Introduction(by Lamber Reyna):
First of all what is the definition of Politics? Well politics came from the greek word polis which means “affairs of the cities.” Politics basically is all about power, or is also about the struggle of attaining power, as a matter of fact, it is also the exercise of power. Politics is a formal discussion on what to get for the people and how to provide them with it while Governance on the other hand is the manner of which politicians govern, it is also how people are ruled or force to behave.
Politics is all about power, as a matter of fact, it is the exercise of power. Politics refers to a set of activities associated with the governance of a country, or an area. Politics is a formal discussion on what to get for the people and how to provide them with it while Governance on the other hand is the manner of which politicians govern, it is also how people are ruled or force to behave. The World Bank defines governance as: the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development.
How is Politics portrayed in the Philippines(by Christian Bagang) :
In an article made by Carlos H. Conde, he said in the New York Times: “In the Philippines, politics is a blood sport. Here, politicians often behave like gladiators: To survive they have to entertain the spectators.”(Conde, 2005). Being a citizen in the Philippines I can almost truly say that it is indeed a way to please or entertain your audience. I have witnessed several accounts of politicians inside the acting industry also in terms of sports, people who were sentenced with multiple accounts of graft and corruption, and many more would enter politics.
A good example for sports would be, Manny Pacquiao otherwise known as Pacman. He is a well-known boxer here in the Philippines and internationally. He entered politics as part of the senate and was successful in doing so. Some of you might think, “what is a boxer doing in the senate?” I know we too are dazzled by this.
Another example would be in terms of the acting industry would be, Bong Revilla, and yes he was once an actor and had been part of several films and shows. Although if it would come to mind that this person became a part of the senate and was convicted of several accounts of graft and corruption, and yet still the government allowed him to run again in the same position.
Basically Philippine Politics works same way as how it was defined, if you are one of the most powerful people in the senate or in general the government then, simple as that you get to win and be given a second chance. But if you’re a nobody and don’t have political status, I’m sad to say that you wont be able to be a part of this so-called government. Philippine Politics work in such a way that if you are famous and have alot of money everything would be in your favor. Especially when you have good reputation with people who have connections specifically other politicians and also if you align yourself with people who are powerful who are in the government, senators, congressmen, or even the president, surely you would have the upper hand. It may seem like politics is just flexing on what you have and what you can do, sad to say but that is the truth in this country.
Opinions and 2 cents worth(by Christian Bagang, Lambert Reyna, Tasie Menis):
An unpopular opinion aligned to their positions; it is as important to be able to discuss what they’re doing as it is to act upon what they’re purposed for. This should be applied to poverty and corruption mostly held by leaders of the same major territorial surnames which is not allowed under the constitution.
For all that we label ‘nasty’, they’re one to get their hands on smuggling goods and drug trafficking to satisfy their thirst behind political colors (epal politics) to ensure the position they fancy. To give a cite; profiteering is an evil greedy strategy that Bong Revilla made to only ever (disappointingly for him) have netizens oppose the proposed parliamentary style.
Some of us netizens want to take part with these political stands given with ideals having people become so hostile and pointless in bashing without having them give out a presentation of a legitimate debate. All of these acts lead to unspoken political killings because most of us are frightened and lose our rights expected from the old usual Philippine self, ending Katipunan this way.
South China Sea Dispute(by Tasie Menis):
By now, it should be clear to everyone that China is not giving up its maritime claims in the South China Sea. Despite pending international court decisions and worldwide condemnations, China has aggressively reclaimed about 2,000 acres of land in the South China Sea — proof of its intent to stay, defend, and protect 90% of the sea that it claims it owns. China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s response was as revealing as it was firm: China’s determination “to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the South China Sea is as firm as a rock, and it is unshakable.” (Lee, 2015). Chinese scholars contend that China’s historical claims have been established “by ways of discovery, naming, mapping, patrol and control, public and private use, administrative allocation of jurisdiction, and other manifestations of authority throughout history.” (Sheng, 2002). In two notes verbales submitted to the UN Secretary-General in May, 2009, China declared that it “has indisputable sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and the adjacent waters, and enjoys sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the relevant waters as well as the seabed and subsoil thereof.” (Dupuy, n.d). However, other claimant countries could also present historical evidence to support their own historic claims. For instance, Vietnam could produce maps claiming historical sovereignty going back to the 17th century. Likewise, the Philippines could produce old maps showing the Scarborough Shoal, which China took two years ago, to belong to the Philippines: the Carte Hydrographica y Chorographica de las Islas Filipinas, dating back to 1734; a subsequent map published in Madrid in 1808, which includes Scarborough Shoal (known as Bajo de Masinloc) as part of the Philippine territory; and another topographic map drawn in 1820 showing Bajo Scarburo as part of the province of Zambales.” (Bondoc, 2013).
The nine-dash line map, upon which China is staking its sovereignty claims, was first published in 1948 by the Republic of China’s Interior Ministry in Taiwan. It encompasses 2,000,000 square kilometers of maritime space equivalent to about 22 percent of China’s land area. Legal experts say, however, that this map has no legal value since cartographic materials do not constitute titles in international law: “The principle that emerges from international jurisprudence and doctrinal discussions is that cartographic materials do not by themselves have any legal value.” (Dupuy, n.d.). According to Professors Florian and Pierre-Marie Dupuy, China’s 2009 and 2011 Declarations to the UN did not meet at least two central requirements applied by international courts in deciding whether maps can have a probative value. Therefore, the authors conclude that China’s nine-dash line map was not a product of a consensual agreement between two parties, nor was it created and established by an unbiased, neutral party. China has persistently refused to recognize or commit to the tribunal’s judgment just as every other member in the Security Council has previously behaved when facing international law, as Harvard University Professor Graham Alison pointed out. Despite original positive expectations, after one week the South China Sea dispute remains in a stalemate. The international community, especially the U.S.-backed bloc including Japan, Australia, the EU, Vietnam, and the Philippines, have been pushing China to come to a final commitment, expecting an end to this daunting conflict. However, pressing for a final outcome is neither a good method nor a realistic way of dealing with this conflict.
Asean as an organization should take the lead to unite its members to face off with China. To do that, they should find their own common ground before they propose a definite solution to the problem. However, the current state of affairs within Asean does not make good for the unity of the grouping. The Philippines is pulling itself away from Asean on the SCS issue, while Vietnam is pushing for a political solution only and wants the grouping to support its national needs. Asean, split into various groups, does not seem to know how to handle this lingering issue. Former Malaysian Foreign Minister Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar delivered a keynote address at an event in Kuala Lumpur in 2016, discussing the PCA ruling and the need to find alternative solutions to the problem. “Asean should use the economic potentials in the SCS to deal with China on the issue. Economic exploitation of the disputed seas could help settle the issue,” he said. To achieve that, Mr Syed Hamid said Asean should find common grounds as an organisation. He added that it should set aside the differences among the member countries over the thorny SCS issue (Mahmood, 2018). It is also important to recognize the fact that the South China Sea conflict is very much asymmetric, and therefore cannot be dealt with in a symmetric way. China is indisputably a superpower in the region and the Philippines, Vietnam, and other claimants are just smaller states. Consequently, it is impossible to expect a fair solution that treats every participant equally. Everything should be proportionate. The ASEAN countries have to learn how to work with the regional hegemon, China, in a proportionately mutual beneficial way. he only thing that ASEAN nations can do, should they really want to stand together against China, is to first focus on developing the individual countries’ economies and together gradually try to reduce their dependence on Chinese products, markets, and aid. ASEAN should reduce competition among its members, increase internal aid programs, and exchange technology and experiences. Only when each and every ASEAN nation is strong enough and really enjoys cooperation within the organization, can a common approach finally be considered. But in the age of a prosperous ASEAN, there would no longer be a need to raise this sensitive issue against China. Seeing ASEAN growing stronger economically will entice China to behave moderately — to cooperate rather than take the offensive in the South China Sea. This is the only peaceful solution to the conflict (Tong, 2016). By resolving the South China Sea dispute, stability and prosperity can start taking place in the region that is otherwise fraught with insecurity and economic tensions. It is China’s call whether to start a war over its maritime claims or contribute towards security, stability, and economic development in the region. The conduct of nations is measured in terms of the choices they make between prosperity or stagnation, civilization or ignorance, peace or war (Tacujan, 2015).
Final Thoughts on Philippine Politics(by Christian Bagang)
With the facts presented above, my views on the Philippines and the government who runs it is that I am very disappointed with how they have dealt with the issues presented above. I hope their is still hope for this country despite what the situation has come to. We are run by leaders who are corrupt and unjust, people who are very hungry for power in which they would abuse it to the extent of letting China claim our territory, running for the senate despite of past and recent criminal cases that involve graft and corruption and plunder aswell. If this is what it has come to then I would say that I prefer to be in a another country than to be here. All I can say is I am a proud Filipino citizen but if the people of the Philippines themselves don’t start and make a change for the better, then I might aswell be born in another country.
Citations and References:
https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/12/07/18/bong-revilla-cleared-of-plunder-in-pork-barrel-scam-case
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governance
https://www.jpolrisk.com/what-it-takes-to-resolve-the-south-china-sea-dispute/#_edn23
http://news.yahoo.com/kerry-urges-china-reduce-tensions-south-china-sea-071331994.html.
http://chinesejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/1/94.full.pdf
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2013/06/19/955583/china-needs-undo-its-pseudo-history
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2347797017733821
https://thediplomat.com/2016/07/seeking-a-solution-to-the-south-china-sea-disputes/
https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/stop-the-south-china-sea-charade/
https://www.khmertimeskh.com/511423/an-economic-solution-for-the-south-china-sea-conflict/
Matthew Lee, (2015, May 17). “Neither China nor US giving ground over projects dispute,” Associated Press.
Jianmin Sheng, (2002). “China’s Sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands: A Historical Perspective,” Chinese Journal of International Law, p. 157.
Jarius Bondoc, (2013, June 19). “China needs to undo its pseudo-history,” Philippine Star
Kazi Mahmood, (2018, July 13). “An economic solution for the South China Sea conflict.” KHZM Time
Carlos H. Conde,(July 2, 2005) “In the Philippines, politics is a blood sport. Here, politicians often behave like gladiators: To survive they have to entertain the spectators.” New York Times
Philippine Politics and Governance 