I have read two different views of both Ramon Magsaysay and Claro M. Recto’s towards the foreign policy of the Philippines. Magsaysay’s call for understanding towards the west and Recto’s wile against the phantasm of sentimentalism and altruism between nations in international relations.
Magsaysay’s article addressed the roots of Foreign policy through the three considerations. It put quite an emphasis on the Philippine’s reaction towards the US as being under its protectorate and support, considering the historical background between both countries as the colonizer and the colonized. Instead of reacting like most of the west’s victims with a cautious and doubtful manner, the Philippines instead accepted the west fully through bilateral treaties in the pursuit of the three considerations. The difference of our reaction is clear especially in Recto’s speech, wherein Philippines in my opinion is practically following the Americans blindly.
Magsaysay has written the dependency of Philippines towards the US, as it is an undeniable fact that US is a dominant super power. In my own opinion Magsaysay’s call for understanding has placed the US on a pedestal that it is a model country to be followed due to the apparent change it is undergoing from its former imperialist glory. As an ally of the US under its protectorate and support, I in all honesty see this article in a more twisted degree that is more of a way to curry favor of the west. Magsaysay’s call to understanding to me sounds like the implication towards the other countries whom are scarred from the previous ruling of the west like a way of saying letting bygones be bygones. With which I quite disagree about, to follow its ideals, or rather, integrate its ideals towards its own nations, reasoning that there is no perfect state nor system but rather there is always room for change and improvements to be made, in an easier term that everything is an on-going process with an ad-lib kind of system as the time goes by.
This article paints the US in a good light regardless of the matters of the past which I do not fully agree with nor do I disagree. Although there is a visible change towards their system of governance, but I also disagree with the fact that they no longer have the imperialist approach. In my opinion, although no longer in a direct forceful way, I see it still in a subtler manner, the US still holds their imperialist nature through the ways it is affecting the so-called western influence in many aspects in life, whether through economic, social, or political. The undeniable fact that the western influences has penetrated majority of this world’s way of living is a proof that their power as an imperialist has yet to disappear rather it has just changed into a new shape without its title as an imperialist country.
Whilst Magsaysay’s article holds the foreign policy in an almost positive manner, Recto’s on the other hand addresses the ignorance of the Philippines towards its foreign policy. That although the Philippines has gained its independence it continues to depend on the graces of the Americans as a mendicant country. The speech tells that the US is not to blame for our dependency towards them but rather that we have not done any considerable action towards rectifying this situation, directly stating the incompetency of our corrupt administration. Although being under the protectorate of the US we hold no secure position of being one, we lie in the illusion that the US is obliged to give us protection and provide for our needs under compassion and sentimentality regardless of the risk to their own national-interest, that altruism does in fact exist. It is false to believe that US is doing this without its own underlying reason.
In my view toxic phantasm that Philippines delves into, following the westerners words, actions, system, everything that comprises the US, imitating it regardless of the incapability of our country, and throwing our own meager resources under the bus in the pursuit of copying the western high living, completely ignoring the problems we face for the survival of our country must be rectified. I think that Philippines have followed US far too deep, both in the international and domestic yet we still hold no secure position nor binding reassurance that they would be there if there ever would be a threat to our own survival. Compared to the states that are geographically advantageous, states that the US could never abandon, Philippines hold no such thing, being a distant country under their protectorate. What can a bankrupt country cling on in desperate times that we could use as a leverage on to US, to prove that we are a state as important as the rest that they are allied with when we ourselves are far too much dependent towards them to stand on our own, to fight our own battles, and to live without their support.
Such is why in my opinion we must prioritize our own national-interest rather than that off the others, giving consideration towards the utmost capability and sustainability of our own country and be able to stand on our own feet. That we must accept that US will never compromise their own interest for ours, neither for vague promises and treaties that holds no substantial binding force behind it. We have become victims to our own propaganda, tagging along US like a foolish dog that does its biddings, creating tensions against others without consideration towards our meager unstable power, with the false belief that Uncle Sam has got our backs, without a hint of doubt that he would not use us a scapegoat. If we must fight for them then we must also know why we must, if we must lose then we should know why we must accept such resolution, that if we must compromise the survival our own country for the survival of another then we must know why we should accept this bitter judgment.
Otherwise I do believe we must prioritize our own preservation, restrain ourselves from making enemies and hold our peace, to not bite more than we could chew. That whatever may happen, that we must stand united as whole, under our constitution, our flag, and our nation.
