BANGKAROTE ANG PILIPINAS UNDER MARCOS,
AT HINDI NA NITO MABABAYARAN ANG UTANG SA SINGAPORE, SO I REFUSED MORE LOANS TO MARCOS. – (from Lee Kuan Yew’s book with parts on bankruptcy of the Philippines, translated into Taglish)
By Maria Lourdes Sereno
Si dating Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew ay may malinaw na kwento ukol sa pagka-bangkarote ng Pilipinas sa panunungkulan ni Ferdinand Marcos, Sr. Mababasa ito sa isinulat nyang aklat na “From Third World to First”.
Sa pagbuo ng ugnayan sa Thailand, Pilipinas at Brunei, ikinuwento ni Lee Kuan Yew sa kanyang sariling talambuhay ang pagbisita niya sa Pilipinas noong mga unang taon ng pagiging pangulo ni Marcos, at tinawag pa nga niyang ‘gracious hosts’ sina Marcos at Imelda. Nagsimulang magbago ang kanyang opinyon matapos ang nangyaring pagpatay kay Ninoy Aquino noong 1983. Sa aklat ni Lee Kuan Yew, binigyan niya ng focus ang economic and financial issues na kinakaharap ng Pilipinas nang mga panahong iyon. Sinabi niyang may $25 billion na utang ang Pilipinas sa foreign banks, which stopped all loans to the Philippines after Aquino’s very public killing.
Sinabi ni Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew ang ganito: “He (Marcos) sent his minister for trade and industry, Bobby Ongpin, to ask me for a loan of US$300–500 million to meet the interest payments. I looked him straight in the eye and said, ‘We will never see that money back.’”
Noong 1984, nagkita ulit sina Ferdinand Marcos at Lee Kuan Yew, this time ay sa Brunei naman. Ganito ang pagsasalaysay ni Lee Kuan Yew, “As soon as all our aides left, I went straight to the point, that no bank was going to lend him any money. They wanted to know who was going to succeed him if anything were to happen to him; all the bankers could see that he no longer looked healthy. Singapore banks had lent US$8 billion of the US$25 billion owing. The hard fact was they were not likely to get repayment for some 20 years. He countered that it would be only eight years. I said the bankers wanted to see a strong leader in the Philippines who could restore stability.”
Ibinahagi niya rin sa kanyang aklat ang discussions niya sa noon ay kasalukuyang U.S. President, na nang panahong iyon ay kaibigan ni Marcos:
“As gently as I could, I described to Reagan how Marcos had changed from the young anti-communist crusader of the 1960s to become a self-indulgent aging ruler who allowed his wife and cronies to clean out the country through ingenious monopolies and put the government heavily in debt. The credit ratings of the Philippines and his government had plummeted.”
Sa Chapter 17, ikinuwento ni Lee Kuan Yew nang minsang tinanong siya ng U.S. Vice President Walter Mondale, “You knew Marcos. Was he a hero or a crook? How does Suharto compare to Marcos? Is Suharto a patriot or a crook?”
Ito ay noong ’90s, panahon ng pagbagsak ng Indonesian President na si Suharto, na ang mga huling controversial na taon bilang pangulo ay ikinumpara kay Marcos.
Bilang tugon ay sinabi ni Lee Kuan Yew, “Marcos might have started off as a hero, but ended up as a crook… Unlike Marcos of the Philippines, Suharto did not spirit his wealth outside his country in readiness for a quick exit.”
Matapos ang People Power Revolution, umasa si Lee Kuan Yew na makakaahon muli ang Pilipinas sa tulong ng sumunod na pangulo na si Corazon Aquino. Ngunit habang lumilipas ang panahon, ang hindi mabilang na banta ng kudeta sa Pilipinas ay lalong pinasama ang investment reputation ng bansa.
Narito ang ilan pang relevant na sinabi niya tungkol sa economic prospects sana ng Pilipinas:
“This was a pity because they had so many able people, educated in the Philippines and the United States. Their workers were English-speaking, at least in Manila. There was no reason why the Philippines should not have been one of the more successful of the ASEAN countries”.
“Something had gone seriously wrong. Millions of Filipino men and women had to leave their country for jobs abroad beneath their level of education. Filipino professionals whom we recruited to work in Singapore are as good as our own. Indeed, their architects, artists, and musicians are more artistic and creative than ours. Hundreds of thousands of them have left for Hawaii and for the American mainland.”
“The difference lies in the culture of the Filipino people. It is a soft, forgiving culture. Only in the Philippines could a leader like Ferdinand Marcos, who pillaged his country for over 20 years, still be considered for a national burial. Insignificant amounts of the loot have been recovered, yet his wife and children were allowed to return and engage in politics. They supported the winning presidential and congressional candidates with their considerable resources and reappeared in the political and social limelight after the 1998 election that returned President Joseph Estrada.”
“Some Filipinos write and speak with passion. If they could get their elite to share their sentiments and act, what could they not have achieved?”
Hindi po Golden Age ang panahon ni Marcos, ayon mismo kay Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew. Nagsimula si Marcos na inakalang anti-Communist crusader, yun pala, in Lee’s words, Marcos turned into a “SELF-INDULGENT AGING RULER WHO ALLOWED HIS WIFE AND CRONIES TO CLEAN OUT THE ECONOMY THROUGH INGENIOUS MONOPOLIES AND PUT THE COUNTRY HEAVILY IN DEBT.”
So, sino po ang nagpahirap sa Pilipinas?
Sa leader ng Singapore, SINA MARCOS AT IMELDA, KASAMA ANG MGA CRONIES NILA ANG NAGPABAGSAK SA PILIPINAS AT IBINAON ITO SA NAKAKAKUBANG UTANG. MAS MABUTI PA NGA SI INDONESIAN PRESIDENT SUHARTO KAYSA KAY MARCOS, SA TINGIN NI LEE KUAN YEW, KASI HINDI NI SUHARTO ITINAKAS ANG MGA NAKAW NIYA SA LABAS NG BANSA. Implied po dito, in contrast, hahayaan ni Marcos lumubog ang Pilipinas, basta maitakas lang ang para sa pamilya niya.
Makinig po tayo kay Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew. Kahiya-hiya po na parang hindi na tayo natututo sa mga leksyon ng kasaysayan. I-reject natin ang fake news na pinaunlad ni Marcos ang Pilipinas. Itindig natin ang ating self-respect. Let’s take the lessons of history seriously.
