Question 1

philippines military power粘拔的幸福碎碎念 在Facebook 的評價

Accepted Answer

整理得很好【**川普做了哪些40年來其他總統沒做的事?**】中共就是這幾任包括柯林頓，小布希，歐巴馬給搞到為所欲為，不管川普是否連任，這4年能夠把中共搞到崩潰邊緣，他真的不簡單! **這裡整理幾點，他做了那些前任總統沒做的事?** **1. 讓反共成為美國共識:** * 正式公開承認過去幾十年對中政策的錯誤，並將中國與中共分開，認定中共所領導的中國為「有別於民主」的獨裁國家，視其為「新威權主義」 **2. 讓反共成為民主自由國家共識:** * 呼籲並整合西方國家，在民主自由與極權暴政之間只能選邊站，價值觀勝過經濟誘因 * 在這次疫情，願意第一個出來講真話，讓我們不用活在指鹿為馬的世界，指出就是因為中共隱匿疫情，造成全球染疫超過千萬，死亡超過50萬人，經濟停擺，損失無可計算，四億多全職工作消失不復返，生活模式改變 * 甚至，他點出了 [#宗教自由](https://www.facebook.com/…/%E5%AE%97%E6%95%99%E8%87%AA%E7%9…)，喚醒我們與中共的差別，西方民主國家不要忘記我們的價值觀，行善止惡的重要性 **3. 斷絕中共資金來源:** * 進行貿易戰，提高關稅，迫使各國紛出走中國 * 提供優惠措施，輔導美企出走中國 * 嚴審中概股，逼迫中企會計公開透明，被迫在自由市場滅頂 * 限制經由香港的資金流動 * 對中國敏感科高科技出口禁令擴展到香港 * 下令美聯邦退休基金撤出中國，禁止用美國公務及老兵的退休基金去投資中國，使其製造武器來威脅美國人/士兵生命，過去幾任總統都是這樣做 * 美國八成假貨來自中港，不但危害智慧產權，消費者安全，更打擊市場公平性，川普對這些產品進行關稅制裁 * 進行《香港自治法》的簽署: 潛在制裁對象還首度包括國際金融機構，可導致中港銀行無法與美國銀行交易、不能使用美元結算，以打擊中港方資金鏈 **4. 斷絕中共技術來源，消滅「中國製造2025」:** * 抵制中興、華為及與中共及解放軍有關係的中企 * 阻斷中國晶片來源，沒了心臟，所有設備根本出不了中國 * 對美國涉及千人計劃的學者、科學家開鍘，並對源頭中國駐美使館進行公開譴責 * 反制習近平「軍民融合戰略」竊取高科技，針對中國公民和學生進行簽證禁令，禁止具任何解放軍背景公民、學生與研究人員的再入境，撤銷簽證，甚至逮捕，一解放軍軍官以學術研究到美，在機場被捕，面臨最高10年刑期 * 正在進行「年度國防授權法案 (NDAA)」的簽署: 公布竊取美商業機密、威脅國家安全或經濟健康的個人或公司名單，[#向竊取技術的企業實施懲罰](https://www.facebook.com/…/%E5%90%91%E7%AB%8A%E5%8F%96%E6%8…)，包括凍結他們在美國的資產，及禁止美國公民與這些公司和個人進行交易的制裁，還包括加強美國供應鏈的措施，以及擴大與中國導彈防禦系統整合的限制 **5. 5G:** * 正式宣布華為國安威脅，目前世界已有多國正式宣布不用華為進行5G基礎建設，這對全世界各國國家安全極為重要，菲律賓即因電網用華為設備，中共可遠端停電菲律賓48小時 * 美憂中國監視及竊盜資料，海纜准通台灣，不准通香港 **6. 印太戰略** * 美國對中國擴張問題，不再只是內容空泛的抱怨，反而是堅強的執行意志。從新加坡李顯龍公開表示，希望華府不要逼新加坡與東協在美、中兩國選邊，很明顯就是針對美國印太戰略在發言 * 美國正在亞太地區部署前所未見的軍力，目前美軍部署在亞太地區的兵力為37.5萬人，占美軍總兵力的28%，其中包括60%的海軍艦艇、55%的陸軍部隊，以及2/3的陸戰隊兵力 * 美國前總統歐巴馬8年任期中，在南海只執行4次航行自由行動，然而川普上任迄今四年已執行22次，是歐巴馬的11倍 **7. 台灣** * 稱蔡英文為台灣總統，國務卿蓬佩奧公開稱讚台灣在民主自由的貢獻，並支持台灣加入WHO等國際組織 * 台灣被確認是美國印太戰略核心夥伴，公開邀請參加八月南海軍演 * 2016年共和黨首度將《六項保證》納入黨綱 * 《台北法案》: 內容涵蓋台灣對外關係、美台經貿關係和台灣參與國際組織，增強美台雙邊經貿關係，並要求美政府促進台灣國際參與 * 《2018年亞洲再保證倡議法》其中第209條款「對台灣之承諾」重申支持美國與台灣在政治、經濟及安全的合作，規定「美國總統應依來自中國之威脅而定期對台軍售」 * 《台灣旅行法》: 促進兩國高層交流 * 重啟台美FTA談判 * 美方加強參與台灣國艦國造 * 軍售台灣: 18枚MK-48 AT重型魚雷，66架F-16戰機，派里級巡防艦、AAV7兩棲突擊車、人攜刺針飛彈250枚、拖式2B型飛彈769枚、標槍飛彈及迅安系統後續支援，HARM反輻射飛彈50枚、聯合距外武器（JSOW）空對地飛彈56枚、MK48魚雷46枚、標準二型（SM-2）飛彈16枚、MK54輕型魚雷168枚、4艘紀德級驅逐艦AN /SLQ-32（V）3電戰系統性能提升、SRP偵蒐雷達後續維持、MK41垂直發射系統，C-130 運輸機、F-5 戰鬥機、經國號戰鬥機，M1A2T戰車、M88A2裝甲救濟車、M1070A1 重裝備運輸車、M1000 重裝備運輸板車、FIM-92刺針便攜式防空飛彈、122把M2重機槍、216把M240通用機槍 * 進行《台灣防衛法》的簽署: 確保美軍有能力保護台灣安全，包括評估採取有限核武來嚇阻中國 **8. 香港** * 制裁傷害香港自治的中港官員，包括: 中共政治局常委，負責港澳事務的韓正，加速中共高層內部的分裂 * 通過《香港人權與民主法》，撤銷香港特別待遇，包括禁止出口軍民兩用技術到香港 * 著手撤銷香港在引渡條例、出口管制、旅遊及獨立關稅區地位等領域所享有的特殊待遇 * 進行《香港自治法》的簽署: 對破壞香港自治的中港官員，凍結其在美資產，禁止入境美國；潛在制裁對象還首度包括國際金融機構，可導致中港銀行無法與美國銀行交易、不能使用美元結算，以打擊中港方資金鏈 **9. 新疆** * 2019年10月，美國宣布將28個打壓新疆穆斯林的中企列入黑名單 * 2020年5月，美國宣布將中國公安部法醫研究所和8家中企列入經濟黑名單，並將33個協助中國政府監控維族，或與中國解放軍及大規模殺傷性武器有關聯的企業、機構、個人列入黑名單 * 通過《2020 年維吾爾人權政策法案》，呼籲禁止在中國境內外對這些族群的任意拘留、酷刑和騷擾，將制裁監禁超過百萬穆斯林的中國官員，制裁手段包括：凍結中國有關官員的在美財產、拒絶他們入境、拒發或取消簽證 **10. 媒體:** * 今年2月，美國已將新華社、中國環球電視網（CGTN）、中國國際廣播電台（CRI）、《中國日報》發行公司，以及《人民日報》發行商美國海天發展公司列為外國使團 * 今年3月，美國要求削減60位中國籍記者 * 今年4月，白宮史無前例地批評美國之音為中國政府做宣傳。新任執行長在6月初通過國會核准，原本貝內特（Amanda Bennet）在內多名美國之音高管宣佈辭職 * 今年5月，美國限制中國籍記者簽證90天 * 今年5月，川普與推特等社群媒體槓上，怒斥打壓言論自由 * 今年7月，新增4家中共官媒為外國使團，包括: 中央電視台（CCTV）、中國新聞社（中新社）、《人民日報》和《環球時報》，從此需向美國國務院提供在美員工的名單及他們在美租賃或持有的房地產清單 **11. 疫情前，2019年底的美國經濟表現** * 失業率維持在 3.5%，創 1969 年以來新低 * 執政 3 年美股飆逾 50%，高居歷屆總統第一 * 招聘人數的增加和工資的上漲推動了消費者支出，消費者支出占美國經濟的三分之二以上 * 美國是2019年G7唯一經濟增速將超過2%的國家 * 至2019年12月，美國經濟已連續第126個月持續增長，是有記錄以來最長的經濟增長期 * 美國股市的總市值攀升至創紀錄，1.5倍於其GDP * 強勁的美國經濟在2019年繼續吸引來自世界各地的投資，使美元匯率升至歷史新高 **12. 國際組織** * 川普大聲譴責目前「過於以中國為中心」的國際機構，包括WHO等 * 以行動退出世衛及拒絕提供資金後，世衛終於在6月30日承認中國並非第一個告知疫情，也就是中共違反世界衛生條例，並沒有在24小時內告知世衛，也代表全球都有法源依據跟中共求償 * 川普政府的國家安全小組甚至在考慮建立一個全新的國際衛生組織，以使美國能擁有更大影響 * WTO秘書長突然在今年5月辭職 * 川普表示: 聯合國是一個過時的組織。暗示應成立一個以民主自由國家，有共同價值觀為前提的組織，並開始邀請各國參加G11 What did Trump do that the former presidents did not do? 1. Making  Anti-CCP a consensus in the United States: * Formally and publicly acknowledged the mistakes of the China policy over the past few decades, separated China from CCP, and regarded China led by CCP as a dictatorship, different from democracy countries 2. Making  Anti-CCP a consensus in the democratic and free nations: * Appealed the democratic and free nations to stand together against CCP. Western countries is forced by CCP to choose side between persistence in freedom and acceptance of Beijing’s bully tactics, between value and economic incentives. * In this epidemic, told us the fact that it’s because of the CCP’s deliberate concealment, more than 10 million people have been infected, more than 500,000 people have died, more than 400 million full-time jobs have disappeared, and our lifestyle is forced to  be changed. * Pointed out the importance of religious freedom and awakened us the differences between us and the CCP. CCP is a regime that oppresses her people’s religious freedom. Western democracies should not forget our insistence on freedom and beliefs 3. Cut off the sources of CCP funds: * Carried out trade wars,  raised tariffs, forced the companies and the investment to move out of China * Provided preferential measures to assist US companies to move out of China * Passed a bill that would prevent companies that refuse to open their books from listing on Wall Street. This move is aimed to kick deceitful Chinese companies off US exchanges. * Restrict the flow of funds through Hong Kong * Directed federal pension fund to halt investments in Chinese stocks * Imposed tariff sanctions on Chinese fake products * Passed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act to require the imposition of sanctions on foreign individuals and banks that participate in China’s oppression of Hong Kong 4. Cut off the sources of high-tech technology and knowledge acquired by CCP, and eliminate the possibility of Made in China 2025: * Boycotted ZTE, Huawei, and the Chinese companies which are related to the CCP and the PLA * Block CCPs access to acquire the high-end chips * Arrested the scholars and scientists involved in the Thousand Talents Program, and publicly condemned the Chinese Embassy accused to lead this program in the US * Ordered a ban on issuing visas to the Chinese people, students and researchers with PLA background, in order to prevent Xi Jinpings military-civilian integration strategy from stealing US high technology * Signed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA): published a list of individuals or companies that steal US trade secrets, threaten national security or economic health; Penalize the companies that steal technology, including freezing their US assets; Prohibit U.S. citizens from trading with these companies and individuals...and so on. 5. 5G: * Barred American firms from selling tech and supplies to huawei without first obtaining a license to do so and restricted companies like TSMC, a Taiwan-based firm, from exporting computer chipsets and other key components to Huawei. * At the same time, warned the world that Huawei products will pose a risk to their national securities. Now, the tide is turning against Huawei, many countries have given up using Huawei equipments on their 5G instructure. * According to CNN, because of using huawei equipments, the Philippines power grid is under the full control of the Chinese government and could be shut off in time of conflict * Denied Google to use a direct connection between the US and Hong Kong, due to a significant risk to security 6. Indo-Pacific Strategy * The United States is no longer just complaining about the content of Chinas expansion, but rather a strong will to execute. Li Xianlong from Singapore stated publicly that he hopes that Washington will not force Singapore and ASEAN to choose sides in the United States and China. * The United States is deploying unprecedented military power in the Asia-Pacific region. Currently, the US military has 375,000 troops deployed in the Asia-Pacific region, accounting for 28% of the total US military strength, including 60% of naval ships, 55% of the army, and around 66% Marine Forces * During the eight-year term of the former President Obama, only carried out four freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea. However, Trump has carried out 22 times in the four years so far, which is 11 times that of Obama. 7. Taiwan * Ignoring CCP’s intimidation, the secretary of State Pompeo publically and officially called Tsai Ing-wen the President of Taiwan. Also, praised Taiwan’s contribution to democracy and freedom, and supported Taiwan’s accession to WHO and other international organizations * Publicly announced Taiwan is the core partner of the US-Indo-Pacific Plan, and openly invited Taiwan to participate in August Joint Navy Exercise in South China Sea * Reiterated the Six Guarantees for Taiwan in 2016 * Signed Taipei Act: It aims to increase the scope of US relations with Taiwan and encourage other nations and international organizations to strengthen their official and unofficial ties with this nation * Signed Asian Reassurance Initiative Act 2018 : It aims to support the close economic, political, and security relationship between Taiwan and the United States, to faithfully enforce all existing United States Government commitments to Taiwan,  to counter efforts to change the status quo and to support peaceful resolution acceptable to both sides of the Taiwan Strait, to conduct regular arms sales To Taiwan * Signed Taiwan Travel Law: It aims to encourage the travel of high level United States officials to Taiwan 8. Hong Kong * In May 27, 2020, announced by the Secretary of State under the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act that Hong Kong no longer enjoys sufficient autonomy in order to justify special treatment by the US * In May 28, 2020, announced that the United States would initiate the process of revoking Hong Kong’s favorable treatment under US law * In July 1st, 2020, passed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act. It’s aimed to provide for mandatory sanctions against individuals, entities and financial institutions in response to China’s National Security Law for Hong Kong. 9. Xinjiang * China has rounded up at least a million Uighurs in Xinjiang and imprisoned them in what it calls re-education camps. An investigation found that most of the detainees were imprisoned due to their religious practices and culture, rather than extremist behavior. * In October 2019, banned the import of products made by a firm in Xinjiang over its use of forced labor, also, blacklisted 28 Chinese entities for their role in the repression of Uighurs and issued visa restrictions on key Chinese officials * In May 2020, added 33 companies to the United States’ economic blacklist of Chinese companies with ties to China’s military. The Commerce Department explained the banning of these companies, claiming that they are “complicit in human rights violations and abuses committed in China’s campaign of repression, mass arbitrary detention, forced labor and high-technology surveillance against Uighurs, ethnic Kazakhs, and other members of Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region.” * In signed into a law an act authorizing sanctions against Chinese officials over the mass detention and surveillance of Uighur Muslims in Chinas western Xinjiang province. The new legislation is the most significant action by any country to punish China over its treatment of ethnic minorities. 10. Media: * In February, require five Chinese state-run media organizations to register their personnel and property with the U.S. government, granting them a designation akin to diplomatic entities.The five organizations affected are Xinhua News Agency; China Global Television Network, previously known as CCTV; China Radio International; the parent company of China Daily newspaper; and the parent company of The People’s Daily newspaper. All five meet the definitions of foreign missions under the Foreign Missions Act, according to the State Department. * In March, ordered several Chinese media organizations to dismiss 60 U.S.-based Chinese nationals * In May, reduced the length of work visas for journalists from China employed by non-U.S. media will be to a maximum of 90 days. Chinese reporters can apply for extensions, each one also limited to 90 days * In the end of May, after Trumps complained reminding, Twitter has flagged a tweet written in March by a Chinese government spokesman that the US military brought the novel Coronavirus to China, as the social media platform ramps up fact-checking of posts. * In July, announced that four more Chinese media organizations will be treated as foreign diplomatic missions, including: China Central Television (CCTV), China News Service (China News Service), People’s Daily, and Global Times. 11. Before the epidemic, the US economic performance at the end of 2019 * Unemployment rate remains at 3.5%, a new low since 1969 * During Trump’s three years in power, U.S. stocks soared by more than 50%, ranking first among successive presidents * Increased recruitment and rising wages have driven consumer spending, which  accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic output, and its health has helped the economy maintain a stretch of growth that is now in its 11th year. * In G7 in 2019, the United States is the only country with an economic growth rate of more than 2% * As of December 2019, the U.S. economy has expanded for a record 126 straight months, the longest time period in the country’s history according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. * The total market value of the US stock market climbed to a record, 1.5 times GDP * In 2019, the strong American economy attracts investment from all over the world,bringing the dollar exchange rate to a record high 12. International organizations * Loudly accused WHO of being very China-centric and withdrawn from the WHO by action and refusing to provide funds, the WHO finally admitted on June 30 that it was alerted by its own office in China, and not by China itself, to the first pneumonia cases in Wuhan. * Trump is even considering to establish a new international health organization to allow the United States to have greater influence * WTO Secretary-General suddenly resigned in May this year * Trump even called for reform of outdated United Nations, implying that an new UN organization should based on the common value as democracy and freedom. Hence, he is starting to invite more democratic countries into G7

Question 2

philippines military power黃之鋒 Joshua Wong 在Facebook 的評價

Accepted Answer

【「停止政治檢控抗爭者 不要再拖延公平公開的民主選舉」 聲援泰國抗爭者之團結聲明 #MBK39 │Statement of Solidarity for the Thai pro-democracy protestors and youth’s call for free and fair elections, Call for dropping of charges against #MBK39】 亞洲民主青年連線(NOYDA)是一個由亞洲不同國家的年輕民主運動領袖及基層組織者的網絡。是此發表聲明，是要聲援泰國被政治檢控的民39位主運動戰友，特別是我們的朋友Rangsiman Rome 和Sirawith Seritwat。 過去一星期，泰國爆發一連串的和平示威，抗議軍隊獨裁兵貪污，以及要求軍方恢復2014軍事政變後，一直拖延的公平公開選舉。 上月27日，示威者於曼谷MBK購物商場附近集會，實踐他們合法的表達自由和和平集會的權利，要求軍隊結束軍政府下台及停止拖延大選。39名示威者隨即被控2015年「公眾集會條例」第七條及「國會和平及秩序命令3/2015」，兩條法例分別禁止皇宮150米以內集會、及禁止五人以上集會。39名被捕者當中，有9位再被加控煽動罪。兩日前，市民再次在市內民主紀念碑出集會，重申軍政府下台和本年內舉行大選的訴求。集會後，Rangsiman Rome 及三位示威者被以他們曾參與兩年前反對修憲的行動為由，被警方拘留。 亞洲民主青年連線(NOYDA) 強烈譴責泰國軍政府打壓民主，及無視泰國憲法及國際法賦予市民和平集會及表達自由的權利，政治檢控和平示威者。我們要求泰國軍方及警方撤消MBK39人的控罪，並停止一切政治檢控。 我們聲援泰國的戰友要求泰國政府盡快舉行大選的訴求。大選應是公開公平的，不容軍方以任何形式，包括派出傀儡代議士參選，並保障泰國人民能實行自決的權利。 最後，我們希望向泰國的民主運動、泰國的市民，特別是年輕一代，送上我們的支持。作為年輕一代，我們將與你一起行動、一起發聲；我們共同克服困難，共同為真民主及公義而戰。【Statement of Solidarity for the Thai pro-democracy protestors and youth’s call for free and fair elections, Call for dropping of charges against #MBK39】 Please scroll down for other languages. 　 We, the Network of Young Democratic Asians (NOYDA), a collective of young pro-democracy leaders and grassroots activists from around Asia, express our solidarity with the pro-democracy activists and movement in Thailand, particularly our friends and comrades Rangsiman Rome and Sirawith Seritiwat together with the other 37 protestors composing the #MBK39. 　 In the last weeks, a series of peaceful protests have snowballed criticising the military junta for corruption, and calling for free and fair elections in Thailand. 　 Last 27 January, protesters gathered at the skywalk near MBK department store in Bangkok, Thailand, to urge the junta to step down and to stop postponing the elections. Shortly after, 39 activists were charged for this exercise of their freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, allegedly in violation of Article 7 of the 2015 Public Assembly Act, which forbids assembly within 150 meters of a royal site, and the National Council for Peace and Order’s (NCPO) Order 3/2015, which bans public gatherings of five people or more. Nine of them were charged with sedition. Again, on 10 February, a protest at Democracy Monument again called on for elections to be held this year and for the military government to step down. Soon after the protest, Rangsiman Rome, with three others, reported to and was detained by the police and military officials in light of an existing case against him and other pro-democracy activists two years ago, related to their Vote-No campaign and pamphleting during the referendum on the then proposed new Constitution.  　 We, in NOYDA, strongly condemn the Thai government’s suppression of democratic rights, and its prosecution of individuals who exercise their right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, which are enshrined both in the Thai Constitution and in international law. We call on the Thailand military and police officials to drop the charges against the #MBK39 and to cease its persecution of activists and the Thai people in their exercise of these rights.  　 We join the growing calls for the holding of free and fair elections as soon as possible, and for guarantees prohibiting the transfer of power to parties and individuals running on behalf of the military government, in order for the people to fully exercise and realise their right to self-determination. 　 Finally, we express our solidarity to the Thailand pro-democracy movement and the Thai people, especially the youth: we, the young generation, are not just the future, we are also here in the now. So we enjoin you to rise up and let your voices be heard now.  We are with you in your struggle. Your fight for genuine democracy and justice is ours as well. 　 #About #NOYDA Network of Young Democratic Asians (NOYDA) is an alliance of committed young individuals and activists in Asia, working to achieve a peaceful, equal, sustainable society through democratic process and people-oriented development. By confronting common challenges, we defend human rights, stand in solidarity with civil society and the oppressed in the region.  　 NOYDA founding members come from ten Asian states, including Burma, China, Hong Kong, Japan, Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Tibet and Vietnam. 「停止政治檢控抗爭者 不要再拖延公平公開的民主選舉」 聲援泰國抗爭者之團結聲明  亞洲民主青年連線(NOYDA)是一個由亞洲不同國家的年輕民主運動領袖及基層組織者的網絡。是此發表聲明，是要聲援泰國被政治檢控的39位民主運動戰友，特別是我們的朋友Rangsiman Rome 和Sirawith Seritwat。 過去一星期，泰國爆發一連串的和平示威，抗議軍隊獨裁兵貪污，以及要求軍方恢復2014軍事政變後，一直拖延的公平公開選舉。 上月27日，示威者於曼谷MBK購物商場附近集會，實踐他們合法的表達自由和和平集會的權利，要求軍隊結束軍政府下台及停止拖延大選。39名示威者隨即被控2015年「公眾集會條例」第七條及「國會和平及秩序命令3/2015」，兩條法例分別禁止皇宮150米以內集會、及禁止五人以上集會。39名被捕者當中，有9位再被加控叛亂罪。兩日前，市民再次在市內民主紀念碑出集會，重申軍政府下台和本年內舉行大選的訴求。集會後，Rangsiman Rome 及三位示威者被以他們曾參與兩年前反對修憲的行動為由，被警方拘留。 亞洲民主青年連線(NOYDA) 強烈譴責泰國軍政府打壓民主，及無視泰國憲法及國際法賦予市民和平集會及表達自由的權利，政治檢控和平示威者。我們要求泰國軍方及警方撤消MBK39人的控罪，並停止一切政治檢控。 我們聲援泰國的戰友要求泰國政府盡快舉行大選的訴求。大選應是公開公平的，不容軍方以任何形式，包括派出傀儡代議士參選，並保障泰國人民能實行自決的權利。 最後，我們希望向泰國的民主運動、泰國的市民，特別是年輕一代，送上我們的支持。作為年輕一代，我們將與你一起行動、一起發聲；我們共同克服困難，共同為真民主及公義而戰。

Question 3

philippines military powerNasser Amparna Funpage 在Facebook 的評價

Accepted Answer

A GOOD READ from one of the greatest leader that lived, #SINGAPORE's founding man, #LeeKuanYew

THIS MUST BE SHARED AND THOROUGHLY READ BY EVERY FILIPINO... Its quite long but it will surely strengthen our minds but then at the end, I was like "SAYANG!!!"
It came from the SINGAPORE'S FOUNDING MAN ITSELF, former Prime Minister LEE KUAN YEW on how the Philippines should have become, IF ONLY...

I've just read it and, its point blank!
Its a good read
____________

(The following excerpt is taken from pages 299 – 305 from Lee Kuan Yew’s book “From Third World to First”, Chapter 18 “Building Ties with Thailand, the Philippines, and Brunei”)

*

The Philippines was a world apart from us, running a different style of politics and government under an American military umbrella. It was not until January 1974 that I visited President Marcos in Manila. When my Singapore Airlines plane flew into Philippine airspace, a small squadron of Philippine Air Force jet fighters escorted it to Manila Airport. There Marcos received me in great style – the Filipino way. I was put up at the guest wing of Malacañang Palace in lavishly furnished rooms, valuable objects of art bought in Europe strewn all over. Our hosts were gracious, extravagant in hospitality, flamboyant. Over a thousand miles of water separated us. There was no friction and little trade. We played golf, talked about the future of ASEAN, and promised to keep in touch.

His foreign minister, Carlos P. Romulo, was a small man of about five feet some 20 years my senior, with a ready wit and a self-deprecating manner about his size and other limitations. Romulo had a good sense of humor, an eloquent tongue, and a sharp pen, and was an excellent dinner companion because he was a wonderful raconteur, with a vast repertoire of anecdotes and witticisms. He did not hide his great admiration for the Americans. One of his favourite stories was about his return to the Philippines with General MacArthur. As MacArthur waded ashore at Leyte, the water reached his knees but came up to Romulo’s chest and he had to swim ashore. His good standing with ASEAN leaders and with Americans increased the prestige of the Marcos administration. Marcos had in Romulo a man of honor and integrity who helped give a gloss of respectability to his regime as it fell into disrepute in the 1980s.

In Bali in 1976, at the first ASEAN summit held after the fall of Saigon, I found Marcos keen to push for greater economic cooperation in ASEAN. But we could not go faster than the others. To set the pace, Marcos and I agreed to implement a bilateral Philippines-Singapore across-the-board 10 percent reduction of existing tariffs on all products and to promote intra-ASEAN trade. We also agreed to lay a Philippines-Singapore submarine cable. I was to discover that for him, the communiqué was the accomplishment itself; its implementation was secondary, an extra to be discussed at another conference.

We met every two to three years. He once took me on a tour of his library at Malacañang, its shelves filled with bound volumes of newspapers reporting his activities over the years since he first stood for elections. There were encyclopedia-size volumes on the history and culture of the Philippines with his name as the author. His campaign medals as an anti-Japanese guerrilla leader were displayed in glass cupboards. He was the undisputed boss of all Filipinos. Imelda, his wife, had a penchant for luxury and opulence. When they visited Singapore before the Bali summit they came in stye in two DC8’s, his and hers.

Marcos did not consider China a threat for the immediate future, unlike Japan. He did not rule out the possibility of an aggressive Japan, if circumstances changed. He had memories of the horrors the Imperial Army had inflicted on Manila. We had strongly divergent views on the Vietnamese invasion and occupation of Cambodia. While he, pro forma, condemned the Vietnamese occupation, he did not consider it a danger to the Philippines. There was the South China Sea separating them and the American navy guaranteed their security. As a result, Marcos was not active on the Cambodian question. Moreover, he was to become preoccupied with the deteriorating security in his country.

Marcos, ruling under martial law, had detained opposition leader Benigno (Ninoy) Aquino, reputed to be as charismatic and powerful a campaigner as he was. He freed Aquino and allowed him to go to the United States. As the economic situation in the Philippines deteriorated, Aquino announced his decision to return. Mrs. Marcos issued several veiled warnings. When the plane arrived at Manila Airport from Taipei in August 1983, he was shot as he descended from the aircraft. A whole posse of foreign correspondents with television camera crews accompanying him on the aircraft was not enough protection.

International outrage over the killing resulted in foreign banks stopping all loans to the Philippines, which owed over US$25 billion and could not pay the interest due. This brought Marcos to the crunch. He sent his minister for trade and industry, Bobby Ongpin, to ask me for a loan of US$300-500 million to meet the interest payments. I looked him straight in the eye and said, “We will never see that money back.” Moreover, I added, everyone knew that Marcos was seriously ill and under constant medication for a wasting disease. What was needed was a strong, healthy leader, not more loans.

Shortly afterward, in February 1984, Marcos met me in Brunei at the sultanate’s independence celebrations. He had undergone a dramatic physical change. Although less puffy than he had appeared on television, his complexion was dark as if he had been out in the sun. He was breathing hard as he spoke, his voice was soft, eyes bleary, and hair thinning. He looked most unhealthy. An ambulance with all the necessary equipment and a team of Filipino doctors were on standby outside his guest bungalow. Marcos spent much of the time giving me a most improbable story of how Aquino had been shot.

As soon as all our aides left, I went straight to the point, that no bank was going to lend him any money. They wanted to know who was going to succeed him if anything were to happen to him; all the bankers could see that he no longer looked healthy. Singapore banks had lent US$8 billion of the US$25 billion owing. The hard fact was they were not likely to get repayment for some 20 years. He countered that it would be only eight years. I said the bankers wanted to see a strong leader in the Philippines who could restore stability, and the Americans hoped the election in May would throw up someone who could be such a leader. I asked whom he would nominate for the election. He said Prime Minister Cesar Virata. I was blunt. Virata was a nonstarter, a first-class administrator but no political leader; further, his most politically astute colleague, defense minister Juan Ponce Enrile, was out of favour. Marcos was silent, then he admitted that succession was the nub of the problem. If he could find a successor, there would be a solution. As I left, he said, “You are a true friend.” I did not understand him. It was a strange meeting.

With medical care, Marcos dragged on. Cesar Virata met me in Singapore in January the following year. He was completely guileless, a political innocent. He said that Mrs. Imelda Marcos was likely to be nominated as the presidential candidate. I asked how that could be when there were other weighty candidates, including Juan Ponce Enrile and Blas Ople, the labor minister. Virata replied it had to do with “flow of money; she would have more money than other candidates to pay for the votes needed for nomination by the party and to win the election. He added that if she were the candidate, the opposition would put up Mrs. Cory Aquino and work up the people’s feelings. He said the economy was going down with no political stability.

The denouement came in February 1986 when Marcos held presidential elections which he claimed he won. Cory Aquino, the opposition candidate, disputed this and launched a civil disobedience campaign. Defense Minister Juan Enrile defected and admitted election fraud had taken place, and the head of the Philippine constabulary, Lieutenant General Fidel Ramos, joined him. A massive show of “people power” in the streets of Manila led to a spectacular overthrow of a dictatorship. The final indignity was on 25 February 1986, when Marcos and his wife fled in U.S. Air Force helicopters from Malacañang Palace to Clark Air Base and were flown to Hawaii. This Hollywood-style melodrama could only have happened in the Philippines.

Mrs. Aquino was sworn in as president amid jubilation. I had hopes that this honest, God-fearing woman would help regain confidence for the Philippines and get the country back on track. I visited her that June, three months after the event. She was a sincere, devout Catholic who wanted to do her best for her country by carrying out what she believed her husband would have done had he been alive, namely, restore democracy to the Philippines. Democracy would then solve their economic and social problems. At dinner, Mrs. Aquino seated the chairman of the constitutional commission, Chief Justice Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, next to me. I asked the learned lady what lessons her commission had learned from the experience of the last 40 years since independence in 1946 would guide her in drafting the constitution. She answered without hesitation, “We will not have any reservations or limitations on our democracy. We must make sure that no dictator can ever emerge to subvert the constitution.” Was there no incompatibility of the American-type separation of powers with the culture and habits of the Filipino people that had caused problems for the presidents before Marcos? Apparently none.

Endless attempted coups added to Mrs. Aquino’s problems. The army and the constabulary had been politicized. Before the ASEAN summit in December 1987, a coup was threatened. Without President Suharto’s firm support the summit would have been postponed and confidence in Aquino’s government undermined. The Philippine government agreed that the responsibility for security should be shared between them and the other ASEAN governments, in particular the Indonesian government. General Benny Moerdani, President Suharto’s trusted aide, took charge. He positioned an Indonesian warship in the middle of Manila Bay with helicopters and a commando team ready to rescue the ASEAN heads of government if there should be a coup attempt during the summit. I was included in their rescue plans. I wondered if such a rescue could work but decided to go along with the arrangements, hoping that the show of force would scare off the coup leaders. We were all confined to the Philippine Plaza Hotel by the seafront facing Manila Bay where we could see the Indonesian warship at anchor. The hotel was completely sealed off and guarded. The summit went off without any mishap. We all hoped that this show of united support for Mrs. Aquino’s government at a time when there were many attempts to destabilize it would calm the situation.

It made no difference. There were more coup attempts, discouraging investments badly needed to create jobs. This was a pity because they had so many able people, educated in the Philippines and the United States. Their workers were English-speaking, at least in Manila. There was no reason why the Philippines should not have been one of the more successful of the ASEAN countries. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was the most developed, because America had been generous in rehabilitating the country after the war. Something was missing, a gel to hold society together. The people at the top, the elite mestizos, had the same detached attitude to the native peasants as the mestizos in their haciendas in Latin America had toward their peons. They were two different societies: Those at the top lived a life of extreme luxury and comfort while the peasants scraped a living, and in the Philippines it was a hard living. They had no land but worked on sugar and coconut plantations.They had many children because the church discouraged birth control. The result was increasing poverty.

It was obvious that the Philippines would never take off unless there was substantial aid from the United States. George Shultz, the secretary of state, was sympathetic and wanted to help but made clear to me that the United States would be better able to do something if ASEAN showed support by making its contribution. The United States was reluctant to go it alone and adopt the Philippines as its special problem. Shultz wanted ASEAN to play a more prominent role to make it easier for the president to get the necessary votes in Congress. I persuaded Shultz to get the aid project off the ground in 1988, before President Reagan’s second term of office ended. He did. There were two meetings for a Multilateral Assistance Initiative (Philippines Assistance Programme): The first in Tokyo in 1989 brought US$3.5 billion in pledges, and the second in Hong Kong in 1991, under the Bush administration, yielded US$14 billion in pledges. But instability in the Philippines did not abate. This made donors hesitant and delayed the implementation of projects.

Mrs. Aquino’s successor, Fidel Ramos, whom she had backed, was more practical and established greater stability. In November 1992, I visited him. In a speech to the 18th Philippine Business Conference, I said, “I do not believe democracy necessarily leads to development. I believe what a country needs to develop is discipline more than democracy.” In private, President Ramos said he agreed with me that British parliamentary-type constitutions worked better because the majority party in the legislature was also the government. Publicly, Ramos had to differ.

He knew well the difficulties of trying to govern with strict American-style separation of powers. The senate had already defeated Mrs. Aquino’s proposal to retain the American bases. The Philippines had a rambunctious press but it did not check corruption. Individual press reporters could be bought, as could many judges. Something had gone seriously wrong. Millions of Filipino men and women had to leave their country for jobs abroad beneath their level of education. Filipino professionals whom we recruited to work in Singapore are as good as our own. Indeed, their architects, artists, and musicians are more artistic and creative than ours. Hundreds of thousands of them have left for Hawaii and for the American mainland. It is a problem the solution to which has not been made easier by the workings of a Philippine version of the American constitution.

The difference lies in the culture of the Filipino people. It is a soft, forgiving culture. Only in the Philippines could a leader like Ferdinand Marcos, who pillaged his country for over 20 years, still be considered for a national burial. Insignificant amounts of the loot have been recovered, yet his wife and children were allowed to return and engage in politics. They supported the winning presidential and congressional candidates with their considerable resources and reappeared in the political and social limelight after the 1998 election that returned President Joseph Estrada. General Fabian Ver, Marcos’s commander-in-chief who had been in charge of security when Aquino was assassinated, had fled the Philippines together with Marcos in 1986. When he died in Bangkok, the Estrada government gave the general military honors at his burial. One Filipino newspaper, Today, wrote on 22 November 1998, “Ver, Marcos and the rest of the official family plunged the country into two decades of lies, torture, and plunder. Over the next decade, Marcos’s cronies and immediate family would tiptoe back into the country, one by one – always to the public’s revulsion and disgust, though they showed that there was nothing that hidden money and thick hides could not withstand.” Some Filipinos write and speak with passion. If they could get their elite to share their sentiments and act, what could they not have achieved?

-----

SAYANG! kindly share.

關於 philippines military power ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

「philippines military power」的推薦目錄：

philippines military power 在 粘拔的幸福碎碎念 Facebook 的最佳貼文

About author

philippines military power 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳解答

About author

philippines military power 在 Nasser Amparna Funpage Facebook 的最讚貼文

About author

philippines military power 在 DrTech Youtube 的精選貼文

About author

你可能也想看看

搜尋相關連結

philippines military power 在粘拔的幸福碎碎念 Facebook 的最佳貼文

philippines military power 在黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳解答