Arroyo must review stance on U.S.-led war

Conrado de Quiros, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Asia News Network, Manila

It's not Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, a presidential daughter and recent beneficiary of people power, who is giving voice to Southeast Asia in the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum; it is Indonesian President Megawati Soekarnoputri, another presidential daughter and beneficiary of people power, who is.

In contrast to Macapagal's mindless repetition of the American mantra on anti-terrorism, Megawati has risen to proclaim before the world: "Whoever commits terror must be punished. However, the search for and the bringing to justice of the perpetrators of terror or those parties who harbor them must be in accordance with law that is generally acceptable.

"It is unacceptable that someone, a group, or even a government -- reasoning that they are searching for perpetrators -- attack a people or another country for whatever reason. Blood cannot be cleansed by blood."

Megawati obviously has a better grasp of the sentiments of the region, of the folly that is the American bombing of Afghanistan; she has a better grasp of what it takes to fight terrorism.

Macapagal might be really desperate to cull American favor to boost her chances in 2004. She would delude herself to think she would loom large as a world-class statesman with it. The image of the Philippines as America's right arm in Asia has never elicited awe from other Asian countries, it has elicited laughter.

At the very least, the tack is suicidal. The overseas Filipino workers (OFW), as government keeps reminding us, are the lifeblood of the country, who keep the economy afloat. Well, where are many of those OFWs but in the Middle East?

The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) has already issued an advisory to Filipinos in those parts of the world to not be too vocal about their support for the American cause to avoid trouble. It did so in the wake of the shooting of a Canadian and his Filipino wife while they shopped in a mall in Kuwait. The Canadian died while the Filipino was seriously wounded.

But the DFA misses its target. Its advisory is not best issued to the OFWs, most of whom possess not only common sense but possess uncommon ability to see things from the perspective of the people they live with.

It is best issued to the President of the Philippines herself.

Macapagal's espousal of the American cause, done with a zeal over and above the call of duty, opens our OFWs up not just to mayhem but to all sorts of discrimination. It openly invites maltreatment, quite apart from shipping back to the Philippines. It will not make Filipinos the first choice in hiring or the last in firing. You would think that the APEC, being expressly concerned with the survival of nations, would inspire some sense of realism in Macapagal. It has not.

But Macapagal's tack is not just suicidal, it is wrongheaded. It is not just the Muslim countries -- Indonesia and Malaysia -- that are lukewarm to the anti-terrorist cause being espoused by the Americans in APEC. It is also the other Asian countries. You won't hear the Indo-Chinese countries rooting for it. You won't hear Thailand applauding it. You won't even hear Singapore, the most iron-fisted country in the region, trumpeting it.

Who in God's name wants terrorism? But the point is not what and when, it is how and why. That is what the other countries, as voiced out by Megawati, want to know. She does not speak for the Muslim countries alone, she speaks for the Asian continent as a whole.

Only the Philippines is willing to believe there can only be one campaign against terror, and that is the one America is calling for. Only the Philippines is willing to believe that either you agree to such things as the bombing of Afghanistan, the rearming of Southeast Asia, and the blanket endorsement of American global policy, or you are a supporter of terrorism, if not a terrorist yourself.

Our own experience in dealing with the Abu Sayyaf should have shown the folly of that belief. The Abu Sayyaf is obviously a terrorist group. How to destroy them? We answered that by unleashing the dogs of war on the island of Basilan, reasoning that the people there were guilty of harboring them, and must pay the price for it.

The result being that instead of alienating the Abu Sayyaf from the people of Basilan and the Muslim community in general, we gave the latter a reason if not to find common cause with them at least to commiserate with them.

The same is true of Afghanistan. How to destroy Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda network? The United States has answered that by unleashing the winds of war on Afghanistan, reasoning that the people there are guilty of harboring them and must pay the price for it.

The result being that instead of alienating the terrorists from the Afghan people and the Muslim ummah (community) generally, it has given the latter if not a reason to find common cause with them at least to commiserate with them.

And now we want to internationalize that idiocy and make it the hallmark of our foreign policy? No wonder we call it a foreign policy. It is monumentally foreign to us.