By withdrawing from Iraq, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has kissed goodbye any reputation she had as Asia's "iron lady," but her strong bond with Washington seems unlikely to unravel as a result.
Despite harsh criticism from the US and talk of a rift in relations, analysts said Washington needs the Philippine government to keep up the pressure on Muslim militants in the country's lawless south, some of them linked to al-Qaeda.
Still, the price she is willing to pay to win the release of truck driver Angelo de la Cruz may rise if, as some predict, the pull-out undermines her credibility in fighting insurgents in Manila's own back-yard or prompts Washington to cut vital aid.
Neither does the withdrawal inspire confidence that the US-trained economist will use her second term won in May 10 elections to take the tough, unpopular decisions needed to wean the country off debt dependency and reform its feeble economy.
"I think everyone perceives her now as weak, vacillating and prone to cave in, which might be a little unfair given the circumstances," said Tom Green, executive director of the Pacific Strategies and Assessments (PSA) consultancy in Manila.
"Nevertheless, she's got a lot of ground to make up now," he said.
Arroyo, who styled herself as Asia's answer to Britain's "iron lady" -- former prime minister Margaret Thatcher -- after winning the presidency in 2001, has remained virtually silent during the crisis, leaving the talking to the foreign ministry.
The comparison with Thatcher already looked shaky after the devoutly Catholic Arroyo flip-flopped on whether the Philippines should have the death penalty and over her decision, later reversed, not to run for a second term as president.
But her ratings seem unlikely to be dented by the end of a deployment that was not particularly popular despite the country's long-standing ties with the US.
Securing de la Cruz's release should mean Arroyo will improve her chances of a smooth start to a new six-year term, which followed a bitter election overshadowed by opposition allegations of cheating.
"A decision to keep the Philippine contingent in Iraq is something the opposition would have loved," said Felipe Miranda, head of the Pulse Asia polling firm, whose surveys have shown most Filipinos opposed the Iraq deployment.
"It would have allowed them to mount a terrific campaign which could even unseat her. So I think President Arroyo from a purely political calculation point of view had no choice," he said.
Many politicians, both friends and rivals, have rallied around her in the face of criticism from Washington and others who have said Manila is now in the diplomatic dog house.
Despite US disappointment, analysts said it would not be in Washington's interest to punish Manila by cutting its hefty military aid to the country or reducing other forms of support.
"I expect [Washington] DC will get over this thing fairly quickly because the fact is they still need a lot of cooperation from the Philippines in the war on terrorism," Green said.
The US is giving more than $100 million in aid over five years to the Philippine military, whose lack of training and equipment has hampered attempts to find Muslim militants suspected of being sheltered by the home-grown Moro Islamic Liberation Front insurgency in southern Mindanao.
"For a time, I think there could be a certain cooling of the Uncle Sam relationship, but how long that lasts, one doesn't know," said one diplomat in Manila.
"I know the Americans believe the Philippines is a bit of a burden, but they've got them whether they like it or not. I don't think they're going to give them up but there could be a slowing in the assistance that's coming forward," he added.
The Abu Sayyaf group based in the south has made a speciality of kidnapping in recent years and could find grounds for encouragement in Arroyo's policy of appeasement, said Matt Williams, another analyst at PSA.
"The question is in the future what happens when someone gets nabbed in Zamboanga or Basilan and the ASG [Abu Sayyaf] demands something from the Philippine government," Williams said, referring to a city in Mindanao and a nearby island.
Swirling within the cybersphere’s vast ocean of reports, statistics and graphs about the international coronavirus pandemic, there is a short sentence out there in the worldwide web, which the Chinese government doesn’t want people to notice. It is on the Johns Hopkins University website “https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html” which houses the popular “live map” of Wuhan coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) data from individual countries. That sentence reads: “The map’s names of locations correspond with the official designations used by the US State Department, including for Taiwan.” Most readers may think this merely is an unremarkable footnote, akin to other source data on the site. But
On March 6, China announced through Hong Kong’s Chinese-language Ming Pao that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) would visit Wuhan “soon.” On the same day, US-based Chinese-language IPK Media published an article by Chinese tycoon Ren Zhiqiang (任志強), with the headline: “An official call to arms against Xi: The clown who insists on wearing the emperor’s new clothes.” Will the truth about the struggles inside the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the wake of the COVID-19 outbreak finally be revealed? Ren’s article is reminiscent of Tang Dynasty poet Luo Binwang’s (駱賓王) “An official call to arms against Empress Wu Zetian (武則天)
Recent global media coverage of Taiwan has at times reduced the nation’s success in containing the spread of COVID-19 to some East Asian values such as cooperation with social control or Confucianism. An article in Wired magazine debunks this myth, crediting the nation’s success to democracy and transparency. It is appalling to learn that this misconception still exists. Here is one thing that world citizens should keep in mind: Taiwan is the first and only country in Asia that has legalized same-sex marriage. There is nothing Confucian about that. If anything, the Confucian legacy is a major obstacle that Taiwanese
The novel coronavirus known as COVID-19 — or the Wuhan virus, after the Chinese city from which it emerged — could not have come at a more advantageous time for China’s communist government. Not for the Chinese people, of course, thousands of whom have perished because of Beijing’s lack of transparency, disinformation and cruel refusal to cooperate with international public health organizations. No, the advantage goes exclusively to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), whose deceptive practices unleashed the deadly virus to the world. To understand how Beijing benefits from the pandemic, it is necessary