Whirlwinds of Change

There is little doubt that the whirlwinds of change are blowing across the world with the seeming upending of long held geopolitical relationships. Foremost of these would certainly be the ongoing negotiations between the United States and Russia toward a peaceful and lasting resolution of the war in Ukraine. Few expected that the US, under the direction and leadership of President Donald Trump, would appear to favor a long time US adversary such as Russia over staunch Western allies like the major economies of Europe and Nato. As events unfold, the US seems to be on a path toward preferring to develop détente with Russia over a continuous war alliance with its G7 western partners.

Meanwhile on the domestic front the vigorous demolition of the so-called “Deep State” as highlighted by the continuing findings of gross malfeasance at the US Agency for International Development (USAID) by the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency has had the dual effect of charting a road toward more sensible deployment of US taxpayer contributions but simultaneously, perhaps unwittingly, speaking volumes to the rest of the world about how things have come to pass beyond the widely promoted perception of the US as universal peacemaker and its identified adversaries as aggressors.

Both the Trump administration’s moves on the domestic and geopolitical fronts are a work in progress (considering they’ve been only a little over a month in office) toward its fulfillment of its campaign promises. However, these still seem to be at the stage of disrupting old structures while yet being somewhat unclear as to what will take their place. Thus, assuming peace in Ukraine and détente with Russia, is that intended to evolve a wedge between Russia and China or a weakening of Russian resolve to strengthen BRICS? How does the US envision its positioning in a multipolar world? On the domestic initiatives, assuming successful cleanup of entities such as USAID, and success of tariff policies designed to bring a vibrant manufacturing sector back to the US, what peaceful outreach instruments will be introduced to project a more sincerely altruistic US agenda toward the Global South, and will tariffs be a sufficient counterbalance to the US high-cost labor structure to indeed attract manufacturing back and regain competitiveness?

As the old saying goes, “it’s easier to demolish structures than build them.” Still, I have high hopes for the “common sense” and exemplary key Cabinet and other appointments that underpin the current strategies of the present administration and am prepared to give it the benefit of the doubt at this early stage toward achieving world peace and a positive definition of what constitutes restored “Greatness” for America. Abangan.

Meanwhile back at our ranch as midterm elections become imminent, we once again escalate our valid but ages-old laments about the seemingly irreversible decline of our democratic political system as visibly evidenced by the motley bunch of candidates with which our electorate is presented. Many blame our “poor uneducated” voters for the seemingly sordid outcomes of our elections that produce leadership toward a headlong downward spiral of our economy compared to most others in Asean that have overtaken us. Others blame incessant widespread corruption and toy with the “need” for violent revolution.

I neither fully agree nor disagree with these observations but may I venture to add one more element contributing to our national malaise which I believe is systemic—our seemingly natural penchant for fragmentation.

Consider for instance that a recent research article just reported an initiative by Vietnam to embark on a national political restructuring toward consolidation as a way to streamline administrative processes, engender bureaucratic efficiency, and attract foreign investments via stable policies. Perhaps it isn’t surprising that Vietnam (among others) has overtaken the Philippines. Rather than consolidation, we prefer fragmentation.

Thus, our agriculture sector continuous to limp as we have failed to acknowledge the immutable reality of our unique geography as the only nation fragmented into a multiplicity of islands (yes, Indonesia has more islands but the preponderant majority live in the contiguous land area of Java) that perhaps calls for a different approach toward sufficient agricultural productivity and infrastructure across islands. Thus, it is that we fragmented Metro Manila into fiefdoms, thus making rational urban planning and an efficient public transport system virtually unrealizable. Thus, it is that we whimsically fragment provinces into multiple parts, we fragment our political system into multiple political parties, party lists, etc. and we fragment our governance structure toward micro levels of political positions and areas of responsibility. I could go on. But let me leave it for now as musings hopefully for our incoming elected leaders to at least reflect upon.