” adding “An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly, but the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.”

She talks of treason for something that, in all probability, has not even been thought of by Duterte who, through words and actions, is generally seen as being a fairly patriotic leader and extremely conscious and critical of the days of a colonized Philippines under both Spain and the United States government.

The irony of it all is that while all these critics of Duterte’s pivot to China policy hardly ever, if at all, blasted then President Corazon Aquino who fought for — and not against — the retention of the American bases in the Philippines, and even led rallies against the Philippine Senate that voted to terminate the bases agreement between the US and the Philippines, there was no such criticism from them. The media did the job instead.

Her son, Noynoy, as President, revived the American bases and their presence to provide the US with several bases in the Philippines while insisting they will be under the jurisdiction of the Philippines.

What a big joke he and his yellow clique played on the Filipino people.

What? US bases under Philippine government control, when this country can’t even control the entry of US nuclear weapons despite the Charter banning nuclear weapons in the country?

What? When not even our immigration has the power to check on how many US troopers enter this country without going through Philippine immigration?

What, when the late Sen. Leticia Ramos Shahani tried to constitutionally drop Sabah from our historic territory?

These critics should all stop pretending to be patriotic when they are far from it by way of their inconsistent stance on similar issues in the past, when they served as allies of the Philippine presidents.

By their past actions, you shall know them and their inconsistencies.

Advertisement

LIKE US ON FACEBOOK

Advertisement
Advertisement