n this editorial, we limit our discussion to former presidents. We cannot render an opinion on our current president who has just started his term in office.

As far as we're concerned, no former president even comes close to Fidel V. Ramos. His honesty, stateliness, and work ethic propelled the country forward at a time when the Philippines was derisively referred to as "the sick man of Asia."

"Steady Eddie" as he was often called, came to the office with impeccable credentials. Not only was he a West Point graduate, but he also had decades of government service under his belt. With Ramos at the helm, the Philippines was poised to regain its leadership role in Southeast Asia.

But alas, the president's single six-year term as mandated by the new Philippine Constitution proved too short to realize lasting gains. Nevertheless, the Ramos administration made sure that the next president would inherit a well-functioning democracy with a solid economy to continue the country's march towards development.

Sadly, the administration's well-laid plans were for naught after Joseph Estrada won the presidency. Just like Corazon Aquino who preceded Ramos, Estrada who succeeded him was even more unqualified than Aquino.

Estrada's tenure as president was continually plagued by scandal and charges of corruption. His detractors accused the president's friends and cronies of operating with impunity at every level of government. Sadly, most of the gains of the Ramos administration's gains were squandered during Estrada's two years in office.

Gloria Arroyo, who replaced Estrada after he resigned his post following the EDSA Dos revolution, was likewise hounded by accusations of corruption. Arroyo's detractors claim her administration became a well-oiled machine that specialized in kickbacks and under-the-table deals. Under Arroyo, who unfortunately lasted ten years in office, the Philippines lost further ground and appeared to institutionalize opaqueness at all levels of government. Not surprisingly, both Estrada and Arroyo were jailed after their terms in office.

Noynoy Aquino replaced Arroyo in 2010. With Noynoy Aquino, some semblance of normalcy returned to government. Corruption was held at bay and the Philippines attained its first-ever investment grade rating from top credit rating agencies.

Noynoy Aquino's presidency can be seen as a net positive for the Philippines. Unfortunately, his inexperience, and the already ingrained corruption built up over more than a decade by his two predecessors, kept him from achieving more significant economic development for the country.

Rodrigo Duterte, who replaced Noynoy Aquino as president appears to have hammered the final nail into the coffin of Ramos' quest to turn the Philippines into a world-class country Filipinos can be proud of. Like Estrada, Duterte was a small-town mayor of Far-flung Davao City. Even worse, he had an autocratic bent and chose to align himself with autocracies such as China and Russia. The sheer brutality of his war against drugs which killed thousands of suspected drug addicts has been universally derided as simply wrongheaded on so many levels.

Duterte is currently being investigated by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. Like Estrada and Arroyo before him, he may find himself detained or incarcerated.

With Duterte, the Philippines has lost much of its luster as a god-fearing and liberal democracy. And his subservient attitude towards China has kept Philippine territory, in the South China Sea, under Chinese control.

Given the country's generally dreadful experience with former presidents (post EDSA), Fidel Ramos stands out as a shining example of what a Filipino president should be. If those who followed him were even half of what he was, the country would be in a much better place than it is today.

The Philippines' travails over the past three decades are a stark reminder that leadership does matter. Unqualified leaders really do cause lasting damage that subsequent generations—our children and grandchildren—have to fix. The Philippines now lags far behind many of its Asian neighbors. Therefore we as a nation can no longer afford to take chances with second-rate leaders. Going forward only the best, most talented, battle-tested, individuals should be allowed to lead the country.

Published 8/7/2022