There is much ado over the call made by US President Donald Trump to President Rodrigo Duterte on Saturday.
“The ambit of the conversation between the two leaders include(d) the expression of commitment of US President Trump to the PH-US alliance and his interest in developing a warm, working relationship with President Duterte,” Malacañang Spokesman Ernesto Abella said.
The White House, meanwhile, described the meeting as very friendly. The two leaders discussed the concerns of the Asean on regional security, including the threat posed by North Korea.
Trump supposedly told Duterte that he was looking forward to the US-Asean summit in November. Moreover, he invited the Philippine leader to the White House “to discuss the importance of the US-Philippines alliance.”
Trump’s critics used the phone call to bash the US President, who had marked his 100th day in office over the weekend. They said the invitation showed Trump was now “morally complicit in the killings.” Trump’s chief of staff denied, however, that the call meant he was “honoring” Duterte who had been gaining notoriety in the international scene for his brutal war on illegal drugs.
The chief-of-staff insisted the issues developing out of North Korea are so serious and the US needed the cooperation of as many partners in the area as it could get.
Here at home, the fuss is mostly about how cordial Mr. Duterte is to Mr. Trump, in contrast to how he behaved with the latter’s predecessor, Barack Obama, who he said was a “son of a whore.”
Those more sympathetic to the meeting say a stronger alliance between the two will counterbalance Mr. Duterte’s apparent leniency toward China.
In all this, what stand out are the similarities between the two leaders-—both speak their minds, talk too much, and appear to care little about getting facts straight, relying on their subordinates to explain what they supposedly really meant. Both Duterte and Trump are personalities perhaps more than they are presidents, and that is where the problem lies.
Of course there should be a conversation between the leader of the Philippines and the leader of the United States. The two are linked by military and political history as well as trade. There are Filipino communities, in varying sizes, in practically all states in the US. It is also true that the two countries share common security concerns both from rogue governments and terror groups.
What would be strange is if they did not speak to each other. Let the conversation be about far-reaching policy, rather than who said what or who can utter the more controversial statement.