Identifying Facts and Opinions

One can never give a fair and sound judgment unless he is able to determine a factual statement
from an opinionated one. One’s capacity to identify a fact from opinion is a significant means to write a fair
ad an intelligent reaction paper. Though it is really possible to combine facts from opinions when you write
a reaction paper, your ability to separate logically the facts from your views is something really important.

A statement of fact can be proven to be either true or false. It can be proven for accuracy through
observation or concrete references. It is never affected by the author’s personality, background or training.
Most of factual statements make use of statistics, numbers, dates, measurements and the like.

On the other hand, a statement of opinion expresses what the author believes or thinks. It cannot
be verified for accuracy because an author uses personal responses which cannot be proven true or false.
Similarly, an opinion is not always true and cannot be proven. It is generally affected by the writer’s
personality, background and training. It frequently uses comparisons using words such as more, better,
most, and least. Verbs and adverbs like seems, appears, looks, apparently, practically, probably,
potentially, and the like are commonly utilized in the construction. Remember that an opinion is not a false
statement.

Read the sample text below:

Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" Cojuangco Aquino III is a Filipino politician who served as the 15th
President of the Philippines from 2010 until 2016. Aquino is a fourth-generation politician and is the
chairman of the Liberal Party from 2010 to 2016. Born in Manila, Aquino finished his Bachelor of Arts (major
in economics) from Ateneo de Manila University in 1981 and joined his family in their exile in the United
States shortly thereafter.

On September 9, 2009, Aquino officially announced he would be a candidate in the 2010

presidential election and on June 30, 2010, at the Quirino Grandstand in Rizal Park, Manila. Aquino was
sworn into office as the fifteenth President of the Philippines, succeeding Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. As a
president, he gave many speeches and was perhaps the most eloquent president. He stepped down from
office on June 30, 2016.

Note that all sentences in the first paragraph can be verified either true or false upon checking
those using credible sources; hence, the all sentences in the first paragraph are factual statements. Also
remember that the tone of the paragraph is objective and straight to the point.

However, not all sentences in the second paragraph can be proven either true or false. The third
sentence is an opinion because it uses the writer’s belief and perception about the subject. The sentence
likewise uses the word “perhaps” which is a mere suggestion of things.
The following are examples of reviews.

Book Review: ‘The State, War and the State of War’

Source: https://locatingasia.wordpress.com/.

Author: Kalevi J. Holsti

Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Year of Publication: 1995

Introduction
In the academic world of today, it has become quite fashionable for a scholar to be immersed in
state-of-the art material; in fact, this has often been unduly valued over using dated literature. Using old
material always begs the question: “Are its claims still relevant?” or “Does the book speak to this present
time and context?” I have always opined that so-called outdated materials certainly remain ubiquitously
significant, at the very least, because they aid all epistemological inquiries. Notwithstanding how far we
have gone into the new discourses, yawning cognitive gaps will continue to shadow us, never allowing us
complete understanding unless we experience what have come before them.
It is not only for this principled attitude to learning that I delved into the 18-year-old book under review;
frankly, I was seduced by its title, a title that many I am sure would otherwise consider quite unembellished
and technically-straightforward. Being principally a graduate of Consular and Diplomatic Affairs before
embarking on being a Political Science scholar, my curiosity was sufficiently stimulated by the title’s implicit
suggestion that the ‘state’ has a causal relationship with ‘war’ and vice-versa.
What intensified my curiosity was the fact that the ‘state’, a central concept in the field of political
science, can also be used as analytical framework in explaining phenomena under the field international
studies such as war (or conflict studies); that no matter how we separate international studies from political
science as different academic disciplines, their academic
inquiry will certainly converge at some point of area
discussions. That there was the possibility I would understand,
even if only a little bit more, why and how the state has been
either creating or resolving war was all the incentive I needed.
It was also particularly significant that the book was
published in 1995, almost 5 decades after the Second World
War and 5 years after the Cold War where, wars were by
nature, wars between what have been known as Westphalian
States. War takes place due to either political or military
tension between states. The outcomes of the game depend
on the strategic utilization of weapons and how alliances are
arranged. There was an impression that this literature is nothing but a way of looking back at the traditional
sources and nature of war and thus theorizing what kind of war there will be in the future.
In light of all the foregoing, this review addresses itself to the following concerns: (i) How well does
the book provide a theoretical framework that helps clarify the role of state in war and vice-versa, (ii) How
consistent is the book in explaining the nature and sources of wars that took place in different era and (iii)
How useful its analytical framework in theorizing war vis-à-vis the current trends and issues in international
politics. This book review also evaluates the propositions of the author in terms of its applicability and
limitations in discussing the state, war and the state of war.

A Thematic Summary of the Chapters under Review

Theoretical Perspectives on War
As an introductory chapter, the author directly pointed out his main thesis by saying that new and
weak states are the primary locale of present and future wars. As noted, the book was published in the
post-Cold War years were alliances and alignments of states are shifting rapidly. As states slowly leave the
trail of bipolar system, power dynamics between them easily change and emerging powers start to be
recognized as important actors in international politics. The author seconded his main thesis my looking at
different country cases where ‘lack of legitimacy between rulers and their community over whom the rule’
serves as the main feature of a weak state in which he view as ‘a state prone to war’ he labeled as ‘third
kind’. Using the case of Rwanda, Sri Lanka and Somalia, the author presented his clear picture of a weak
state. It showed indeed that the author intends to visualize and favor a ‘strong state’ that is in contrast, has
less probability of war. Using Social Darwinist’s take on war, a weak state is subject to the question of its
legitimacy which is an important element of state. Therefore, as the book suggests, it must undergo a
process of gradual change to re-establish its sovereignty and or power and therefore regain legitimacy
either through revolutionary means or bureaucratic engineering. This can only be done however through
war-making which perceived to be crucial in state-building.
In the first chapter, the author provided various conceptualizations of war. Referring to post-1648
Europe, he thus explained war as a contest between states and their arms. States choose to take part in
war as it enables them to impose military and political terms on the defeated party. As evidently shown
during the First and Second World Wars, war was then a useful policy instrument to extend state powers
and to propagate their political ideology as in the case of United States as champion of democracy and
Soviet Union as exemplar of a socialist state. The author then formulated three types of war; first, second
and third kind.
War and its Kinds
The ‘wars of the first kind’ refers to tribal war which happened in the classical and medieval Europe.
War then is a political force of sovereigns to keep their territory and people under their subject intact. The
‘wars of the second kind’ however pertains to wars that took place during the first and second world wars.
Its main difference from the first kind is that is a contest of power through military force between and among
states. War is seen as a feasible strategy to win over new territories and attain regional dominance. Thus,
the author also emphasized that war has been also useful in state-making or state-creation. This was
evident during Nazi’s expansionism in Europe and the formation and maintenance of Soviet Union as a
political community of communist states composed of the mainland Russia and Eastern Europe. During
World War II, war was used as an instrument for struggle for power and again, regional dominance. Japan’s
aggressive behavior was then spurred by their intention to control Asia with their mantra ‘Asia for Asians’.
Lastly is the author’s theoretical contribution, ‘wars of the third kind’.

Holsti’s Theoretical Contribution: Wars of the Third Kind

Holsti’s ‘third kind’ or inter-state war is an attempt to provide a non-mainstream approach to the
study of war. For him, the post-1945 wars exist within states. Wars are no longer about foreign policy,
national security, honor or status but rather a contestation of power between the state and society. Credible
enough, K.J. Holsti as political scientist was able to bridge the gap between theorizations on war and the
state-society relations (although state-society relations debate was only given much attention by political
science scholars in the 20th century). The root of inter-state war can explained through state-society
relations. Using the concept of ‘state-strength dilemma’, the state is taken as independent variable in
explaining why inter-state war occurs in the society. One is due to issues surrounding statehood and two,
is governance. Statehood contributes to the strength or weakness of the state. Because of religious, cultural
and ethnic differences, it becomes challenging for the state to establish national identity as the author draws
on the premise that nationhood is prerequisite to statehood .
These challenges were classified as (1) wars of national liberation, (2) national unification, (3)
decolonization and (4) ideological or democracy versus socialism. These social mechanisms disable the
state to formalize and consolidate its institutions and laws. Social movements, cultural and ethnic groups,
rebel and terrorist groups and religious groups are mobilizing and thus contest state power because of
regime’s inability to unify social cleavages or differences. Moreover, Holsti posits that state-society relations
in terms of governance also contribute to the factors that may trigger inter-state wars. For him, weak states
characterize a weak foundation of bureaucracy whereas the state is becoming an apparatus of economic
and political elites. The elites penetrate the bureaucracy to maintain their political status and to ensure that
their economic interest will be sustained. Through this, there is less attention given to social service
provisioning. Wealth and power are concentrated to the ruling class thus this scenario creates social
divisions. Mass-base groups and other social forces question the ability of the state to provide sound
economic solutions that will answer poverty, unemployment, inflation etc. In effect, the society brings
animosity against the state and tries to spur rebellion, and therefore, inter-state conflicts or wars. He pointed
it clear that wars since 1945 are ‘armed combat not against another state but against authorities within state
or between armed communities ’.
 For Holsti, wars between and among sovereign states have ended and that he criticizes the alleged
inapplicability of the measures of United Nations in resolving the causes and outcomes of war. He argues
that UN Security Council’s measures cannot be used as instrument for inter-state wars that have been
occurring in weak states such as those in Africa, Asia and some parts of Eastern Europe brought about by
decolonization, economic crises, democratization, and liberation. While he recognizes and supports
humanitarian intervention, he also suggests a more comprehensive way of its implementation specifically
on matters concerning sovereignty, role of government and jurisdiction debates. Further, he warned that
weak states do not remain weak as it is. It is either weak state will re-engineer its bureaucracy and
consolidate itself into an impersonal image of power or it will resort to as becoming a failed state.

Theoretical Debate on Conflict Resolution: Does democracy bring peace?

Holsti’s skepticism on how international organizations practice conflict resolution incentivized my
curiosity on how he will present a consequent argument. If IOs are not effective and efficient enough, then
what other alternatives left to attain peace? Yet, instead of (just) narrowing his debates on inter-state wars,
his discussion on South American case showed his tendency to go back to the traditional/mainstream
discussion of war. He asserts that the transition of South America from ‘zone of war’ to ‘zone of peace’
debunked Kant’s proposition, ‘democracy brings peace’. While it is true that democracies may not go into
war with one another, Holsti affirms that these democratic regimes are the ones using coercive techniques
to avoid wars with democracies and non-democracies as in the case of (a) the joint American-British
destabilization of Mossadeq regime in Iran in 1951; (b) US subversion of a freely elected government in
Guatemala in 1954; (c) French armed intervention to sustain beleaguered military regimes in Africa against
popular movements; and the (d) American destabilization of the elected Allende government in Chile during
1972 to 1973. Further, Holsti also used South America as an example of a region composed of non-
democracies yet it was able to transform as zone of peace. It can be remembered that 1960s to 1980s is
the period of military junta in most of Latin American countries such as Chile, Argentina, Brazil, among
others.

The Future of International Politics

The author concluded his piece by acclaiming that scholars of international politics have
excessively focused on traditional security concerns. To date, he states that there is mountain of literatures
concerning the struggle for domination between and among global powers. Thus, theoretical devices
commonly used by scholars such as realism and neo-realism in studying war also failed how ‘war or power
dynamics affects weak states ’ as they only draw on traditional international issues; security, sovereignty,
domination and other geopolitical and geostrategic concerns. Holsti argues that it is evident that
international politics scholars still bear the ‘notion’ of Westphalian states as both theoretical and empirical
unit of analysis. In terms of international peace and security, he also argues that even international
organizations are blinded with ‘traditional security issues among Westphalian states’.
 In a normative sense, Holsti is pushing for a new approach in dealing with international political
issues; that there is a need for international politics to ‘shift from exclusive focus on the activities of the
great powers to a concern with what have traditionally been considered peripheral actors’ (weak and failed
states). Instead of heavily analyzing how power plays in Security Council decision-making process,
diplomats and academics must delve into how the organization will respond to the problems or threats
posed by weak and failed states. He then, used collective humanitarian intervention as an exemplar of a
mechanism feasible to the case of weak and failed states. However, he contemplates that there is a need
for more robust debates on how this must be properly implemented and how it will become more effective
alongside peace-making and peace-building strategies.

Conclusions
I would like to note that Professor Holsti provided a state-centric discussion on the ‘state of war’.
The impression his work gave me is that he successfully used the tools of comparative politics to explain
the strands of international politics, such as war. While he provided enough historical accounts in
international relations, his analysis is undoubtedly inward-looking. He sounded blunt in saying that
practitioners and academics of diplomacy should start looking at the internal causes of wars rather than
power arrangements in the international community. As I review his piece, Holsti seems to indirectly eroding
the entity of state as an individual actor in international politics. Instead, he emphasized the link between
the state and society. Thus, I would also like to point out that Holsti’s theorization on the causal relationship
between state and society is evidently applicable in analyzing both ‘wars of third kind’ and ‘wars of second
kind’.
The author’s state-strength dilemma is useful in theorizing how ‘internal matters’ affect directly or
indirectly state’s relationship with other states. Here, I want to use the case of the Philippines, specifically,
the case of Sabah Issue. Beyond analyses on power relations between the Philippines and Malaysia as
Westphalian states, one must look at the issue in deeper sense thus, considering internal factors that
contributed to the longevity of the issue. For instance, one factor is socio-cultural and economic whereas,
some ethnic groups and rebel groups try to push for their own claim over some parts of the territory as they
simultaneously contest the state through secessionism or to some extent, acts of terrorism. The recent
incident between the Sultanate of Sulu and Malaysian Armed Forces is indeed a manifestation that wars
can possibly arise internally, not power-centric, but rather, essentially ethnic/cultural.
On the other hand, Holsti’s masterpiece is also useful in theoretical discussions on traditional
security issues. North Korea’s recent aggression against South Korea and United States shows how
applicable is Holsti’s take on the relationship between domestic politics and foreign relations and thus
supports Kant’s premise that non-democracies go into war and democracies do not. As propounded by the
author, he claims that ‘ideological wars’ as his typology of war will continue to be a cause of all wars. In the
case at hand, it shows how the communist-democratic debate seems to be the dominant factor in on-going
conflicts in the Korean peninsula alongside economic, cultural and alliance issues.
 Movie Review: Big Hero 6

Introduction

The movie, “Big Hero “encapsulates the American and

Asian cultural differences and distinctiveness across borders.
Screen writers Robert L. Baird, Daniel Gerson and Jordan
Roberts have joined together the elements of manga, anime
and science fiction into something that really has tickled the
imagination and good taste of moviegoers. The computer-
animated project has also yielded to the downside faced by a
lot of other super heroes. A murky Marvel Comics, Big Hero 6, has provided raw material to assemble its
own superhero frnachise with innumerable robots in it, underlining the life of one, a balloon-bellied virtual
nurse named Baymax, who would always be remembered. Co-directors Don Hall and Chris Williams
borrowed the character names and a few key details from their source, but succeeded in putting a
thoroughly Disney twist on things, delivering good personalities, dazzling, playful animation, optimistic and
relatable life lessons and what looks like a world record for the complete amount of hugging featured in a
movie.

Body

The plot has been exposed in a set that is beautifully rendered in a futuristic amalgam city called
San Fransokyo — which combines familiar NorCal features, like steep hills, the Golden Gate Bridge and
the bay, with skyscrapers, neon signs and characteristically Japanese architectural flourishes.

“Big Hero 6” seems wonderfully color-blind by comparison, centering on a Japanese-American

lead, 14-year-old Hiro Hamada in a role that could have gone to a character of any race or gender. Hiro is
crazy-smart for a kid his age. He is an amateur inventor with a special interest in robotics. He graduated
from high school at 13 and now spent most of his time hustling bigger mecha at underground bot-fighting
competitions — a hobby that jumpstarts the high-energy story with a few “Real Steel”-style scenes early
on. Older brother Tadashi wished Hiro would pick something safer to occupy his time, arranging an
impromptu tour of the university science lab in hopes that the teen might be tempted to enroll. The four
inventors who worked alongside Tadashi in the school lab will soon join Hiro’s band of amateur crime-
fighters. These misfits include cycling junkie GoGo Tamago laser-blade innovator Wasabi ; chemical-
reactions specialist Honey Lemon; and Fred, a shaggy-haired weirdo obsessed with Godzilla and other
freak-of-nature phenomena. As a group, they come across less like the Avengers.
 Then who was the sixth member of the group? It was Baymax, a robotic Healthcare Companion.
Baymax was a helper robot, who provided assistance to the host or guest within his presence. He was an
inflatable white robot with his metal parts built from inside. They were only visible when one looks deep
inside through his inflatable vinyl material. Baymax's external structure resembled the appearance of a
cute, fluffy snowman, or, as Hiro called him, a big marshmallow. A small badge-shaped access port is
placed on the left side of his chest that can hold four cartridge chips to contain his programming.

One thing that interests me as a movie lover is how Big Hero 6 became very creative and
resourceful in creating their cast especially the character, Baymax. He’s a medical robot who’s built to serve
whoever needs his medical attention, and his ultra literal AI goes along with Hiro’s questions about his
brother’s death and the forming of the team because he felt it would stabilize Hiro’s new pubescent
tendencies. The relationship between Baymax and Hiro is the core of the heart of “Big Hero 6,” and their
interplay was woven beautifully with real emotional heft. So simple in design and appearance with his
stubby little feet but brought to convincing life through the efforts of the Disney animators and an admirable
vocal performance from Scott Adsit, Baymax’s functionality and deadpan Siri-esque literalism established
him as a reactionary and convincing portrayal of how AI of the future might actually act, along the lines of
2012’s underseen sci-fi gem “Robot and Frank.”

The movies ended Baymax being seen sticking along with Hiro as they hang out with Hiro's friends
and watch television with Cass and Mochi. Newspapers show the Big Hero 6 team performing heroic deeds
around the city and Baymax stopping a runaway cable car, saving its passengers. Baymax also attends a
ceremony of a building dedication in Tadashi's name alongside Hiro, his friends, Cass and Mochi.

Conclusion

While the film serves as a healing of sort for Hiro and Baymax, it’s also very much about the origin
of the supposed team. The team is refreshingly diverse. It has well-rounded personalities that extend
beyond mere stereotypes and their powers actually stem from their scientific interests. If “Big Hero 6” had
one problem, it would be that the lightheartedness of the screenplay, but it left me the urge of wanting to
see the movie again and again for the connectedness between Hiro and Baymax and some of the
characters has motivated me a lot in learning life lessons of friendship and family.

Play Review: A Contrary View of Miss Saigon

By Isagani Cruz
Accessed, May 2017. https://isaganicruz.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/a-contrary-view-of-miss-saigon/.

“It would be a rather irresponsible critic or reviewer,” wrote Fr. Nicasio Cruz, S.J., in his Reel World
on September 17, 1988, “who would analyze, say, Scorpio Nights, Ora Pro Nobis or Private Show solely
on aesthetic grounds, praising its undeniable (though limited) artistry, without making a further prudential
judgment about the possible moral dangers for the viewers.” As a critic and reviewer, I have no wish to
appear irresponsible. I shall, therefore, venture into a moral criticism of the much-publicized Miss Saigon.
There is no question about Lea Salonga’s achievement as the lead singer of this new musical at
the Theatre Royal Drury Lane near Covent Garden at the heart of London’s West End. She is brilliant as
the Vietnamese prostitute who falls in love with an American customer, bears his child, escapes to Bangkok
where she continues to ply her trade, and kills herself when he decides to stay with his American wife. She
is clearly the best singer in the whole ensemble, even besting Claire Moore (who plays the wife), who
starred in The Phantom of the Opera. Beside her, the male singers in the cast all look like neighborhood
favorites who failed to make it to the grand national finals of Ang Bagong Kampeon. Looking particularly
inept because he has to sing several songs with her is Simon Bowman (who plays the American customer
Chris), who starred in Les Miserables. Only male lead Jonathan Pryce (who plays The Engineer, a
Vietnamese pimp) gets the same kind of applause at the curtain call. The night I saw it (September 22,
1988), in fact, the loudest applause was reserved for Lea Salonga, who got a standing ovation.
“What a lovely voice,” I heard the British viewers saying after the show. “She is very good,” echoed
others. There were very few Filipinos in the Grand Circle that night (I was forced to buy an expensive ticket
because there was no other ticket left). It could not be said, therefore, that patriotic feelings clouded our
judgement. The cheering after the show for Lea was genuine aesthetic delight, brought about by her talent
for singing and acting. Let it not be said that I am taking away from her achievement, which has made her
an international theater star.
What bothers me about the production – and it has also bothered a number of British viewers and
reviewers, including our own Paul Woods who wrote his review for another newspaper – is the blatant
racism, sexism, and bigotry of the production.
First, the racism. All the Vietnamese and Thai characters in the story, whether played by Filipino,
Malaysian, Italian, French, Dutch, Japanese, American, or British performers, were the scum of the earth –
pimps, prostitutes, bar habitues, sadistic and mindless soldiers, anti-nationalist visa-hunters at embassies.
None of the Asian characters had any redeeming human qualities. Even The Engineer (played ingeniously
by Pryce) helps Kim (played by Lea Salonga) only because her child is his “passport to America.” In the
well-hyped production number “The American Dream,” where an enormous Cadillac slides into the stage
from the back, Pryce even dilutes the apparent satiric intent of the song by making it too subtle for the
American tourists in the audience.
In contrast to the bad guys who populate Asia, there are the good guys in the United States. In a
scene set in Atlanta, the Americans (played by all the nationalities I’ve cited) are portrayed as genuinely
concerned about the human rights of the children they have left behind. (Interestingly enough, they are not
concerned about the women the men left behind.) Chris’s friend John (played by Peter Polycarpou) is
portrayed as an all-around good guy, trying to find a way out for Chris while protecting his son. After all, the
son has American blood, making him “better” than the pure-blooded Vietnamese. Ellen the wife is so kind-
hearted that she even takes Kim’s son under her wing at the end of the show. What the writers try to satirize
in “The American Dream,” they forcefully lionize in the characterization. You can’t get more racist than that.
Sexism is something else. The first scene, meant aesthetically to establish the milieu, is actually
meant to titillate the men in the audience. The director and designers recreate the inside of our Ermita
joints. There is the raffle where the unlucky prostitute (“Miss Saigon”) is given to the lucky customer. There
is endless kissing and pawing, with our Filipina actresses getting effectively mauled on stage. There is the
baring of skin. In short, under the pretext that the prostitutes are sex objects for the customers, the show
manages to make the actresses sex objects for the audience.

One particular stage business says it all: an actor shakes a beer can in front of his groin, thus giving
the appearance of masturbation. Pornography under the guise of art is still pornography. The scene set in
Patpong (Bangkok’s answer to our Mabini) repeats the pornography. The lascivious dancing of the
actresses is done every night both in Patpong and in Manila (or Quezon City or Cebu or any other place
where poverty forces women to prositution). There is only one difference between Theatre Royal Drury
Lane and our neighborhood beer garden: it’s considered respectable for a man to bring his wife to the
Theatre Royal.
Finally, there is bigotry. No matter what we think of communism, we cannot deny that the
Vietnamese fought a war to get rid of foreigners in their own land. Miss Saigon makes it appear that the
Vietnamese fought the Americans simply because of Ho Chi Minh’s ego, symbolized by a gigantic statue
hoisted up by mindless communist soldiers. We might as well say that the Americans fought the British
because Thomas Jefferson and George Washington wanted memorials built in their honor, or that Filipinos
fought both the Spaniards and the Americans because we wanted to have a Rizal Park. Racism and sexism
are recognized moral evils all over the world, but bigotry is just as much of an immorality.
It is the most ironic twist of all that a musical meant to appeal to an eventual American audience
on Broadway has to distort the American ideal. If democracy offers us anything, it is openness to other
people’s ideas. A play that says that Asians, women, and communists are not worth taking seriously betrays
a narrowness of mind unworthy of Jefferson, Washington, Rizal, Ho Chi Minh, or even Lea Salonga.

A Reaction to Current Issue:

PH and CHINA’s 21st Maritime Silk Road

By Robert Joseph P. Medillo
Accessed, May 2017. https://locatingasia.wordpress.com/.

Are we getting it wrong? Was it an honest mistake to have overlooked President Xi Jinping’s “21st
Century Maritime Silk Road Speech” in Indonesia? Was this even noted from the many promising foreign
policy speeches of our president? Upon reviewing press releases of the Department of Foreign Affairs
(DFA) and President Benigno Aquino III’s speeches on South China Sea issue, much has been said about
putting China in the bad light.
From China’s disrespect of international law to its violation of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct
of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), the Philippines has moved farther and has found its refuge on
scientific arguments condemning China’s massive land reclamation in the region. During the side event on
maritime issues in the recently concluded 60th Asian African Conference Commemoration in Jakarta, the
Philippine government said that China’s massive land reclamation threatens marine life in the disputed area
and poses a great challenge in the realization of Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs) set forth by the
United Nations.
A press release from DFA published last April expressed the agency’s concern on the irreversible
and widespread damage to the biodiversity and ecological balance of the South China Sea along with
China’s violation of the UNCLOS, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). (LOOK: Photos show China’s
‘massive’ reclamation in West PH Sea)
All these are but few of many public statements made by the Philippine government emphasizing the
environmental impacts of China’s almost completed reclamation activities, not to mention scientific
research-based presentations during the recently concluded 26th ASEAN Summit in Malaysia.

Threats or opportunities?
What the country fails to realize is the possibility of transforming threats into opportunities in light
of an emerging China. Its suspicious calculation of China rendered damage to its relations with the latter,
thus undermining the revisionist element in China’s foreign policy through its 21st Century Maritime Silk
Road deemed beneficial for the Philippines and other Southeast Asian nations.
Despite efforts made by President Aquino to gather support from countries in Europe during his
official visits, world leaders had only redirected their support to international norms of “rule of law” and
“freedom of navigation,” thus refusing to side with any party involved in the arbitration process. Unlike
Manila’s interpretation, such support for international norms did not really make a direct impact on China’s
behavior.
The possibility of winning the legal battle narrows. The perceived immateriality of legal process and
outcomes prompted the Philippines to find another source to pressure China. In May 2014, President
Aquino said China’s reclamation is a clear violation of the fifth provision of the DOC, specifying the clause
on “self-restraint” and “handling differences on constructive manner.” As expected, the Chinese Foreign
Ministry responded otherwise.
Language games are expected to continue in the coming months.
Both countries have utilized the DOC as weaponry to shape public opinion, and this is unlikely to help the
Philippines in all aspect. Ironically, what both parties are missing is the uselessness of DOC at the moment
where substantial revisions are yet to be conceived. Australian professor Carlyle A. Thayer, during his
lecture at the Philippine Foreign Service Institute last May 12, warned that the war of words may only
exacerbate the damage to China – relations among the members of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) thus lessening the chance to negotiate the Code of Conduct in the near future.
Instead, Thayer suggested the Philippines to lead the ASEAN’s engagement with China to “fill in
the blanks” in all provisions under the DOC. To pull China within ASEAN, member-states must first define
what constitutes the region’s maritime domain and set the rules of behavior among themselves. What does
“self restraint” mean? What are the determinants of threat escalations? Are communication lines open for
the notification of joint military exercises? When does bilateral or multilateral cooperation apply?
For Professor Thayer, clarifying these questions would also pave the way to convince China to sit
down with ASEAN countries to finally conclude the long-awaited COC.

The ‘silk road’ of the 21st century

 But will China sacrifice the trust it built across regions at the expense of its possible militarization
of the South China Sea?
What the Philippines is missing is the signal of what China really wants to convey. In his speech to the
Indonesian Parliament, President Xi officially launched the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, considerably
the core of China’s modern foreign policy highlighting the future of China’s relations with Southeast Asia
and the world.
President Xi linked the historical, cultural, and economic affinity of China with its neighbors, which
he aims to revive by strengthening the China-ASEAN Strategic Partnership. He assured ASEAN of China’s
commitment to be a good neighbor, friend, and partner, sharing common security and prosperity through
“thick and thin.”
Xi’s promises cannot be easily dismissed by China’s ongoing land reclamations in the South China
Sea. The whole of Indonesia and the world is surely taking note of his government’s planned joint efforts
strategies with ASEAN, a goal set for the constitution of the broader vision towards giving life to China and
ASEAN’s “shared destiny.”
In addition, launching the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road in Indonesia is already symbolic in itself.
Speaking before the Indonesian Parliament, the largest Southeast Asian country taking leadership within
the ASEAN and an outsider in the South China Sea dispute, is indeed a good and valid indication of China’s
genuine and strong commitment to cooperate with Southeast Asian countries on the same course as they
did in the past. In one way or another, the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road Plan can already be considered
as China’s way of slowly abandoning the Nine Dash Line claim.
In order to weigh in our narratives on China, one must look at it as paving the way for the realization
of the 21st Maritime Silk Road which aims to facilitate modern shipping routes, information sharing facilities,
and faster delivery of goods across Asia and the rest of the world. This is better than just frightening
ourselves of an imagery of South China Sea as solely a Chinese military base – an idea China surely
thought unbeneficial even for their greater interest.
The vision of an “Asian Way” of cooperation and alliance is getting closer to reality, and the
Philippines must be part of that vision and leave the tradition of nation-state as the world blurs its borders.
Confining itself within its preoccupations on international law, ASEAN unity, state sovereignty, and alliance
with the US will only isolate us from the progress taking place in our region.
The Philippines must change course and re-engage China towards meaningful and more beneficial
relations – it should consider a second look at reclamations not as structures of threat but formations of
shared prosperity, and opportunity to harmonize its national interest with China and the rest of Southeast
Asian nations. It will happen once again at the heart of the ancient maritime silk road of Asia – the South
China Sea. – Rappler.com

(This article appeared in Rappler Philippines, 22nd of May 2015. Here’s the link: http://www.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/93829-
philippines-china-maritime-silk-road.)
 CREATING

A. Read each statement below. Identify each as FACT or OPINION. If it is

fact, underline the word or words that support it. If it is an opinion, encircle the word
or words that make it an opinion.

_______________ 1. Former President Benigno Simeon Aquino III returned to

the Philippines in 1983 after the assassination of his father.

________________2. He was possibly devastated after his father’s death, so he

decided to join politics.

________________3. In 1998, he was elected as a representative in the 2 nd

district of Tarlac.

________________4. He passed bills that have benefitted all of the Filipinos.

________________ 5. After having barred for re-election as a representative due

to term limits, he ran and won as a Senator in 2007.

________________6. He was one of the most dynamic senators during his term.

________________7. He has authored the Budget Impoundment and Control

Act (SB 3121).

________________8. In 2010 elections, Aquino ran for President having Mar

Roxas as his vice-president.

_______________9. Theirs was the strongest and the best tandem during that

time.

________________10. Aquino finished his term as the 15th President of the

Philippines and perhaps can be noted as one of the best

leaders.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benigno_Aquino_III#Senate_.282007.E2.80.9310.29 .

B. Read the article below. After which, answer the questions that follow.

Elites and Democratization in Southeast Asia

Source: https://locatingasia.wordpress.com/.

Democratization can be explained through its three main stages; the actual breakdown of
authoritarian regimes, transition and consolidation. It is an inevitable political process that took place, and
continued to be underway, in different regions of the world. Historically, the first account of democratization
manifested during the American Revolution in resistance to British imperialism, followed by the French
Revolution’s overthrowing of the Bourbon dynasty. At the end of Second World War, some countries in Asia
also democratized; Japan, Korea, Thailand, the Philippines among others. This development was
accounted by scholars as the “second wave of democratization”. From 1960s to 1980s, democratization
spread in the Latin American region where most regimes are controlled by a Military Junta, known as the
“third wave”.

In general, democratization takes place as consequence of regime’s inability to manage economic

crises or failure to maintain its allies or cronies within the government. In effect, authoritarian regimes will
collapse and undergo a process of transformation (transaction, extrication or replacement). In most cases,
such transformation takes place when elections begin. However, democracy is more than just elections.
There arise questions on how to proceed further with democratization after elections. Political scientists
prescribe consolidation as the right way to succeed after transitions. Consolidation refers to the actual
institutionalization of democratic norms and principles applied through inclusive governance.

Elites play crucial roles in consolidating newly democratic states beyond simply ‘institutionalizing
democracy’. To some extent, they contribute positively or negatively to the quality of democracy depending
on their behavior and colonial or historical legacy. In assessing their contribution, the performance of elites
in democratization is traditionally linked to their relationship with the civil society through the following
indicators; levels of legitimacy, participation, and integration, extent of social penetration, and quality of
social services provisioning.

Democratic consolidation prevents the return to authoritarian regimes. To sustain it, the
institutionalization of governance is necessary to maintain democratic norms and rules that are expected
to balance power between branches of government. In the context of legitimacy, the citizenry and all other
segments of the society must have a peaceful and voluntary recognition of new government in place.
Whereas, there are no particular group that seeks to overthrow the newly established democratic regime,
and or secede from it. Legitimacy strengthens democracy when democratic institutions and procedures are
accepted by the public as the only appropriate means of governing political life, and when constitutionally,
rules, procedures and institutions are strictly followed by and implemented evenly to those in government.

On one hand, legitimacy is often abused by the elites who lead the consolidation process. When
elites hold important positions in the government but do not (or avoid to) subject themselves to public
accountability, they are able to maximize their power to protect their business interests. In effect, such
behavior decreases the chance of full consolidation by putting democracy at risk. When elites utilize the
state as an apparatus to exploit allotted resources for citizens, the political system becomes a democracy
with feudal or predatory characteristics (these characteristics are symptomatic of countries returning to
authoritarian rule).

The colonial legacy of the Philippines is accounted for very strong segments of elites in our political
and economic systems. Since the establishment of the Philippine Congress, public offices were enjoyed by
the landed elites thus enabling them to protect their properties. After Marcos’s authoritarian-crony capitalist
regime, the EDSA Revolution accommodated the return of strong elite influence in our polity and economy.
Until very recently, Philippine democratic institutions are popularly labeled as stable but low quality due to
prevailing issues of corruption, electoral fraud, extra-judicial killings, rebellion, poverty and stagnating
process of agrarian reform. These cases in Philippine politics indeed reflect that while democratic processes
are regularly held (elections, campaigns, congressional sessions), the same personalities of elites hold
political power. In other words, the elites are able to “capture” democracy by alienating the citizenry from
mature political discussion and participation, and encouraging dependency via patronage system of social
services provisioning.

Unlike the Philippines, Thailand has no record of colonial legacy. Hence, Thailand’s political
landscape was initially formed by monarchical and elite lineage. This, in effect, translates into stronger elite
formation whereas elites sooner dominate social transactions, especially, the political sphere. By
categorization, elites in Thailand can be divided into four groups; the business elites, bureaucratic elites,
party elites and the military elites. In Thai politics, the increasing level of influence of elite factions over the
government resulted to its national leaders’ failure to manage elites’ conflicting interests and the wider
public interest. Business elites pressure national leaders as they control majority of the resources, thus
ensuring that economic policies will be advantageous to their interests. This happened in the case of Joint
Public and Private Sector Consultation Committee (JPPSCC) whereas Thai’s economic strategy was
diverted from Import Substitution Industrialization to Export Oriented Industrialization. Bureaucratic elites,
on the other hand, penetrate the government and gained important positions to advance their principles on
how properly manage the government. Through their influence, Thailand was able to strongly prohibit
foreign ownership or control of land, which in effect, helped Thai’s agricultural sector. Military elites too were
able to penetrate the instrumentalities of the government, especially in the executive branch or the
ministerial positions. Their mission focused on unifying the nation through monarchical authority. Yet, their
mission was again, disturbed by the rise of another elite faction that led to the formation of party elites. This
faction saw that the only way for them to counter other elite forces is to form parties as tool to influence the
parliament. After several elite factions and change of coalitions, Thailand remains unconsolidated – the
state failed to unify its elites, stabilize parliamentary rules and leadership, make effective parties based on
representation, and resolve competing class rivalry within the entire political system. In other words,
Thailand’s failure to address elite disintegration remains the main reason of its unconsolidated democracy.

In contrary to Thailand’s case, elite formation in Indonesia was initially formed and managed by
an authoritarian leadership under President Suharto. Suharto formed three elite groups to stabilize his
leadership; military elites (internal security), bureaucratic elites (order and implementation of rules) and
business elites (middle-class employment and development programs). Disciplined elites in Indonesia
helped authoritarian leadership to enforces laws that limit civil liberties (mass media, freedom of expression
etc.) to overshadow democracy. After Suharto’s authoritarian rule, his successors are able to extend
reforms to expand democratic spaces in Indonesia. These reforms led to consolidation. Under such
process, the state was able to (1) bring back civil authority over the military, (2) devolve national power to
empower local governments, (3) strengthen the judiciary to safeguard contracts and property rights, (4)
institutionalize the exercise of constituency-based governance thus mitigating interest between ethnic
groups and religious groups.

Malaysia and Singapore share the same characteristic as stable semi-democracy. Semi-
democracy refers to a democratic country that is successful in unifying elites yet political participation and
processes remain concentrated to only one dominant party. In the case of Malaysia, decision-making and
executive administration is concentrated to the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) whereas
Prime Minister Mahathir used his power to advance his political ambitions by continuously winning
elections, giving favor to the business elites and undermining the masses. This illustrates Malaysia’s stable
semi-democracy with strain points. On the other hand, Singapore features a stable semi-democracy.
Stable, meaning, while elections are regularly done, there is single political party that dominates the entire
bureaucracy – the People’s Action Party. Civil liberties are controlled by the government and competitive
opposition parties are impaired before elections. The caveat is, although the government appears less
democratic, it is exceptionally outstanding in providing quality social services to its citizens.

Democratic consolidation can be explained in three ways:

(1) consolidation is achieved when elites are competitive, united, accountable, and visionary when
it comes to national goals or agenda;

(2) when elites allow meaningful participation of civil society (regardless if limited or expanded);
 (3) when the state is able to deliver quality social services up to the most vulnerable sectors of the
society.

Therefore, the struggle towards strengthening democracies in Southeast Asia must be understood
not in the context of how strong or how many elites are within political and economic systems, but in their
capacity and reliability to execute reforms for better governance within the boundaries of their limited power.

1. What is the issue the author addresses?

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________

2. Please cite the article’s thesis statement. Do all the paragraphs support the central claim?

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____

3. Does the author make assumptions? If yes, enumerate those assumptions.

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________

4. How does the author support the assumptions mentioned?

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

5. List down the strong points of the article.

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

6. Enumerate the weak points of the text and explain why you think they are weak.
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

7. Write your general comments about the article. Do you agree or disagree with the author?

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

C. Following the tips in writing a good reaction paper, express your views and insights in the article
used in the Configuring titled, A country not even his own. Consider having your introduction,
body and conclusion. You may use references for your in-text citations. Your work will be graded
based on this rubric:

Source:https://www.cbd.int/images/bioday/2008/ibd-2008-rubric4.gif.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

UPLOADING

Watch any of these films: La La Land, Sing, The Forest and The Rise
of the Legend. After watching, write your movie review. You may use
the following considerations:

• Give your general comment about the director, the producers, the cast, the awards, etc.
• Comment on the characterization of the cast members and their roles in the film.
• Discuss the plot. Point out the strengths and weaknesses of the arrangement of the events.
• What can you say about the cinematography?
• How do you like the ending of the story? Explain if you agree or disagree with it.
• Write recommendations and/or suggestions about the film.

Use the APA format in writing your Movie review.

Sources: http://public.wsu.edu/~moonlee/WritingReactionPaper.html.

Jimenez, E.(2000). Writing in the Discipline. Manila: St. Augustine

Publications, Inc.

Flores, M. et al. (2009). Thought and Expression: Academic

Writing.Quezon City: C & E Publishing, Inc.