Category: Trump

Melania mystifies, distracts from Donald?

While struggling to make sense of government (including legislative) efforts to address the economic crisis brought on by our utter dependence on imported stuff, from petroleum products to essential foodstuff, and while keeping track as best I can of what is really going on with Trump and Netanyahu and the on-again off-again savage war vs. Iran and Gaza and Lebanon, here comes Melania Trump in a suprise press conference denying allegations of any sexual relationship with either the “disgraceful” Epstein or Maxwell, and even calling for Congress to give a hearing to victims of Mr. Epstein’s crimes. This, a few days after Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Epstein Files should not be part of anything going forward.” It is said that Trump knew nothing about it and Fox News and the rest of media are baffled: Why now? And then again, why not now. Something’s coming down, malamang?

Melania Trump’s surprise Epstein statement prompts bafflement
The Guardian

Melania Trump’s surprise statement denying she had any relationship with Jeffrey Epstein sparked confusion about why she had chosen to speak out, and whether Donald Trump knew that the first lady was planning to draw attention to a subject he has called for the public to move on from.

Even normally well-sourced correspondents for rightwing outlets were at a loss to explain why Melania Trump felt the need to issue the seemingly out-of-the-blue statement about her relationship with Epstein, the late sex offender who socialized with her husband for nearly two decades, or his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.

The Fox News senior White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich said that she and her team were baffled.

“We’ve been trying to understand why she made it today, if there was something that she is reacting to that might already be in the news that has upset her, or if there’s a story that’s yet to come out, that’s about to drop that she wanted to get ahead of,” Heinrich told Fox viewers. “Because it did feel like it came out of left field for us. … I’ve called every contact in my phone, including the president, and not gotten any answers.”

The New York Post, which, like Fox, is owned by Rupert Murdoch and often acts like an arm of the Trump White House communications team, was also puzzled. “It’s unclear why the first lady chose to hold the press event at a time when the White House is trying to move on from the Epstein saga that has been a drag on her husband’s second term,” the New York tabloid reported.

Marc Beckman, a senior adviser to the first lady, told the Post only that she “spoke out now because enough is enough”.

“The lies must stop,” Beckman added in his cryptic statement. “It is time for the public and media to focus on her incredible achievements as first lady, the lives she has positively impacted, and her commitment to our nation.” Read on

Trump & fake news

When I heard him on CNN saying that “productive negotiations” with Iran were ongoing, I decided not to believe him until Iran confirmed it — and Iran didn’t, fake news daw — but stock markets rose and oil prices fell anyway. Nobelist economist Paul Krugman is thinking insider trading

ADVENTURES IN FANTASY DIPLOMACY 
Paul Krugman
March 23 2026 

It’s Monday morning. Donald trump has for the time being called off plans to bomb Iran’s civilian infrastructure. He has done so because, according to him, highly productive negotiations are underway involving the government of Iran and an invisible six-foot white rabbit and his Canadian girlfriend.

Hi, I’m Paul Krugman. What I just said is not strictly true. Or it’s not all true. Trump did not say anything about the invisible rabbit or the Canadian… but the gist of it is true.  He said that there’s highly productive talks underway, and shortly afterwards the Iranian government and Iranian state media said no, they aren’t, this isn’t happening.

Not gonna say that Iranian state media is necessarily a credible source but the odds are that they are in fact telling the truth and the president of the United States is either lying or  fantasizing, or both. There’s really no reason at all to believe that anything like what he said is happening is in fact happening.

Why do I say that, aside from the fact that Trump has not exactly been truthful about a lot of things. Beyond that, there are three important reasons to believe he might be making this stuff up.

First, he put himself in a very bad spot with his threat to commit a massive war crime if Iran doesn’t open the Strait of Hormuz, and must be looking for a way out. Another president in another time might say that, on careful consideration we have recalibrated the policy, or something like that. Trump doesn’t do that. Trump is always winning. Never admits that he’s had a setback, never admits that he’s changed his mind. So, saying that, oh, but the Iranians have, you know, come to the table, probably big strong Iranians with tears in their eyes, but anyway, that the Iranians have come to the table and that’s why we’re not doing what I said we would do is a very Trumpian out.

Second, why would the Iranians be making a deal at this point? We can talk a lot about how the war is going, but it’s pretty clear that, as the Iranians are likely to see it, they’re winning. I mean, they’re not winning militarily, but that was never on the cards. They are… they have successfully turned what was supposed to be a lightning decapitation of their government into a protracted contest in relative ability to bear pain. And all indications are that the Iranians are nowhere near cracking. And all indications are that the U.S. — although obviously we’re not losing thousands of people and we aren’t having our whole life disrupted, but the American public really doesn’t like higher gas prices — it does not believe Trump. The clock is ticking for Trump on this in a way that it’s apparently not for the Iranian regime. So Iran has the upper hand here. Very hard to see why they would be wanting to make a deal until they basically humiliated us substantially more.

Finally, consider possible motives. Imagine that you were somebody close to Trump, somebody close enough to actually have an influence on his decisions, as well as inside knowledge. Here’s what you could have done. Really, just between last night and now: you could have sold a bunch of crude oil futures at very high prices. Brent was over $112 over the weekend. Then bought them back immediately after Trump’s announcement of, you know, triumphal progress, but before the Iranians said that it is not happening. And you know you could have turned a very very nice very large profit.

To say that insider trading might be driving US policy would have been outrageous in the past. Who thinks that that’s beyond the realm of possibility now. So all of this could be happening.

Last point to make here. Think about how much America’s position in the world has been weakened not just by apparent failure to subdue a fourth rate power but by the fact that everybody now knows that you cannot trust anything, cannot trust any promises the US makes. You cannot count on the US carrying through with promises [or] with threats. Not just promises, but threats are also not incredible in the sense of not being at all credible. And that the default assumption should be that anything that this administration says is a lie. That is a really really bad thing.

That we’re [a] world power is not simply a matter of missiles and bombs although we seem to be running low on those, too. It’s very much a matter of people taking what you say and what you promise and what you threaten seriously, and we are not ruled by serious people.

Have a great day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc120RAcx48

EDSA, Iran, Trump

In the early days of Trump’s and Netanyahu’s madly unsustainable killer attempt to bring about “regime change” in Iran, two Manila Times columnists opined on our EDSA event forty years ago. “WAs EDSA 1 not an American project?” tanong ng isa, in effect saying, reminding kuno, na EDSA was a “regime change” event na pakanâ ng Amerika. Sabi ng isa pa, tiyak na may kinalaman ang C.I.A. sa snap election returns at dapat ay i-declassify ng U.S. government ang records of that event, now na, para magkalinawan.

Expected naman ang ganyan from loyalists who don’t think, or know, much of People Power circa 1986. So, dedma. Besides I was deep into browsing the internet, needing to understand the Trump-Netanyahu War for World Domination. Until a day or so ago, nabasa ko itong “Iran: Scenarios and odds” ni Stephen CuUnjieng, also of the Manila Times.

For CuUnjieng there is no telling how long Iran’s active resistance will last, which would depend on how much pain they can take, and that could be a lot and for long, given the successful outcomes of “asymmetric warfare” in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Also, depending on how fast its weapons stockpiles are depleted or destroyed. But regime change?

With the Vietnamese and Afghans, the effect was largely limited to their area and the cost to their enemy. Alas, with Iran, it affects the Middle East more broadly through the cost and supply of oil, and the social and political order in the region. The US and its ally Israel may find out yet again that when you throw a stick, it may be a boomerang.

As noted by others on regime change, it is hard to make work and has rarely worked when caused by an invasion. When it works like the Velvet Revolution in then-Czechoslovakia (now peacefully divided into the Czech Republic and Slovakia) and EDSA, it came from within. There can be help from outside, but the impetus for change and the alternative needs to be internally driven. As the Buddhists say, change comes from many countries, including China, which is one of our major suppliers of gasoline and diesel within.

Salamat nang marami, Stephen CuUnjieng! Indeed EDSA “came from within” and “was internally driven” — the Americans knew about RAM planning to kill and replace Ver and some of them approved, and they helped RAM with intel, but they had nothing to do with Cory or the civil disobedience and crony boycott campaign or Butz’s call for people to march to EDSA and shield the military from Marcos forces [Cardinal Sin echoed Butz only after a lot of dillydallying].

Two more points to keep in mind:

Besides the military cost, there is the economic cost in price, availability and activity of oil. Brent Oil was $59 on Dec. 17. On March 9, it breached (proper use of the word unlike in much of Philippine journalism as breach means to exceed with a negative connotation) $111, and as of March 11 was around $93, or a 57-percent increase in three months. Then there is availability as the Strait of Hormuz is basically shut down for shipping so there goes the supply chain. Many countries, including China — which is one of our major suppliers of gasoline and diesel — have curtailed exports to reserve supplies for themselves.

And this.

Bloomberg’s weekend email on March 7 quotes the excellent interview Mishal Husein had with Bernard Haykel of Princeton (available on YouTube) which was very insightful. He says there are three ways the war can end — “the regime could fall. It could stay but soften its stance and cut a deal with the US. Or it could simply hold on and survive — but “hardened even further in its determination to be a revisionist power.” The last one is the most likely.

To my mind, it all hinges in, on, Trump’s head. I checked out his astrological birthchart and I’m not surprised to find that he has Sun in Gemini (sign of the lower mind) opposed to his Moon in Sagittarius (higher mind) — he’s pronouncedly two-minded (if not multiply-minded) about everything, this and that, below above, maybe certainly, we did we didn’t, at nangingibabaw ang kababawan. AND his ascendant is on the cusp of Leo and Virgo, signs of the lion, the commander|performer, and of the perfectionist.

Trump’s not as dumb as many think, just open to every game worth winning by elitist capitalist standards and more than well-connected enough to be untouchable, especially while he’s president, if he stays president. The Virgo in him hates to be criticized, and he is being widely and wildly criticized now for being goaded into this war that he cannot win, the Iranians are going for broke. So I pray na kakayanin niya to call a ceasefire soon, make a deal, give in some, surprise us all, change his mind as he has done before, maybe tomorrow, as I pray every night, surely long before the November midterm elections. Hope springs.

Trump, Netanyahu, the Epstein Files

“It’s a crazy planets,” sabi daw ni Pepsi Paloma (1985), or was it Stella Strada (1984), sa kanyang suicide note, na napaka-descriptive of the state of world affairs these days. Not “interesting times” at all, rather, outrageously condemnably brutally murderous, targeting not just nuclear facilities but people, children, and the leaders and their families, na nakakatuliro because so uncivilized, barbaric, savage. It’s a struggle wrapping one’s head around, making sense of, this death and destruction Trump and Netanyahu are wreaking on Iran and the Middle East with no regard for human rights and the rule of law, upending peace and order around the globe, such as it was. As though life weren’t already hard enough and sad enough for most of humanity.

Twelve days into the Trump War, beyond the usual questions of how and when he will end this war, many in social media have been tracking back to when it all started, when the fallout from the Epstein Files was peaking, painting Epstein an Israeli, if not also a Russian, spy, a Trojan horse even, who had the goods on Trump, as does, presumably, Netanyahu. And that Netanyahu and the Esptein Gang of crooked billionaires, including highly placed government officials in the centers of  power, were able to convince Trump that waging and winning a war on Iran was the answer to their collective predicament as criminal enablers of the most evil rapist, con man, and alleged killer ever. Perhaps they thought, absurdly, that Gaza-ing Iran would usher in a new world order under their own rules? Which reminds of this 2016 Epstein email to one of his high-tech capitalist cronies, predicting that the era of globalism was over and the world was beginning to move towards tribalism, with Brexit just the beginning.

Reddit post I_am_white_cat_YT 19 days ago

From: “Jeffrey E.” <jeevacation@gmail.com>
To: Peter Thiel
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016

return to tribalism . counter to globalization.  amazing new alliances. you and I both agree zero interest rates were too high, and as i said in your office. finding things on their way to collapse , was much easier than finding the next bargain

Peter Thief: Of what?
Jeffrey E:  Brexit,  just the beginning.

But how could they have been so naive as to think that Iran would not fight back? How could they not have anticipated the closure of the Strait of Hormuz or the strikes against Israel and US bases in the Gulf States? Hubris?

Sharing here excerpts [lightly edited] from a loooong interview of PNoy spokesperson Edwin Lacierda with poli-sci and geopolitics Professor Clarita Carlos, National Security Adviser in PBBM’s early days. Tatamaan ba tayo? But first a quickie history of arch enemies Iran and Israel, from how they’ve been at each other’s throats since 1947 to how Trump wagged the dog and joined the fray to deflect from the Epstein fallout. The professor punchlined on Epstein some three or four times but Lacierda refused to bite, I can’t imagine why. I so wanted to hear her take on the Epstein Files (and Samson, and number 76).

Bilyonaryo News Channel | The Spokes | “What the US-Israel/Iran War Means for the World” March 3 2026 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_OK9WlnVtE

LACIERDA. How long has it been, the conflict between Israel and Iran?

PROF CARLOS. Since Israel was created in 1947, during the partition of Palestine. And they have always been arch enemies, at least that is how Israel continues to define Iran, a country of 3,000 years of civilization. And we have to link this with Israel’s, Netanyahu’s particularly, plan for a Greater Israel, which means dadapaan niya yung Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, to create a bigger Israel.

LACIERDA. Israel is one among many Arab nations. But Iran does not consider itself an Arab nation. They call themselves Persians. Everybody seems to be against Israel, but the animosity between Israel and Iran is quite different from the other Arab nations.

CARLOS. Maybe because there is the regional leadership factor. Netanyahu wants to be the top honcho there, and Iran, thinking itself superior to the Arab population …  I have Iranian friends, and when somebody makes the mistake of identifying them as Arab, they immediately say, no no, we’re Persians — which means there’s already an innate, almost a built-in superiority  among them.

LACIERDA. And the Persian empire was really stronger in the time of Darius…

CARLOS. And they will never forget that the Arabs were the ones who burned their libraries, they will never forget that, and of course that was a loss to our civilization, to humanity.

So you have different layers of conflicts, and you have, of course, the factor of the United States, a very young country, 250 years old, and Israel also a young country, as old as I am. And all these other things would be because Saudi and Iraq and so on are not growing pineapple and broccoli, they have oil, otherwise we would not even talk about it.

LACIERDA. So what led US President Donald trump to initiate authorize an air strike on Iran?

CARLOS. A number of things. If you want to think sinister about it, my hypothesis is you have to link it to the Epstein Files. When I content-analyzed Trump’s articulations with regard to this — he is a reluctant leader, he doesn’t want war, in fact he wants to be called the man of peace , the president of peace, but given all that, and  his proclivity for braggadocio… looking at it from a political psychological perspective, his wanting to be the top honcho, waging war, but against a country which was negotiating in Geneva just a week before. And so what was it about, how is it that suddenly there is a crescendo in the activity and BAM! they now invaded Iran in a joint operation. So again, I don’t think you have to be sinister, Edwin, to think about its relationship to the Epstein files.

LACIERDA. So it’s pretty similar to the film Wag the Dog. The numbers of the president were down and so to find another way of bringing up the numbers of President Trump … let’s do this attack on Iran.

CARLOS. Like a diversion.

LACIERDA. There’s a CNN poll right now that says it’s an uphill climb for him because the number of US citizens approving of the invasion is around 39 percent only.

CARLOS. Just this morning, or late last night, he already signaled, through Italy, that he wanted a ceasefire. Because he thought that this would be a surgical attack but he now discovered that Iran this time is no longer as accommodating, especially if purportedly they have killed the leaders.

LACIERDA. The stated purpose of President Trump was regime change but just using air strikes, with no ground forces, how would you possibly effect regime change? Does he expect the people within to mount a revolution?

CARLOS. That’s the tragic, almost comedic part, in this absurdity. Again, if you content-analyze his articulations over weeks, he was echoing Netanyahu. And if you think that Netanyahu has the goods on him on Epstein, crochet all the narratives together, Edwin, and you don’t need an IQ of 140 to get the picture.

LACIERDA. i saw a tweet of a Democrat congresswoman who said Netanyahu has always been peddling the idea for the US to do a strike on Iran — it was offered to George W Bush, to Obama — and only Donald trump agreed to do it.

CARLOS. But, again, it’s as if the speechwriter of Trump is really Netanyahu. And Netanyahu has been… I’m sure you’ve heard of the AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee], the biggest lobby group — they’re really lining up the pockets of both Democrats and Republicans, so everybody is getting benefits. And Netanyahu has been saying over and over again na baka magiging nuclear-capable na ang Iran. Paulit unit niyang sinasabi yan.

LACIERDA. But the International Atomic Energy Commission [IAEA] has found no evidence. Iran has uranium enrichment but the level of uranium enrichment is only for civilian-related technology. I think it’s around 60 percent, not enough to create weapons-grade nuclear systems.

CARLOS. Yah, but Grossi, the head of IAEA, before June, was mouthing what Netanyahu was saying —  they made it a casus belli for doing the 12-day June bombing of the subterranean nuclear facilities of Iran . … I really was flabbergasted that Grossi contradicted his previous announcements.

LACIERDA. The bombing of Iran, are there any positive effects to that? Do you think this will further degrade Hamas, Hezbollah…  the proxy groups of iran?

CARLOS. On the other hand, I think the assumptive frameworks of Trump and Netanyahu are off the mark. They used up so much war materiel last June … you cannot rebuild that right away because some of them will take years. And then of course some of the materials needed, nasa China, rare earth… So put all these together plus Iran now is no longer accommodating. You say, we will use the Samson option: tutal we’re going down, we will bring you down, too.

LACIERDA. The Jews have already achieved hegemony without even going to war, through the Abraham Accords with some of the Arab states. So why go to war if the US wants hegemony?

CARLOS. You know, if you’re losing that power… and we know that the US on all measures is really going down — we don’t have to talk financial, the unemployment etc — they’re gasping for air. You need to have something happening to you, some bravura action, and this is one of them.

And I think both Trump and Netanyahu will be genuinely disappointed because Iran will drag this. If they think this will be surgical, they’ve got another think coming. I think Iran will drag this to a war of attrition. And, as one of my students declared, time is on the side of Iran.

LACIERDA. They’re not as weak as Iraq.

CARLOS.  Not. Very different dynamics there. And if Trump thinks that he can cajole the Iranian public — oh, you know, your leader is dead, therefore move towards democracy — let us remember they were the ones who destroyed democracy in 1953 when Mosaddegh nationalized the oil industry.

The reason why I get irritated, Edwin, when people just shoot off their mouths and don’t know history — hindi ko naman sila minamaliit pero minamaliit ko sila dahil hindi nga sila nagbabasa ng kasaysayan. Please, magbasa ng kasaysayan bago makipagtunggali sa akin. Otherwise, zipper your mouth dahil nakakayamot na kayo.

LACIERDA. A New York columnist said Iran committed a grave mistake when they bombed the UAE and all the other territories where US bases are concerned, because they themselves were against Israel or the US attacking Iran. And because Iran attacked, they failed to drive a wedge between the US and the Arab states that are allies of the US.

CARLOS. That’s not true. Iran knows whereof it speaks and why it was attacking them. Because it is true also, as we know, that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has one of the biggest bases, Bahrain, Qatar, and that means that all the attacks of Iran will be to-whom-it-may-concern, particularly the US military bases, and they made that very clear.

And the statement of one from their collegial body, sabi kanina, this may even go beyond the region, territorially. That telegraphs to Trump na mag-cuidao ka, people are saying na baka magkaroon ka ng another 9/11. Sana hindi mangyari, ‘no.

LACIERDA. The more sinister way that Iran can cause global disorder is through terrorism. They have terrorist sleeper cells, Hamas and Hezbollah can be reactivated and cause turmoil in the US or Europe.

CARLOS. I think that would be like number 76 on their strategy. Sa ngayon, Iran is going for broke — naguusap lang tayo sa Geneva nung sang araw, tapos ito ang ginawa mo. And I suspect that Trump was cajoled to move. I don’t know what is the reason, the motivation  about why they are compelled to go along with Netanyahu’s plan. And I guess the only plausible explanation, call it a hypothesis because I don’t know any support for the same, would be the Epstein files.

LACIERDA. It appears to be so, ’no, and so far it’s not achieving the purpose, that is, to bring up his numbers. But President Trump already mentioned that this is going to be a four-week campaign. Do you see this statement as signaling limited objectives or expected escalation?  The possibility of a global war?

CARLOS. Two things. Will it move towards a global conflagration? I hope not. Less likely. I hope it encapsulates. Just keep it within the territory of the conflict areas. Second, many times when countries make plans there are strategic frameworks, but these are cases where there are many moving parts, many known unknowns, and many unknown unknowns in Iran because its a hermit country.

LACIERDA. But the population is really unhappy with their government, is that correct?

CARLOS. Yah, no doubt about that. But again, all around… I want the Venezuelans to decide what they want, we want the Iranians to decide what they want, whatever that may be. And no external entity should dictate that.

So right now there’s a propaganda war. I’m a fairly intelligent person, Edwin, but minsan nakaka-ano din ako ng fake news and can’t decide, ‘no, not being an IT person. I read it and work back, work forward … meron ba itong suporta all around? Like yung sinasabi ko kanina, that a member daw of their collegial body said this might go beyond the territory of West Asia, of the Middle East, I hope not!

People also are asking me, in an interview this morning, whether this is going to reach to where we are, and involve the missiles that are located in our EDCA bases, and I said, less likely. The only reason that would happen would be if Taiwan becomes an issue , which is less likely right now because the US cannot fight on two fronts.

LACIERDA. So far we have not heard anything from China… Russia… if im not mistaken.

CARLOS. Both have spoken but … words.

LACIERDA. But these two are allied nations of Iran.

CARLOS. They call themselves strategic allies. I don’t know the operational definition of strategic allies but I think both are cautious because if they enter this you will really have World War Three. These two actors are major actors.

LACIERDA. And it’s being mentioned that Iran will try to block the Strait of Hormuz to stop the passage in that area. However that would also affect their allies, such as China, which is heavily dependent on oil.

CARLOS. I’m sure they will calibrate. They will add the pluses and the minuses. And I’ve read — I don’t know if it’s fake news — that they’ve also mined that very narrow area. It will also hurt them. Because oil revenue is what keeps the war machinery going.

The people themselves, whether they like Khameini or not, his death, as reported, really hit them, you know. Here you have a country who continued to negotiate but the demands of Netanyahu, and of course Trump along with him, are really demands which any respectable sovereign country would not agree with. Imagine, to give up your ballistic missile system. Eh yun ang depensa mo eh. Parang, sige, pumasok ka na sa bahay ko, bahala ka na diyan kung anong gusto mo diyan. That’s exactly what Trump and Netanyahu want. And no self-respecting country would agree to those terms. So they were not negotiating. They were really demanding.

So why go through the rigmarole of Geneva, Oman, and wherever? That’s because Trump was also biding for time. Ang tingin ko sa kanya dito is the reluctant partner. … I want to use the word “reluctant”. As I said, Edwin, kino-content analyze ko ang mga sinasabi niya, and because he’s not reading from a speech, off the cuff … mas malapit yon sa damdamin niya, sa iniisip niya.

LACIERDA. Siya lang ang pangulong nag-invade sa Venezuela, sa Iran. Other presidents had the same problem with Venezuela and Iran, and yet they chose not to invade.

CARLOS. But Trump kasi is a different personality altogether. And to be fair, he’s also fairly intelligent, hindi naman siya magiging milyonaryo bilyonaryo kung tatanga-tanga siya. Nagca-calculate din yan.

But remember meron pang isang factor. November elections. November elections can change the face of Congress, both lower and upper chambers. And that is what Trump is afraid of. Because now may social media. Dati rati, tinatakpan nila yung bodybags na dumarating, mga namamatay na soldiers, sinasabi sa family, bigyan namin kayo ng salapi, wag na lang kayo magsalita. This time the dynamics are different.

LACIERDA. So if you were an Iranian, if you were a Persian, how would you feel that Khameini has been killed.  Apparently he was an obstructionist in all the democratic reforms offered by the more enlightened ayatollahs.

CARLOS. As always the public is not a monolith, Edwin. That means they can go from left to right. Those for Khameini from the beginning will always be for him whatever he does. Those who are against him will always be against him. The factor that would not be known to us is: to what extent would his death and his family galvanize those who are against him and those who are in the middle, the swing, to move towards defending the country. Because it now goes beyond Khameini and the family and the top leadership who were killed. … It’s really the swing vote, the one in between the left and the right that will matter right now.

LACIERDA. How soon do you think will the situation in Iran stabilize?

CARLOS. Not soon. If we believe what Iran is saying and they’re fairly consistent, they will drag this. They will drag this and the US and even Netanyahu will really have serious genuine logistics and rearming issues. And I really have my heart for the American soldiers. It’s rather personal to me because my granddaughter was married recently and her husband has a younger brother who is a US marine, bagong bago, and naka receive na sila ng memo to be ready to be deployed. Eh 24 lang yung bata . So young. Tapos gagawing bala ng kanyon, in a manner of speaking.

LACIERDA. Ground forces will be deployed to Iran?

CARLOS. It’s part of the plan but, again, I think it will be number 76 in their reckoning. Because you know what happens when you put Americans on the ground. Parang jungle warfare yan. And you know the topography of Iran, di ba. Alam nila yung kanilang teritoryo. Di alam yan ng invading force, whatever composite.  And always our hearts will be for the innocents, for the soldiers, on all sides, whose lives will be lost because of the hubris of two malevolent leaders.

LACIERDA. When you were security adviser, did you anticipate any turmoil in the Middle East or were you just focused on the China concern.

CARLOS. The Middle East has always been a powder keg. It has never been stable for a long long time. That was why, when I had a 3-week lecture series in Turkey, natuwa ako because that was the time Erdogan wanted a common market. Gusto niyang kopyahin yung E.U. model, and I really liked that because I was there to talk about the ASEAN and the move towards regional integration.

LACIERDA. Anong gusto ng Turkey na common market, its already part of EU.

CARLOS. Hindi pa siya part of EU. Part siya ng NATO. … Ang gusto niya — different levels kasi bago maging common market — free trade muna, tapos common market, hanggang mag- reach ka doon sa level ng European Union ngayon, na meron nang common economic policy and so on. Ang ganda ng plano niya because gusto niya to stitch them all together, these warring groups in the middle East, pati Israel. Ang ganda nung plano.

But in response to your question. When I was NSA, this did not loom large … at the time China was the pivot of our national security concerns. But the dynamics changed, of course, radically, after I left because the president moved towards the arms of the Americans.

LACIERDA. Do you believe that the Philippines should close all the EDCA sites so that we would not be a target of Iran?

CARLOS. Siguro it will not happen now. It’s less likely because we are so deeply embedded in the American embrace plus I don’t know if they’ve already established Subic as an ammunition depot, and I think that is a very very major error in judgment.

… All of this will have an impact on us. I don’t know what percentage of our oil is coming from this area, I would imagine a large percentage. I remember in the seventies, the oil embargo, my husband would get up at 3 or 4 a.m. to line up sa Philcoa. Yung queue hanggang sa Regladao sa Fairview. Tapos ang makukuha lang namin 10 liters.

Pero that said, siguro kung gusto mo yung upside nito, people will walk, they’ll be healthier, people will cycle, they’ll be healthier, and maybe, like during the Japanese occupation we will plant.

Ma-affect ang ating food sources, syempre ang transport costs mo tataas bigla. Tatamaan tayo. Pero sabi nga ng nanay ko, during the Japanese occupation they were really forced to plant mga kangkong, mga kamote, yung short-term, pechay, ganyan. And we survived. Kasi tayo, we are a hardy people we will plant, do whatever needs to be done. ***