The Philippine government has properly expressed its moral indignation over the sudden closure of three foreign missions in Makati.  As I told the members of the diplomatic corps in a meeting that I had convened  on very short notice at the Department of Foreign Affairs, this decision had given the Philippines, a country leading the fight against international terrorism in Southeast Asia, an undeserved blackeye and a degree of political disrepute before the international community.

Having said that, I also do not see the point in some of our countrymen going overboard to ruin our relations with Australia, Canada, and the European Commission out of spite, through juvenile responses, such as the proposal to also shut down our embassies and consulates in those countries.  As Senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. has trenchantly put it, Canada, Australia and the European Commission are among the most generous aid givers to the Philippines, especially to Mindanao.  In their hearts they cannot wish this country ill.

What the media have overlooked is that in spite of the so-called closures, the three embassies have decided to continue essential consular services from alternative sites, mainly the ambassadors” residences and hotel rooms in the same Makati area, while exploring relocation possibilities.  In hindsight the buildings occupied by them have turned out to be unsuitable in the post 9/11 and the Bali bombing scenarios.  Secretary Joey Lina and Mayor Jejomar Binay have offered to help them relocate to more suitable places.

The Department of Foreign Affairs has already done what is necessary and proper.  In the case of Australia we have secured the commitment of the government at Canberra, at highest levels, that the Manila embassy will resume normal operations after a few days. The ambassadors themselves have assured us that the so-called closure is under constant, daily review.

Some intelligence officials have been quoted as saying that the DFA has taken “a weak stand.”  Apparently they would like to see the secretary of foreign affairs strut on the world stage and take a more combative posture.  That is a job cut out for members of Congress who are not constrained by diplomatic duties or intelligence officials smarting from hurt egos.  The duty of the Department of Foreign Affairs, as the Constitution states,   is to “adhere to a policy of peace, justice, equality, justice and freedom, cooperation and amity with all nations.”

As I have said earlier in another context, political bravado cannot substitute for an intelligent and sober foreign policy. The outspoken tourism secretary, Richard Gordon, and the Secretary of Interior and Local Governments, Joey Lina, fully understand this.

So much unnecessary acrimony between friendly nations and partners in the fight against terrorism can only hurt the national interest.  It may salve some big official egos but the national interest is something else, and this is the single constitutional lodestar that should guide foreign policy.

On the eve of my departure for Japan to join the President’s state visit, I have instructed the DFA to pursue all the necessary measures with the diplomatic community so that normalcy may be restored at the earliest possible time.