DEALING with Manila can be trying, cables released by WikiLeaks last week indicated, with the American embassy in Manila pointing to politics and policy changes as complicating negotiations.
A July 24, 2009 report, for example, noted that Tokyo had pointed out the need for “political will” to address non-tariff barriers and investment restrictions if maximum benefits were to be realized from the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA).
“[T]he lengthy, tedious, and controversial process that Japan went through to negotiate a free trade agreement with the Philippines (i.e., nearly seven years from inception to ratification for JPEPA) … reinforce the difficulty in concluding trade agreements with the Philippines until they take more concrete and convincing steps to demonstrate a commitment to market-oriented reforms,” the US Embassy commented.
The document also referred to the United States’ “experience with the bilateral Trade and Investment Framework Agreement [signed in November 1989 that] confirms that pushing for reforms here can be a protracted and difficult process.”
An earlier document dated Sept. 15, 2008, meanwhile, noted that while “narrow ratification” of the JPEPA seemed certain, the burden of pushing the deal lay with senators Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Manuel A. Roxas II.
“With half the Senate up for reelection in 2010, and several senators organizing presidential runs, nationalist electoral politics are already overshadowing the debate on the economic merits” of the trade deal, it states.
Another 2008 cable focused on senators berating foreign businessmen for opposing amendments to the Electric Power Industry Reform Act.
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile was said to have labeled members of the Joint Foreign Chambers as “carpetbaggers, predators, and buccaneers”, telling them to “get out of this country if you can’t live with us.”
It noted that Mr. Enrile’s criticism may have backfired on him as it contrasted with the Filipino custom of welcoming guests, and also cited analysts’ observations that it may have been tied with the JFC’s anti-smuggling efforts — representatives had recently met with the legislator’s son, who runs an auto import operation in the province of Cagayan.
A 2005 cable, meanwhile, focused on Kraft Foods Philippines, Inc.’s frustration over tariffs on imported powdered beverages. It noted that the protracted dispute “illustrates two common problems with conducting business in the Philippines: lack of transparency and lengthy judicial processes.”
The local Kraft unit, said to be Kraft Foods’ biggest investment in Southeast Asia, was noted to be exasperated enough to consider moving out of the Philippines.
A more recent cable issued on December 2, 2009, meanwhile, cited Philippine officials’ changing initially held positions on greenhouse gas emissions ahead of that year’s Copenhagen climate change summit.
Then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was said to have told US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack that she preferred workable, binding emission targets, a change from the initial call for deep and early cuts.
Philippine lead negotiator Heherson T. Alvarez was also said to have pushed for “all the big boys, including China, [to accept] binding emission cuts” for real progress on climate change mitigation.
“Recent statements by President Arroyo and Climate Change Advisor Alvarez indicate a welcome moderation of the GRP (Government of the Republic of the Philippines) climate change position. Questions remain as to whether this view will manifest itself as a consistent negotiating position in Copenhagen,” the cable states.
It also questioned the role of environmental adviser Bernarditas de Castro Muller who was also a lead negotiator of the G-77 group of developing countries.
==============================================================================
By: EJD, LDD and FJGDLF
Source: Business World, Aug. 29, 2011
To view the original article, click here.
Comment here