Gilbert Teodoro: Light at the end of the tunnel
HINDSIGHT By F Sionil Jose (The Philippine Star) Updated January 10, 2010 12:00 AM
Gilbert Teodoro: I believe that the 1987 constitution was reactive. It was enacted for a single purpose; to transition the country from a dictatorship to a democracy. Unfortunately, it stopped there. It instituted checks and balances to the point that it completely disregarding synergy.
Being this ancient, I have a lot of hindsight, although of course we all know that hindsight is the lowest form of wisdom. I am old enough to have heard Quezon before World War II deliver those fiery speeches at the Luneta then divide Quezon City — named after him while he was still alive — among his mestizo friends.
I knew of how the late President Sergio Osmeña, a very honest man, would go down to Malacañang to check that the GI sheets in the grounds had not been pilfered. Then President Quirino, who was wrongly accused of having bought an expensive bedpan; and on to that greatest of all our presidents, Ramon Magsaysay, how the masa adored him! Then the disastrous regimes of Ferdinand Marcos, Cory Aquino, Erap Estrada, and now, Gloria Arroyo.
Being an unsinkable optimist, I’ve pinned hope on leaders like Raul Manglapus, Pepe Diokno, Emmanuel Pelaez, but they never got to be president.
The list is short — I had hopes, too, for Haydee Yorac, Richard Gordon, Oscar Orbos. Now, here comes Gilbert Teodoro, Jr.
I first got to know Gilbert when I saw him and his wife on one of those asinine TV talk shows in mid 2009. His answers to the vapid questions were sensible and well thought out. Aside from these qualities of intelligence, he exuded sincerity. I called his office and asked to see him and he readily agreed.
My first meeting with him took place at his office in Camp Aguinaldo months before he was proclaimed the administration’s candidate.
I knew Gilbert’s father; he was the head of the Social Security System — a major institution with billions; he was able to protect the SSS from the rapacity of Imelda. He was a judicious public servant, punctilious and efficient. Gilbert Senior was strict, and Gilbert Junior is grateful to his old man for his Spartan upbringing; this way early enough he understood the wellsprings of his father’s unblemished integrity.
But what does a rich boy know about poverty, which is the country’s gravest malady today? His answer: a doctor treating a leprous patient does not have to have leprosy himself to treat the disease.
Though the manor where he lived was in Manila, he commuted to Paniqui, in Tarlac to that irenic Ilokano barrio Matalaptap, where he got to live with the children and know the language.
As a trapo — he honors the label — he learned how it is to be cast in the dumps, the humbling punishment of being there, and the healing rise from the bottom of the pit.
Then, in those years that he served, first as a three-term Congressman, he saw the real face of poverty, and from this visceral experience, he has come upon ideas about how to alleviate it, not by institutionalizing the solutions but assuring, for instance, that the peasantry should be comfortable through entrepreneurship and by other methods by which farm incomes will rise.
Gilbert Teodoro has more assets — in contrast to the others who aspire for the job. For one, he topped the bar examinations, and has a master’s degree from America’s most famous university, Harvard. He is a colonel in the Reserve Force.
Integrity? Vicente Paterno, one of the superb technocrats whom Marcos recruited to work for him is most admirable; of all the Marcos inner sanctum acolytes, to the best of my knowledge, he is the only one who had come out to say mea culpa; this requires so much courage and humility as well. Shortly after I had that first meeting with Gilbert, Paterno confirmed my estimate of the man when he said, as quoted in the papers that he knew of only two Arroyo cabinet members who were really honest: Esperanza Cabral of the Department of Social Welfare, and Gilbert.
During the recent onslaught of typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng when so many sections of Luzon were flooded and hundreds were killed in the floods and landslides, Gilbert, who headed the National Disaster Coordinating Agency, was often criticized for not doing enough, and if he did something, it was too little and too late.
What the critics forgot is that Gilbert was merely the coordinator of that massive relief effort, that other agencies had not acted fast enough. Still, during this period, Gilbert worked very hard, spent many sleepless nights and those who saw him on TV noticed how haggard he looked.
As Gilbert explains it, that disaster was, for him a defining moment. That catastrophe and his unequivocal stand to the challenge of the Abu Sayyaf in Mindanao were the most difficult tests of his endurance and iron obligation to his office.
Gilbert’s wife, Monica, belongs to the affluent Prieto clan of Manila. She spent her young years in Switzerland and speaks impeccable French. Gilbert’s family and hers knew each other; it was in Manila where Gilbert met Monica in 1999. They have a son, Jaime, who Gilbert says, worshipped his grandfather, Teodoro Sr.
Monica is a member of the Lower House where she has already left her imprint by creating a committee for the welfare of children — as different from the committee concerned with the welfare of women. Focusing her attention on children, she has authored bills that benefit them, including one that raises the statute on rape from 14 to 16 years. In short, a man who has sexual relations with a minor, 16 years and below, is guilty of the crime of rape.
Gilbert admits to having disagreements with his wife but these are soon enough settled; Monica, he says, is headstrong — a streak that runs in her family, and is grateful for the stout support she gives him.
The election in May will certainly be very different from past elections. First, since it will be automated, it is expected that the results will be known quicker and there will be less chances for cheating. Second, thousands upon thousands of new voters will go to the polls — many of them students who, like the young everywhere, will not be conned by popular celebrities and dazzling showbiz gimmicks. They will certainly vote for candidates who, they feel, will give us good government. In the last elections, evidence of this burgeoning political maturity surfaced in Isabela, in Pampanga and elsewhere where politicians like Grace Padaca and Among Ed Panlilio were hoisted to pivotal positions on the basis of their exemplar personalities and not as flashy TV stars or media icons. This is how it should be, that we be proud of our leaders because they have something between their ears, that they can stand shoulder to shoulder beside other leaders of the Western world.
At the end of a recent talk at the Philippine Military Academy, I was asked by a cadet to forecast the future. I said my crystal ball is foggy and that I also suffer from astigmatism. Given these liabilities, even without that crystal ball, I can see so many changes coming. So much of these depend on the elections this year. I hope we will not usher to Malacañang scoundrels, thieves and nicompoops — and that I had my eyes on Gilbert Teodoro.
My announcement was greeted with applause.
I did a bit of inquiring. The military officers know what he had done in the two years that he was Defense Secretary — a post which he vacated to run for the presidency even if he didn’t have to. They know, too, that he did not take a single peso from the department coffers, that he protected the integrity of the bidding process.
For the cadets at the Academy, he offered academic freedom, but reminded them at the same time of their obligations wherein they were not free. As for the PMA honor code, if in the past, cadets who broke it were given a second chance, he saw to it that there would be no second chance now for those who violate the code.
Two generations ago, then Senator Pacita Madrigal Warns declared that “millionaires don’t steal.” Considering the Filipino experience, the declaration was met with disbelief and ridicule.
For the moment at least, we have a politician who has validated Manang Pacita’s statement. Gilbert said that he will retire from public service when he reaches 51. With his background and record, could he possibly be the man on a white horse — or atop a tank — who will be the ultimate modernizer? Abangan, for there is no assurance that he is the man. I am sure, though, that if he wins, he will try as best as he can not to disappoint us.
It was with this thought that I sought him again the other week. We met at a coffee shop at The Fort in Taguig. I asked these questions which, I know, are in the minds of so many of us.
You are listed as one of the richest in the Arroyo cabinet. What is the nature of this wealth, how did you come to it? What does money, which is power, mean to you?
GIBO: My wife and I both inherited from our late fathers. Perhaps my father would have wanted me to pursue a profession other than public service, something more gainful such as investment banking and the like, as he was in public for 32 years and my mother for more than 10 years. But that was not to be.
True, money is a route to power. But it is also a shield against the improper influences of power. It provides a degree of independence. Thus I am thankful to have been provided for by my family
That old cliché, blood is thicker than water, is in the minds of many Filipinos. You belong to one of the richest families in the country. How will you convince our people that your high office will benefit the people and not your family?
The strongest way to convince people that one’s family will not be unduly favored is through one’s platforms, policies, and actions. I believe in encompassing interests rather than narrow interests as defined in Mansur Olson’s book Power and Prosperity, which, by the way, is an excellent read. There are interests that transcend class and benefit the majority; these are the interests one seeks to buttress. The best evidence that I have my own views is that I embarked on my latest political journey aboard a new ship, making my own choices and decisions, not under the auspices of any familial patronage.
You served Marcos who plundered this nation. I presume you understand why it is necessary for this country to have a strong leader and, therefore, a strong state. Given your experience, what does Marcos mean to you?
As with any leader, history, including its biases, will be the judge. All leaders had something positive to contribute, and people must learn to winnow the chaff from the grain in reviewing a leader’s legacy. I believe the country, more important than needing a strong leader, needs strong leadership. This is the difference between what I perceive to be contemporary viewpoints, the failure to distinguish between the person and the institution. Oftentimes, strong leadership is built around an individual and stays that way, while I believe in creating lasting institutions with the clear position that my participation will be temporary.
Poverty is our foremost problem. How will you resolve it in the six years? Our political economy—will you reform it? What is your view on foreign investment?
One cannot resolve poverty. One can only set the stage for people to get out of it. If a government has for its primary purpose the resolution of poverty, solely or principally through government intervention, then it will be taking on a burden which is not fully its own, thereby creating a moral hazard. In the final analysis, only the individual can free himself or herself from poverty. A government can only create the basic conditions that will provide a favorable atmosphere to alleviate poverty.
My goal is to make the Philippines a favorable platform for investments both domestic and foreign, with some conditions, for example protection of workers’ rights, of the environment, of our farmers. The goal is to provide proper government investments, such as infrastructure, and policies such as transparency, to afford confidence in our economy and in our people — basic education reform. Thomas Friedman recently wrote an article entitled “Innovate, innovate, innovate,” where he says it is once again the age of innovation. A country to get ahead must innovate and invent something new that the world does not have and that it will need. The Philippines is not exempt from this reality.
Your program on health and education will require a vast outlay of resources. You need to increase revenues. Will you finally, really tax the very rich?
Tax reform both on the policy level and the administration level is extremely important. One must be able to balance between those two goals. I favor strict enforcement balanced by simplified taxation systems and perhaps some easing of tax rates. Our corporate tax rates are one of the highest in ASEAN. We have to study how we can make up the shortfall enforcement while easing tax rates to attract investments.
Certainly you are aware that your connection with an unpopular administration diminishes your chances at the polls. How will you defend your position?
It is I who should be the focus, not the administration. I have my own views, goals, achievements, and the capacity to govern. It is convenient, of course for the opposition to use the administration line of attack, but I believe our people will be able to see through such a tactic.
As a member of the administration party you will be beholden to the same people who are perceived to have wrought havoc on government. You will have to repay them because you are Filipino. Is this perception correct?
If I were to be running just to be a lapdog or a paid hack, I can very well be that with less risk. I will not risk a carefully guarded reputation and a legacy that I want our son to be proud of.
We will be hundred million people in less than five years and will have difficulty feeding this population. What are your ideas on population control?
Population management is essential, not merely because our resources are not limitless but also to reduce the risk of disaster. With the visible effects of climate change on our country, we have more vulnerable areas and fewer areas where people can stay. Population is a big issue. It is a problem that continues to fester while everyone gets lost in the acrimonious debate on which is the right institution to deal with it. So nothing gets done.
Granting that the cornerstone of population management is a moral choice freely and knowledgeable made by couples and that government should not make that moral choice, several things must follow because the debate must not stop there. We cannot pretend the problem does not exist. The following construct must logically follow: 1. There must be institutional responsibility and accountability. If government is not the proper agency to deal with the problem because it is a moral issue, then our moral guardians must take the responsibility and the consequent accountability for positive results, and not merely for information and education; 2. Government must support the choice freely made by a couple; 3. No to abortion.
As secretary of National Defense you have had a first hand view of the military. What is the most important problem in the military and how did you handle it? What does this experience mean to you?
There are two major problems of our military: resources and doctrines. In terms of resources, there is a serious shortfall both in manpower and equipment. I trace this back to the failure of our country to properly plan for and build up a credible AFP since our independence after WWII. We have low defense spending and a force that is small for our country’s geographical make up.
In terms of doctrines, we still have the mindset of addressing ideological wars in a conventional sense, while we should be building up our small unit expertise for internal security and law enforcement purposes. This though is now being introduced by the AFP hierarchy. Recent literature, particularly with what is known as 4G warfare or fourth-generational warfare, preaches that although territory is important, the key element now is people, or a single person. You have to arrest that person to stop a security situation. The best example is Osama bin Laden. Here you have Bravo, Kato, Parad, and their ilk. This is what we have to re-engineer our AFP to deal with.
Surely you know of the Ampatuans, the clan wars in Moro Mindanao. What can be done about it? What have you done?
It would have been militarily impossible to disarm a sizable armed threat while facing a restive MILF during the time the MOA-AD issue was being heatedly debated, and amid irresponsible threats of some local and national leaders which led to actual skirmishes, creating a volatile and confused situation on the ground, At that time our troops were also focused on the repeated kidnappings in Sulu and in the Zamboanga peninsula. Now because of the ceasefire with the MILF we can disarm. But the question is how long we can maintain our current police and military strength in the area so the equilibrium holds. Your guess is as good as mine.
Granting that the two rebellions will be diminished under your term, how will you insure that they will not recur? What will you do with the armed men in both organizations?
There is one essential thing that must be done so as not to allow security situations to recur: effective deterrence. This is achieved through a combination of various things like presence of police and military personnel in the area for an effective length of time, infrastructure development, capacity building of LGUs, livelihood opportunities; education, and such other empowerment measures. But the underlying factor is the disarmament of non-state armed groups.
You are in favor of changing the Constitution. What are the main provisions that you want changed by a constitutional convention or a constituent assembly?
I believe that the 1987 constitution was reactive. It was enacted for a single purpose; to transition the country from a dictatorship to a democracy. Its tactical objective was to dismantle Marcos mechanisms. Unfortunately, it stopped there. It instituted checks and balances to the point that it completely disregarding synergy. It is a constitution which breeds false expectations because the state guarantees a proverbial heaven on earth.
We must ingrain into our people’s mindset that our political system must evolve with the times. It must effectively address the operational environment. It cannot be stuck in the quagmire of its own making. Although we must be equally vigilant and steadfast in preserving the Bill of Rights and the independence of the Judiciary. I am in favor of a freely elected constitutional convention that will have no other mandate but to study and to consider the subject.
Our relationship with the United States is the cornerstone of our security policy. What are your thoughts on this relationship? Should the Visiting Forces Agreement be renegotiated?
Our relationship with the United States is a cornerstone of our policy, as our relationships with ASEAN, the OIC, and other regional and multilateral groups, and our bilateral relationships as well. Our bilateral relationship with the United States has transcended the traditional diplomatic, economic, and military spheres but has permeated into this country’s cultural and social fabric in the informal sense. We have shared ostensible political values such as the different constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and the concept of democracy. It is a strong relationship both in the formal structured sense and the informal personal sense.
We should leverage this relationship as we should our relationship with other countries, identifying mutually advantageous and mutually beneficial points of cooperation, after a transparent and arms-length realization of each country’s conditions. It is a paradox that one of the most effective deterrents against conflict between states is close interaction between their armed forces—soldiers do not make wars, politicians do. The VFA is such a mechanism. Recently we have seen it at work in the non-traditional military sense, in what we call HADR—humanitarian assistance and disaster response. In typhoon Frank last year and in Ondoy, Pepeng etc. this year US troops immediately came to our assistance. Thus the VFA should be judged from a broader perspective than just criminal jurisdiction. Second, the VFA is merely an implementing treaty of Mutual Defense Treaty which embodies both countries’ bilateral military obligations. To sum up I am in favor of more VFAs with other countries.
China’s growing influence in the Asian region and the world is increasing. What would our relations with China be? With China’s claim on the Spratleys? Our rich and powerful Chinese minority?
Our connection with China is strong, both in an economic sense and in a cultural sense. It is perhaps without fear of rebuttal that I can say that within ASEAN, save for Singapore and maybe Thailand, the Philippines is where the Chinese have assimilated with the least prejudice and with the least difficulty.
China’s rising economic power is a reality of the world. Its economic growth is a welcome development because it has been a strong economic partner of our country. We must enhance our economic relations with China in a sustainable way. Yet the geopolitical realities still remain — China has embarked on an unprecedented military build up. It has blue water naval capabilities to include aircraft carriers and it cannot say that Taiwan is the sole focus of such a military enhancement. It behooves China’s leadership to be transparent and to be forthright in stating its military objectives. It must also be clear in its policy regarding states such as North Korea, which are popularly believed to be under its influence. The Philippines must assert its sovereignty realistically and responsibly in accordance with legally supportable aspects of international law. We must be steadfast in this.
Some two decades ago, James Fallows of the Atlantic Monthly postulated that our “damaged culture” hinders our development. If culture both as anthropological and aesthetic concept is a factor in the building of a nation, how will you handle it?
I believe that the effort to disregard the rich cultural diversity of our country led to a lot of damage. The single language, single ideology line of nation-building has not been a positive development for our country. It has bred bigotry and division.
I believe that we must accept that we are diverse. We are an archipelago, for heaven’s sake. We must encourage that diversity and teach each other what we are, so that a culture of tolerance and respect evolves. Even the contributions of our colonizers such as languages, both Spanish and English, must be appreciated and their use enhanced. The world itself because of increasing interconnections is getting increasingly culturally aware. We should be the same in our own country.
Is your wife an important factor in your decision making?
Yes, any member of one’s nuclear family is an important element of decision making for two reasons: trust and the fact that your decisions affect them, too. They are an important source of feedback, as are other groups in your political atmosphere. But at the end of the day, the reality is that they are one, rather than the only, element in decision-making. The determining factor should be conscience and the appreciation that several factors need to be weighed in arriving at a decision.
Among the many insights into the Filipino character, which our history unfailingly illustrates, is that, despite our faults, we are a talented and heroic people with a revolutionary tradition. You are a student of history, what makes a Filipino a hero?
A hero takes extraordinary steps, with total disregard for personal safety and security, for the benefit of others.
Heroism bears the essence of individuality in the context of using it for collective good. Thus the soldier who dies while saving others in a flood, the seven-year-old who saves his younger siblings from an inferno while his parents are away, to the schoolteacher who spends her own money to buy food for her students who had to be temporarily housed in the public school because of the flood — they are all heroes.
What is your vision for our country?
I want to see a Philippines that is peaceful, has strong institutions of governance, has modern infrastructure, has food security, is technologically and educationally advanced, with a people who have the capacity to make rational decisions for themselves, true freedom of thought and of expression, a power in Southeast Asia and perhaps the Asia-Pacific, ecologically rich and diverse, in short a country where our people would want to remain.
