DRUGS AND HYPOCRISY / DECIDE NOW, MA'M

Here's The Score

As I figured, the government's "all-out" war against drugs would start with
a big bang, end with a whimper, slink into a hole and blame somebody else.
It's actually buck-passing. The whole thing sucks and the whole thing
sickens. Now the government line is like this: "We can't go very far in our
war against drugs. We find out the communist New People's Army is heavily
involved in the drug trade. Well, we all know they are terrorists, almost
impossible to catch and arrest. They fight on the sly. They are elusive and
we can't even get their leaders to resume peace negotiations. Hell, they
are narco-terrorists."

I say this is bunk. I say this is pastrami.

Yes, it could be true the NPA is into the culture of marijuana. Nothing
novel about this. Rebellions and revolutions the world over, particularly
in Latin America and Central Asia are into drugs one way or the other, as
are their governments. The drug trade in Afghanistan is virtually
monopolized by the government. The Taliban got by largely because of lush
drug proceeds, and this trade was in the open. It's really possible Muslim
terrorist groups in Southeast Asia, including the Moro Islamic Liberation
Front (MILF), have their hooks on this evil weed or substance.

But having said that, the awful truth is that narcotics planted their
tentacles in the Philippines because our military and police establishments
played major roles. I have some close friends in the Philippine National
Police, several generals among them. Whenever I bring up the matter of
shabu or narcotics in general, they change the subject, pretend not to have
heard it, then whistle wistfully. Two subjects are generally taboo. First,
drugs and police involvement; second, Sen. Panfilo Lacson. I am not stupid.
I understand.

Now no less than President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo plays the role of
coloratura soprano in accusing CPP-NPA leaders of digging their hands deep
into the cookie jar of marijuana and shabu. This early, the government is
seemingly admitting defeat in their "all-out war" and washing their hands
off. That was a big blunder, the president saying even the "rich and the
powerful" would be flushed out, arrested, arraigned, convicted and jailed.
Come again?

All it took was about a week of theatrical pomp and empty bombast.

The names of Sen. Bobby Barbers, Fred Lim, the so-called "four aces" were
bandied around. The appellation "Anti-Drug Czar" went up the marquee. The
criminals were warned their days were numbered. The drug lords were
supposed to shiver in their timbers. They didn't. They knew everything was
palabas. And so after a week of hauling in hundreds of seedy characters,
street rogues, squatter suspects, lowly neighborhood thugs, the flotsam and
jetsam of society, the whole war against drugs went down to a piffle. Not a
single police general was caught in the government dragnet, not a single
drug lord, not a single cigar-puffing Malacanang biggie.

The war against prostitution is never won because police squads stage
raucous raids, arrest hundreds of misbehaving girls half-nude, and forcibly
drag them into wagons. The dirt-poor prostitutes most of the time are
largely the sorry and pathetic victims of this vile and vicious racket. The
ringleaders are never caught; the real white slave traders, the pimps,
escape in a jiffy. In due time, the girl prostitutes are released. But
hardly ever the big-bellied bosses, the mama-sans. They fork over scads of
money to the police. And everything starts all over again.

The whole thing reminded me of a similar operetta early during President
Fidel Ramos' administration.

FVR had appointed then Vice President Joseph Estrada as head of the
Presidential Anti-Crime Commission (PACC). Big, burly, his words angry
mortar bursts, Erap Estrada tried very hard to look the part. Crime was
then rampant as it is today. Calauan Mayor Antonio Sanchez and his police
thugs had just been arraigned for the rape-murder of Los Banos coed Mary
Eileen Sarmenta. And so Erap erupted the only way he knew, buffo,
theatrical, a laughing Buddha in reverse. I shall always remember those
words which thundered approximately: "As for you, criminals, your days are
numbered. There will be no mercy." Hah!

Unforgettable words these for their pretense, their hypocrisy. And it takes
an Erap to duplicate Erap. During his inaugural address as president after
the 1998 elections, Mr. Estrada unburdened himself of another lulu: "Walang
kumpadre, walang kamag-anak, walang kaibigan!" Oh, Mother of Mercy, will
the time ever come when we Filipinos will be spared of shameless
demagogues? GMA has gotten into the same act -- promises, promises,
promises. Welsh, welsh, welsh. And this defies explanation because she was
unto the manor born, her father was president, and we all presumed
Christian culture and upbringing would make a difference.

I have often been asked why can't I take it easy on GMA.

My answer has always been that I would like to but I can't. I have to judge
her the same way I have judged past presidents. We Filipinos are stuck in a
sinking world, and I would be the first to exclaim: Mirabile dictu! If GMA
would change, backtrack and reform. Then we can be friends again. But
somehow, the outer world escapes her. Maybe she tries, but the people
around her gum her up. The 20th century sped past her. And now the 21st
century comes at her with even more speed, more problems, more headaches --
a holocaust of what to do, what to say, where to go.

Honestly, I hope she can find her way. * * * And while I am on the subject
of the president, I might as well unwind with two pieces of unsolicited
advice. Ma'm, if I may, get off your grey palomino and state clearly and
candidly where you stand on Cha-Cha and Con-Ass. These are fire-engine
national issues deeply affecting the future of our republic. Are you for
constitutional change? If no, why? If yes, why? If yes, by what mode? A
constitutional convention after the 2004 elections? Or a Constituent
Assembly as proposed by Speaker Jose de Venecia and his cohorts? This means
the Con-Ass comes to life this month or the next. This means the 2004
elections will be for a unicameral legislature, where your presidential
term will be extended. This is where the term "transitional president"
comes in. This also means that national patrimony provisions of the present
constitution will be vandalized.

You can't be neutral or silent, or non-committal on the issue. You occupy
the most pre-eminent position in the republic, that of president. You
decide, whatever the outcome might be. And you decide now, not tomorrow,
not next week. You can't let the Republic dangle on a shoestring.

Oh yes, the next issue. Are you or are you not going to run for president
in 2004? You've played it cute and very smart so far, clinging to your Dec.
30, 2002 pledge renouncing the presidency in 2004, but allowing many of
your constituents to clamor with more stridency each day that you run -- oh
by golly you run -- because the nation needs you more than ever. In
fairness to yourself, in fairness to one and all, in fairness to the
nation, you have to do an Archimedes and bellow your decision to run or not
to run.

If you do not make a decision now, many will conclude Malacanang is
manipulating the citizenry, and certainly all organs and institutions of
the government to go for a "Run, Gloria, Run!" clamor. The clamor can also
be manipulated by pouring massive resources into media so media will make
it sound deafening, irresistible, irreversible. The clamor will be made to
sound like an "act of God" beseeching La Gloria to fare forth. The surveys,
of course, will play a major role but the surveys can also be nudged here
and there subliminally to favor a GMA candidacy.

This is the time to stand on the hill, Ma'm, and show them what stuff you
are made of.

If indeed, your mind has never changed since Dec. 30, 2002, then for
chrissakes say it, shout it, belch it. Say something like this: "I stand by
what I said Dec. 30 last year, while our greatest national hero was
listening. It was to Jose Rizal and all of you that I vouchsafed that
pledge. I shall not run for the presidency in 2004 for reasons I have
explained time and again. That is my word of honor. That is as final as
final can be."

Or if circumstances have changed radically, and now you wish to run, we the
citizenry will appreciate your saying the following: "A president's
responsibility to lead his or her people is the loneliest in the world. The
world whirls and despite my pledge to stand down, the enemy -- terror -- is
at the nation's neck. Shall I cower and flee? Or shall I continue to fight
at the urging of the citizenry? I have a covenant with the people, I shall
heed that covenant. I shall run."

You can't go on with two horses in midstream, Mrs. President. Whatever you
decide, you and you alone, will be responsible for the results. The
presidency is always a gamble, like throwing dice at the stars. And often
the presidents who gambles when the stakes are highest, turn out to be the
greatest presidents.