A high ranking United States embassy official has predicted an opposition leadership (MALAYA, July 6).

The prediction does not encourage me because what is acceptable as "responsible" behavior in the American analyst’s eyes is the kind of behavior that will allow the relationship between the United States and the Philippines to "prosper." Such a leadership will not necessarily be good for the Philippines.

The leadership of people like Cesar Virata, Jaime Laya, and Roberto Ongpin -- all "responsible" people in American eyes -- bears a major responsibility for the present economic crash.

And among the opposition figures, the leaders who are "responsible" in American eyes, are not likely to do much better. While I deeply respect Jovito Salonga professionally and Eva Estrada-Kalaw personally, I feel that if they replace Marcos, they will turn over the economy to the technocrats who are mainly responsible for the bind we are in today. All that Salvador Laurel has demonstrated is the skill for political maneuvering.

But even if we look at the would-be leaders who would be "responsible" in American eyes, our prospects are no better. We have Aquilino Pimemtel, whose mishandling of foreign funds is a far more important issue than the Imelda tendencies of his wife; Homobono Adaza, who seems more interested in making Pimentel look bad than grappling with the issues that confront us; and Jose Diokno and Lorenzo Tanada whose continued prominence despite their age tells us that there is no one in the splintered Opposition whose leadership will permit these two worthy but decrepit gentlemen to retire.

The present would be more bearable if there were a better future to look forward to. A post-Marcos leadership that would be "responsible" in American eyes presents a no better prospect than the leadership of the Conrado Balwegs whose idea of good cash crop is marijuana.

QUIRINO TORRES