Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube
Home Blog Page 6005

House bill seeks to expand sports commission fund source 

A BILL that seeks to increase the funds of the Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) to ensure adequate support for local athletes competing in international competitions was filed at the House of Representatives.  

House Deputy Speaker and Biñan City Rep. Marlyn B. Alonte filed House Bill 10270 or the proposed Sports Finance Act of 2021, which would expand sources for the National Sports Development Fund.  

New sources of funding would include proceeds from the Motor Vehicles Users’ Tax, revenues from gaming operators of online cockfighting or e-sabong, and all taxes collected from imported athletic equipment.  

The National Sports Development Fund currently comes from proceeds from lotto games and sale of stamps.    

“The sweepstakes have become obsolete and is now just a shadow of what it once was,” Ms. Alonte said in her explanatory note. 

The measure would also allow the PSC in coordination with the Department of Budget and Management and the National Economic and Development Authority to explore, negotiate, and secure foreign grants and technical assistance to augment sports funds.    

The bill comes after the historic run of the Philippine delegation at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, including the country’s first gold medal from weightlifter Hidilyn F. Diaz.  

The House has earlier conferred the Congressional Medal of Excellence to Ms. Diaz and the Congressional Medal of Distinction to boxers Nesthy A. Petecio, Carlo Paalam, and Eumir Felix D. Marcial.    

A House bill was also filed on Aug. 26 to establish an Olympian Museum at the New Clark City Sports Complex in Capas, Tarlac, which would be the official public venue for all Olympian records and other memorabilia. — Russell Louis C. Ku 

Fishers to raise DENR dismantling order in global food system summit  

PHILIPPINE STAR/ MICHAEL VARCAS

FISHERFOLK and civil society organizations seek to raise the dismantling order of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) at the Global People’s Summit on Food Systems.    

Ronnel Arambulo, Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (PAMALAKAYA) spokesman, said the government is destroying the livelihood of the poor sectors with its plan to dismantle fisheries structures situated along the Cavite shore of Manila Bay.    

The Global People’s Summit on Food Systems is an initiative to counter the United Nations Food Systems Summit in New York City held on Sept. 23.    

“The DENR order to dismantle fisheries structures in Cavite should be the kind of policy the United Nations should stop. The fisherfolk and urban poor families are suffering because of the lockdown, and declining household incomes, but the Duterte government is hell-bent in destroying sources of food and livelihood,” Mr. Arambulo said in a statement on Thursday.    

According to PAMALAKAYA, international groups also showed their support to stop the dismantling of the fisheries structures such as Andhra Pradesh Vyavsaya Vruthidarula Union (APVVU), Southeast Asia Sub-Region of the Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples’ Mechanisms (CSM) for Relations with the United Nations Committee on World Food Security (CFS) and International Women’s Alliance.   

The group also disclosed that lawmakers under the Makabayan bloc are set to file a house resolution to check the justification of the DENR’s dismantling order.    

Anakpawis Party-list National President Ariel B. Casilao said the DENR order is a clearing operation for reclamation projects, and urged fisherfolk communities in Manila Bay to unite since it will displace their sources of livelihood.    

“Instead of genuinely cleaning up the waters of Manila Bay, the DENR is busy coordinating with the local government unit to displace more fisherfolk and urban poor families relying on fisheries as livelihood,” Mr. Casilao said.    

The dismantling of fishing structures in Cavite will take place on Sept. 25.    

DENR previously said that the dismantling will be conducted as part of the rehabilitation efforts in Manila Bay and will not cover any mussel farms operating legally. — Revin Mikhael D. Ochave   

Opportunity loss from corruption

Two days ago, this broadsheet reported on Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Karl Chua’s estimate of the total economic cost of the coronavirus pandemic and lockdowns. The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) cited a total cost of P41.4 trillion representing foregone growth drivers such as consumption, private investment, and human capital investment for 2020 and the next 40 years at net present value.

Without the pandemic and economic lockdowns, the NEDA report shows what could have happened to the Philippine economy. Instead of gross domestic product (GDP) of P19.5 trillion in 2019 contracting to P17.9 trillion in 2020, it could have grown to P21.4 trillion. With economic scars, the 40-year opportunity cost combined would be equivalent to almost two years of output.

With foregone opportunities, NEDA believes that “it may take 10 years to catch up to pre-COVID-19 trajectory” in terms of financial investments.

Corruption is another source of missed opportunities. This is more sinister because it is committed by those in authority, whether elected or appointed, and most probably supported by those around them.

A pioneering study by Paolo Mauro (“The Effects of Corruption on Growth, Investment, and Government Expenditure”) of the IMF in 1997, nearly a quarter of a century ago, attempted to pin down the reality of public sector corruption.

Mauro argued the obvious, that we should worry about corruption. He traced the seminal research on corruption all the way to the 1960s when economists preferred to call it “rent seeking.” Mauro concluded that quantifying the extent of corruption and putting value to it was rather difficult. Corruption is done in secret unless exposed by those with authority to audit relevant transactions.

Joint annual meetings of the IMF and the World Bank in the 1990s invariably harped on governance and corruption, calling it a “cancer” that must be excised. The only available metrics of corruption were those supplied by private rating agencies based on the responses of locally consultants. No one could fault the results for being subjective because there was hardly any other option.

The context of corruption is very interesting.

Mauro explained, in the Fund’s simplified version, that “since much public corruption can be traced to government intervention in the economy, policies aimed at liberalization, stabilization, deregulation and privatization can sharply reduce the opportunities for rent-seeking behavior and corruption.” This fundamental cause resonates even in the Philippines today when reported cases of corruption involved official interventions that would thwart the tenets of competition and liberal markets.

Liberalized importation of rice, for instance, made a handful of middlemen unhappy but all rice-eating Filipinos rejoiced when rice prices dropped and inflation weakened. Farmers have started to benefit from the support coming from the rice tariff collection.

Sin taxes had an impossible time in Congress because big money was involved in sin products like liquor and cigarettes. Once they were in place, taxes from this source helped promote fiscal sustainability and the Philippine economy turned the corner before the pandemic.

Corruption is indeed rent seeking because those who are bribed are policy makers who can make policies or change the regulations to suit the interests of the corrupting party. Mauro wrote that “throughout the world bureaucrats and people in authority are indefatigably maneuvering to position themselves in a tiny monopoly where they can be bribed for issuing a license, approving an expenditure or allowing a shipment across a border.”

Another good material on corruption focusing on the Philippines is the article by Emmanuel S. Dios and Ricardo D. Ferrer, “Corruption in the Philippines: Framework and Context” published in January 2000. The authors used Susan Rose-Ackerman’s (“Corruption and Development,” 1998) table on types of corrupt states to show the interesting dynamics of corruption. Normally there are few bribers to a few recipients. Since there could be whistleblowers, one could spread the largesse to more recipients and produce a Mafia-dominated state.

Transaction-wise, corruption targets bids, purchases, and auctions as well as sale of policies, laws, and regulations, among others. As example, corruption in public procurement results in bid-rigging, overpricing, or even over-purchasing. Sale of public policy involves changes in ownership rules.

Like the pandemic, corruption has economic consequences. The literature contains instances when corruption could have some constructive use like incentivizing bureaucrats to perform better than without bribe. But its negative impact trumps its efficiency value.

Recipients of public spending could lose what has been earmarked for them. Due to corruption, both investment and economic growth could drop. Like a tax, corruption discourages economic activity in a sense similar to what community quarantines do to business and mobility. Unlike a tax, corruption is unpredictable and unreliable. One of the parties may not deliver on his commitment.

De Dios and Ferrer replicated Mauro’s approach and used his equations for the Philippines but with a great difference: the level of corruption is modified to mimic Singapore. This means if we are able to reduce the extent of this insidious practice, we could expect a 6.6 percentage point increase in the ratio of investment to GDP and a 1.65% increase in annual per capita GDP growth at that point in the past.

In addition, revenues could drop and spending could get bloated resulting in unsustainable fiscal deficits. Under-provisioning of public goods and over-provisioning of something unwanted, or unnecessary, happen.

How does the Philippines compare with other countries in terms of Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index?

Based on the table compiled by TAKE-PROFIT.ORG, in the last five presidencies, only President Fidel V. Ramos and President Benigno Aquino III managed to increase their scores from the year they started their administration to the end of their terms.

For the year 2020, of the 180 countries assessed, the Philippines scored 34 points that brought it to 115th place. In the ASEAN, those which rated higher include Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam. The Philippines was specially mentioned with these remarks: “with a score of 34, efforts to control corruption in the Philippines appear mostly stagnant since 2012. The government’s response to COVID-19 has been characterized by abusive enforcement, and major violations of human rights and media freedom.”

We recall that in August 2019, before the pandemic, Deputy Ombudsman Cyril Ramos reported his personal calculation that the Philippine government lost around P1.4 trillion in the previous two years, or P700 billion a year, because of corruption. This was about 20% of the annual budget of the Philippine government.

This were estimated as the equivalent of 1.4 million housing for the poor, medical assistance for around 7 million Filipinos, or a rice buffer stock for over a year.

From another angle, somebody estimated that a kilometer of road, 11-meters wide or two-lanes on each side, would cost around P100 million. This means we could have additional 7,000 kilometers of road — that is all the way from Ilocos Norte to Bicol, seven times. Many years ago, the Department of Education estimated an average of about P1 million per classroom in the public school, although Senator Frank Drilon challenged this amount. Without corruption, we would have at least 700,000 classrooms more.

Today, the anomaly in the Pharmally transactions with the Procurement Service-Department of Budget and Management could also involve corruption. Public documents from the Securities and Exchange Commission prove Pharmally is undercapitalized but it managed to win billions worth of contracts. Its deliveries were certified even without inspection. Its pricing was not exactly competitive. Rent seeking was clearly present. With a level playing field, the government would not have to pay more than necessary. Lost from these transactions that produced luxury cars, among others, were more kilometers of road, more classrooms, more medical assistance, or more rice buffer stock for our people. Obviously, following Rose-Ackerman scheme, the pandemic crisis presented an opportunity for corruption.

 

Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former Deputy Governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was Alternate Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.

Private tyrannies

PCH.VECTOR-FREEPIK

Government officials in many countries today have been using State power to advance their and their collaborators’ interests, and transforming what should be the rule of the many into the rule of the few — of “private tyrannies.” The Philippines, where such a tyranny rules in the guise of democracy, is no exception, and neither is that self-proclaimed bastion of liberty, the United States of America.

In a series of speaking engagements in Sydney, Melbourne, and Canberra, Australia, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Emeritus Professor of Linguistics Noam Chomsky said the term “private tyrannies” describes the use by some US politicians of the powers the electorate has delegated to them to advance their private interests and those of their cronies in the business sector.

The politicians who benefit from that partnership craft policies advantageous to a handful of corporations that, as a result, decide the conditions of work and hence the very terms of existence of millions of people. These are not only structures of corruption but also of tyrannical rule by private non-elected entities and by the politicians involved who personally profit from them.

Chomsky noted that both Republicans and Democrats have been guilty of it, with the former being arguably more hypocritical. Republicans are, after all, identified with “conservatism,” which in the US is popularly assumed to mean being opposed to government intervention in the conduct of the economy as well as the political and social life of the nation. They oppose and have in fact dismantled welfare programs such as support for the unemployed, and subsidies for inexpensive meals for disadvantaged school children.

Democrats are, on the other hand, identified with “liberalism,” which in the US is usually understood to mean a preference for greater government involvement in those areas. For example, it was a Democratic Party president of the US, Lyndon B. Johnson, who, in his first State of the Union address in 1964, launched a “war on poverty” under government auspices which included a number of federal social welfare programs that were supposed to end poverty in the richest country in the world.

“Conservatives” opposed those programs on the argument that they were being imposed by “big government,” but they themselves have proposed and won tax cuts and favored federal grants and contracts for big business. A succession of both Republican and Democratic Party administrations has also enriched a handful of corporations through government contracts, purchases of the weapons the US military machine uses in its endless wars, and arms sales to mostly non-democratic regimes as well as US client-states like the Philippines.

The late US President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a five-star general. But when leaving the White House in 1961, he called attention to the threat to democracy posed by the influence and power over government and the whole of US society of the “military-industrial complex” — which is what he called the partnership between the defense establishment and the arms-making industry.

The Philippines may not have a military-industrial complex to speak of, but it has long had private tyrannies at both the local and national levels. The local variety consists of the warlords’ practice of transforming public security forces into their private armies so as to assure their continuing control over a region or province. The security forces that are usually involved are local police and military personnel, plus elements from such government-supported paramilitary groups as the Civilian Armed Force Geographical Units (CAFGUs) and Civilian Volunteer Organizations (CVOs). By harassing, terrorizing and even murdering rivals as well as voters, these private armies make a mockery of democratic rule. Rather than the popular will, what prevails in some localities are the personal, familial, and class interests of the ruling few.

In 2009, the entire country and the rest of the world witnessed how brutal the private tyranny called warlordism can be. To prevent its rival’s contesting the Maguindanao governorship, the ruling Ampatuan clan planned and carried out through its private army of hired killers and police, military and CVO personnel the massacre of 58 men and women including 32 journalists and media workers.

Private tyranny has similarly been of long standing at the national level, but not only in the form of the ruling dynasties’ use of public power to advance and defend their personal, familial, and class interests through their privatization of State funds, resources, and organization. Mostly unremarked prior to the Marcos martial law regime were the links of politicians to private business interests or their control over this or that corporation and the implications of those connections on governance. During the 14 years of military rule (1972-1986), cronyism — in which government favored only certain groups, especially those controlled by its officials, at the expense of others — dominated Philippine business. The Marcos kleptocracy made sure that those favored groups would prosper by institutionalizing such regime interventions as banning strikes, and reducing taxes.

Though still a fact of life in Philippine governance, cronyism abated in succeeding administrations, but is in resurgence in the present regime, if we are to believe the findings of both the Commission on Audit (CoA) and the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee.

What the Senate hearings found suggests that it was the Pharmally Pharmaceuticals Corp.’s closeness to those in power that enabled it to make billions through its contracts to supply the government with personal protective equipment (PPEs), face masks, face shields, and other supplies for coping with the COVID-19 pandemic. These supplies, according to a Senate source, “passed inspection” even before they had arrived in these shores. But quite apart from that anomaly is the distinct possibility that not only were these imports from China overpriced, that local manufacturers could have provided them at a lower cost. Had they been sourced from Filipino suppliers, they could have also created thousands of jobs, and helped revive the ailing economy.

These revelations imply that Pharmally was, from the very beginning, the preferred supplier of the current dispensation despite the above disadvantages. There is thus the attendant implication that something illegal had transpired. But rather than assure the public that such suspicions are unfounded, President Rodrigo Duterte, who had earlier berated CoA for doing its job, instead went on one of his usual rant rampages.

This time the targets of his tirades were the senators involved in the hearings, particularly Blue Ribbon Committee Chair Richard Gordon and Senator Panfilo Lacson. In another fit of vindictive pique, he vowed to find something onerous in their public and even private lives to criticize, and hold them responsible for. He later declared that only with his permission could the members of his Cabinet testify at the Senate hearings. His abettors in the aptly named Lower House of Congress and other apologists echoed his outbursts in what seems like an orchestrated attempt to prevent the public from getting at the truth in the Pharmally scandal.

Mr. Duterte has always looked at government as his private property to which he can do as he pleases. The police are in his view “my police,” the military “my soldiers,” and the Philippines “my country.” Neither civility, concern for the public welfare, nor statesmanship is his strong suit. Whether as mayor or president, he has seldom gone beyond the defense and advancement of his personal and political interests. In the process he has empowered himself and his cronies both in and out of government to decide who lives and who dies.

Hopefully this too will pass, as Ferdinand Marcos’ own private tyranny did.

 

Luis V. Teodoro is on Facebook and Twitter (@luisteodoro).

www.luisteodoro.com

If Aukus, China and Russia don’t take Europe seriously, guess who’s to blame

ICONICBESTIARY-FREEPIK

IF IT TAKES a cheap phonetic pun to drive home the point, so be it. Last year, the Munich Security Conference, the world’s leading forum on international relations, warned of “Westlessness.” Everything since that report has borne out the danger, because the rate at which the world is becoming Westless — and, therefore, restless — keeps accelerating.

The latest sign is Aukus, the new geopolitical alliance of Australia, the UK, and the US, which has China as the obvious adversary. There it is again: the old Anglosphere, as distinct from the wider West. The undertone is that when it comes to staring down genuine threats — in the 21st century as in the 20th — it’s those ancient ties of language and culture that bind.

France under President Emmanuel Macron, predictably, is as livid about being snubbed as it ever was under Charles de Gaulle or other Gallic roosters. As part of Aukus, Australia will buy nuclear-powered submarines from its fellow Anglophones, instead of conventional ones from France, as previously agreed. Macron recalled his ambassadors to Washington and Canberra and is now preparing for an extended sulk.

You can expect to hear a lot from him in coming weeks about “European sovereignty” and “autonomy,” nebulous slogans he’s been pushing alongside his more evocative ruminations about the alleged “brain death” of NATO, which remains the most concrete manifestation of a strategic West. If it were up to Macron, the European Union, now unencumbered by those pesky Brits, should finally become a distinct geopolitical and military power, at eye level with the US, and presumably led by France.

The usual suspects in a few other European capitals have taken up his rallying cry, especially since the ignominious Western withdrawal from Afghanistan. There, too, the Europeans felt betrayed by the Americans, who didn’t bother to meaningfully consult or coordinate with their allies as they pulled out. Predictably, the call for a “European army” has returned. In this latest iteration, the idea is to start with an EU 5,000, a sort of elite force that could have secured the Kabul airport without American help. Forgive my skepticism, but the Spartan 300 this will never be.

It’s understandable that the Europeans are frustrated about not being taken all that seriously, either by adversaries like Russia and China or by friends like the US and Australia. But rather than fume impotently, they’d do better to take an honest look at themselves to find the reasons.

They could start by asking Lithuania, that former victim of Soviet imperialism which is now a proud member of the EU and NATO. It’s become the latest European country to get the full bullying treatment from Beijing. The reason is that Vilnius allowed Taiwan, which China considers a renegade province, to set up a representative office. In retaliation, if that is the word, Beijing withdrew its ambassador, clamped down on Lithuanian trade and generally tightened the vise.

The US immediately offered its support to Lithuania. And the EU? Its member states aren’t so sure. After all, they do a lot of business with China — Germany’s largest trading partner — and feel that Lithuania could have been more diplomatic. It fell to the prime minister of Slovenia, which currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency, to plead with his counterparts to stick up for Lithuania at a gathering in two weeks.

So it goes, country by country, crisis by crisis, threat by threat. The Europeans do not see the world and its dangers the same way, nor do they feel they co-own the West’s problems. Just look at Berlin, which has rebuffed entreaties by the US, Poland, and others and built a pipeline connecting Germany to Russia, the most direct menace to peace on the continent. Moscow plans to start pumping gas through it within weeks.

The shock of Trumpism in the US is certainly one reason for the trend of Westlessness — former President Donald Trump never understood, much less appreciated, the concept of a “West” that stands together for open societies and world order. But the Europeans bear at least as much of the blame. They have not made their armies capable of fighting a real war without the Americans. And they haven’t taken responsibility in managing the biggest geopolitical threats, which now include China.

Germany is the best example. It’s probably the one country, thanks to its economic weight, that could nudge the EU to become stronger and therefore “autonomous.” But it has no interest in doing so. Instead it skimps on its army and pretends that the world’s problems are for others, and mainly the US, to deal with. In the debates between the candidates for chancellor before this Sunday’s election, none had anything to say about foreign or security policy at all. This is disgraceful.

While it lasted, the West — not in an ethnocentric but in a normative sense — made the world, on balance, a better place. Its ongoing fragmentation therefore bodes ill for stability and peace. The US should keep trying to salvage this West, even as others, like the UK and Australia, are wise to draw up a Plan B. But ultimately, it’s the Europeans who have to decide what they want — and then do what it takes to become credible.

BLOOMBERG OPINION

Canceling free speech is anti-Filipino

FREEPIK

It may be a sign of the times but isn’t it strange that those who say “I may not agree with what you say but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it” are more apt to actually prevent you from saying what you want to say?

Incidentally, Voltaire never actually said those words. It was written by his biographer, the writer Evelyn Beatrice Hall. In any event, it speaks to the utterance of free expression as our lot as human beings, for it is an avenue for us to fully flourish as individuals. Truth is a necessary component to such flourishing. Yet truth is not achieved solitarily. It must be debated, refined, and shared. Hence the significance of language and the ability to express our thoughts freely and without fear.

Put another way, we have the right to free speech because it arises from our responsibility to know the truth.

Nevertheless, to protect only those speech that we agree with is inutile. Because, what then is the point? Freedom of speech (and of the press) is there, all the more so, precisely for speech we disagree with. That we find intolerable. Revolting even.

The reason, so wrote Villanova University law professor Robert Miller (“In defense of disgusting speech,” July 2011), is that speech “disgusting and vile may turn out to be good and valuable. Reflect that the educated, cosmopolitan, highly literate Romans of the first century regarded the preaching of the Christians as disgusting and vile.”

The point is that an idea or belief, no matter how sure that portion of the population believes they are right, could — by the nature of reason and dint of human experience — still be wrong. And hence the need for opposing thoughts to be expressed. As Professor Miller puts it, whether it be about politics, history, and most specially science: “being sure is not good enough, because even when you’re sure, sometimes you turn out to be wrong. There is no principled way to make exceptions in your own favor here.”

This is the only way for a dynamic and prosperous society to exist. In fact, it could be said that civilized societies actually only came to being when people learned to welcome dissenting thought.

“Dissent, in primitive societies, was normally punishable by death. The upshot of this was that a society’s core body of knowledge and doctrine tended to remain almost static, especially if inscribed in writings that were regarded as holy. It was against this historical background that the pre-Socratic philosophers of ancient Greece introduced something wholly new and revolutionary: they institutionalized criticism. From Thales onwards each of them encouraged his pupils to discuss, debate, criticize — and to produce a better argument or theory if he could. Such, according to [Karl] Popper, were the historical beginnings of rationality and scientific method, and they were directly responsible for that galloping growth of human knowledge.” (Bryan Magee, Confessions of a Philosopher).

The inanity and insanity of cancel culture callously disregards all that.

But what about “fake news” and “historical revisionism”? Those are valid concerns but the question is: who makes the call as to what constitutes fake news and revisionism? Should it be the government? The unelected members of those small cliques that is the media or the academe?

When the government (Congress or the Executive branch) imposed laws against fake news (e.g., Article 154 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 10951; or RA 10175 or the “Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012”; or RA 11469 or the “Bayanihan to Heal as One Act”) it nevertheless was unable to provide a workable definition of what constitutes fake or false news.

Indeed, while there are situations that require limiting speech, yet that should be done with the utmost circumspection. What the foregoing demonstrates is the utter difficulty of simplifying complex issues requiring nuance and depth (e.g., determining the truth and actualities behind the Marcos martial law years), and that such cannot be left in the hands of a select few. And definitely not those select few that seek to shut out and silence any contrary or questioning voice.

Professor Miller is right: “I would rather live in a coarser nation that upholds that principle [of free speech], secure that my own freedom to say what others may deem vile and disgusting is protected, than in a more genteel nation that may someday take that freedom from me.”

As the present times show, those who proclaim they are acting for our own safety, whether it be from COVID or historical revisionism, be they politicians, news media, or academicians, more often than not simply want to dictate to everyone else how to live, or what to say and believe.

It shows a distrust and lack of respect for our people and their ability to think for themselves. That is no way for a society to be.

 

Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence.

https://www.facebook.com/jigatdula/

Twitter @jemygatdula

Melbourne anti-lockdown protests fizzle out as daily infections hit pandemic high

SYDNEY — Melbourne’s streets were largely quiet on Thursday after three days of anti-lockdown protests, with hundreds of police officers on patrol in the city to prevent another rally as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in Victoria hit a daily pandemic record.

Police in central Melbourne were checking people’s reasons for being outside, footage on social media showed, after a violent protest on Wednesday in Australia’s second-largest city resulted in more than 200 arrests.

A vaccination center at the Melbourne Town Hall would be shut until Monday after several of its staff were physically and verbally abused on their way to work, operator Cohealth said on Thursday.

“Why would you abuse, as I’m told, why would you spit on people who are doing that sort of work?” Premier Daniel Andrews said at a media briefing in Melbourne, the state capital. “That is ugly, that is uncalled for.”

Hundreds of protesters have taken to the streets in the city of 5 million since officials earlier this week ordered a two-week closure of building sites and made vaccines mandatory for construction workers to limit the spread of the virus. — Reuters

French ambassador to return to US after Biden and Macron fence-mending call

PARIS/WASHINGTON — The US and French presidents moved to mend ties on Wednesday, with France agreeing to send its ambassador back to Washington and the White House acknowledging it erred in brokering a deal for Australia to buy US instead of French submarines without consulting Paris.

In a joint statement issued after US President Joseph R. Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron spoke by telephone for 30 minutes, the two leaders agreed to launch in-depth consultations to rebuild trust, and to meet in Europe at the end of October.

They said Washington had committed to step up “support to counter-terrorism operations in the Sahel conducted by European states” which US officials suggested meant a continuation of logistical support rather than deploying US special forces.

Mr. Biden’s call to Mr. Macron was an attempt to mend fences after France accused the United States of stabbing it in the back when Australia ditched a $40-billion contract for conventional French submarines, and opted for nuclear-powered submarines to be built with US and British technology instead.

“The two leaders agreed that the situation would have benefited from open consultations among allies on matters of strategic interest to France and our European partners,” the joint US and French statement said.

“President Biden conveyed his ongoing commitment in that regard.”

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his French counterpart Jean-Yves Le Drian, interacting for the first time since the submarine crisis erupted, had a ‘good exchange’ on the margins of a wider meeting at the United Nations on Wednesday, a senior State Department official told reporters in a call.

The two top diplomats were likely to have a separate bilateral meeting on Thursday. “We do expect that they’ll have some time together bilaterally tomorrow,” the official said, and added that Washington ‘very very much welcomed’ France and European Union’s deep engagement in the Indo-Pacific.

Earlier on Wednesday, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki described the call as “friendly” and sounded hopeful about improving ties.

“The president has had a friendly phone call with the president of France where they agreed to meet in October and continue close consultations and work together on a range of issues,” she told reporters.

Asked if Mr. Biden apologized to Mr. Macron, she said: “He acknowledged that there could have been greater consultation.”

The new US, Australian and British security partnership (AUKUS) was widely seen as designed to counter China’s growing assertiveness in the Pacific but critics said it undercut Mr. Biden’s broader effort to rally allies such as France to that cause.

Biden administration officials suggested the US commitment to “reinforcing its support to counter-terrorism operations in the Sahel” region of West Africa meant a continuation of existing efforts.

France has a 5,000 strong counter-terrorism force fighting Islamist militants across the Sahel.

It is reducing its contingent to 2,500-3,000, moving more assets to Niger, and encouraging other European countries to provide special forces to work alongside local forces. The United States provides logistical and intelligence support.

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the US military would continue to support French operations, but declined to speculate about potential increases or changes in US assistance.

“When I saw the verb reinforce, what I took away was that we’re going to stay committed to that task,” she told reporters. — Reuters

Echoes, uncertainty as Afghan pilots await US help in Tajikistan

REUTERS

WASHINGTON — A US-trained Afghan pilot was talking to Reuters on a smuggled cellphone from Tajikistan, where he is being held, when something strange happened — his voice started looping, repeating everything he had just said, word for word.

His fiancée, an American nurse in Florida, was on the line too and started to panic. She shouted his name, but his words kept cycling back.

“I was freaked out,” she said, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect him. “The worst things came to my mind.”

Whatever the reason for the telephone glitch, which only happened once, it added to a deep sense of anxiety for the couple. It also came amid growing feelings of impatience and uncertainty among the Afghan pilots and personnel who have been held by the government in Tajikistan since fleeing there on Aug. 15.

There are 143 Afghans detained at a sanatorium in a mountainous, rural area outside of the Tajik capital, Dushanbe, waiting and hoping for more than a month for transfer by the United States.

After flying there with 16 aircraft as their military’s ground forces crumbled before the advancing Taliban, the Afghans say they had their phones taken away. They were initially housed in a university dormitory before being moved on Sept. 1.

Contact with family is extremely limited. Although they appear to be held in humane conditions, they are on edge, uncertain about the future.

“We don’t know about our destination. … We’re all worried about that,” the pilot said.

The pilots want to join the other Afghan military personnel being processed for US visas in places like Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Germany.

“Whenever we ask the government of Tajikistan, they just answer: ‘Please wait,’” said a second pilot, speaking separately on condition of anonymity.

Among the military personnel at the facility are two Afghan women, including a pilot who is eight months pregnant, the second pilot told Reuters.

Such a pregnancy would be an important reason to move them quickly, said David Hicks, a retired US brigadier general who is helping lead a charity called Operation Sacred Promise working to evacuate and resettle Afghans.

There are also 13 Afghan personnel in Dushanbe, enjoying much more relaxed conditions. Several of those pilots told Reuters they flew separately into the country on Aug. 15 and are staying in a government building. Speaking in a video call, they said they have not had contact with the Afghans at the sanatorium.

The pilots could not explain why the two groups were being kept apart.

The US State Department declined comment on the pilots in Tajikistan. Tajikistan’s Foreign Ministry did not respond to a request for comment.

The US-trained Afghan pilots in Tajikistan are the last major group of Afghan air force personnel abroad still in limbo after flying dozens of advanced aircraft across the Afghan border to that country and Uzbekistan in the final moments of the war.

Earlier in September, a US-brokered deal allowed a larger group of Afghan pilots and other military personnel to be flown out of Uzbekistan. Some of the English-speaking pilots there had feared they could be sent back by the Uzbeks to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan and killed for inflicting so many Taliban casualties during the war.

‘NO DOMESTIC URGENCY’
Afghanistan’s new rulers have said they will invite former military personnel to join the country’s revamped security forces and that they will come to no harm.

That offer rings hollow to Afghan pilots who spoke with Reuters. Even before the Taliban takeover, the US-trained, English-speaking pilots had become their prime targets. Taliban fighters tracked them down and assassinated them off-base.

The pilots did not express concern the Tajiks will send this group back to the Taliban. But after more than a month, pilots and their supporters complain about a lack of urgency by authorities to move the group along.

Reuters has learned that US officials have started collecting biometric information to confirm the identities of members of the group, in a sign that help could soon be on the way. A similar effort in Uzbekistan preceded those pilots’ transfer from there.

People close to the pilots said the United States had collected biometric data on about two-thirds of the group so far.

Paul Stronski, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, thinks Tajikistan’s president, Emomali Rahmon, may be proud of his role receiving the pilots as the Taliban swept to power.

Tajikistan, which shares a porous, 835-mile (1,345-km) border with Afghanistan, has broken from its more conciliatory neighbors and been outspoken about its concerns over the new Taliban government in Afghanistan.

“The Tajik government is probably playing this to try to get some benefit,” Mr. Stronski said. “There’s no domestic urgency, and it probably suits Rahmon to sort of say: ‘We’re housing these people.’”

About a quarter of Afghanistan’s population are believed to be ethnic Tajiks, although no recent census data exists. But they and other ethnic minorities are not represented in the Taliban’s interim government, a point Mr. Rahmon has made publicly.

“Foisting any political system on Kabul without regard for the voice of the Afghan people, which consists of diverse ethnicities, may lead to seriously negative consequences,” Mr. Rahmon was quoted by Russia’s TASS news agency as saying last week.

Tajikistan says it has given asylum to more than 3,000 refugee families from Afghanistan, a total of 15,000 people, in the past 15 years.

A Tajik government source familiar with the situation blamed delays by the United States and Canada to issue visas.

When the Tajik government confiscated the Afghans’ phones, it told the pilots it was for their safety, explaining the Taliban could trace their signal when they called home.

“You are not allowed to use your phone for the security of your family,” a Tajik official said, recounted the second pilot.

The Tajik government source also said the Afghans’ phones were taken from them so that their exact location could not be tracked.

But being largely cut off from communications has taken a psychological toll. The pilots are fearful their families in Afghanistan could suffer Taliban reprisals and, with the war lost, they have no income to support them.

The second pilot recounts seeing people pacing around outside the sanatorium in the middle of the night.

“Whenever I ask someone why… they (say): ‘I’m not relaxed, I’m thinking about my family,’” he said.

The American nurse, who is a dual US-Afghan national, and her fiancé have only spoken infrequently. After the technical glitch, where the pilot’s voice started looping, they took a break from calls for a while.

The nurse sounded exhausted and frustrated by the lack of progress after calling offices of US lawmakers and government officials.

“I have reached out to literally anyone and everyone I could,” she said. “No one has been able to help.” — Reuters

Bolts head into playoffs on a high

THE Meralco Bolts sustained the momentum they built in the elimination round heading into the PBA Philippine Cup quarterfinals, winning their fourth straight game at the expense of the Barangay Ginebra San Miguel Kings on Thursday.  — PBA IMAGES

THE Meralco Bolts are heading into the Philippine Basketball Association (PBA) Philippine Cup playoffs on a high after racking up their fourth straight win in their final game of the eliminations over the defending champions Barangay Ginebra San Miguel Kings, 79-66, on Thursday in Pampanga.

Already assured of the number two seed in the quarterfinals of the ongoing Philippine Basketball Association tournament, the Bolts showed no letup, dominating the game early and finishing strong to book the win that pushed them to a 9-2 record at the end of classification play.

“We just wanted to build momentum. We did not want to go into the playoffs coming off a loss,” said Meralco Bolts coach Norman Black after the game.

Meralco opened the proceedings with a 10-0 run, which it used to set the pace en route to building a comfortable 47-32 advantage by the half time break.

In the third quarter, the Kings found their footing, outscoring the Bolts, 19-8, to narrow the gap, 55-51, entering the final quarter.

But Meralco regained its form in the payoff canto, reestablishing a double-digit lead, 68-58, midway and never looking back from there.

Mac Belo and rookie Alvin Pasaol led the Bolts in the win with 15 points apiece.

The loss dealt Barangay Ginebra’s playoff hopes a big blow as it fell to 4-7, sending them to a three-way tie, as of this writing, for number eight, along with the Phoenix Super LPG Fuel Masters and Terrafirma Dyip, and will have to go through a playoff match, if ever, just to make it to the quarterfinals. — Michael Angelo S. Murillo    

Philippine women’s football team shoots for spot in 2022 AFC Asian Women’s Cup

THE Philippine women’s national football team shoots for a spot in the 2022 AFC Asian Women’s Cup when it takes on Hong Kong in an all-important Group F qualifying match on Friday in Uzbekistan. — AFC

THE Philippine women’s national football team shoots for a spot in the 2022 Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Asian Women’s Cup when it takes on Hong Kong in an all-important Group F qualifying match on Friday in Uzbekistan.

Currently leading the group with three points, the Malditas are looking to complete a sweep of their assignments that would earn them direct passage to the Asian Cup happening in India next year.

The Philippine women’s team had to dig deep in its opening qualifying match against Nepal on Sept. 18 at JAR Stadium in Tashkent, banking on late goals by Thanai Annis and Camille Wilson to pull the rug from under the Nepalese.

The nationals played catch-up throughout the contest after going down, 0-1, in the 10th minute after Nepal’s Bimala Chaudary scored on a header.

While the 68th-ranked Malditas were seemingly heading to an upset loss at the hands of 101st-ranked Nepal going into stoppage time, the former extricated for an equalizer.

Ms. Annis found herself free in the box and converted a cross from teammate Chandler McDaniel to level the count in the 90th minute.

Two minutes later, Ms. Wilson would score the go-ahead goal on another assist from Ms. McDaniel to complete the impressive charge-back win.

The Malditas, whose campaign is being supported by the Philippine Sports Commission and the MVP Sports Foundation, will still advance even with a draw with Hong Kong, which was held to a nil-nil stalemate by Nepal in their clash on Sept. 21.

In the qualifying phase, the format has the top teams in each of the eight groupings advancing to the AFC Women’s Asian Cup, where they get to vie for spots in the 2023 International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) Women’s World Cup. — Michael Angelo S. Murillo

Champ Pacio thrilled to meet Saruta for the third time

ONE CHAMPIONSHIP world strawweight champion Joshua Pacio of the Philippines — ONE CHAMPIONSHIP

FOR the third time, reigning ONE Championship world strawweight champion Joshua “The Passion” Pacio of the Philippines will take on Japanese Yosuke Saruta in a title clash.

And for the Team Lakay stalwart, he is still thrilled to face Mr. Saruta, looking at it as a chance to showcase his improvement as a fighter against an opponent he considers as one of his motivations.

“I want this to be over with, so I can move on,” said Mr. Pacio in a recent media conference with local sports media for “ONE: Revolution” happening on Friday. “He’s the number one contender for the title and he deserves a shot.”

Messrs. Pacio (18-3) and Saruta (21-9-3) will fight in a rubber match in Revolution after splitting their previous two encounters.

The Japanese took the strawweight title from the Filipino in a controversial split decision in January 2019, but Mr. Pacio bounced back three months later by reclaiming the belt with a knockout win over Mr. Saruta in their rematch.

That set the stage for their third fight, part of a stacked ONE Revolution card featuring three world title fights.

“I’m excited and we’re ready for this fight. I want to show how I have improved as a fighter,” Mr. Pacio said.

“Saruta and the other contenders are part of my motivation to continue to grow as an athlete, to be a better martial artist. Through them, I got to see my weaknesses, the things that I need to improve on,” he added.

Twenty-five-year-old Mr. Pacio last fought in January last year, defeating former champion Alex Silva of Brazil by split decision.

Unfortunately, the pandemic forced Mr. Pacio to a long layoff.

Mr. Saruta, 34, for his part, last saw action in ONE in October 2019, winning over compatriot Daichi Kitakata by second-round knockout.

FIGHT TAKE
For local fight analyst Nissi Icasiano, Pacio-Saruta III is going to be interesting, considering how their previous fights panned out and the possible effects of the pandemic-forced inaction on the two fighters.

“For Joshua, we have to remember that training and actual competition are two different things. There are certain aspects that only actual competition can provide. And I believe this was the longest layoff he had ever gone through in his young career. It will be intriguing how Joshua Pacio will dust himself off and shrug off the cobwebs come fight night,” the analyst said.

“Second is the fact that this is a rubber match… Let’s take note that there is an element of familiarity here in this third. It’s a no-brainer that they already know each other’s strengths and weaknesses. There will be adjustments in the fight, but it will be very minimal,” he added.

But the analyst highlighted that Mr. Pacio being the more well-rounded between the two will serve him in good stead.

“As seen in their last two fights, Pacio can trade strikes in the stand-up as well as carry himself efficiently on the ground with Saruta,” he said.

Mr. Pacio has to go out and claim it though, Mr. Icasiano further said.

“Joshua has to mix it up with Saruta. Like in the second meeting, he has to keep Saruta guessing. By doing so, he will be able to dictate the pace from start to finish against an opponent like Saruta who gets really frustrated and flustered when he’s not on the driver’s seat,” said the analyst.

Also featured in ONE: Revolution is the lightweight world championship clash between champion Christian Lee (Singapore/United States) and challenger Ok Rae Yoon (South Korea) as well as the bantamweight kickboxing world championship bout between Thai champion Capitan and Algerian challenger Mehdi Zatout.

ONE: Revolution will take place at the Singapore Indoor Stadium and will be broadcast live over One Sports on Friday, beginning at 6:30 p.m. and over the ONE mobile app. — Michael Angelo S. Murillo

1...6,0046,0056,006...12,780Page 6,005 of 12,780
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube