A REQUIEM FOR THE EDSA SYSTEM? Part 1 of 2 - Walden Bello

PR

To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful." - Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965)

**************************

NOTES TO READERS:  
1. Colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, etc. THANKS!!
2. Click the following underlined title/link to checkout these Essential/Primary Readings About Us Filipino Natives:
Primary Blog Posts/Readings for my fellow, Native (Malay/Indio) Filipinos-in-the-Philippines
3. Instantly translate to any of 71 foreign languages. Go to the sidebar on the right to choose your preferred language.
*************************

April 14, 2004

The history of the last 18 years has been a dreary one for most Filipinos.  The promise of political liberation and economic and social progress that accompanied the overthrow of the Marcos dictatorship in February 1986 remained just that: a promise.

As the campaign for the presidential elections of May 2004 unfolds, there is a sense in the air that the “EDSA system” may be on its last legs.  The administration and the opposition slates are made up of candidates pirated from one another’s ranks; yesterday’s enemies are today’s comrades.  

The overwhelming need is for a program for economic growth that will address the country’s gaping social inequalities, yet it is a topic studiously avoided by the leading candidates—the administration because it has led the country to its worse fiscal crisis, the opposition because its presidential candidate does not have a grasp of basic economics.

A carbon copy of the electoral democracy that was the country’s system of governance before it was destroyed by Ferdinand Marcos in September 1972, EDSA has reproduced most of its faults of the former:  it has encouraged maximum factional competition among the elite while allowing them to maintain a united front against any change in the system of social and economic inequality.

Two Sides of the EDSA System
The staying power of the EDSA system is that, in contrast to the Marcos regime, it is democratic.  Yet it is democratic in the narrow sense of making elections the arbiter of political succession.  In the principle of one man or woman, one vote, there is formal equality.  

Yet this formal equality that exists cannot but be subverted by its being embedded in a social and economic system marked by great disparities of wealth and income.  Like the American political system on which it is modeled, the genius of the EDSA system, from the perspective of the Philippine elite, is the way it harnesses elections to socially conservative ends.   

Running for office at any level of government is prohibitively expensive so that only the wealthy or those backed by wealth can usually think about standing for elections. Thus the masses do choose their representatives, but they choose from a limited pool of people of means that may belong to different factions—those “in” and those “out” of power—but are not different ideologically.  

The beauty of the system is that by periodically engaging the people in an exercise to choose among different members of the elite, elections make voters active participants in legitimizing the social and economic status quo.  Thus has emerged the great Philippine paradox: an extremely lively play of electoral politics unfolding above an immobile class structure that is one of the worst in Asia.

Throughout the EDSA years, the Filipino masses were largely a force that was manipulated electorally to achieve the political ends of competing elite alliances.  Yet coexisting with the electoral tradition of the EDSA system is another one–an insurrectionary dimension that derives its legitimacy from the manner in which Ferdinand Marcos was ousted from power.  

In the last 18 years, it was through an appeal to this insurrectionary tradition that the masses occasionally erupted on the national scene, bursting the electoral parameters to which the elite wanted to confine them. 

In January 2001, the middle class, driven by anti-corruption sentiment, served as the base for the extra-constitutional removal of Joseph Estrada from the presidency in what is now known as EDSA II.  Then three months later, in what is now known as EDSA III, the lower classes, particularly the urban poor, came together in a mass uprising that was only dispersed by the military at the gates of Malacanang. 

Especially in the case of EDSA III, elite personalities were only nominally at the head of an angry class-based urban insurgency that took the form of a movement to restore to power a defrocked leader who, despite a record of corruption, was seen as a man of the masses.  After each insurgency, however, politics settled down to a normal electoral competition managed by elite politicians.

The Anti-Developmental State
While entrenched corruption is the feature of the EDSA system that has elicited loud protest from the middle classes, it has been the utter failure of the system to deliver economic prosperity and reduce the inequality that is the greatest source of mass alienation.  Close to 10 percent of the Filipino nation, or over seven million Filipinos, now work or live abroad, and, according to recent surveys, one out of five Filipinos wants to migrate.  

The sense of frustration is deepened by the widespread sense that our neighbors in Southeast Asia were achieving “economic miracles” while we were paralyzed by factional politics and mistaken policies.  However much we may decry its authoritarian policies, it is hard to deny that Singapore, with its controlled competition, prosperity, and security, has become to many Filipinos the ideal polity, the anti-thesis of an EDSA system that has become deeply dysfunctional.

Economic stagnation, according to some analysts, may be related to the political system’s focus on elite representation and the parliamentary mechanisms to assure this rather than on the development of a strong central bureaucracy that is relatively autonomous from the private sector.   The influence of pre-1930’s American model of governance that guided the formation of the colonial and post-colonial state in the Philippines is again evident here. 

With the rationale of discouraging tyranny, the American pattern of a weak central authority coexisting with a powerful upper-class social organization (“civil society,” in today’s parlance) was reproduced in the Philippines, creating a weak state that was constantly captured by upper-class interests and preventing the emergence of the activist “developmental” state that disciplined the private sector in other societies in post-war Asia.    

In his influential book on contemporary politics in the US, Daniel Lazare says, “Government in America doesn’t work because it’s not supposed to work.”   For much the same reason, the subversion of the democratic potential of the masses by the realities of concentrated wealth and power, one can say the same thing about the Philippines. 

How long such a state of affairs can persist is anybody’s guess.  But the really deep sense of frustration, bitter electoral competition, and EDSA’s insurrectionary tradition can interact in volatile ways.  EDSA III showed how this mix can produce a lower-class insurgency, something that can be set off by a concatenation of events.  

To many observers, the question is not if EDSA III can happen again but when.

EDSA, NEO-LIBERALISM AND GLOBALIZATION - Walden Bello 3/18/2017...[OUR ROAD TO PERDITION]

"the EDSA system failed to translate its promise of delivering less poverty, more equality, and more social justice into reality."

"the Philippines had become one of four guinea pigs of the new structural adjustment program unveiled by the World Bank(WB)"


*************************

NOTES TO NEW READERS/VISITORS:  

1. Colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. PLEASE SHARE: Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, etc. THANKS!!

2. Click the following underlined title/link to checkout these Essential/Primary Readings About Us Filipino Natives:

Primary Blog Posts/Readings for my fellow, Native (Malay/Indio) Filipinos-in-the-Philippines

3. Instantly translate to any of 71 foreign languages. Go to the sidebar on the right to choose your language. Fellow native Filipinos translation in Cebuano and Tagalog.

4. The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies...The selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep, serious thoughts per my MISSION Statement and hopefully to rock our boat of ignorance, apathy, and complacency, and hopefully lead to active citizenship.

LET US NOT KEEP OUR HEADS IN THE SAND

REMINDER: March 3, 2022. The total number of postings to date = is 578. Use keywords in the sidebar: PAST POSTINGS, Click LABEL (sorted by number of related posts)

to access.

*************************

EDSA, NEO-LIBERALISM, AND GLOBALIZATION
-- Walden Bello 3/18/2017
(Delivered at Coalesce Conference, sponsored by Ateneo Lex, Ateneo de Manila, March 18, 2017.)

Most of you had not yet seen the light of day when the EDSA Uprising took place in February 1986. To my generation, this event was a memorable step in the Philippines' struggle for democracy. The three decades that followed were marked by the reign of liberal democracy as the country’s political regime. Those thirty years coincided with the rise and dominance of neoliberalism as an economic ideology and globalization as an economic trend.

It is now clear that those three decades constituted a lost opportunity for the Filipino people, that the promise of the EDSA Republic was subverted by the neoliberal and pro-globalization policies that were adopted by the administrations that reigned between 1986 and 2016. 

It is also evident from the tumultuous events of the last year that what we now call Dutertismo is to a great extent an angry and resentful reaction to the EDSA Republic’s failure to live up to the promise that accompanied its birth.

My focus in this talk will be on how neoliberalism and globalization combined with the continuing gross inequality in the distribution of income and wealth to subvert the promise of EDSA. I would like to begin, however, by briefly discussing the failure of EDSA to deliver on the political front.

Unhealthy Birthmarks

There were three unhealthy birthmarks that marred the EDSA Republic: 

1. the role of the military,

2. the intervention of the United States, and

3. the leadership of the elite.

The prominent role of the military rebels in triggering the insurrection gave them a sense of having a special role in the post-Marcos dispensation. Only after seven failed coups was the civilian constitutional role stabilized. But, in retrospect, military discontent was not as damaging to the EDSA Republic as US patronage and elite hegemony.

The US was not only a player; it was a decisive player. Even before the Aquino assassination in 1983, Washington sought to nudge Marcos and the elite opposition to arrive at some compromise. These pressures escalated in 1985, resulting in Marcos’ calling for the snap elections that became the vehicle for the mobilization of the middle class and some of the popular sectors against the regime and paving the way for the military mutiny. At that point, powerful forces in Washington overcame President Ronald Reagan’s reluctance to cut Marcos loose and moved to directly remove the dictator from the scene. 

At an off-the-record briefing at the State Department on April 23, 1986, to which I was mistakenly invited, Undersecretary of State Michael Armacost openly boasted of how the US moved during Marcos’ last months in power: “Our objective was to capture… to encourage the democratic forces of the center, then consolidate control by the middle and also win away from the soft support of the NPA [New People’s Army]. So far, so good.”

The US role in serving as a midwife led it to consider the EDSA regime as a protectorate. While the opposition of the Senate majority to the new bases treaty was disconcerting to Washington, it got what it wanted from the government in virtually all other areas. It got Cory Aquino to make repayment of the foreign debt–especially that owed to US banks–the top priority of the new government. And it eventually brought its overwhelming military presence back with the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), where Cory’s son, President Benigno Aquino III, agreed to allow Washington to set up US bases in nominally Philippine bases.

The third flaw of the EDSA Revolution is that it was an uprising whose direction was set by the anti-Marcos factions of the elite. Their aim was to restore competition among the elites while containing pressures for structural change.

The 1987 Constitution enshrined the rhetoric of democracy, human rights, due process, and social justice, but these aspirations were frozen in amber owing to the dearth of implementing laws and actions that would translate them into reality. Via periodic electoral exercises, the factional monopoly of power under Marcos became a class monopoly, open to intra-elite competition for the most important national, regional, and local offices but virtually closed to the lower orders as money politics became the order of the day.

The Neo-liberal Debacle
Despite its political shortcomings, the EDSA regime would probably have retained a significant amount of support had it delivered on the economic front. Indeed, it would be an understatement to say that the EDSA system failed to translate its promise of delivering less poverty, more equality, and more social justice into reality. 

Perhaps the key tragedy of the EDSA Republic was that it came into being right at the time that neoliberalism was on the ascendant as an ideology and globalization became the flavor of the month for capitalism. Even before the February 1986 uprising, the Philippines had become one of four guinea pigs of the new structural adjustment program unveiled by the World Bank(WB), which aimed to bring down tariffs, deregulate the economy, and privatize government enterprises.

As noted above, under the administration of Corazon Aquino, pressure from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and US banks made repayment of the foreign debt the top national economic priority, and Washington and the IMF ensured that succeeding administrations would follow suit by having Congress adopt the automatic appropriations law that made repayment of the state’s debt the first cut in the national budget. 

Over the next three decades, debt servicing would take up to 20 to 45% of the annual government budget, crippling the government’s capacity to invest and stimulate economic growth and provide essential social services.

With the 1992-98 administration of Fidel Ramos, neoliberalism reached its apogee: tariffs were radically cut to zero-to-five percent, deregulation and privatization were sped up, and the Philippines joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) — to “benefit”, it was said, from the tide of corporate-driven globalization. 

Under Ramos and later administrations, the contours of the EDSA political economy were firmed up: pro-market policies, relentless privatization, export-oriented development, the export of labor, low wages to attract foreign investors, and conservative monetary and fiscal management.

As the Philippines’ neighbors retained high levels of economic protection, neoliberal policies contributed to the Philippines’ having the second-lowest yearly average growth rate in Southeast Asia from 1990 to 2010. Even the second-tier ASEAN economies of Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Burma outstripped it.

The sad reality is that liberalization was a program of unilateral disarmament that resulted in the destabilization of almost all sectors of manufacturing, resulting in our de-industrialization. 

Let me cite the sad plight of our once world-class shoe industry. In the 1960s and 1970s, our shoe industry based in Marikina was very dynamic, with some 2000 factories. Owing to liberalization and smuggling, there are only some 100 factories left today. And with the demise of the industry, the leather, and tanning industry that serviced the shoe industry whose center was Maycawayan, Bulacan, also virtually disappeared.

Let us briefly touch on our agriculture. Before we joined the World Trade Organization in 1995, we were a net agricultural exporting country. Free trade turned us into a net agricultural importing country, with cheap imports eroding all sectors of the industry from vegetables to grain to poultry and meat. The crisis of our farmers stems not only from the continuing unequal distribution of land but also from the removal of protection of our agricultural economy.

De-industrialization and agro-destabilization were one face of globalization. The other was our conversion into a remittance-dependent economy as we were pushed into an international division of labor in which we became a prime exporter of cheap labor to the global economy. 

In short, globalization involved the disintegration of our domestic economy and our integration into the global economy as a provider of low-wage unskilled and semi-skilled labor. 

To a great extent, education has become a process of preparing workers for export abroad. As the former chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Overseas Workers, who witnessed first hand the tremendous insecurity of our migrant workers, I can tell you that this was a bad bargain.

Let me continue. Although the economy registered 6-7% growth rates from 2012 to 2015, there was no “trickle-down” to counter the legacy of stagnation bequeathed by neoliberal policies. At nearly 25% of the population, the percentage living in poverty in 2015 was practically the same as in 2003. 

The Gini coefficient, the best summary measure of inequality, jumped from 0.438 in 1991 to 0.506 in 2009, among the highest in the world. For many Filipinos, the statistics were superfluous. Extreme poverty was so wretchedly visible in the big urban poor clusters within and surrounding Metro Manila and in depressed rural communities throughout the country.

Corruption and Class
The neoliberal paradigm was not, however, the only cause of the EDSA regime’s failure to address the deepening social crisis. Corruption was a problem, as it was in the Philippines’ neighbors. The administrations of Joseph Estrada and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo became synonymous with unbridled corruption.

But even more consequential than corruption was class. Just as they had forced Marcos to halt his land reform program in the 1970s, the landed class successfully resisted the implementation of Republic Act 6657, Cory Aquino’s already watered-down land reform program. 

A civil society push to re-energize the program, which was passed in 2009, bogged down under the Benigno Aquino III administration owing to lack of political will and presidential indifference. By the end of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program with Extension Law (CARPER) in 2014, about 700,000 hectares of the best private land in the country remained in the hands of landlords, violence against land reform beneficiaries was common, and rural poverty remained stubbornly high.

Unaccompanied by structural reforms, the World Bank-supported the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) anti-poverty program of the Aquino administration, though it eventually covered some 4.4 million families or nearly one-fifth of the population, could barely make a dent on poverty and inequality.

Over the Cliff
Class callousness, double standards, and inept governance finally drove the EDSA Republic to the edge of the cliff during the Aquino III period. 

Popular support had steadied the EDSA Republic when it was challenged by military coups in the late eighties. By 2016, however, three decades of disillusionment had made it a tired, discredited system waiting to be pushed over the cliff, and it was, by the electoral insurgency that brought Duterte to power and provided legitimacy to his brazen moves toward fascism. 

Dutertismo is EDSA’s vengeful offspring even as the administration has not broken with the EDSA Republic’s failed economic policies. That is, however, another story.

So let me just end by saying that neoliberalism and globalization have been discredited globally, especially after the 2008 global financial crisis. Our experience is not unique. And the response has been, as in the Philippines, a turn towards fascist or authoritarian populist solutions. 

The challenge to us at this point is to break with this failed economic model and junk the old mantras about the so-called benefits of globalization. 

That won’t be easy, but we have no choice.

Thank you.

Suicide of Gen. Angelo Reyes, Corruption in the AFP & the late Capt. Rene Jarque (PMA & West Point) - REPOSTED FROM 09/10/2005

"I either want less corruption, or more chance to participate in it." - Ashleigh Brilliant, 1933"


"Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might endanger the morals of an individual; the former invariably endangers the morals of the entire country." - Karl Kraus, 1874-1936."

*****************************************

Notes: Colored, underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posts/articles. Forwarding this and other posts to relatives and friends, especially those in the homeland, is greatly appreciated). To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr,Twitter,Facebook, etc. THANKS!!

****************************************

Hi All,


NOTE: The hearings on AFP corruption and the subsequent suicide of Gen. Angelo Reyes highlight the imperatives to relentlessly continue and persevere in the investigations of corruption in the AFP, especially in its higher echelons and their partners in recent administrations, from Ferdinand Marcos, through Cora Aquino, Fidel Ramos, Joseph Estrada and most recently that of former President Gloria-Macapagal-Arroyo. 

Our armed forces who are supposed to protect the native citizenry have turned into mini-centurions, mimicking the "generals and colonels" of Latin America and/or as "men with guns," and being influenced by their JUSMAG-training; latter historically tunnel-visioned by vehement anti-communism (which equates Filipino nationalism as communism) -- allowed by the creeping militarization of United States society (as warned by WW2 Allied commander General and later two-term U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower in his last/valedictory address).


Thanks to this one legacy of the Marcos dictatorship, that of "taking care of the armed forces"-- a common practice among overt and covert dictators around the world -- to gain unquestioning loyalty from the military top brass, gross military corruption has now become a characteristic of our Philippine society. 

In our homeland, from the time of Marcos, we have come to witness so many "mistah" or "so-called officer and gentleman," turn into men who have enriched themselves by just being or having been soldiers!! [I grew up admiring PMA'ers - I have a much older first cousin from the late 1940s, I do not know how the newer breeds are seen since Marcos to now]. 


The case of Reyes may just be the tip of the iceberg, an instance of grave corruption, a tree in the forest of systemic corruption. Let us investigate and search for the truth and convict the guilty ones: Lt.. Gen. Ligot, Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia, and the rest. 


But at the same time, let us take a deep and critical look to see the forest for the trees so that we native Filipinos can minimize, if not eliminate, abuses of power, i.e. thievery of public funds by military officers and their civilian counterparts. 

Thievery may kill a guilty few, but as a consequence of the selfish and anti-nationalistic action by these officer-thieves, their grand corruption has been killing --through deprivation-- so many more of our poor, hungry and sick native Filipinos.


The below article by the late Capt. Rene Jarque tells us to do exactly that:  to examine the AFP, its reason and purpose for being, its relation to "the people," its source of power, its relation to the civilian government in our Republic, etc.


PS. Use Google Search if details on the case/events of Gen. Angelo Reyes are sought.  


 -Bert 02/14/2011



*************************************************


Hi All,


Given the sad realities and dire straits of the native Filipino majority in the homeland, it is a rare occasion that we see a few individuals who may give us hope that the lights are not completely out.


It is often frustrating and maddening to read or hear columnists, soldiers, politicians, businessmen, churchmen, etc. automatically, like parrots, charge and label those who speak out against the government and for the people as all "communists," etc. inadvertently implying that only communists really care for the ordinary man. 

That's how regressive, anachronistic and stunted our Filipino thinking is.

Anyway, Here's an article by Capt. Rene Jarque, one of these few --obviously non-communist-- who speaks out; a relatively, young ex-military (PMA/West Point Class 1986) officer.

UPDATE: I found this news shockingly sad and an enormous loss to the homeland: minutes after posting this one, a relative emailed to say that former Captain Rene N. Jarque had a cardiac arrest last August 19, 2005 in Jakarta (he was to turn 41 in October). We seem to have only a "few good men" and for some reason, the homeland loses them. We wonder why them?

For related postings and website, please click below URLs:

1.  PMA alumni & corruption in the AFP
2. What's with the Armed Forces by the late Capt. Rene Jarque
3.  AFP "soldier-dissenters" website (Update - for unknown reason, the website disappeared or removed after the Gloria Arroyo administration ended; and the Aquino regime began; to me an indication of its short-term goal and not really for the country)

*************************************************************

THE PHILIPPINES NEED A CONSTRUCTIVE ARMED FORCES

In this period of uncertainty, it is time for the armed forces, as the protector and defender of the people, to play a constructive role so that the nation can alter course with the right leaders and build a true democratic society so the people may have a firm hope in the future.

BY RENE N. JARQUE, Bulatlat

During the 1989 coup attempt I was a young lieutenant in the First Scout Ranger Regiment. After that disaster, I asked myself this question:

The ideals of democracy state that the Army stands for the people and not just the privileged few. However, political reality dictates that the Army is really of the constituted government. In our country, the government is the privileged few and their network of relatives and patrons. 

What then if the policies and actions of government do not coincide with the common aspirations and general welfare of the people. Should soldiers be guided by their collective conscience or by their strict military oath to obey their civilian leaders as embodied in the Constitution they have sworn to defend, in the same way the Centurions obeyed their decadent emperors, the way the Wehrmacht blindly obeyed Hitler?

At this point, whose is the Army, the government’s or the people’s? To whom does the Army now owe its allegiance? To whom does it rightfully or conscientiously belong? (1)

Sixteen years after, that question is still very much relevant. Today, there is tremendous disenchantment with government and the public is in a restive mood. The economy is hobbling along burdened by poverty, foreign debt, high fuel prices, inflation, unemployment, budget deficit and uncontrolled population growth. Peace and order is unsteady with insurgency, terrorism and criminality. 

Corruption scandals plague the presidency and the military. Her Excellency is being accused of cheating in the last election and her spin doctors are taking the people for a ride in a circus of lies and deception. Our country today is being bamboozled by a discredited, crippled and insecure government which does not seem to have a clue, cannot get its act together and lacks the strength of character to lead the nation out of its misery. There is a crisis in national leadership and the people are confused and demoralized.

Once again, we are careening into political turmoil that threatens our fragile democracy. To some, the situation is ripe for a change in government and as such, there are calls for a “revolutionary government” and rumors of destabilization plots and coup d’etat abound. In this time of uncertainty and discontent, what should the military do? What should be its role? Should it intervene as in 1986 and 2001? 

What should the armed forces do to ensure that the government does not abuse its power, promote the welfare of the people while averting a civil revolution? Let us together explore these and other questions in this paper which is divided into three parts:
I. Armed Forces and the Constitution
II. Armed Forces in Philippine Society
III. Challenges Ahead for the Armed Forces


I. ARMED FORCES AND THE CONSTITUTION

The 1987 Constitution contains several provisions directly referring to the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). The most important of them and the subject of much debate is Article II, Section 3 which states that “Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.” 

Fr. Joaquin Bernas calls the first provision the “civilian authority clause” and explains that civilian authority is essentially the “supremacy of the law” and a soldier renounces political ambition when he subordinates himself to civilian authority. He calls the second provision the “mark of sovereignty” implying the professionalism which should be inherent in the armed forces as guardians of the majesty of the law. 

The soldier is expected to divorce himself from politics because he supposedly “finds nobility, dignity and honor in being the guardian of the people and a legitimate government”.(2) 

The two other important provisions are Article XVI, Section 5, paragraph 1: “All members of the armed forces shall take an oath or affirmation to uphold and defend this Constitution” and paragraph 3: “Professionalism in the armed forces and adequate remuneration and benefits of its members shall be the prime concern of the State. The armed forces shall be insulated from partisan politics. No member of the military shall engage directly or indirectly in any partisan political activity, except to vote.” 

This is supported by the AFP Code of Ethics in Article III, section 2.8: “The AFP recognizes the sanctity of its insulation from politics. Its involvement in politics shall be strictly limited to the exercise of its members’ rights of suffrage and in ensuring delivery of ballots to the concerned government entities during election if and when deputized to do so. The AFP therefore pledges not to interfere in any politically motivated activities.” 

However, by declaring in Article II, Section 1 that “sovereignty resides in the people,“ the Constitution silently condones rebellion as a means to change government. As this democratic right was aptly described by former United States President Abraham Lincoln, “This country, with its institutions, belong to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it.” 

Marcelo H. Del Pilar also said something to the same effect: “Insurrection is the last remedy, especially when the people have acquired the belief that peaceful means to secure remedies for evils prove futile”. 

The AFP Code of Ethics in Article III, Section 2.12 also supports this: “The AFP adheres to the principle of democracy that the government is of the people, by the people and for the people. The real power and authority in the governance of the nation emanates from its citizens. The AFP recognizes its role to protect the people and assert its rights to participate in democratic processes in which it is legally allowed to do so, but it shall never allow itself to be used to subvert the sovereign will of the majority neither would it lend its power to stifle the rights of the minority.”

I have a simple interpretation of these seemingly contradicting provisions: “The armed forces shall follow the elected government for as long as the people are fine with it but once the people revolt, the armed forces, being of the people, should go along with them.” 

Indeed, what if the government turns out that it cheated in the elections? What if the supposedly legitimate government no longer reflects the commonweal, is going against its own people and uses the so-called majesty of the law to hide its corruption and flaunt its powers? If the armed forces continues to protect such government, can we can say that the armed forces is no longer acting as the guardian of the people? What if the armed forces no longer finds “nobility, dignity and honor” in being the guardian?

Our experience in 2001 shows that the Constitution can be conveniently discarded to suit the situation. In other words, the majesty of the law can be ignored to cater to those in power or seeking power without the people’s mandate. In the end, the only justification for rebellion or the extra-constitutional takeover of government is victory. If one fails, he is charged with rebellion and sent to jail. 

From a constitutional point of view, the AFP leadership in EDSA Dos (i.e., people’s uprising in 2001) was clearly unprofessional. They mutinied against their commander-in-chief who represented a great majority of the Filipino people and they gravely undermined the Constitution. Consciously or unconsciously, the generals preserved the military’s power using a loud and powerful minority as cover against the silent and weak majority. 

Since there has been no real change in governance and only change in personalities, the action of the AFP leadership in 2001 was misguided and self-serving. They were desperadoes who merely enabled the trade of one set of crooks and nincompoops for another.

The military’s interventionism in government has created a three-way political power structure in the classic Clausewitzian model composed of people, government and the military. And today, between an inept government and a corrupt military, the people are getting screwed. Church activism in recent years has probably made it four-sided, adding a confusing spiritual element. 

Though the armed forces is much more in the background today as compared to the martial law period, it has the unobtrusive power to intervene in politics. A strong and healthy democracy, however, hinges on a two-way structure anchored on a contract between the government and the people as embodied in the Constitution. The military should be under the government and not a separate power entity. (See Figure 1) 


II. A CONSTRUCTIVE ARMED FORCES

The separation of politics and military is a notable feature of western democracies that was rammed down our throats by the Americans. I think it is time that we question this framework and look at alternative models of governance wherein the military plays a productive role in government and in the development of Philippine democracy.

The power of the government is only as good as it is identified with the good of the polity. What if the government has failed in promoting the common welfare and has committed illegal acts? What if the country is heading towards disaster? Should the armed forces stand idle, detached from politics, and allow the politicians to destroy the country? In a situation of political uncertainty and chaos, what role should the military play? What should it do?

Let me attempt to answer these questions by first drawing a simple, rough model showing the relationship of three variables: government, military professionalism and level of intervention. Let’s call this the GPI graph.

a. There is a direct relationship between how good government is to the level of professionalism in the military. Good government means a professional military and conversely, a professional military implies good government.

b. There is an inverse relationship between the level of professionalism and the level of military intervention. As professionalism increases, the inclination to intervene decreases.

c. There is also an inverse relationship between how good government is and the level of military intervention. As government gets better, the likelihood of intervention decreases.

From these relationships, I see three kinds of roles for the armed forces – passive, constructive and interventionist – depending on the political and military situation.

• Role
• Environment / Government
• Armed Forces

(Not able to reproduce the chart in this blog - Bert)


1. Passive
(Constitutional)

• Government is firmly established and robust. Democratic institutions are strong and steady. General political situation is stable
• Armed Forces is highly professional. It totally stays away from politics and subordinates itself to civilian authority. It focuses on its defense roles and improving its capabilities

2. Constructive

• Government is unstable. Democratic institutions existing but not strong. General political situation is filled with uncertainty.
• Armed Forces is semi-professional or undergoing reforms. It prudently intervenes in government but does not take over. It acts as a guardian of the people by being a deterrent to bad government and helps build democratic institutions.
  

3. Interventionist

• Government is weak or illegitimate. Democratic institutions are weak. Peace and order has broken down and violence may have erupted. General political situation is volatile.
• Armed Forces is unprofessional or professionalism is low. It takes over government and takes a direct role in politics through a military government, a military-sponsored government or a civilian government that is beholden to the military.

For the situation today, I believe the armed forces should play the constructive role. It is a balanced role wherein it does not stand idle or directly take over government. It is neither indifferent nor destructive. In this role, the armed forces acts within the framework of the Constitution and as a counterweight to an ineffective government of unruly and corrupt politicians to achieve political stability. 

Further, it acts as catalyst for improving governance and a force for nation-building. If war is too complex to be left to the generals, governance is even more complex to be left alone to the politicians, especially the irresponsible and corrupt.

As a crucial stakeholder in governance and society, the armed forces should use its powers and capabilities for the common good, to deter bad government and promote democracy and development. If the AFP can use its intelligence capabilities to monitor the movements of rebel groups, it can use the same to monitor the activities of corrupt politicians and generals. If it can keep an eye on suspected destabilizers, why can it not check a President or any politician who is cheating an election?

Our soldiers are actually very experienced in this constructive role. The military strategy against insurgency calls for winning the hearts and minds of the people in the countryside. In doing so, the soldiers become involved in the political, economic and social life of the community.

When I was the commander of a remote detachment in San Mariano, Isabela, a major part of our counter-insurgency effort was community projects. My soldiers and I were involved in backyard beautification and cleanliness, medical civic action and building toilets and classrooms. I advised the barangay leaders on how to manage the village. Before my unit was transferred, we were talking about cooperatives, markets and farm-to-market roads. 

Through this exposure to the community and seeing the failure of government, our soldiers undergo a subtle process of politicization that has made them sensitive to the political life of the nation. The participation of junior officers in the coup attempts and in the mutiny at Oakwood in 2004 is largely because of this politicized view.

This constructive role can be elevated to a higher level wherein the armed forces strengthens governance and democratic institutions. In the 2004 elections, for example, I wrote to the AFP Chief of Staff exhorting him to play this constructive role by disallowing and evicting all organizations that use military camps for their political pronouncements and sending a public warning to politicians, including the President, that any violence, cheating or fraud will not be tolerated by the AFP and that candidates cannot use AFP personnel, equipment and funds for the campaign. It was, of course, too much to expect.

In relation to the corruption case filed against Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia, the Chief of Staff can order the AFP finance office to open all documentary evidence. For the jueteng (an illegal numbers game) scandal, military intelligence is more than capable of gathering evidence to confirm the claims of the witnesses in the Senate hearing. 

As to Gloria-gate (allegedly wiretapped conversations between the President and an Election Commissioner), the AFP has the resources to confirm the authenticity of the purported wiretapped conversation.Indeed, if the AFP is convinced that the President has committed improper or illegal acts, it can quietly send her a message to do what is right for the good of the country or lose its support. 

Two factors will inhibit the effectiveness of a constructive role: lack of credibility and a generally anti-people armed forces.

• First, the AFP has lost so much credibility with the corruption scandals involving active and retired officers. The Oakwood mutiny showed a deep crack in the system, a fault line in the AFP leadership. It does not have credible and trustworthy leaders, not even among the ex-generals who may use the armed forces for their own ends. The Officer Corps has lost its moral compass and is fragmented.
  
• Second, having been a pacification army since colonial times, the armed forces has become an “alien force” defending the interests of the ruling elite against the masses.(3)

The masses do not trust the armed forces. If a million squatters today hold a people power at the EDSA Shrine, I doubt if the generals will drop their support for the President and join the masses. National Artist F. Sionil Jose described it best: “This officer corps and the Armed Forces are willing instruments of the oligarchy and worse, when the officers become generals, they also become as rapacious as the members of the oligarchy they serve. In fact,they have themselves become the oligarchs.”(4)

Two inherent risks of this constructive role are the potential abuse of power and unwarranted intervention. Power tends to feed on itself, if uncontrolled, until it becomes so corrupted that a turn-around is very difficult. 

The experience during martial law all too clearly showed the ill-effects of an overreaching military which has lost touch with itself and the people. It became greedy, corrupt and abusive. To protect itself and perpetuate its power, the armed forces can needlessly intervene using convenient even contrived excuses. To minimize these risks, the armed forces should seek a balance with the people and must always analyze the overarching implications of its actions to society and act with the common good in mind.

But let’s be honest. The armed forces can take over government anytime it chooses and we cannot really do much about it. Sure, there will be condemnation from certain groups and the international community. There will be protests and demonstrations but in the end, if the armed forces persists and it is united, there is not much the people can do against guns and tanks.

If it intervenes in a time of political uncertainty, such intervention will most likely be gladly accepted by the people. How long the people can tolerate a military or military-sponsored government will depend on how it is able to govern and fulfills people’s expectations. If unable to do so, there are already existing insurgent organizations throughout the country that can serve as a nucleus for armed rebellion. 

Military intervention is a mere power-grab if it only results in a change of personalities in government and there is no real structural change in society, particularly in the equitable distribution of political and economic power.

If the intent is really to make society better, then the military government or military-sponsored government should focus on:

1. establishing a competent and honest government, 
2. building the economy, 
3. professionalizing the military; and 
4. rebuilding democratic institutions. 

Of the last one, an important task is to prepare the people for an election and then hold an election as soon as possible. “Preparing” would include:

• disciplining wayward and corrupt government officials;
• setting up democratic institutions such as political parties and peoples organizations
• educating the people about their rights and responsibilities as citizens; and 
• fixing the electoral system.

III. CHALLENGES AHEAD FOR THE ARMED FORCES

A constructive, professional armed forces serves as a buttress to democracy and the Constitution. It serves as the guardian of democratic processes while ensuring that it does not abuse its own power. It uplifts democracy by strengthening the pillars of governance. It will not allow an irresponsible and corrupt government to govern. 

By being professional, it can pull or catalyze the government and the bureaucracy to become better. Truly, the crucial challenge for the armed forces is how to rebuild itself to a professional and mature organization.

The first imperative is professionalizing the Officer Corps which is the foundation of professionalism in the AFP and the driving force for sustained reform. Among the younger members of the corps, there is an inherent desire to change. Professionalization efforts should nurture this desire by opening up channels for constructive criticism and initiating affirmative action. 

There must be an organized effort mobilizing the Officer Corps to awaken the generals from their collective self-denial that nothing is wrong with the AFP and to push the chain of command to initiate painful but necessary changes, especially the creation of a performance and merit-based system in promotions and assignments which will ensure that only those who are competent and honest go up. Another key target is the non-commissioned officer corps.

If the officers are the brain, the corporals and sergeants form the workforce or backbone of the armed forces. Besides people, the armed forces should develop efficient, effective and ethical management systems in personnel, procurement, logistics and finance incorporating best practices and new information technology. Corruption through conversion, construction and commissions should be eradicated.It should formulate doctrine – how it should fight – and not use foreign, especially American, formulations which are alien to us.

Part of rebuilding is upgrading capabilities to become a multifunctional force capable of dealing with a variety of military and non-military missions (search and rescue during natural disasters; evacuation of non-combatants like OFWs from disaster or war zones; and developmental activities such as building roads and bridges). Procurement should look into multi-functional platforms, i.e., planes the provide close air support in battle and also deliver emergency medical supplies to remote areas, patrol boats that can also provide medical services to coastal barangays, trucks that can provide covering fire and also evacuate people during floods.

Rebuilding will not be easy and it becomes even more difficult as the armed forces has to also deal with security threats and concerns. Besides political necessity, the security environment is another important reason why the armed forces must rebuild and professionalize. Allow me to divert a bit and briefly explain these security challenges so we can appreciate the enormous challenge facing the armed faces as it struggles to reform as well as perform.

Internally, insurgency is still the major security concern – Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army (CPP-NPA) and the Mindanao separatist and terrorist groups. The communist insurgency is tied to political and economic realities that continue to fuel popular discontent compounded by government neglect and military abuse. On the other hand, the Muslim groups are now linked with other Islamic fundamentalist groups in the region thus broadening the problem. The military approach to the insurgency has been described as a “conflict trap” with “the rebels too weak to defeat the AFP and the AFP too inept to defeat the rebels”.(5)

To get out of this trap, the AFP has to break out of its Martial Law/Cold War mentality with its outmoded approaches. Against the left for example, the Anti-Subversion Law has been repealed and the left organizations have entered mainstream politics with party-list groups in Congress. The military should now learn to deal with them in a different way, one which does not violate its own code of ethics“not to stifle dissent or label principled critique and/or cause-oriented groups as threats to national security and/or enemies of the state as dissent and opposition are important features to ensure a healthy and dynamic democracy”. (Art III, Section 2.20 of the AFP Code of Ethics)

Instead of alienating the insurgents, the government should reach out and engage them, understand their plight, initiate confidence- and trust-building measures and resolve the matter peacefully. The approach must be holistic as a major factor in insurgency is the absence of government in the remote areas where the rebels are strong. All government agencies should be involved in delivering basic services to the people.

However, in my experience,there is this “plan-implementation gap” and government services are non-existent or not felt very much in the countryside. The military alone is not capable and its main task is to contain the violence and make the area peaceful and secure so that government can deliver the services to the people.

Externally, global economic integration has changed the rules of international politics and diplomacy and is creating a new international security order between those who are connected to the globalization process and those who are not. Inter-state conflicts have given way to non-state actors, organizations and individuals engaging in terrorism and asymmetric warfare.(6) With the U.S. as the only superpower, the bipolar structure of the cold war is gone and a more “intrusive America” is expected.(7)

In Asia, China’s emergence as an economic and military power alongside Japan is changing the regional security landscape. Likewise, old flash-points still exist – territorial claims, tensions in the Taiwan straits and Korean peninsula. Erstwhile security concerns like maritime piracy, trafficking of drugs and humans and money laundering have become more sophisticated because of global interconnections and new technologies.

In this new environment, the armed forces should rethink its strategy and outlook of defense-military alliances. We should perhaps explore closer defense and military links with emerging powers such as China and India and strengthen relations with neighboring countries in Southeast Asia. These alliances will provide the first line of defense and give us breathing space as we rebuild our national defense. 

We should likewise develop a self-reliant defense posture to design strategies and indigenous military technology so we can defend ourselves using our limited resources and also maintain our national self-respect by not depending too much on other countries for our defense requirements (VFA, JUSMAG, etc - Bert).

This twin challenge of rebuilding and dealing with security concerns will take a lot of the AFP’s organizational strength. Change will question age-old perceptions and established norms. It will pit people against one another with regard to ideas, concepts and approaches. There will be tremendous resistance to change. 

The existing command structure and social order will be disrupted and challenged. However, with the right combination of commitment, organization, leadership and management, the challenge can be met. The armed forces must hold firm, stay united and keep its eyes on the objectives in order to accomplish the mission to change.


CONCLUSION

We pride ourselves as a democratic nation. But our democracy is a sham as politicians manipulate the system to perpetuate themselves in power. How can we even think that we have a democracy when elections, the very soul of democracy, is being perverted by the very public officials who should protect the sanctity of the ballot. 

Democracy is also not just all about having elections or a Constitution. It is also about having the active and sustained participation of the people through democratic institutions like barangay assemblies, people’s organizations, trade unions and political parties. The armed forces can play a constructive role by safeguarding the elections from fraud and by promoting peoples organizations rather than spying on them.

Democracy is also not just the freedom to vote or the freedom of speech or religious freedom. It is also about being able to live with pride and dignity. It is also about economic freedom enabling the practice of these rights. How can one vote if he cannot afford to go to the polling station? How can one practice his religion when he cannot afford to go to church or has to commit sin to feed his family? How can one practice free speech if he cannot even read the newspaper? 

The government must be able to improve people’s lives so they can exercise their freedoms. The armed forces can play a constructive role in preserving these freedoms by educating the people of their rights and responsibilities as citizens for nation building and engaging in developmental activities to support the national program for economic development.

Ngayon, nagtitimbang na naman ang mamamayan. Hindi natin alam kung saan talaga tutungo ngunit nararamdaman natin na kailangang magbago ng landas para sa kapakanan na ating bayan. Alam din natin na hindi nararapat ang mga tiwaling pinuno sa pamahalaan, na kapag hinayaan natin sila ay wala tayong matatanaw na magandang kinabukasan. Alam natin na kailangan ng ating bayan ng mga pinuno na magaling, matatag at mapagkakatiwalaan. Subalit hindi na tayo nakakasiguro kung sino sa mga pinuno ngayon ang nararapat. 

(Now, the people are weighing their options. We do not know where this will lead but we feel that there is a need to change the direction for the welfare of the country. We also know that corrupt leaders should not be in government, and that if we allow them to stay in power we will not have a bright future. We know that country needs leaders who are competent, strong and trustworthy. But we are uncertain as to the who among the leaders are deserving.)

In this period of uncertainty, it is time for the armed forces, as the protector and defender of the people, to play a constructive role so that the nation can alter course with the right leaders and build a true democratic society so the people may have a firm hope in the future.

(This paper was delivered at a meeting of the Philippine Constitutional Association [Philconsa] last June 21,2005 at the Manila Polo Club. A former Philippine Army officer who served as Special Assistant to the Secretary of National Defense, the author is now working abroad as an executive for a conglomerate.) 
Notes:
1. Jarque, Jose Rene, “Metamorphosis of Idealism”, Army Journal, June 1991.
2. Bernas, Joaquin, in a speech entitled “Supremacy of Law and Mark of Sovereignty”, delivered during the Annual Convention and General Membership Meeting of the Philippine Military Academy Alumni Association on 22 Jan 2005. Published in The Cavalier, March-April 2005.
3. David, Randy in a speech, “The Philippine Army Through the Years” delivered during the Philippine Army Senior Leaders Conference, March 2005.
4. Cited in “Frankly Speaking”, Philippine Graphic, Dec 29, 2003 – January 5, 2004, Vol. 14, Nr 29/30
5. Morales, Ricardo Col., “Transforming, not Reforming the AFP”, Opinion/Columns, INQ7.net, 27 Oct 04
6. Barnett, Thomas P.M., The Pentagon’s New Map: War and Peace in the 21st Century, Berkley Books, New York: 2004.
7. Almonte, Jose, former National Security Adviser, speaking at the Asia-Pacific Security Conference, as reported in the Philippine Star, Feb 24, 2004.

© 2004 Bulatlat ■ Alipato Publications
Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited.
http://bulatlat.com/news/5-21/5-21-constructive.htm





"In all institutions from which the cold wind of open criticism is excluded, an innocent corruption begins to grow like a mushroom - for example, in senates and learned societies." - Friedrich Nietzsche, 1844-1900

A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.

"The accomplish to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference." - Bess Myerson, 1924-present“Nations whose NATIONALISM is destroyed are subject to ruin.” - Colonel Muhammar Qaddafi, 1942-, Libyan Political and Military Leader

********END OF POST********

Hi All,

The below link will show a short list of my past posts (out of 540 posts so far) which I consider as basic topics about us native (indio)/ Malay Filipinos. This link/listing, which may later expand, will always be presented at the bottom of each future post.  Just point-and-click at each listed item to open and read.

Thank you for reading and sharing with others, especially those in our homeland.

- Bert

PLEASE POINT & CLICK THIS LINK:  

http://www.thefilipinomind.com/2013/08/primary-postsreadings-for-my-fellow.html

***********************************************************

PLEASE DONATE CORE SUBJECT BOOKS TO OUR HOMELAND (i.e. your hometown public schools, Alma Mater, etc.). Those books that you and/or your children do not need or want; or buy books from your local library during its cheap Book Sales. Also, cargo/door-to-door shipment is best.  It is a small sacrifice.  [clean up your closets or garage - donate books. THANKS!]

***********************************************************

" Fear history, for it respects no secrets" - Gregoria de Jesus  (widow of Andres Bonifacio)

*********************************

NOTES ABOUT THIS WEBLOG:

THE FILIPINO MIND blog contains 541 published postings you can view, as of December 20, 2012. Go to the sidebar to search Past & Related Postings, click LABEL [number in parenthesis = total of related postings]; or use the GOOGLE SEARCH at the sidebar using key words [labels, or tags] for topics of interest to you. OR click a bottom label or tag to open related topics.

The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies. As the selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep thought (see MISSION Statement) and hopefully to rock the boat of complacency (re MISSION).

(1) Bold/Underlined words are HTML links. Click to see linked posts or articles.

(2) Scroll down to end of post to read or enter Comments. Any comment sent to my personal email will be posted here.

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL BE IGNORED.

(3).Visit my other website SCRIBD/TheFilipinoMind; or type it on GOOGLE Search. View/Free Download pdf versions of: postings, eBooks, articles (120 and growing). Or another way to access, go to the sidebar of the THE FILIPINO MIND website and click on SCRIBD. PLEASE Share!

Statistics for my associated website:SCRIBD/theFilipinoMind :

119 FREE AND DOWNLOADABLE documents

148,510 reads

2,750 downloads

(4). Some postings and other relevant events are now featured in Google+, BMD_Facebook, BMD_Twitter and BMD_Google Buzz.

(5) Translate to your own language. Go to the sidebar and Click on GOOGLE TRANSLATOR (56 languages - copy and paste sentences, paragraphs and whole articles, Google translates a whole posting in seconds, including to Filipino!!).

(6).  From suggestions by readers, I have added some contemporary music to provide a break. Check out bottom of posting to play Sarah Brightman, Andrea Bocelli, Sting, Chris Botti, Josh Groban, etc.

(7) Songs on Filipino nationalism: please reflect on the lyrics (messages) as well as the beautiful renditions. Other Filipino Music links at blog sidebar.  Click each to play.:

• BAYAN KO by Freddie Aguilar
• ”Bayan Ko” by KUH LEDESMA
• ”Bayan Ko” by a Korean choir
• ”Sa Kuko ng Agila” by Freddie Aguilar
• ”Huwad na Kalayaan” by Freddie Aguilar

(8) Forwarding the postings to relatives and friends, ESPECIALLY in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. Use emails, Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. below. THANKS!!