WOULD America have survived the Great Depression if Franklin Delano Roosevelt had not been elected president? Would the British have won the Battle of Britain, marked by the massive Luftwaffe bombing of London, without the leadership of Winston Churchill? Would America have brought Japan to its knees in World War II without Gen. Douglas MacArthur?
Roosevelt, Churchill and MacArthur had a common denominator. They were all tested and experienced leaders. Knowledgeable and decisive in the face of crisis.
Confronting the Great Depression upon his election as president, Roosevelt declared in his inaugural address, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” He introduced the New Deal, infused Americans with renewed hope and turned the US economy around.
As prime minister, Churchill declared, in a speech in the House of Commons, “You ask, what is our policy? I can say: it is to wage war, by sea, land and air…You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: it is Victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.” Saying that, he led his country from the brink of defeat to victory
Forced to flee from the Philippines upon the fall of Bataan and Corregidor, MacArthur, as supreme commander of the US Armed Forces in the Far East, vowed: “I shall return.” He did, with a vengeance.
Against this background, we are constrained to ask: If the Philippines had been led by a knowledgeable, experienced and decisive president, would the 44 Special Action Force troopers have survived the hell hole of Mamasapano? Would it have taken almost two years – and counting – to aid and rehabilitate the victims of the super typhoon Yolanda? Would the siege of Zamboanga have resulted in fewer lives lost? Would the Luneta hostage crisis have been resolved with less bloodshed and embarrassment to the Philippines?
And would the booming Philippine economy be less lopsided in favor big business and the wealthy, while leaving the majority of the population struggling to survive from day to day?
Mercifully, the deaths in Mindanao, the destruction in the Visayas and the Luneta tragedy did not threaten the collapse of our country. However, the miserable plight of our masses is a recipe for social upheaval, diffused only by the Filipino’s eternal passivity.
But all these should serve as enough proof of the importance of an experienced and competent leader, capable of decisiveness in the face of crisis.
Without meaning to diminish “honesty and integrity” which Grace Poe says are vital qualities of a good president, it should be fair to ask her – granting she has these qualities – if she feels equal to the demands of the presidency at this point in her political career.
Until her recent meeting with Noynoy Aquino, Poe was realistic and honest enough to express reservations over her readiness for the highest office in the land. Since then, however, she may have been convinced by her supporters, and by Aquino himself, that she can get by with the guidance of knowledgeable advisers. If that is the case, then she would be less than honest about her own capabilities.
I’m saying this on the basis of my own personal experience as a former president and CEO of an advertising agency, a job considerably less complicated and challenging than the presidency of the Philippines.
The position was literally thrust on me at the time that I was already a relatively experienced executive vice-president and chief operating officer of the company. But I was working under a chairman, Antonio R. de Joya, who loomed large and awesome in the advertising industry. I frankly felt that my feet were not big enough to fit in his shoes. But he promoted me anyway.
After one year on my new job, I asked to be demoted back to my former position. I told the chairman that I did not think I was good enough.
My boss had a classic response: “Damn it. Do you want to demote me back to president?”
He persuaded me to stay on with the promise to help me along. I survived and did reasonably well for 13 years.
But, at least, I was honest about my deficiency. Hopefully, Grace Poe will be equally forthright.
Of course, if she sincerely believes she is completely qualified, or can learn on the job or can depend on a phalanx of expert advisers, then we can only invoke the old saying: “The proof of the pudding is in the eating.”
Note that, five years into his presidency, Noynoy Aquino is still struggling to understand his job. It was the same argument of the primacy of honesty and integrity (“Kung walang korap, walang mahirap”) over experience and competence that catapulted him to the presidency; the same argument that expert advisers would make up for what he lacked.
What has been the unfortunate result? A government that is in denial concerning increasing corruption and increasing poverty, amidst increasing opulence among the very rich.
The trouble with depending on a battery of learned Rasputins is that they will invariably have different opinions and conflicting advice on many issues. But, ultimately, the buck stops with the man on top. The president, whether qualified or not, has to make the critical decision himself – or herself. One can only pray that such a decision is not a matter of life and death.
Needless to say, honesty and integrity alone do not an effective leader make. But they are important. So let’s focus on them. Is it possible to maintain honesty and integrity under our present socio-economic and political system?
For instance, if Grace Poe were to run for president, can she honestly say that she will not entertain the quid pro quo support of big business interests, lobbyists, political overlords and the entrenched cacique?
For her campaign, would she vow not to use the billions milked from the national treasury by her political patrons?
In a recent newspaper column, veteran business editor, Tony Lopez, wrote:
“Today, a presidential candidate must finance the salaries of poll watchers. If there are 80,000 precincts, you hire 80,000 watchers. Multiply that by two – because the count takes two days and the watchers must be relieved to rest. So you have 160,000 watchers. Pay P500 per day for each of the 160,000 watchers. That alone will cost the presidential candidate P8 billion. Add the budget for tv and newspaper ads (usually half of campaign costs) and the cost of campaigning in 80 provinces, 100 cities and 1,580 towns for ten months.
“Where will the candidate get that kind of money? From two sources: one, donations, and two, from years of corruption (kickbacks, overpriced projects, shady deals with gambling, drugs, kidnapping and other syndicates) while in public service. When you get huge sums from donors, you become beholden to them. You are their minion.”
Will Grace Poe be honest enough to acknowledge this harsh and sordid reality?
Of course, Grace Poe’s supporters could insist that she could personally remain pure, even assuming that she has to work in what Imee Marcos once described as “the snake pit” of Malacañang. That is the same specious argument being offered by the apologists of Noynoy Aquino. The same one used for his mother, the late President Cory Aquino.
The bad news is that, if you abet corruption, you are as corrupt as the actual perpetrators. For instance, by going along with Butch Abad’s brainchild, the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP), Aquino became party to corruption, regardless of their protestations of good intentions. And when the funds were used to bribe senators to win votes for the impeachment of a chief justice of the Supreme Court, Aquino became a mastermind, not just an accessory, of corruption.
Indeed, if Grace Poe decides to run for president, she will have to deal with what the Germans call realpolitik. In such a case, she should step down from her holier-than-thou perch and unabashedly paraphrase Winston Churchill: “My aim is Victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of terrorizing the voters, victory however dirty and suspect the campaign funds may be; for without victory, there is no presidency.”
That acknowledgement of inevitable dishonesty would be the most honest thing to say. And that would bring us back full circle to the mandatory qualities of an effective president. Experience. Competence. And decisiveness in the face of crisis. ([email protected])
