INTRODUCTION
For the third time during my presidency, you honor me with this annual president’s night of the Manila Overseas Press Club (MOPC). The first time I came here, I thought that was supposed to be the one night of the year when the press — overseas and local — salutes the president for all his labors, if not his achievements.

I was quickly disabused of that impression. Far from being a tribute, it was more like being put in the frying pan. But that is okay and comfortable enough for me. Not as hot as the gridiron — which I can also withstand.

When we speak of the press, we speak often — and solemnly — about freedom of the press. Yet I think the tennis player Martina Navratilova also had a point when she declared: “in a democratic country, there is no such thing as freedom from the press”.

An Australian prime minister once thought that he had found a way to escape. He said: “you can’t get into trouble for what you do not say”. It seemed like he had the right approach — until what he did not say got reported and then commented upon — interminably.

Levity aside, it is a pleasure and an honor to be your guest here again tonight. And I especially welcome the opportunity not only to talk to you, but to talk about developments in our country, as we near the close of my second year in the presidency.
PROBLEM OF PERSPECTIVE
Since the MOPC is an organization composed of both Filipino and foreign journalists, I wonder if I might begin by discussing here something that we have discussed in our cabinet meetings lately. This is the fact that Filipino and foreign observers — in looking at our country today — appear to be seeing different things.

By our own reckoning in government — and believe me we are not prone to making mountains out of molehills — we believe the country is doing better today than it has done in years. The economy is on the upswing again. Political stability is assured. Government is on the move. And there is a sense of buoyancy and optimism in the land.

This verdict is generally shared by many foreign investment analysts and observers — including, thankfully, members of the foreign press. Yet strangely, it does not look that way to many segments of the Filipino press. Just yesterday, one columnist accused me of incompetence, and another refused to believe the record that things have, indeed, begun to improve.

We all know that — depending on the observer’s point of view — a glass can either be half-full or half-empty. But much reporting and commentary by the local media, compared with that of the foreign press, exceeds this philosophical difference. The way it looks to me, where most foreign observers of contemporary Philippines see the doughnut, some Filipino analysts see the hole.

The contrast is sometimes so great you begin to doubt whether they are reporting on the same country.

Where the Financial Times of London, Salomon Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Barclays, Credit-Suisse, First Boston — and even the supremely cautious World Bank — are increasingly upbeat about Philippine prospects, whole segments of our press have no inkling whatever, or claim to have no inkling, that things might just be turning around for our country.

If one had nothing to read but the manila press, it would be impossible to recognize the Philippines in this report by Newsweek in its issue of May 30:

“Domestic peace and security have been restored, the economy is growing and is predicted to keep growing, foreign businesses are moving in, exports are up, the stock market is up, financial deregulation is underway”.

There is a crucial difference of perspectives here, and it reminds us that cynicism still afflicts certain sectors of the country. Just as a sandstorm can momentarily blind anyone, so our repeated crises and setbacks as a nation appear to have anesthetized some Filipino journalists against the idea of our succeeding or doing better. Their pessimism is near invincible.
POLITICAL WILL AND NATIONAL CAPACITY
If there is reason for optimism today, it is not just the fact that economic performance during the first quarter reported a robust 4.8% GNP increase. As significant are the reasons for such growth.

As I see it, the really important and strategic change that has occurred involves the increase of national political will and capacity. And this, as social scientists have pointed out, means the heart of the capability for problem-solving, conflict resolution, and the legitimate exercise of authority.

Our troubles of the recent past proceeded not only from persistent challenges to the government; they also derived from institutional breakdown and inertia in confronting problems.

When we met last year, I remember well the skepticism that greeted my words from this same platform. Then, as I unveiled our program to meet the power crisis, doubts were being raised about our ability to match our words with deeds. To my forecast of a partial end to brownouts by Christmas 1993, many put out their own predictions that things would get worse.

When emergency powers to deal with the power crisis were granted to the president by Congress, one legislator loudly declared that these were “emergency powers to steal”.

But we solved the problem. And we did not steal. Our critics were not man enough to eat their words, but they have moved on to other issues to complain about. I assure you they will similarly be frustrated.

The handling of the power problem is only one instance, but it illustrates what we have aggressively done on such varied matters as the peace process, economic reform, environmental protection, government streamlining, countryside development, and other issues. We did not just talk about the problem, or about what we would do. We put the policy in place and then we implement. We have improved on the traditional slogan of the “Filipino can do” to “will do”, and in many areas, “have done!”.

To be sure, nothing has come easy — neither in policy-making nor in program implementation. We have had to fight for every reform and development legislation passed by congress; we have had to confront the powerful lobbies against reform; we have had to energize the familiar inertia of the bureaucracy in implementing reform; we have had to face mass actions.

We are still far from satisfied with the results. But coming from where we were only a year ago, the gains are psychologically lifting. They should spur us as one national team to perform better not only for the rest of the year, but in the years ahead.

And we know now that given the will and the push, government, like media, is not a liability but an asset in the development of our country.

Certain things are always at the forefront of our minds today. We are now a nation of 65 million, as compared with three million in 1800, seven million in 1900, and 20 million in 1950. And we still have one of the highest rates of population growth in the world. I suspect that is one of the reasons why Secretary Johnny Flavier has such a high approval rating.

We must now make our own decisions about how best to win the future. There are no masters or friends anymore to blame for our shortcomings; we only have ourselves to fault.

And in the struggle for development, we do not have the luxury of time. Indeed, we are way behind schedule, especially in the face of the opportunities that came our way. In this highly competitive world, it is almost as if we are always starting from scratch. Any more faltering on our part means enormous set-backs for our people’s welfare, our economy and our country. We do not want to miss the boat again.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Much has been said already about the 1994 first quarter economic performance, so i will not dwell on them here. Let me underscore some points because they indicate why national prospects connoted by this growth are much brighter than the previous booms of our economy.

First, the economic expansion is investment-driven, not consumer-driven. Investments, foreign and domestic, have moved up dramatically by 19.2 percent.

Second, export growth is at 15.5% during the first quarter, compared to 0.2% in the first quarter of 1993.

Third, the development program is working much better than even we in government expected. In fact, the economy posted for the first quarter a GNP growth rate of 4.8% against a target of 3.0%.

Fourth, inflation is under check. Although it went up to 10.1% during the first quarter, we are confident that we can bring it down to single digit levels during the rest of the year.

Fifth, the economic recovery is reflected in the labor market. The unemployment rate declined to 11.0% from 11.3% of the same quarter last year.

It bears saying that we are accomplishing some things in the economy without recourse to those measures that are highly touted in Asia by some among you.

There are times when some wish we could also cane people to make them behave and march in step with our national goals. But generally, I believe we Filipinos prefer to have a carrot dangled before us.

Our system is a reflection of our values. This is what we are.

We are proving that here in Asia-Pacific, economic growth and sustainable development can be achieved under a democratic framework — Philippine-style.
FOREIGN RELATIONS
That our development is bound to the international economy we recognized at the very start. It is clear that we have much to learn from others — especially our neighbors.

Two forces, as Henry Kissinger has pointed out, are shaping the world after the cold war. One is globalization — international relations have become truly global and a whole set of issues, including the world economy, can only be dealt with on a global basis.

The other is the fragmentation of the world into nation-states, resembling the European state system of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. National interests have largely superseded the ideological interests that shaped the world during the cold war.

To reconcile these seemingly contradictory trends is the challenge to international relations in our time. Some states belonging to one region are trying to address the challenge together as a regional community. This is the trend rising in Southeast Asia, and in the larger Asia-Pacific region.

Within this framework, we have forged our foreign policy — in a way that would best help our development and our national welfare, stability and security.

Our diplomacy has already taken us on many trips in Asia and the Pacific because, in a real sense, we are presenting the new Philippines to the world.

With the nations of Southeast Asia, especially the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), we have put together a framework to promote our common development, stability and peace within the region.

We continue to seek to resolve or set aside actual or potential disputes with our immediate neighbors and adopt concrete measures, including the establishment of bilateral joint commissions and sub-regional aggrupations such as the Brunei-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA), to strengthen relations with each and all of them.

We also advocate the development of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), which has expanded dialogue and cooperation in regional security issues and measures for enhancing regional security.

With East Asia, we have renewed and strengthened our relations with Japan, China and Korea. Our economic and diplomatic relationships are growing, not only through executive action but also through parliamentary exchange, business collaboration and non-government organization (NGO) networking.

Last November, I visited the United States for talks with president Clinton and other leaders of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC).

That encounter provided a golden opportunity to place our century-old relationship with the US on a new basis of partnership, sovereignty and mutuality. The US and the Philippines continue to share common concerns about regional stability and security in the Asia-Pacific region; but, as important, we have started the process of intensifying anew the economic ties of trade and investment between us.

This September, I shall be visiting Europe — specifically France, Italy, Germany, Belgium and Spain — with whom we share over three hundred years of history.

Europe is an older strand in our relations with the world that was neglected during the cold war. Yet this relationship has always been full of great potential, substance and meaning, just as it is rich in history.

It is especially important for us to see Europe today because of its current moves toward union, and because of the passage of the general agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT), which brings forth a new trading system in the world. As ever, the diversification of markets and sources of investment and technology is high on our economic and diplomatic priorities.

The growth that is now lifting the economy, as I said earlier, is investment and export driven. This would not have happened without the renewed interest of many nations in the Philippines.
REPORTING THE GOOD NEWS IN FRONT
As my second year comes to a close, I find much vindication for many of the ideas and policies I began with. At the start of our program, many were the skeptics and the hecklers, who thought people empowerment was just an election slogan, and “Philippines 2000!!!” just a fantasy.

Not all have been converted, but I think there are now a lot more true believers in our program of government, and our country — because there have been results.

There are many more who support reform because they see what reform can do when applied with resolve and purpose to the solution of problems.

Of all the challenges confronting us, I fear most of the infection of cynicism and complacency, for these touch upon the psychological readiness of our people for the struggle for modernization. With these negatives come inertia and indifference — which did much to sap national energies immediately after the glory days of EDSA.

What we have achieved together is small compared to what we still have to accomplish. We have done no more than put our house in order and position ourselves for take-off. For us to accomplish our modernization goals, we need every bit of encouragement from our own successes, every bit of momentum from our gains, and the support of every hand in this country.

The late Senator Claro M. Recto used to warn our people regarding the perils of daydreaming about American benevolence and urged realism in our attitudes to our circumstances and the future. And he was right — during those frenzied days of the Cold War.

But there is also such a thing as the absurdity of insisting on our national helplessness when the record is already showing much improvement in the way we are running and doing things.

We should not be passive before our faults and shortcomings, but neither should we also sell ourselves short. My fear sometimes is that our press is always active about our failures, and far too ready to sell us short. Let us report the good news in front.

The humorist Will Rogers once said: “I hope we never live to see the day when things are as bad as some newspapers make them out to be”.

There was a time when things in this country were as bad, if not worse, than what the press was reporting.

But it is not that way anymore.

Thank you.

Mabuhay ang MOPC 2000!!!