In a country where the government and media are notoriously partisan, one of the most notable differences between Washington and Manila is the language of its foreign ambassadors.
In Manila, the ambassador to Washington is a Filipino.
In Washington, he is an American.
Both are known for their willingness to make frequent, politically charged statements, whether it’s a trip to the White House or to a World Food Program dinner.
And it’s the diplomatic language that has made the difference.
The Filipino-American ambassador, Daniel G. Santos, recently made headlines when he told an audience at a forum in Washington that he’s “not averse to the language and the rhetoric” of the United States, adding that he “believes that a strong alliance with the United State will make us stronger.”
And the ambassador, David A. Carpio, who’s from the Philippines, said the two countries have a long-standing relationship and that he considers the United Kingdom to be a “friend of our country.”
The Philippines has been the most active member of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a 12-nation trade pact that was finalized in Singapore in March and is set to be signed in Washington next week.
For years, Manila has lobbied for access to the TPP, even before it was finalized.
Manila was one of a handful of countries that were excluded from the agreement, but it’s not the only country to push for access.
In 2014, Manila filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to get access to some TPP provisions.
And the Philippines also has been vocal about its desire to join the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) after the Trump administration said it would not pursue it.
That would allow the U