Left Flank

The Reaction's Michael J.W. Stickings asks if the Philippines is run by the Bush administration now, responding to the RP House of Representatives' passage of the Human Security Act of 2007:

The U.S. has the Patriot Act, now in a subsequent iteration, the Philippines has the Human Security Act. Are they not one and the same, more or less? The Philippine government uses Abu Sayyaf to stoke public fear and to justify its authoritarian efforts, the U.S. government, or at least the Bush Administration, uses al Qaeda, along with nebulous threats of imminent attack, to do much the same. The Philippine government opposes dissent, and Bush and Cheney aren't exactly fond of it. Mrs. Arroyo, you have good friends in the White House.

In both countries, as elsewhere in the Orwellian world, it is all about using some Enemy to secure ever more power, and any Enemy will do. Yes, al Qaeda, Abu Sayyaf, and groups like them are legitimate threats–I do not doubt that–but they are being used for a decidedly political purpose everywhere from Washington to Manila. And, yes, that's part of how and why terrorism works. Even if no act is committed, terror triumphs.

PoliBlog's Steven Taylor highlights the same argument in another form:

Yet another example of how anti-terrorism becomes an excuse for a government to expand its powers. And it is bad enough to have such powers, but even worse if the guidelines to use them are vague.

Further, it isn’t as if the Philippine government has a spotless human rights record–just surf over to HRW’s Philippines page and scan some recent headlines.

And, Luis Teodoro trumps both with this passionate, edgy diatribe on Republic Act 9372:

â€ūThe deeper reality is when there is no power, there is no work, and therefore, the Human Security Act is about defending our way of life,â€? said Mrs. Arroyo.

As great a leap of logic as that may seem to be, it’s actually the closest Mrs. Arroyo has come to being candid about the intent of RA 9372. Militant and activist groups may rail against it. The Church may worry about prolonged detention and bank account snooping. Lawyers may jeer that it’s such an imperfect law it’s bound to be struck down by the Supreme Court. It may not have implementing rules, and may be achieving the exact opposite (promoting insecurity) of what its title promises. And the public may know as much about it as it does about plasma physics.

Never mind. It will be implemented regardless, and for one primary, driving purpose: to defend â€ūour way of life.â€?

And what exactly, pray tell, is that way of life? It is the way of life that keeps a handful of families in control of the country’s corporate assets and a foreign power this country’s political overlord; the way of life that forces people to sleep in carts, doorways and under bridges; the way of life that has made hunger a fact of daily existence among millions and which compels millions to die without medical care; and the way of life that has made leaving it and living elsewhere the primary reason for being of 20 percent of the population.

It is the way of life that has prevented the benefits of economic progress from seeping down to those who need them most: who need not only food and shelter, but education and medical care as well. And oh yes, it is also the same way of life that has made Arroyo and company among the luckiest of people in the world because they have everything while most of the 80 million population of these tragic isles have nothing.

That is the way of life–their way of life–that RA 9372 is defending. It is the way of life the United States, which has lavished praise on this retrogressive law that’s a throwback to the coldest days of the Cold War, is defending. And that is why the chief sponsors and patrons of this law were Juan Ponce Enrile, the military, the police and Arroyo–and why it will be implemented whatever the cost and whatever the rest of us say.

Finally, Karlo Mongaya expresses his jitters about the Human Security Law, and offers concrete explanations of its content.

I will stipulate all this, but the fact is, that 400 American and 1,000 ARP troops are wargaming, and an AFP battalion of the First Marine Landing Team is conducting «punitive actions» (the headline is almost jingoistic) to find the perpetrators who beheaded 14 AFP Marines. Who wouldn't think that the two actions could have some chance of becoming one general campaign, or even that this was the plan all along? To put it bluntly, and this applies to America as well, what is the alternative?

The AFP is waging its «punitive campaign» with barely-disguised wrath, almost a miniature of how America felt after 9/11.

Asked to explain the sudden turnaround from the statement the other day of AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Hermogenes Esperon Jr. that the military would hold its guns for now in consideration of the government’s peace talks with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Bacarro said both the President and Esperon were â€ūoutraged by what had happened.â€?

â€ūThe Chief of Staff is really angry, but of course he is not showing it and keeping it to himself,â€? Bacarro said.

But, fortunately, there are calmer heads near:

In an interview with ANC television, Acting Defense Secretary and National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales said the actions to be taken by the military in pursuit of those who attacked the Marines in Tipo-Tipo, would be done in accordance with the law.

â€ūWe will not do it out of anger. We will do it according to our laws and protocols,â€? he said. â€ūBut definitely we will not tolerate people chopping heads off.â€?

Gonzales said he would meet with Marine officials today in Fort Bonifacio and listen to their account of the ambush on Tuesday.

He said the investigation and actions to be taken by the government would hopefully not affect the peace process.

â€ūBut at the same time, we want justice to be done,â€? he said.

And, what are the goals, guys?

The fresh troops will augment the 1st Marine Brigade and an Army brigade already in Basilan.

They will be â€ūprepositionedâ€? for the eventual â€ūoperations,â€? Bacarro said, adding:

â€ūDefinitely there will be punitive actions. One thing definite is there will be movement.â€?

Asked whether the troops would pursue the MILF or the Abu Sayyaf in its operations, Bacarro declined to reply. But he said reports of â€ūAbu Sayyaf intrusion into the areaâ€? were among the issues that the military was now investigating.

A few hours after the briefing, Bacarro sent a text message to reporters saying that the operations to be launched would â€ūpass through the mechanisms of the peace process.â€?

Esperon had earlier said the military would take action against the Marines’ attackers only after an AFP inquiry into the matter had been completed and a complaint had been lodged against the MILF for violation of the ceasefire agreement.

He said the government had to put â€ūprimacyâ€? on the peace process.

OK, so we have a propertied oligarchy mismanaging a state, a cabal of thugs barely restrained by a constitutional leash, American boots on the ground, Abu Sayyaf, indigenous political movements more or less sanctioned by Manila and supported more or less by most Filipinos, hostages, and a whole lot of innocent targets waiting to die. Could this be a more ludicrous fiasco?

The US should stick to electronic information and liaison, giving the AFP maximal authority to go after Abu Sayyaf, as a condition of US assistance. Kiss and make up with the Moros, even hire them for local help, but one problem at a time. And, get rid of that ridiculous anti-terror law!

As an American, I'm used to the martial history of my nation, when every war starts like a Chaplin short and ends with chest-thumping victory and indiscriminate slaughter. But, taking another nation with it into insanity is supposedly what we should have learned from Iraq. The US doesn't need to destabilize another state now.