Mong Palatino

Blogging about the Philippines and the Asia-Pacific since 2004

About

@mongster is a Manila-based activist, former Philippine legislator, and blogger/analyst of Asia-Pacific affairs.

New Year: A cruel carousel in Myanmar, Ressa’s acquittal “in the upside down”, a quiet crackdown in China, and censored videos. A tax court acquitted journalist Maria Ressa, China has quietly launched a crackdown on anti-lockdown protesters, India ordered YouTube and Twitter to block a BBC documentary, and Fiji’s new government has promised to restore media freedom. Read more.

Women push back in Pakistan, coup anniversary, BBC raid, and silencing independent media across Asia. Digital Rights Foundation has launched several innovative and tech-based initiatives: the Cyber Harassment Helpline, Hamara Internet, Digital 50.50, and a complaint cell for the protection of women journalists. Read more.

A win in Mongolia, interviews spotlight China, Vietnam, and India, and a spate of attacks against journalists. Mongolian legislators voted down a dangerous social media bill, alarming attacks against journalists across South Asia, and intimidating tactics used against organisers of women’s marches in Pakistan and Malaysia. Read more.

My father in America

February 23rd, 2024

Published by Bulatlat

My father Reynaldo spent 43 years of his life in the Philippines and the last 29 years in the United States. Did he achieve the great American dream?

He thrived as a family man while his heart and mind continued to yearn for the homeland. He maintained and strengthened old ties even when he was already reunited with his family. This meant more than sending the generous padala to friends and relatives as he strived to keep himself updated about what was happening at home. Home was where he grew up – San Francisco del Monte; and where he immigrated to rejoin his parents – San Francisco Bay Area. He lived a life that bridged these two homes separated by the Pacific. He was both a resident and stranger, a migrant who sought new connections but whose deep longing was to preserve his native identity.

He was part of the working class, a union member, our breadwinner who endured long working hours for almost three decades. In Manila, he raised a family during the crisis-ridden years of the 1980s which made immigration an urgent option. He embraced the chance and challenge to restart his plans in life even if it entailed separation from his wife and kids for many years. He noted the superior quality of living and the seemingly endless opportunities that any hardworking migrant can avail of.

But he kept on looking back and never stopped mentioning about spending a longer time in his beloved country. His wish reflected a subconscious understanding of the realities experienced by migrant families. Perhaps the spectacle of the new masked the feeling of alienation, the pain of encountering racism or discrimination, and the short-lived fulfillment offered by material goods. Still, he might have done enough calculations and decided to persist and withstand unspoken hardships so his family can enjoy a better life.

He encouraged his children to be bolder in life guided by his unwavering support. He never willingly shared his problems with us. He kept a strong and confident presence until his weak and aging body became more visible. I could have been more helpful by being near and maybe it might have eased some of the difficulties he was hiding from his loved ones. But he was selfless up to the end. Instead of rebuking my decision to leave the United States and live an activist life in the Philippines, he respected it although I know he must have been deeply hurt by it. He worried for my safety and lamented about any bleak future that could happen to me.

Over the years, we were able to spend some time during brief vacations by blending my political work with personal visits. He met and bonded with his grandkids. He enjoyed being called lolo pogi. His last visit was in 2020, a few weeks before global pandemic lockdowns were imposed. It was the first time he was reunited with his Dubai-based daughter in almost 20 years.

Family reunions allowed us to catch up, reenact rituals of domestic living, and build new memories. Were they enough? For a child who sincerely wanted to express his love and gratitude, they were agonizingly inadequate.

My father spent three weeks in the hospital in March. It was a very long and difficult month. His stay coincided with frightening reports about the collapse of two Silicon Valley banks, disastrous flooding, and a storm that caused power outages in many parts of the Bay Area. Meanwhile, what loomed large for us was my father’s heartbreaking condition. He was a symbol of strength, our rock fortress like the nearby Alcatraz Island. Not a frail body injected with needles and attached to various medical machines.

According to his doctors, he miraculously survived. But maybe he willed all his strength so that he can be discharged and spend a few more intimate moments with his family at home. My mother comforted him and lovingly tended to his needs for two days. On the day he died, he was with me and my brother. He asked me to find his checkered jacket and put it on him, he even directed me to help him with the buttons. Then he requested coffee according to his liking. I didn’t realize at that time that it would be his last but tender assertion of paternal authority, and the last act of kindness and affection that I can do for him as a son. And then he was no more.

Rest easy, Reynaldo. We shall continue from here.

Written for The Diplomat

Late last month, the two houses of the Philippine Congress approved the controversial Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF) bill amid persistent criticisms from opposition leaders, lawyers, economists, and civil society groups.

It took the House of Representatives only 17 days to pass the MIF bill in December. Responding to the concern of labor groups, legislators removed pension funds as a source of capitalization for the MIF. President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. certified the bill as a priority measure, which allowed the Senate to hasten the committee and plenary deliberations until it was passed on May 31.

Marcos, who will soon mark his first year in office, needs to prove that the MIF is what the country needs today amid rising prices and economic uncertainty. He should also justify why billions of pesos will be channeled into an investment scheme instead of using the money to expand social services and provide wage hike subsidies as demanded by various basic sectors over the past year.

Read more

Philippines ‘Suspends’ Its Sovereign Investment Fund

Written for The Diplomat

The Philippine government has suspended the implementing rules and regulations of the Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF), three months after it was passed into law. MIF critics welcomed the decision and urged the government to conduct more studies and consult stakeholders about it. But President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. clarified that his government is merely “finding ways to make it as close to perfect and ideal as possible” and that the fund will be operational before the end of the year.

The suspension provides an opportunity for the Marcos government to rethink the MIF concept. At a time of continuing economic uncertainty, it is unwise to divert much-needed funds into a controversial financial undertaking with no guarantee of public benefit.

Read more

Greetings of solidarity from the Philippines, a former colony of the United States. But more importantly, a nation that resisted colonizers and ousted dictators through revolution and people power uprisings.

Today, 14 farmers were killed in a joint police-military operation in Negros, an island province in the Philippines

Martial law is still enforced in the whole southern island of Mindanao.

The bloody drug war has claimed the lives of more than 20,000 people.

Rodrigo Duterte, yes, is responsible for this carnage. He should be made to account. And we are thankful for many groups today, especially U.S. and Filipino-American citizens, who have condemned the deterioration of the human rights situation in the Philippines.

But there’s another monster we have to name, which is enabling mad butchers like Duterte. This is the US-led war machine deployed in the Asia-Pacific region. The pivot to Asia meant more funds are used to support governments, even repressive governments, that allow the basing of US troops, US arms, military drones, and other war materiel.

We ask the following:

Why, despite the drug war bloodbath, did the US continue its military exercises with the Duterte government?

Why are American taxes being used to support the Philippine military’s all-out war against farmers demanding land reform, indigenous peoples resisting the entry of mining and logging, and suspected sympathizers of communist groups?

The rise of an aggressive China is being used to justify the intensified presence of US military in the Philippines

Our response is this:

We oppose China’s illegal expansion in the South China Sea. We condemn its encroachment on our maritime territories.

But at the same time, learning from our colonial experience, we reject the continued US military basing in the Philippines.

We endured a century of humiliating wanton plunder of our resources, the rape of our women, the violation of our sovereignty. The US military-led behemoth has brought nothing but poverty, misery, endless violence, and abuse of our rights.

So we say enough. Stop funding wars in the Philippines. Stop sending troops and weapons of destruction. Stop the desecration of our lands. Stop this government from using American taxes to support Duterte’s drug war, martial law, and its all-out war against the Filipino people.

I travelled more than 8,500 miles from Manila to Washington DC to deliver this message. A message of anger and frustration over decades of military intervention in our land. But I will bring home inspiring testimonies and messages of hope based on what I witnessed today. I will share with our people your powerful solidarity with the Filipino people’s struggle for real freedom, democracy and just peace. That even here in the US, there is a strong and vibrant movement challenging the US war empire. That despite our distance, we are united in our common stand to oppose NATO, the US-led war machine, and the use of imperialist wars to subjugate the resistance of the people.

From Washington DC to Manila, from Bayan to Resist, the anti-war campaign of the International League of People’s Struggle, we proudly proclaim: No to NATO, no to the deployment of war regimes, no to racism and no to the meddling of domestic affairs of sovereign nations.

Long live international solidarity! Mabuhay ang pakikibaka ng lumalabang mamamayan!

*Speech of Mong Palatino, Bayan Metro Manila chairperson, during the 30 March 2019 ‘Oppose NATO, War & Racism!’ mobilization at Washington DC

The continuing pandemic exacerbated the suffering of many in 2022, but we also witnessed how resistance emerged in a context of intensified political crisis and government repression across the region. Protesters demanding the ouster of corrupt regimes, journalists exposing abuse, women resisting tyranny, and civil society groups promoting solidarity – below, we share examples of defiance over the past year to inspire more people to speak out and stand up for freedom of expression, human rights and democracy in 2023.

Read more

Written for The Diplomat

Philippine officials are denying the claim of the Chinese Foreign Ministry that there was a previous pledge to tow away its ship in the Second Thomas Shoal, known to Manila as Ayungin Shoal and to Beijing as Ren’ai Jiao.

China did not identify the Filipino official who promised to remove the grounded ship. And even if a name is mentioned, it will only prompt flat-out denials.

The supposed broken promise should also not distract public attention from what’s going to happen this week and the succeeding months as the Philippines prepares another mission to deliver supplies to its stranded ship, the reported joint naval drills of several countries in the disputed waters of South China Sea, and the filing of diplomatic protests against Chinese activities and presence in Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.

Read more

Manila Bay Reclamation Under Review Over Environmental and China Concerns

Written for The Diplomat

The Philippine government said it is already reviewing the ongoing reclamation projects in Manila Bay after the United States embassy expressed concern over their long-term environmental impact and the alleged involvement of a blacklisted Chinese firm.

As for the Philippine government, the information provided by the U.S. embassy should alert it to review the projects approved in recent years and find out if there are other companies contracted to build foreign installations within the country’s territory. Otherwise, it would appear ludicrous for condemning China’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea on one hand, while welcoming investors and developers who make money by enabling the violation of the country’s sovereignty.

Read more

Published by the Philippine Daily Inquirer

This week marks the first year since the Duterte administration imposed harsh lockdown measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

The failure of the militarist approach is reflected in the surging COVID-19 cases, livelihood losses caused by unnecessary restrictions, and worsening human rights abuses.

The remorseless incompetence of the Duterte administration led to delayed testing and tracing, inadequate treatment, and failure to procure and roll out enough vaccines.

Mr. Duterte asked for more power and loans to deal with the pandemic, but squandered these with his over-reliance on the security cluster.

Instead of containing fear, he inflamed it with unscientific and incoherent remarks during his late-night televised speeches. He used the state of emergency to discourage the people from expressing criticism, persecute the opposition, and wage a brutal crackdown targeting the Left and other critics.

The past year made us realize the tragic consequences of being led by a government that equates the consolidation of power with the public good.

We have no choice but to survive the pandemic by relying on each other and resisting the tyranny of a murderous regime. Our solidarity is greater than the Fentanyl-driven inanities of Mr. Duterte and his cabal.

Why the peace talks ended

November 17th, 2023

Review of ‘The Quest for Peace: The GRP-NDFP Peace Negotiations’ by Raymund B. Villanueva. Published by Bulatlat

Rodrigo Duterte promised peace and federalism but he ended his term without achieving both. He unilaterally scuttled the peace negotiations with the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and abandoned the idea of turning the Philippines into a federal state.

There were high hopes of negotiating a political settlement with the CPP after the elections in 2016 but this quickly vanished in less than a year as Duterte unleashed his all-out war policy against the communist movement.

The book chronicles the revival of the peace process at the start of the Duterte administration, the four rounds of talks, the aborted fifth round, and the abrupt collapse of the negotiations even if the panelists and mediators expressed their willingness to go further to deliver a successful final peace agreement.

Both mainstream and independent media covered the talks but the latter sustained the news coverage especially during the period when the formal talks were suspended. News reports often relied on what the parties of both sides of the conflict wanted to share with little space for the perspectives of observers and other stakeholders of the peace constituency. Thus, the importance of getting news and information that educates the public about the prospect of the peace process, the particular agenda of each round of talks, and the necessary interventions of concerned citizens who had been vigilantly observing the negotiations.

The news articles in this book written by the current chairperson of Altermidya and published by independent multimedia platform Kodao provide readers with comprehensive insight about the talks.

The author has direct access to negotiators which proved useful in validating reports amid the spread of disinformation and even state-sponsored fabrication during the negotiations.

There are limitations to what a news format can convey but this also makes the book a valuable reference for scholars and peace advocates. An archive of stories that can guide researchers in fact-checking the claims of both the Duterte government and the National Democratic Front (NDF). The book is a printed Wikipedia of the peace process during the first year of the Duterte administration.

It is common to read reports parroting the point of view of Duterte propagandists about the alleged insincerity of the NDF without even attempting to offer balanced coverage.

But Raymund Villanueva’s dispatches are fair. His grasp of the history of the peace process is reflected in the reports that highlight the key points of landmark peace agreements. He quotes government negotiators and the peace spoilers in the Duterte Cabinet, but he also makes sure readers are provided with a proper context and rejoinder from the NDF side.

Soon, the terminated peace process will be reduced to a simplified narrative offered by both parties and their supporters.

We need books like this that can temper our biases and allow us to better understand the process that started with “guarded optimism” but ended with the government resuming its scorched earth policy against the CPP and NDF.

The book will remind us that Duterte released several peace consultants and that the Joint Monitoring Committee for the implementation of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law was convened, but at one point he has gone “berserk” with his barest minimum condition for the signing of a bilateral ceasefire. The CPP called Duterte a “double-speaking thug” which is quite an accurate description for the unremorseful authoritarian leader.

NDF leaders were accused of being dogmatic and devious but they extended goodwill gestures such as hinting support for the proposed federalism and the adoption of Comprehensive Agreement on Social and Economic Reforms (CASER) to fulfill the development aims contained in the government’s Ambisyon 2040 program.

The NDF identified not just the continuing incarceration of activists but also the brutal “tokhang” (the bloody campaign against the illegal drugs) as a stumbling block in the continuation of the peace process.

Despite these challenges, negotiators found ingenious ways to keep the process alive. Norway’s diplomats praised negotiators for being “solution-oriented”. Indeed, the demand for a bilateral ceasefire was not ignored since it was linked to the signing of Comprehensive Agreement on Socio-Economic Right (CASER). Negotiations for CASER also moved forward as both parties have agreed to support free land distribution and irrigation.

But these gains did not matter to Duterte and the hawks in his Cabinet who only wanted the capitulation of the CPP and NDF. They would also not appreciate the migrants who met the negotiators in Rome, the religious delegation who prayed for the success of the talks, and the peace assemblies attended by tens of thousands across the country. These voices did not matter to Duterte who later imposed Martial Law in Mindanao.

The book quotes a Catholic nun who reminded both parties that those who are most affected by social inequalities should have the strongest voice in the negotiations. It is an appeal worth remembering as we consider the possibility of resuming the peace process under the government of Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Villanueva, who is also a poet, captured the sense of desperation among those who yearned for peace with these words. “Dawn has broken here, but the sun, hidden behind a gloomy sky, has yet to make its presence felt.”

Published by Newsbytes.ph

As the Internet becomes more pervasive in society, we become less interested in knowing who manages this “network of networks”. We assume that it is a permanent feature of modern living like electricity or tap water as we take advantage of its seemingly limitless potential in improving our lives.

Information about its technical administration is demanded only when it stops working, and this is often limited to dealing with local providers and government regulators. But most of the time, we surf cyberspace without being aware of the “invisible Internet” that encompasses the whole world.

So, who governs the global Internet? No one. No single entity, company, or central authority has total control over the World Wide Web. It is open, decentralized, distributed, and interconnected because the stakeholders who collaborated to painstakingly build the physical and digital infrastructures of the Web had consistently advocated to preserve this design.

What gets discussed more often is the regulation of the Internet fueled mainly by the arbitrary actions of paranoid authorities who wanted to police the social media activities of their citizens.

There are varying levels of censorship, but we take comfort in the fact that netizens have learned to circumvent repressive rules aside from forming networks and safe spaces dedicated to countering digital despots.

Equally important is the matter of managing the Internet, which involves the allocation of numbered resources such as IP addresses, unique identifiers, and domain names. There is less spotlight on this mainly because people assume that technical issues are best left in the hands of academics, experts, and scientists. This perspective ignores the evolution of the Internet from being a research platform for a select few into a web of networks dedicated to serving the information needs of humanity.

The Internet has long ceased to be an esoteric academic project as it became a hugely popular space and network open for public use over the past three and a half decades. The pioneer developers worked hard with various institutions to set the codes and standards that made data sharing possible and turned the Internet into a functioning global open network.

Because of this, the management of the Internet became a global responsibility as well. It also means that its future will be decided by stakeholders who manage and use it. Therefore, it is up to us if the Internet will remain an open platform that enables us to lead better lives.

We certainly cannot allow narrow-minded bureaucrats to redesign the Internet and transform it into a virtual panopticon. Even as we acknowledge the role of commercialization in popularizing the Internet, it is also dangerous to equate the work of profit-seeking developers and tech giants with harmless innovation.

Technological solutions are neither good nor bad but they have real-life consequences as they get entangled with socio-political realities of the world. Internet-mediated disruption is being invoked by governments to seek tighter controls and more rigid laws.

Fragmenting the Internet is being done in the name of upholding social norms and public order. The “splInternet” is a specter that bedevils us even if this is the unintended result of some of our actions in response to the polarizing impact of our online activities.

As we become more overwhelmed with a fast-changing fragile world, we need to forcefully reject false solutions, whether articulated by tyrants or tycoons, that ultimately aim to undermine the open nature of the Internet.

Instead, we should defend the role of stakeholders in deliberating what needs to be addressed on matters relating to the Internet. It is a reminder that despite the perception that only geeks are interested in developing the protocols of the Internet, its management is actually relevant to all who use it.

This requires the constant promotion of the right of ALL stakeholders to have a voice in designing the Internet. At the Asia-Pacific School of Internet Governance and the Asia-Pacific Region Internet Governance Forum held recently in Singapore, I learned that the precise name for this process and approach is called “multistakeholderism”.

Applied to our particular context, it necessitates a continuous dialogue between stakeholders that include the national (e.g. DICT, NTC, DepEd, Congress) and local governments (LGUs), telcos, the technical community, academe, civil society, and Internet users. This is not an easy undertaking as it may involve acrimonious debates on complex and extremely sensitive issues.

Tension may arise due to conflicting interests, and some might attempt to dominate the process which could derail the supposedly free exchange of ideas. This is not a far-fetched scenario given the disappointing record of the government on how it consults the public on key policy proposals. But our resolve to fight for a better and inclusive Internet must be stronger. Stakeholders should remain firm and uphold the open and bottom-up approach.

Internet governance is seldom mentioned in digital literacy programs and online media training sessions which is unfortunate since every netizen can benefit from being informed about the collaborative origins of the Internet, the democratic legacy of the multistakeholder model, and the provocative but empowering idea that everyone has the right to be heard about what kind of Internet is needed in our world.

Mong Palatino is an activist, blogger, and former legislator. He is one of the fellows of the 2022 Asia-Pacific Region Internet Governance Forum held in Singapore

Impunity persists across Asia, as states fail to provide adequate protection to journalists.

This was the common message of Asia-based civil society groups that marked the International Day to End Impunity (IDEI) for Crimes Against Journalists on 2 November by highlighting the efforts of so many stakeholders to counter attacks against the media and hold the perpetrators of violence accountable.

Read more