The silent (super) majority

Barely three months into his term, President Duterte is already making waves in the international media, albeit on the negative side.

Duterte’s campaign agenda was simple: address criminality, drugs and corruption. He vowed real and no-nonsense change. As I said in my previous column “The Duterte Mystique,” this was what made him extremely popular with voters and which, undoubtedly, catapulted him to power out of nowhere.

The President’s mantra seems to be that if the government proactively addresses these problems, everything will follow as a matter of course, and the Philippines will in no time occupy its rightful place in the community of nations.

The early months of his presidency showed his resolve and sincerity. He has even caused the resignation of government officials who have been corrupted by criminality based on available evidence.

To the delight of the business sector, Duterte also ordered government agencies to simplify corruption-prone bureaucratic procedures. Even the much-talked about yet long-delayed public private partnership (PPP) program is now running at a much faster pace.

Duterte has drawn global attention for his unorthodox brand of governance. He is being portrayed as a villain in the global scene by the international media. He even locked horns with United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and United States President Barack Obama.

Just this week, the President has also unleashed profanities against the European Union.

The President appears unfazed amid the controversy. As far as he is concerned, his critics do not understand the gravity of the drug situation.  He is willing to sacrifice everything—his life, honor and the presidency—to fulfill  his covenant with his people.

As one former senator told me, “Finally, we have a President who is willing to take risks to get things done.” Of course, many of us are keeping our fingers crossed he will keep his word he will “conduct [himself] more in keeping with the dignity of [his] office” and that his “adherence to due process and the rule of law is uncompromising.”

But what is clearly perceptible is the deafening silence of a super majority amid all the controversy.  Even politicians, who normally love to grandstand, are eloquently silent on the matter.  Could it be that some  politicians are afraid Duterte will drag their names  into  the matrix of drug-related personalities and the Napoles controversy? Could it be that businessmen are afraid of being named as oligarchs who should be destroyed?

Or, could it be the people are so frustrated of the sins of the past they are willing to bet on his unorthodox brand of governance? Could  it be that a super majority of our people genuinely agree, as I do, that what the country needs is an iron-fisted leader?

Whatever the reasons are, what  comes to mind from my knowledge of Asian history is Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, Malaysia’s Prime Minister Mahathir, and Thailand’s Prime Minister Thaksin Shiniwatra. These Asian leaders were bitterly criticized for their strong-hand brand of leadership.

They took the bitter pill. Look at where they are now in the community of nations.

(The author can be e-mailed at [email protected])