WITH the well-publicised filing of a complaint at the International Criminal Court (ICC) by former Ombudsman Conchita-Carpio Morales and ex-DFA secretary, Albert del Rosario, against Pres. Xi Jin Ping of China, my advice to you, dear readers is simply this: Don’t be fooled by it.
I mean, don’t be fooled into believing that high as their stature are, Morales and del Rosario, were motivated by “patriotism” and their “sincere concern” for our patrimony in general and, our fishermen at the West Philippine Sea, for what they did.
The ugly fact of the matter is that, their doing so remains part of a continuing grand design by imperialist quarters to throw a monkey wrench in the continuously improving relationship between China and the Philippines under Pres. Duterte.
Their “coming out” too, also showed the fast thinning number of Filipinos still willing to play the puppet for their evil designs against our government. I mean, why would Morales and del Rosario risk sticking their necks out -- and their reputations too -- in agreeing to file that ‘dead-on-the-water’ complaint if there are still other lesser traitors among their ranks, aber?
Significantly, last March 24, in an interview by ANC of ABS-CBN, an American, Anders Corr, had urged Filipinos to “flood China with lawsuits,” as he hailed the filing by Morales and del Rosario of the ICC complaint several days previously, or last March 15.
The Phil-BRICS Strategic Studies, a Filipino geopolitical think tank led by NPC member, Herman Tiu ‘Ka Mentong Laurel, had exposed Anders Corr as a U.S. military psy-war operator:
“He (Anders Corr) led the US Army Social Science Research and Analysis group in Afghanistan which oversaw... 44 survey project and conducted quantitative predictive analysis... conducted analysis at US Pacific Command (USPACOM) and US Special Operations Command Pacific (SOCPAC) ... in the Philippines... conducted .. modelling and simulation for the Defense Department ... worked on social networking...”
This guy, therefore, is a ‘dyed-in-the wool’ Cold War warrior, dear readers. Was he the one really “calling the shots” in this ICC case?
In that interview, he was smart enough not to admit that the complaint versus Pres. Xi Jin Ping cannot possibly succeed. So what was it all about?
“Bringing these lawsuits have more than legal impact. It has a public relations impact. It brings the attention of the Philippine community and also the world community to bear on China. It takes China to the court of public opinion..,” Corr declared.
Ah, there it is, dear readers. The whole point of the exercise is not to win but, simply to “propagandise” against China and to what I stated earlier -- throw a monkey wrench on the now healthy relationship between our country and China by dividing the Filipinos’ opinion.
But another well-known international analyst -- of the more objective type -- Dan Steinbock of ‘Difference Group,’ warned us that the real intent of bringing up a complaint before the ICC is to destabilize any country, citing the experience of Kenya in 2010 (the ‘Uhuru Blueprint’).
“In 2010, then-ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo charged then-Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, along with five other government leaders, as an indirect co-perpetrator in the violence that followed Kenya’s 2007-2008 post-election violence. Ocampo accused them of ‘crimes against humanity.’
Now, if the charge against Uhuru by the ICC sounds familiar to you, dear readers, it is because this is also the accusation -- crimes against humanity -- that Morales and del Rosario had raised at the ICC against the Chinese leader.
“Despite the ICC process, Uhuru was elected Kenya’s president in 2013. He is a popular politician and the son of the legendary anti-colonial leader Jomo Kenyatta. However, the opposition led by Raila Odinga hoped to benefit from his demise.
“And yet, after a three-year juridical chaos, the ICC charges were dropped in March 2015 for lack of evidence.
“The Uhuru case undermined the ICC’s credibility… It also cost Kenya as the ICC’s lingering process began to penalize the perceived legitimacy of Kenya’s political leadership.
“When Uhuru served as deputy PM, Kenya’s growth surged to more than 10 percent in the early 2010s.
“During the ICC debacle, it more than halved to 4 percent in 2012 stabilizing thereafter at a lower level. Concurrently, the Kenyan shilling weakened from 80 to more than 100 to the US dollar, plunging more than 25 percent.
“Several ICC cases suggest a similar sequence: First, the target country enjoys promising development. (But then) political destabilization (thru the complaint filed at the ICC) ensues in the name of ‘people power.’”
“Financial speculation penalizes economic growth and currency stability, causing capital outflows. If new leaders take over, privatization of public assets tends to follow. Development potential weakens.”
Translation? “Humihina” ang mga bansa na may usapin sa ICC dahil ginagamit ang usapin ng ‘political legitimacy’ laban sa mga bansang ito.
With China’s economy able to weather any ‘disturbances’ that these global institutions of destabilisation can throw its way, who do you think would end up suffering and bearing the brunt of the political turmoil arising from this ICC case?
You got it right, dear readers. None other than you and me. Tayong mga Pilipino.
Pres. Duterte is right in telling China that the complaint by Morales and del Rosario is their private affair and that, being a democracy, no one can stop imperialist puppets from filing lawsuits left and right against whomever they fancy.
But heck, their acts are already bordering on treason. And treason— betraying your country and its interests on behalf of an alien power— must be punished very severely. Abangan!