Politics, tourism and the struggle for social transformation in the Philippines

By admin | March 2, 2016

Written for Bulatlat

Our country is on fire yet we continue to rank our islands based on what tourists want.

Should we rejoice when travel magazines list some of our islands as among the must-see places in the world? Yes, of course. But it doesn’t mean we should adopt their standards to measure the relevance of our islands. It also doesn’t justify the brutal transformation of our islands so that we can entice more tourists to spend their dollars here. Imagine if all the 7,107 islands of the Philippines undergo a makeover for tourism branding. Sounds fun for foreigners and investors but a scary scenario for residents and the biodiversity of our islands. Just think of the extreme commercialization of Boracay and its disastrous long-term impact.

Compared to the extractive industries, promoting tourism is a more sustainable development model. Indeed, eco-tourism is thriving and it appears to empower several communities. Should we reject this too? No, our appeal is not to ignore the potential of tourism. Instead, what we advocate is the linking of tourism and progressive politics. Sadly, tourism is hostaged today by narrow elite interest. Tourism is invoked to force the entry of mega projects (read: development aggression), the approval of anomalous pork programs, and the conversion of farm lands which benefit landlords and politicians. The lucky residents are hired or employed in these tourist facilities but the unlucky ones are displaced from their lands.

But if tourism is disruptive, mining is clearly several times more destructive. Isn’t tourism the better option? This is a false choice. Why condemn our people to choose between two economic activities imposed by bureaucrats and corporations? The situation remains the same even if tourism is suddenly repackaged as community-driven or the mining permit involves only small-scale operation. Who decides that the survival of a town depends on choosing between tourism and mining? Let the people have the final say and let them explore other options. In other words, this is an issue of politics or how citizens acquire and challenge power to reshape their present and future.

Is tourism really the best alternative for low-income islanders or is this more profitable for the business sector? Treating tourism as if it’s the only way out of poverty reflects the dominance of the thinking that converting an agricultural or coastal village into a retirement haven or backpackers’ sanctuary can quickly uplift the lives of many. Again, this is the perspective of the elite class reinterpreted as an economic necessity. Why should we readily accept the business proposition that the role of our islands is merely to produce dollar tax revenues? As islanders, surely we have equally important things to do such as exposing the abuses of landlords, resisting feudal practices, organizing farm workers, and building grassroots formations. Tourism as defined by those in power makes us forget that we have political tasks to perform.

This is evident in our distorted knowledge of our islands. We think it’s only natural that islands should conform to the needs of the tourism sector. An island becomes a prime destination if it’s tourist-friendly. When Boracay, Coron, and Malapascua are mentioned, we quickly remember their exotic locations that made them world famous; but we overlook the situation of the indigenous Ati of Boracay, the rapid degradation of Palawan’s last frontier, and the destruction left behind by Haiyan in north Cebu. When we allow tourism to trump everything, we prioritize the normalization of business over the urgent needs of ordinary residents. We ignore the everyday struggles of islanders since we believe it is tourism, not politics, that will make ours islands prosper.

We forget also that corporate tourism erodes the organic links of our islands. There is an unnecessary competition between island resorts. Panglao is presented as the new Boracay while Siargao is known as the preferred getaway of adventurers. Again, this is expected since the main goal is to attract tourists. There is no motivation to connect the islands and restore forgotten ties because profit-making is the ultimate aim of island overlords. A nearby island is seen not as a refuge during crisis moments but as a competitor. Centuries of inter-island linkages are rendered irrelevant in the tourism economy.

Only politics can unite islands and islanders. Politicians have been doing this for various reasons but most of the time to advance a conservative agenda. Think of Gloria Arroyo’s inter-island highway (RoRo), the creation of a Negros region, or the patriotic appeal to assert our sovereignty in the Spratlys. But then there’s progressive politics and its reminder to complete the unfinished revolution. Poverty stalks the islands but resistance can spark unity among the people. Island-wide struggles can be won through solidarity from nearby islands. We can cross waters and fight alongside our fellow islanders. We can expose how mining ravaged the beauty of Rapu-Rapu and Manicani, we can stop the proposed mega dams in Panay, and we can join the masses of Samar and Leyte as they rebuild their lives.

Therefore, another way to promote our islands is to highlight the heroic struggles of our people. This is already being done in Mactan and Corregidor but we can also feature the raging battles against foreign plunder, bureaucratic corruption, and feudal oppression across the islands. Are we not the only archipelagic country in the world where a Maoist guerrilla warfare is being waged in the past four decades?

We have more than 7,000 islands and I refuse to accept the popular assertion that these majestic lands exist only to give tourists the chance to experience paradise on Earth. Our people live on these islands and many of them have endured decades if not centuries of marginalization. Our priority is to end the suffering of the masa by enjoining them in the national struggle for true liberation and social transformation. No island can truly prosper as long as 7,000 other islands are mired in abject poverty. Tourism can bring instant cash to select investors and temporary livelihood to a few residents; but if we want substantial change, we should subsume tourism to the broader objectives of progressive politics and nationalist economics.

In the 20th century, Manila politicians encouraged Luzonians and Christians to populate Muslim Mindanao. A similar campaign of island migration can be implemented again but this time the message is entirely different. We can repeat what the First Quarter Stormers did in the 1970s: return to the countryside to jumpstart the revolution. Return to the islands to intensify the struggle for national democracy. The concept of island mentality can be redefined by imbuing it with a radical content. An islander who advances the politics of change through island-wide struggles, inter-island solidarity, and the national mass movement.

Islanders of the Philippines unite, we have nothing to lose but an archipelago in chains.

Posted in places, travel | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A ‘Prayut Effect’ in Southeast Asia?

By admin | February 28, 2016

Written for The Diplomat

Three new leaders have risen to power in Southeast Asia since 2014: Thailand’s Prayut Chan-o-cha, Indonesia’s Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, and Myanmar’s Aung San Suu Kyi.

In some ways, the three could not be more different. Prayut was the army chief who led a coup and established a new government in Thailand. Jokowi was an ordinary entrepreneur who became mayor of Solo, governor of Jakarta, and president of Indonesia despite having no ties with either the military or Suharto. Suu Kyi is a democracy icon who led her party to victory in the 2015 election.

The three of them emerged victorious by campaigning for genuine reform in their respective countries. Suu Kyi fought long and hard in order to defeat the military-backed party in Myanmar; Jokowi mobilized a young constituency to displace the old order in Indonesia; and Prayut invoked the violent conflict between Thailand’s major political parties to justify the imposition of martial law in the country.

Jokowi’s quick ascension to the presidency boosted Indonesian democracy, while Suu Kyi’s electoral victory assured Myanmar’s transition to modern democracy would continue. Meanwhile, though Prayut’s usurpation of civilian power was condemned by many, some also acknowledged that his new government successfully ended the vicious street clashes in Bangkok and other urban centers in Thailand.

Jokowi and Suu Kyi captured the aspirations of their people to strengthen representative democracy, while Prayut symbolized the lingering influence of authoritarianism in the region. If asked to choose, pro-democracy forces would certainly prefer to replicate the strategies of Jokowi and Suu Kyi in order to end one-party dominance in Cambodia, Vietnam, Singapore, and Malaysia. Indeed, opposition parties in the region briefly appeared to be headed toward clinching political victory in 2014 and 2015 but the rebellion in the ballots didn’t happen as expected. Perhaps it will take more time before a strong democracy movement can emerge and gain power in these countries.

In the meantime, the Prayut way of politics continues to hold sway in Thailand. Here is a self-proclaimed ‘non-politician’ politician who held on to power by ignoring the democratic process. He presents himself as a reformer who rejects the detested methods of bureaucratic politics. He offers quick (albeit extra-legal) solutions to fix what is wrong in society. Being mocked by the Western media for his politically-incorrect antics has only provoked him to make more offensive remarks in public.

Jokowi’s style is also unusual, though not nearly as crude. Suu Kyi is also non-traditional but not controversial. It is no surprise that unlike Jokowi and Suu Kyi, Prayut is widely condemned outside Thailand.

However, some of Prayut’s methods and manners are surprisingly gaining traction in the region. In the Philippines, a leading presidential candidate is called “Dirty Harry” because of his threat to wipe out criminals by executing them. Like Prayut, he is described as a non-politician who is ready to overhaul society even if his means are questionable or even unconstitutional. In Malaysia, the beleaguered ruling party has enforced draconian measures to silence critics and the opposition. In Cambodia, opposition leaders are harassed by no less than the prime minister.

It is not like Prayut has suddenly become the model of effective leadership. Rather, his methods are becoming less aberrant as more leaders in the region, both elected and unelected, downplay their public adherence to ethics, dialogue, democratic principles, and rule of law. This is a dangerous trend because it misleads people to think that human rights can be abused and democratic traditions can be ignored to allow the leader or the state to build a better nation more effectively. While many in the region wanted their leaders to be like Jokowi and Suu Kyi, the specter of Prayut is too strong to ignore.

Prayut took control when traditional politicians in Thailand failed miserably to uphold civility. The lesson here is that non-politicians like Prayut will always find the mandate to lead when there is a visible breakdown of political order and a subsequent yearning for substantial social change. Sometimes, the situation will produce a Jokowi or a Suu Kyi heroic icon. But there’s always the unfortunate chance that a Prayut figure will rise to grab power.

Jokowi, Suu Kyi, and Prayut are three Southeast Asian leaders that have captured our attention since 2014. Of the three, I fear it is Prayut who will have a greater (though quieter) influence in the region. Though Prayut himself may eventually be discredited, his methods will remain relevant, especially in a region desperately seeking stability.

The challenge is to aggressively promote democratic practices and support progressive movements so that we can prevent the emergence of little and big despots. When there’s real or imagined disintegration of societies, we need to prove that there’s an alternative to governments enforcing blind conformity and discipline. The alternative is what leaders like Prayut aim to subvert: democracy.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Metro Manila’s Earthquake Drill as Rehearsal of the Coming Revolution

By admin | February 25, 2016

Published by Manila Today

Something significant took place on July 30. Metro Manilans crowded the streets as part of a coordinated earthquake drill. Thousands marched toward barangay and city evacuation centers. Various institutions trained their constituents to follow some procedures as directed by the state. Everybody moved to safety. This was a disaster preparation activity, but it also fulfilled several crucial political objectives.

The regional drill in the country’s premier urban hub was conducted in anticipation of the “Big One”, the apocalyptic 7.2-magnitude shaking of the ground that could wipe out entire communities around the dreaded 100-kilometer West Valley Fault. Everywhere else in the world, the anxious anticipation of a “Big One” stems from geological possibilities of an earthquake of magnitude 7 and higher. And since our government agencies came out with the study that it can happen in this lifetime, the Big One of Metro Manila has been built up to secure obedience to government as much as (or even more than) to encourage disaster preparation.

The drill clinched what barangay and school seminars have aimed to achieve in recent years: instill popular awareness about the real dangers of a strong earthquake. Hopefully, it convinced many that the earthquake threat and the devastation it can cause are not based on Hollywood film effects but scientific evidence.

Nobody will admit it but the drill was an act of politics.
Furthermore, its practical value in the future is dependent on politics. Will it work out during crunch time? Politics will be the deciding factor. What is essential is not just leadership in the bureaucracy but political will to mobilize an entire society during crisis moments. What is needed is a political force capable of uniting the community. If the bureaucratic state fails to act quickly, this is an opportunity for other political interests to enhance their influence and legitimacy in the grassroots.

The drill is an outstanding concrete example of the hazards of individualism on one hand and the necessity of regular state intervention on the other. It rejects the dominant thinking of how individuals can afford to be selfish while promoting the greater good. During the drill, participants are told to cooperate, share resources, and act decisively as part of their survival techniques. The participants are reminded that they belong to a community or institution which is contrary to the prevailing mentality that individuals are responsible for their own lives if they want to survive in this world. Survival of the fittest? It’s a taboo attitude in group dynamics. In real life, our survival depends on the existence and strength of active collectives.

Meanwhile, the drill is an affirmation of the integral role of the state in boosting the capacities of high-risk communities. Again, this contravenes the neoliberal prescription against state involvement in activities that can be done by more efficient actors (read: private sector) in society. The drill teaches the public that there are vital aspects of life that cannot be left in the hands of the supposedly free market. The state, not profit-seeking corporations, should supervise disaster preparation, evacuation, and relief distribution. Economists view it as state intervention; but for us, we simply consider it as the primary obligation of the state in power.

If the drill is a political act, does it promote the people’s interest? As an initiative of the ruling state, it’s designed to perpetuate and not restructure the present order. Its political objectives are narrow. It succeeded in advancing the legitimacy of the state to command the population with minimal or no dissent. If disaster drills are effective in controlling the movement of crowds in a large territory like Metro Manila, what can stop the state from using the same methods during political upheavals in the future?

Organizing the drill is convenient for the state in search of credibility. Here is an ambitious yet necessary project that addresses the public clamor for rapid state response during disasters. Finally, the state is doing something right. And look, everybody is participating in the drill.

But after this, another political intervention is required to emphasize the continuing vulnerability of Metro Manila residents. It’s not the absence of disaster drills that put our habitats and lives in danger in our communities. Poverty, inequality, injustice, bad governance – these are the structural deficiencies we need to fix so that we can survive the great earthquake. Is there a drill to address these daily threats?

The government drill should be supported by everyone; but at the same time, we must make some progressive political assertion. Turn the drill into an event that can truly empower our communities. Through people power tactics, question the persistence of poverty, hunger, and landlessness in the country. Identify anomalous public infrastructures. Make the state accountable for the visible signs of corruption in public areas. As the people march toward safety, discuss the lack of adequate welfare services that have weakened the capabilities of the marginalized. For workers in private institutions, there should be an information campaign about labor rights.

After their participation in the recent drill, many felt empowered because they became more knowledgeable about what to do during earthquakes. We should sustain their political education by launching a more comprehensive program on disaster preparation. One of the objectives is to make people realize that many are dying already not because of natural disasters but the low quality of living in Metro Manila and the uneven allocation of resources across the country. And if more are in danger of dying during typhoons or earthquakes, it is mainly caused by maldevelopment, corrupt governance, and historic inequities.

Situated in the Pacific Ring of Fire, it’s common knowledge that the Philippines is disaster-prone. It’s already the 21st century but why do many communities still lack the facilities to assist residents during disasters? Why are Filipinos migrating and settling in the overcrowded districts of Metro Manila? Why do unsafe workplaces exist? Why are incomes low? Why are basic services inadequate? Why can’t we solve the perennial flooding?

The Metro Manila earthquake drill addressed only one aspect of disaster preparation. We should compel the state to focus also on how to substantially uplift the living conditions of Metro Manila residents.

It is clear that we cannot conduct this other drill without altering the socio-economic and geo-political conditions in the country. The state in power will obviously reject these political demands. Thus, there is also the need for a new political force that will challenge the reign of the disastrous state.

The metro drill actually gave us a glimpse of how the people can attempt to reclaim political power from the rich and powerful. The people crowding together, the masses marching in the streets, workers disrupted from their routines and occupying establishments, and the transmitting of information signals via church bells, TV and phones. Imagine if the political force orchestrating this drill is a revolutionary party.

What if the Big One we are told to be afraid of is not the earthquake but the coming political revolution? What if the drill is a preview of how the state will react if the political conflagration in the countryside will reach the cities in the future? What if another political force, backed by the mass movement, is able to mount a counterdrill in the metro?

If the drill sounded familiar and the mechanics are easy to understand, it is because we are reminded of previous mobilizations that gathered the masses in Metro Manila.
The drill creates a crowd that turns into a collective when it becomes conscious of its politics.

But whether the revolution will arrive or not, the metro drill should be reconceptualized as a political platform to challenge the oppressive present, an opportunity to demand a pro-poor disaster preparation program, and the unveiling of the agenda for change as we continue the struggle for the establishment of a progressive and resilient society.

Posted in places, reds | Tagged , | Leave a comment

7 Things to Know About the 2016 Philippine Elections

By admin | February 13, 2016

Written for The Diplomat

1. The Contest: The Philippine elections are scheduled for May 9, 2016. Filipinos will vote for a new president, vice president, 12 senators, one district representative, one party list representative, and provincial/city/municipal officials. The winning president has six years to lead the country but he/she cannot run again for reelection since the constitution forbids it.

2. The Personalities: The five major contenders in the presidential race are Mar Roxas, Jejomar Binay, Grace Poe, Miriam Santiago, and Rodrigo Duterte. Roxas, the administration bet, topped the senate race in 2004 although he lost as a vice presidential candidate in 2010. He was subsequently appointed by incumbent President Benigno Simeon Aquino III to various executive positions in the past six years. Binay was mayor of Makati City, the country’s financial center, before becoming vice president in 2010. Poe dominated the senatorial election in 2013. She is also the daughter of a famous actor who ran but lost in the 2004 presidential elections. Santiago is a senator who placed second in the 1992 presidential elections. Duterte is mayor of Davao City, located in the southern island of Mindanao. He became popular for making Davao a safe city through his tough methods in suppressing criminality. He is called the ‘Dirty Harry’ of the Philippines because of his anti-crime agenda.

3. The Playing Field: Roxas has the advantage in terms of commanding a nationwide political machinery and vast resources because he is the leader of the ruling party. He vows to continue and expand the reforms instituted by Aquino whose platform is called Daang Matuwid (Straight Path or Righteous Path). If Roxas is the administration candidate, who is the opposition leader? There is no clear answer to this question. While Binay may be the head of the opposition coalition, it was only six months ago when he resigned as a member of the Aquino cabinet. And even though Poe has been critical of the Aquino government, it didn’t prevent her from becoming the first choice of the ruling party for the position of vice president. Santiago is also a consistent critic of the government, though her political party has little influence in local politics. Duterte only formalized his candidacy last month.

4. The Platforms: Roxas hopes to win by emphasizing the need for continuity. But rivals question his competence and the supposed accomplishments of the Aquino administration by highlighting the worsening traffic situation in Metro Manila, the continuing suffering of Typhoon Haiyan survivors, and the implementation of unconstitutional ‘presidential pork’. Binay seeks the support of the poor even though his family is hounded by corruption and plunder charges. Poe was the early favorite because of her stellar performance in the Senate but her popularity suffered when her previous American citizenship was questioned in the courts. Santiago, who is known for her intellectual prowess, has a large following among the youth but many are worried that her health problems could affect her candidacy. Duterte’s phenomenal rise from mayor to presidential contender could be attributed to the people’s frustration with an unequal and inefficient political system. He is seen by some analysts and an increasing number of citizens as this year’s alternative candidate who will solve the country’s problems which traditional mainstream politicians have failed to do.

5. Foreign Policy: All candidates support most of the actions taken by the Aquino government in dealing with China’s maritime claims and activities in the South China Sea or West Philippine Sea. With respect to United States military pivot, Duterte and Santiago have publicly opposed the Visiting Forces Agreement which allows the entry of U.S. troops in the country. Despite the recent Supreme Court ruling affirming the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, Santiago renewed her opposition to the construction of U.S. military facilities in the country. Duterte once claimed that he rejected the request of the United States to make Davao a center of drone operations in the region. Meanwhile, Binay is in favor of amending the economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution which restricts the foreign ownership of land and corporations.

6. Aquino’s Legacy: The presidential election will also determine whether several major programs and policies of the Aquino government will be continued, amended, or revoked such as the Bangsamoro Basic Law (expanded autonomy for Muslim-dominated provinces in southern Philippines), conditional cash transfer for the poorest of the poor, the stalled peace negotiations with communists, and the commitments made by the Philippines in the 2015 Paris climate talks.

7. The Vote: This is the third time that the Philippines will use automated voting technology, which many experts credited for the faster and more credible election results in 2010 and 2013. However, some are worried about the reliability of the digital software and the prospect of vote manipulation based on previous results. In addition, some are questioning the dominance of one company in facilitating vote automation and counting since 2010.

The Race for the Philippine Presidency Has Begun

Written for The Diplomat

According to the Philippine Commission on Elections, 130 persons have applied to run for president in next year’s election. The majority are unknown aspirants who will likely be disqualified for lacking the means to mount a nationwide campaign. The election itself is set for May 9.

There are four major candidates with both strong party backing and large public following. The administration candidate is former interior secretary Mar Roxas. Opposition leader and incumbent vice president Jejomar Binay also formally registered his bid for the presidency. Neophyte Grace Poe, a senator and the leading candidate based on several surveys, also submitted her certificate of candidacy this week. But the surprise candidate is Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago, who declared her intention to run for president only a few days ago.

Roxas is the grandson of a former president and son of a former senator. He topped the Senate race in 2004 and became the leader of Liberal Party, one of the country’s oldest and biggest political parties. He ran unsuccessfully for vice president in 2010.

Binay was a longtime mayor of Makati City, the country’s premier business and financial hub, prior to his election as vice president. Poe is the daughter of Fernando Poe Jr, an actor who ran for president in 2004. Santiago placed second in the 1992 presidential election before becoming senator in 1995.

Roxas has the edge in terms of election machinery, since he is the candidate of the ruling party. President Benigno Aquino III, who enjoys high public confidence based on opinion polls, has also committed to actively campaign for Roxas. But Aquino’s endorsement can also hurt Roxas by turning away voters who are disappointed with the performance of the president.

Binay claims he has the support of the poor, overseas Filipinos, and local government leaders. But his numbers went down after he was accused of being involved in various corruption scandals. Though he insists that these were all politically-motivated, his reputation has already been tarnished.

Poe presents herself as an alternative candidate who has a clean record as a public servant. Tired of the antics of traditional politicians and political dynasties, many urged her to run for higher office. Though she has decided to run, her previous American citizenship was immediately questioned in the court.

Santiago is also seen as an outsider, even though she has been a politician for more than two decades. She is admired by many people – especially the young – who are looking for intelligent and articulate leaders. Santiago’s candidacy was not expected because she has only recently recovered from cancer.

Turning to their running mates, Roxas has teamed up with Leni Robredo, the widow of a respected politician. Binay’s vice presidential candidate is Senator Gringo Honasan. Poe, meanwhile, chose her mentor, Senator Chiz Escudero, to be her vice president. Santiago has reportedly endorsed the vice presidential candidacy of Senator Bongbong Marcos. Marcos is the son of the country’s former strongman, Ferdinand Marcos, who ruled the country for two decades before he was ousted by a popular uprising in 1986.

Campaigning will officially begin next year. But since the candidates are already known, political realignments across the country are expected to reshape the electoral landscape. Political bickering between candidates and parties is also anticipated to intensify.

Posted in election | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Ang lumalabang Lumad, hindi si Duterte, ang tanglaw ng Mindanao

By admin | February 3, 2016

Published on Bulatlat

*Talumpating binigkas sa Mindanao Human Rights Summit na ginanap sa Philippine Normal University, Taft, Manila noong Nobyembre 12, 2015

Sa susunod na linggo, ipapalabas na ang inaabangang huling installment ng pelikulang Hunger Games. Sa pelikula, lumusob sa Capitol ang mga nakatira sa District 12 at iba pang inaaping distrito ng Panem. Sa isang banda, hindi ba’t ang mga Lumad na andito ngayon sa Maynila, ang kapitolyo ng Pilipinas, ay tulad din nina Katniss at mga kasamahan niya na ang pinaglalaban ay katarungan at kapayapaan? Hindi ba’t ang Panem ay tulad din ng Pilipinas na may malaking agwat ang mayaman at mahirap? Sa Panem, sinisipsip ng Capitol ang yaman ng lahat ng distrito; sa Panem, ang mga komunidad na pumipiglas ay tinatapatan ng dahas ng estado. Ganito rin ang relasyon ng Metro Manila at Mindanao, ang imperial Manila at ang mayamang lupain ng Mindanao. Ang yaman ng bansa ay nakakonsentra sa iilang pamilya at korporasyon habang ang mayorya ay nasasadlak sa kahirapan.

Binabati ko ang lahat ng isang mapagpalayang hapon subalit nais kong ibigay ang aking pinakamatikas na saludo sa mga Lumad na naglakbay pa mula Mindanao, binagtas ang silangang Visayas, tumawid ng dagat, binaybay ang Bikol, dumako sa Timog Katagulagan, at nagmartsa mula timog Metro Manila papuntang UP DIliman, at nandito ngayon sa Maynila. Araw-araw nagrereklamo tayo sa trapik, siksikan sa MRT, at byaheng nakakahilo; subalit ang mga kapatid nating Lumad, pambihirang paglalakbay ang kanilang ginawa upang ipaabot lamang ang kanilang mensahe sa pamahalaan at sa ating lahat.

Pinaunawa sa atin ng mga Lumad na ang problema ng Pilipinas ay hindi lamang ang mabagal na Internet, tanim bala at trapik sa kalsada kundi mas malala pa: kahirapan sa lahat ng panig ng bansa – at ito ay ramdam na ramdam ng mga magsasaka at mangingisda sa kanayunan. Sinu-sino sila? Sila lang naman ang mga taong nagpapakain sa atin araw-araw.

Dagdag pa sa kahirapan ay ang karahasan sa kanayunan. Mahirap na nga ang buhay, pinapalayas pa sa kanilang lupang tinubuan. At kapag lumaban, pinaparatangang kriminal o kalaban ng gobyerno.

Sa pelikulang Avatar, nais patalsikin ng isang korporasyon ang tribong Na’vi sa kanilang tinitirhan dahil gusto nitong minahin ang kagubatan. Pamilyar ito sa mga Lumad dahil nasa Mindanao ang mining capital ng bansa. At tulad ng mga Na’vi, pinapaalis din ang mga Lumad sa kanilang lupa ng mga gahamang transnational corporation kasabwat ang armadong pwersa ng estado. Sino ang tunay na kriminal: ang mersenaryong korporasyon o ang katutubong nagtatanggol ng kanilang buhay at pamumuhay?

Ang karanasan ng Lumad kaugnay ng pagmimina ay di naiiba sa kuwento ng maraming komunidad na sinasalanta ng tinatawag nating development aggression. Mga aktibidad na mabuti raw ang epekto sa ating ekonomiya subalit kapalit naman ay habambuhay na pagdurusa ng mamamayan. Halimbawa: mining, logging, expansion ng mga plantasyon, agribusiness ng malalaking korporasyon, at land conversion para sa biofuel na pang-eksport.

Sa nakaraang dekada, lumobo ang industriya ng pagmimina. Gaano ba kalawak ang kasalukuyan at mungkahing mining operation sa bansa? Mga dabarkads, natataandaan ninyo pa ba ang Philippine Arena? Ayon sa grupong Kalikasan, kasinglaki ng 62,000 na Philippine Arena ang proposed mining areas sa bansa.

Hindi tayo tutol sa pag-unlad; tutol tayo sa pangangamkam ng lupa at pagkasira ng kalikasan habang ang yumayaman ay iilang indibidwal lamang. Ito ang karanasan ng Pilipinas sa nakalipas na siglo. Inubos na nila ang mga kagubatan, yumaman ba ang ating bansa? Noon, ang sabi nila huwag tumutol sa pagputol ng puno dahil kapalit nito ay dagdag kita ng mga komunidad. Magkakaroon daw ng mga kalye, paaralan, health center, negosyo at iba pang biyaya mula sa mga kumpanya ng troso. Ano ang nangyari? Kalbo na ang mga bundok subalit nanatiling atrasado ang ating ekonomiya. Sino ang yumaman? Silang mga nasa poder. Samantala, sino ang nagdusa? Tayong lahat.

Ngayon ang target naman nila ay ang ilalim ng bundok. Sa Mindanao, agresibo ang pamahalaan at mga dayuhang korporasyon sa pagbili ng lupa upang ito’y mabilis na pagkakitaan. Subalit ang kanilang modelo ng pag-unlad ay walang espasyo para sa ordinaryong mamamayan. Hindi rin holistiko ang idudulot na kaunlaran sa komunidad at sa bansa. Kung matutuloy ang kanilang disenyo, hindi magagamit ang yamang likas ng Mindanao upang madebelop ang mga industriya sa bansa. Magpapatuloy lang ang kalakaran kung saan sadyang nililimita lang ang ekonomiya ng Pilipinas sa pagsuplay ng hilaw na materyales na kailangan ng ibang bansa.

Kung bakit binabansot ang kakayahan ng ating lokal na ekonomiya ay may kinalaman sa mga preskripsyon ng mga kasunduang ating nilagdaan at mga pormasyong ating nilalahukan tulad ng Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation o APEC. Dahil sa APEC, lalong pinagtibay ang papel ng Pilipinas na maging supplier lamang ng murang lakas paggawa at hilaw na materyal. Inalis ang proteksiyon para sa mga produktong agrikultural at hinayaan ang pagbaha ng murang imported goods sa mga pamilihan. Nagresulta ito sa pagbagsak ng kabuhayan ng mga magsasaka na hindi kinaya ang kumpetisyon mula sa mas murang produktong galing sa ibang bansa. Ito rin ang dahilan kung bakit lumawak ang mga plantasyon, dumami ang mining application, at sinakop ang ancestral domain ng mga katutubo.

Unang naging host ng APEC ang bansa noong 1996 at kasunod nito’y ratsadang imposisyon ng mga patakarang liberalisayson, deregulasyon, at pribatisasyon. Kung ang pamantayan ay pagbukas ng mga oportunidad para sa malaking negosyo at dayuhang kapital, masasabing nagtagumpay ang APEC. Kung susuriin ang buhay ng ordinaryong mamamayan lalo na ng manggagawang kontraktuwal, malinaw na higit pa sa delubyo ang idinulot ng APEC. Subalit kahit masaklap ang karanasan ng bansa sa pagsunod sa dikta ng APEC, nakatakdang gawin ang APEC summit sa Maynila sa susunod na linggo.

Sa pelikulang Jurassic World, nalaman natin na binuksan muli ang lumang Jurassic Park kahit na napatunayang nakamamatay ang ganitong klase ng theme park. Hindi ba’t ganito rin ang aktitud ng pamahalaan sa mga patakarang neoliberalisasyon na pinagtibay natin noong unang APEC? Lalong lumubha ang kalagayan ng ekonomiya subalit eto ulit ngayon ang pamahalaan, tagasuporta pa rin ng APEC. Kontraktuwalisasyon pa more. Mababang sahod pa more. Taas singil sa kuryente, tubig, at pamasahe para sa mga kumpanyang pag-aari dati ng estado na ngayo’y kontrolado na ng pribadong interes. Sa pelikulang Pacific Rim, ang tawag sa mga halimaw ay Kaiju; para sa akin yan ang APEC: halimaw na pumapatay at mapaminsala sa Asya-Pasipiko.

Isa sa malagim na pamana ng APEC ay ang mabilis na pagkasira ng kalikasan. Kinamkam at sinira ng maraming dayuhang korporasyon ang ating yamang likas, kabilang ang lupang ninuno ng mga katutubo. Sa mga mining areas, nilason ang tubig at hangin. Nilamon ang mga kagubatan, ang luntian ay naging putik.

Kaya mahalagang basahin muli ang Laudato Si ni Pope Francis. Napapanahon ang kanyang paalala na ang pag-unlad ay dapat nag-aambag sa maaliwalas na buhay at pagkalinga sa kapaligiran.

Marami sa mga kalamidad na humagupit sa bansa nitong mga nakalipas na taon ay naganap sa Mindanao tulad ng bagyong Sendong at Pablo. Sa kasaysayan nito, bihirang daanan ng malalakas na bagyo ang Mindanao. Subalit dahil sa climate change, mukhang nagiging madalas na ang pagdating ng mga kalamidad sa isla. Gayunpaman, ang pinsala sa kalikasan ay nagdudulot ng mas malaking trahedya sa buhay ng tao. Dahil sa expansion ng mga plantasyon sa Bukidnon, ang dating kagubatan ay ginawang taniman ng pinya, saging, at iba pang export crops. Ganito rin ang nangyari sa timog Mindanao. At nang rumagasa ang bagyo, lumikha ito ng flashflood at mudslide na pumatay ng marami.

Hindi natin kailangan ng ‘guardians of the galaxy’; sapat na ang ‘guardians of the gubat’ upang maibalik ang sigla ng kabundukan. Sa mahabang panahon, ginampanan ito ng mga Lumad subalit nanghimasok ang estado at tinaboy ang mga katutubo. Hinati ang hanay ng Lumad at sinilaw ang ilan ng alok ng kapangyarihan at salapi. Minaliit ang sinasabing makalumang kultura ng Lumad at pilit na pinalit ang pangako ng modernisasyon.

Agad nagdulot ito ng kaguluhan at pagwasak sa lupang ninuno ng mga Lumad. Ito ang dahilan kung bakit marami sa mga Lumad ay lumikas papuntang sentrong bayan o kaya’y mariing tumutol sa mga proyektong sumisira sa kalikasan.

Kung uunawain natin ang buod ng kahilingan ng mga Lumad, simple at makatwiran lang naman ang kanilang mensahe: hayaan silang mabuhay nang mapayapa sa kanilang komunindad.

Hindi ito mahirap ipatupad lalo na kung ang pamahalaan ay nakikinig sa boses ng mamamayan. Ang problema, ang tunay na ’boss’ ng pamahalaang Noynoy Aquino ay hindi ang karaniwang tao kundi mga campaign donor, malaking negosyo, at dayuhang interes. Kaya ang bilis ng aksiyon kapag may dinadaing ang mga kaibigang oligarkiya. Mining permit, approved. Tax exemption, approved. Private armies, approved. Military escort, approved. Pero nang Lumad na ang may hinahapag na usapin, sinisi pa ang Lumad kung bakit nagpapagamit daw sa NPA.

Totoo, marami sa mga problema ng Lumad ay deka-dekada na ang tagal. Totoo, minana ito ni Pnoy. Subalit, ang daming pananagutan ni Pnoy: Bakit pinagpatuloy niya ang mapaminsalang pagmimina? Bakit pinayagan niya ang militarisasyon sa mga mining areas? Bakit hindi inatras ang mga patakarang nagpatindi sa paghihirap ng magsasaka at katutubo? At bakit sa halip na kapayapaan ay pinili niya na maghasik ng dahas sa kanayunan?

Kung pinagpatuloy lang sana ni Pnoy ang usapang pangkapayapaan kasama ang National Democratic Front, isa sana itong pagkakataon upang resolbahin ang ilan sa mga isyung bitbit ng Lumad. Nasa adyenda dapat ng peace talks ang mga sosyo-ekonomikong isyu na mahalaga sa Lumad tulad ng repormang agraryo, pag-unlad sa kanayunan, pagplano ng ekonomiya, at pagrespeto sa ancestral domain.

Tinalikuran ni Pnoy ang peace talks at sa halip ay hinarap sa katutubo ang brutal na mukha ng pasismo. Nagdeploy ng bata-batalyong sundalo at pinalawak ang counterinsurgency gamit ang iba’t ibang ahensiya ng pamahalaan. Marami sa mga serbsiyong pinamimigay ay nakaangkla sa misyon na magkondukta ng surveillance at pahinain ang tinatayang support base ng mga rebelde sa mga komunidad.

Kinakailangan pa bang maging conflict area ang isang lugar para lang mabigyan ito ng mga kaukulang serbisyo mula sa pamahalaan? Hindi ba’t responsibilidad ng estado na magtayo ng paaralan o pagamutan sa bawat barangay, ito man ay may malaki o maliit na bilang ng botante o iniimpluwensiyahan man o hindi ng mga rebelde?

Subalit walang interes ang pamahalaan ni Pnoy na ugatin ang sigalot sa kanayunan kung kaya’t ang stratehiya nito ay talunin ang mga rebelde sa pamamagitan ng militarisasyon sa mga komunidad. At nang hindi ito umubra upang talunin ang rebolusyon, inakusahan ang mga sibilyan bilang protektor ng NPA o kasabwat ng mga rebelde. Kabilang sa mga sinasangkot sa rebelyon ay ang mga Lumad.

Nagtayo ng paaralan ang mga Lumad, subalit sa mata ng estado, paaralan daw ng NPA. Tumutol ang mga Lumad sa pagmimina, subalit para sa militar at malaking negosyo, pakana daw ng NPA.

Tanggapin natin ang argumento na nasa likod ng mga Lumad ang NPA, ang solusyon ba ay gibain ang mga eskuwelahan? Patayin ang mga guro? Magsunog ng mga bahay, nakawin ang mga pananim, at sirain ang kabuhayan ng mga katutubo?

Kung tinuloy lang sana ni Pnoy ang peace talks, pwede niyang singilin nang harapan ang NPA at NDF kung ano ang katotohanan sa bintang na pumapatay ng Lumad ang mga rebelde. Sa pamamagitan ng peace talks, pwedeng pagkasunduan ng magkabilang panig ang mga kongkretong hakbang na makakatulong sa panunumbalik ng normalidad sa buhay ng Lumad.

Ngunit sadyang utak-pulbura ang nasa pamunuan o kaya nama’y tila mas nanaisin pa ng pamahalaan na lumikas ang mga Lumad upang tumigil na rin ang oposisyon sa pagmimina at iba pang operasyon ng mga oligarikya sa Mindanao.

Tama si Cardinal Tagle sa kanyang pahayag na itigil ang militarisasyon sa mga komunidad ng Lumad. May mga mungkahi siyang hakbang na pwedeng pag-usapan ng NPA-NDF at pamahalaan ni Aquino.

Samantala, habang hindi umuusad ang usapang pangkapayapaan, igalang natin ang karapatan ng Lumad na ipabatid sa lahat ang kanilang sitwasyon. Nandito sila dahil ang kagyat na sagot sa kanilang problema ay nakasalalay sa mabilisang aksiyon ng pamahalaan ni Aquino. Idagdag natin ang ating boses sa mamamayang nakikiisa sa laban ng Lumad. Iparating natin hanggang Malakanyang ang ating suporta para sa pinaglalaban ng Lumad. Medyo lakasan natin ang ating mga sigaw kasi si Pnoy baka abala sa mga kasalan at hindi niya tayo mapansin.

Marami akong pelikulang nabanggit ngayong hapon tulad ng Hunger Games at Avatar. Sa dalawang pelikulang ito, tampok ang matapang na pag-aklas ng mamamayan. Kabigha-bighani, di ba? Madali tayong napahanga kahit ito ay mga likhang sining lamang. Kaya bakit magkakasya lamang sa pantasya kung nariyan at pinatunayan ng mga Lumad na nagpapatuloy ang pakikibaka. Dun tayo sa totoo.

Ngayong taon, sumikat sa bansa ang pangalang Duterte bilang lider na pwedeng mamuno. Binigyan niya ng pag-asa ang marami. Isa ako sa may respeto kay Duterte pero sa totoo lang, hindi siya ang maningning na liwanag na natatanaw natin sa Mindanao. Ang liwanag na ito ay buhat sa sulo na hawak ng mga Lumad habang magiting nilang tinataguyod ang paglaban para sa tunay na kalayaan, katarungan at panlipunang pagbabago.

Posted in nation, speeches | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

What Made Headlines in Southeast Asia in 2015?

By admin | January 23, 2016

Written for The Diplomat

A look back at some of the top stories from Southeast Asia in 2015:

1. Landslide victory for Myanmar’s National League for Democracy. Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi may be constitutionally barred from becoming president of Myanmar but her party secured an historic victory in the general election. A tenth of the new members of the parliament were former political prisoners, including Suu Kyi herself. NLD’s victory was less surprising than the decision of the military and the incumbent military-backed civilian government to recognize the poll results. Will this lead to sweeping reforms in Myanmar next year?

2. Corruption scandal in Malaysia. First, there were allegations that state-run investment firm 1Malaysia Development Bhd lost a large amount of money due to anomalous transactions. Subsequently, Prime Minister Najib Razak was accused of pocketing more than $600 million from 1MDB. Najib denied the charge and insisted that the money was a donation for his political party from a supporter in the Middle East. Some of his influential allies were not convinced and they tried to persuade him to resign. Najib gets to keep his post (for now) but the scandal is expected to undermine his leadership until the end of his term.

3. Indonesian haze. The recurring haze from Indonesia affected residents of Singapore, Malaysia, and some parts of southern Philippines. Caused by forest fires, the haze reflected the inability of Indonesian leaders to stop plantation owners and farmers from clearing the land for palm oil. But responsibility for resolving the problem is not restricted to Indonesia alone, since several plantations in the ‘ground zero’ of the forest fires are owned by Singaporean and Malaysian companies.

4. Lese majeste cases in Thailand. Since grabbing power in 2014, the Thai junta has used the anti-Royal Insult law to silence and harass opposition leaders, activists, and even ordinary citizens. Some lese majeste cases led to convictions with harsh prison terms. The law is meant to protect the monarchy but the junta is using it to justify repression. Diplomats and foreign scholars are urging Thailand to review its strict implementation of the law but the junta responded by threatening to arrest critics — and recently, even began investigating the U.S. ambassador for insulting the king by questioning the application of the lese majeste law.

5. Corruption scandal in Indonesia. House Speaker Setya Novanto resigned his post after he was accused of asking for a 20 percent stake in the mining giant Freeport in exchange for the extension of the company’s contract to operate in Indonesia. The House leader found it difficult to deny the charges, since his conversation with a Freeport executive was secretly recorded but still insisted that he was only joking. He was being probed for ethics violation when he resigned as House speaker. He is still a member of Congress and leader of the powerful Golkar Party.

6. Rohingya refugees. Thousands of Rohingya boat refugees were pushed back into the seas by the governments of Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia early this year. The Rohingya are mostly Muslim but they are treated as illegal residents in Myanmar. The marginalized Rohingya are living in makeshift camps in western Myanmar, forcing many of them to seek refuge in neighboring countries.

7. Trade agreements and economic integration. Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei are included in the United States-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement. Meanwhile, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines are also seeking to join the club. Negotiations over the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a regional free trade area including the ten ASEAN countries and those nations with existing free trade agreements (FTAs) with ASEAN – Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea – continued but did not conclude by the end of the year as had been hoped. Aside from TPP and RCEP, the plan to create a single economic community in the Southeast Asian region known as the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) also took off this year.

8. Cambodia’s opposition lawmakers boycott parliament. Last year, Cambodian politicians vowed to pursue a so-called “culture of dialogue,” which ended the decision of the opposition to boycott the parliament. This year, the opposition boycotted the parliament again for two months after some of their members were beaten by a pro-government group. A defamation case against the opposition leader was also revived. The opposition is now back in the parliament but it doesn’t mean the ruling party, which has been in power for more than three decades already, will stop its attacks against its political rivals.

9. Laos assumes leadership of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Laos announced that the theme of ASEAN in 2016 is “Turning Vision into Reality for a Dynamic ASEAN Community.” Its great task is to help build the foundations for establishing the ambitious ASEAN Economic Community.

10. Philippines vs China maritime case. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at The Hague ruled that it has jurisdiction over the case filed by the Philippines against China over the maritime disputes in the South China Sea (known in the Philippines as the West Philippine Sea). The case proceeded to oral arguments. The decision, expected around the middle of 2016, could also affect the similar claims of several countries in the region and China’s behavior with respect to its neighbors.

11. Death of Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew. Singapore’s founding leader Lee Kuan Yew passed away this year, an event that saw an entire country mourning his death and paying tribute to Southeast Asia’s most famous statesman. Global leaders also recalled the visionary leadership of Lee Kuan Yew and his success in leading the transformation of a small island state into a prosperous economy in less than three decades. Lee Kuan Yew’s party, the People’s Action Party (PAP), led by his son Lee Hsien Loong, maintained its leadership by clinching a landslide victory in September.

12. Human trafficking in Thailand. International scrutiny over human trafficking in Thailand continued in 2015, as a shocking expose led to several arrests and rescue missions related to slavery in Thailand’s seafood industry. The discovery of mass graves of trafficking victims in the country and the case of a senior police officer seeking asylum in Australia only heightened concerns about the issue in the country.

13. Vietnam passes transgender law. The new law in Vietnam now recognizes the right of transgenders to undergo sex reassignment surgery in the country. In addition, those who have undergone sex surgery can legally change their gender status. The LGBT community inside and outside of Vietnam welcomed the passage of the law but urged the government to improve it by recognizing the right of all transgenders, including those who are unable to undergo a sex surgery.

Corruption Scandals Hound ASEAN Leaders in 2015

Written for The Diplomat

The year 2015 in Southeast Asia will be remembered for two things: the historic election victory of Aung San Suu Kyi’s party and the corruption scandals involving leaders of the ruling parties in the region.

In Malaysia, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is accused of pocketing more than $600 million (2.6 billion Ringgit) from state-run investment firm 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). Najib admitted that this large amount of money was transferred to his personal bank accounts but denied that the funds came from 1MDB. He claimed that a supporter from the Middle East donated the money for the election campaign of the ruling party, the United Malays National Organization.

The issue has affected Najib’s credibility as a leader and some of his influential allies even called for his resignation. But Najib is undeterred and insists he did not steal from public funds. While he is likely to remain prime minister until the end of his term, the mysterious $600 million donation and the anomalous financial transactions of the 1MDB will continue to undermine his leadership.

In Thailand, the junta is embroiled in a corruption mess after reports surfaced that a park it built in 2014 is grossly overpriced. The Rajabhakti Park in Prachuap Khiri Khan Province featured seven giant statues of popular kings which the junta commissioned to honor the monarchy, the country’s most beloved political institution. But there were allegations that large kickbacks were demanded for the construction of the park.

Last month, a former army chief and deputy defense minister confirmed that an “amulet-hawking middleman” took a 10 percent commission from the project. The army immediately announced that it would investigate the issue. This week, the junta ordered the closure of Rajabhakti Park for “maintenance” after activists and opposition groups tried to visit the park in order to conduct a protest against military corruption. When it seized power last year, the junta vowed to stop corruption in government. But the controversy surrounding the Rajabhakti Park today has raised questions about its credibility to follow through on that commitment.

In Indonesia, House Speaker Setya Novanto is under investigation after mining giant PT Freeport Indonesia accused the influential politician of asking for a 20 percent stake in the company which is estimated to be worth $4 billion. The head of Freeport Indonesia released an 80-minute audio recording of a meeting where Novanto allegedly made the demand in exchange for an extension of the company’s permit to operate in the country. Freeport’s mining site in Papua province has the world’s largest gold mine and third largest copper mine. And though Freeport is also the largest taxpayer in Indonesia, activists and nationalist groups believe that the company should remit a bigger share of its revenues and profits to the country’s treasury.

Novanto, a member of the Golkar Party which fielded a losing presidential candidate last year, allegedly claimed in the recorded conversation that the 20 percent stake is made in behalf of the country’s president and vice president. Indonesian President Joko Widodo has vehemently denied this. According to some analysts, this is already the biggest political scandal to hit Indonesia in recent years.

In the Philippines, Vice President Jejomar Binay is facing several plunder charges in connection to alleged anomalous contracts he signed when he was still mayor of Makati City, the country’s financial center. Binay, one of the frontrunners in the 2016 presidential election, described the corruption cases as politically-motivated. He questioned the string of cases filed against him, which he said was made to disqualify him as a candidate in the election.

But public perception is not in favor of the vice president as evidenced by his declining popularity ratings. It does not help that Binay’s alleged lavish lifestyle and properties have been exposed by the media. To be fair Binay could hit back by pointing out that the ruling party has not yet adequately addressed the issue of the presidential pork barrel program which was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In any case, the fight against corruption is expected to be one of the major election issues next year.

This year was supposed to be a glorious year for Southeast Asia as the region was set to establish a single and united community. Instead, it will be remembered as the year when the region’s elected leaders and army generals were implicated in embarrassing and unprecedented corruption scandals.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

1975: The Start and End of Conflict in Southeast Asia

By admin | January 14, 2016

Written for The Diplomat

This year, we commemorate the 40th anniversary of the end of Vietnam War, a two-decade conflict that pitted a poor and divided Asian nation against the rich and powerful United States. Understandably, it was a politically significant moment in world history.

But there were other equally memorable events that took place in Southeast Asia in 1975. Aside from the end of war in Vietnam, elsewhere in the region, the year also marked the start of the Indonesian invasion of East Timor, the rise of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, and the escalation of Muslim rebellion in the southern parts of Thailand and the Philippines.

When the army from the communist North Vietnam arrived in Saigon on April 30, 1975, the war had already been raging on for two decades. The war killed at least three million Vietnamese and more than 50,000 Americans. While Vietnam may have ‘won’ the war, it was a devastated country in 1975. Its rural and urban centers were in ruins and its economy was devastated.

If Vietnam succeeded in expelling American troops, it failed to remove the bombs left behind by the invading army. Over the past 40 years, more than 100,000 Vietnamese have been killed or injured by these bombs and land mines. Another grim legacy of the war is the poisonous impact of Agent Orange, which the Americans used against the Vietnamese Army. The chemical warfare not only destroyed Vietnam’s agriculture but also affected residents who were exposed to it. About three million people, including 150,000 children, suffered from defects caused by Agent Orange.

Though the Americans may have left in 1975, for millions of Vietnamese their suffering did not end that year.

Another country which was ravaged by the war was Vietnam’s neighbor, Laos. Between 1964 and 1973, the United States dropped more than two million tons of bombs on Laos to cut off the supplies of communist guerrillas operating along the borders of Vietnam and Laos. Because of this, Laos became the most heavily bombed country on Earth. At least 30 percent of these bombs failed to detonate. Forty years after the end of Vietnam War, these unexploded bombs continue to kill and injure farmers and other rural residents of Laos.

Another country which saw a communist party take power in 1975 was Cambodia. The communist Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia from April 1975 to January 1979. During this brief period, the Khmer Rouge under the leadership of Pol Pot was accused of killing more than one million people. Some claim the casualties reached two million, or about a quarter of Cambodia’s population at that time. Those who resisted the government were sent to labor camps. Almost 800,000 suffered from torture, slave labor, and starvation.

Like Vietnam, East Timor ended colonial occupation in 1975 when the Portuguese government left the country and a Democratic Republic of East Timor was proclaimed. But it was a short-lived independence because East Timor’s neighbor, Indonesia, sent troops in December to occupy the country. More than 200,000 East Timorese, or about one-third of the local population, died during the invasion. Indonesia argued that it had only responded to the appeal of some East Timor leaders for military assistance. But many scholars believe Indonesia’s invasion was tacitly approved by the United States and Australia to prevent communists from taking control of East Timor. Indonesia occupied East Timor from 1975 to 1999.

The year 1975 also saw the rise of tension in the Muslim-dominated areas of Thailand and the Philippines.

In southern Thailand, the army was accused of killing several young Muslims, which worsened the political situation in that part of the country.

Meanwhile, intense clashes between government soldiers and Muslim rebels in the southern Philippines displaced thousands of residents. The conflict generated greater international attention to the demand of Muslims in the Philippines for independence or autonomy.

So while the end of Vietnam War in 1975 shaped the modern history of Indochina, other events during the same year also clearly had a profound impact in the Southeast Asian region, such as the Timor occupation by Indonesia, the ‘killing fields’ in Cambodia courtesy of the Khmer Rouge, and the Muslim insurgencies in Thailand and the Philippines.

Many things have changed after 1975: Vietnam and the United States have reestablished diplomatic and military ties. East Timor became an independent republic in 2002. And some of Pol Pot’s subordinates are on trial today for committing grave crimes against humanity.

But many things have also remained the same. Muslim separatist movements in both the southern parts of Thailand and the Philippines continue to linger. And for millions of Vietnamese and Laotians, the war that ended in 1975 is still a reality today; many of them continue to get hurt or killed because their lands are still littered with deadly bombs.

The year 1975, therefore, is crucial not just to remembering the past but also to understanding the present.

Posted in east asia | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Who Are Southeast Asia’s ‘Lost’ Generations?

By admin | January 9, 2016

Written for The Diplomat

The theme of ‘lost generations’ is relevant across Southeast Asia, a region besieged by decades of civil war, foreign invasion, military dictatorship, and economic underdevelopment over the past half century.

In Myanmar, the ‘missing’ generation refers to young people who were deprived by the military regime of the right to political participation in the 1990s. The junta shut down many universities after the 1988 student uprising which forced students either to quit school or seek refuge abroad. Political science programs were removed from the curriculum which the military blamed for the rise of activism in the country. After a decade, there was already a shortage of skilled labor. Furthermore, a new generation emerged with little or no exposure to democratic politics. The youth and first time voters in this year’s historic general election belong to this generation.

Myanmar’s ‘lost’ generation also includes the children who were displaced by ethnic wars. Some of these local conflicts have been ravaging the countryside over the past 60 years. Thousands have crossed borders in Thailand to seek shelter and work. However, many end up as illegal migrants or undocumented workers. International groups have been consistently pointing out that stateless children in Thailand continue to be denied of their basic rights.

The Vietnam War affected several generations in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and the United States. We remember the young soldiers who perished during the war, the innocent villagers caught in the crossfire, and the wounded survivors who thought that their suffering was already over. Even after the war ended, thousands in Vietnam and neighboring countries continue to be wounded or killed by unexploded bombs. Meanwhile, an estimated 100,000 Vietnamese Amerasian children left behind by U.S. soldiers endured years of neglect and discrimination.

The victory of the communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia in 1975 was followed by three years of terror that killed more than 1.5 million people or about one-fifth of the country’s total population. This explains why a majority of Cambodians today are below 30 years old. But some are worried that Cambodian children have already forgotten the country’s traumatic experience under the Khmer Rouge regime.

Another group of casualties of war are the ‘lost’ Timorese during the two-decade Indonesian invasion of East Timor which started in 1975. At least 100,000 were killed or one-third of East Timor’s population. In addition to this, an estimated 4,000 children were taken from East Timor by the Indonesian military and civilian organizations, and they were delivered for adoption in Indonesia.

Indonesia lost at least half a million people in a military-led anti-communist purge in 1965. This led to the victory of Suharto who reigned as a strongman until 1998. But a new ‘lost’ generation emerged after Indonesia was hit hard by the 1997 Asian financial crisis. The economic crisis, exacerbated by political unrest, severely affected working-class families, and their children. The number of Indonesia’s street children and child laborers swelled during this period.

When the economy is down, many seek better opportunities in other countries. This temporarily addresses a country’s unemployment problem but it also leaves behind children growing up without their parents. They could be said to be the new ‘lost’ generation. This is most evident in Indonesia, Philippines, and Thailand – countries with a high number of migrant workers.

In the case of the Philippines, 12 million out of a population of 100 million are working overseas. The emergency program to send workers abroad in the 1970s became a permanent policy that fundamentally altered various social institutions in the country, most especially the traditional concept of family. Today, the new normal is to have a family member, usually a parent, working in another country.

The ‘lost’ generation may also mean the young Filipinos who died fighting the martial law regime in the 1970s. Some of them were bright students who could have become the country’s next leaders.

As Southeast Asia faces the new century, one reason to pursue peace and prosperity is to remember that embracing war and meaningless growth would only lead to death and desolation. The proof is most poignantly provided by Southeast Asia’s ‘lost’ generations.

Posted in east asia, youth | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Why the Left is fighting alongside the Lumad

By admin | January 3, 2016

Written for Bulatlat

The accusation that the Left is exploiting the Lumad for political propaganda is easily refuted by the Lumad themselves through their compelling articulation of various abuses inflicted by state forces in their communities. The Lumad do not need the Left or activists to voice out their demands; they can speak for themselves.

With or without the Left, the Lumad have the right to assert the protection of their ancestral domains. They have the right to resist the entry of corporate interests in their lands and other forms of development aggression.

Solidarity is essential to effectively advance the cause of the Lumad and other marginalized communities. But expressing solidarity through advocacy is not necessarily a Leftist act. In fact, Malacanang NGOs are aggressively pursuing “peace activities” in Mindanao, even if the real intent is to broaden the constituency in favor of the Bangsamoro Law.

What is scandalous in the eyes of yellow apologists is not the idea of a marginalized community learning to defend its heritage, but the active presence of the Left among these ethnic tribes. They cannot accept that the Left is wielding influence in the grassroots.

What they refuse to recognize is that it is mainly the Left which has chosen to embrace the struggle of the Lumad compared to other political forces which sided with foreign capital and big business in the exploitation of our precious resources.

Hence, the malicious and desperate tirade against the Left, in order to tarnish the credibility of the local resistance movement.

But perhaps the red baiting tactic is intended to achieve more. Aside from muddling the issue and diverting the attention of the public, the other motive could be to render the Left ineffective in pursuing similar campaigns in the future.

Ridicule the Left, demonize its image, and spread nasty lies about its political record. As the Lumad continue to gain broader public support, government apologists responded by hyping the so-called Left menace. Pathetic and unprincipled, but this propaganda operation works all the time. Ask Duterte who recently accused the administration party of engaging in black propaganda.

Consider these examples: The Lumad held a caravan from Mindanao to Manila, but they were mocked as mere hakot (paid crowd) of the Left. They have reasonable political demands, but reactionary pundits quickly dismissed them as part of a Leftist “agit-prop.” It is disappointing to encounter echoes of these anti-Left and anti-Lumad rantings on mainstream and social media.

If the Left joins the Lumad in calling for land, justice, and human rights in Mindanao, does it invalidate the message? If some of the Lumad become activists, does it mean the Left is committing political opportunism?

It is not unlawful and unethical if the Left pursues a stronger political bond with the Lumad. But for the anti-Left and many liberals, the link between the two is repulsive. The anti-Left have their own misguided reasons for reacting this way, but how do we explain the sentiment of many middle-class liberals?

Perhaps they have been frustrated already by the behavior of traditional politicians which led them to misperceive the militant pro-Lumad campaign of the Left as another insincere publicity stunt. They fail to appreciate that the Left is doing something concrete on the ground precisely because politicians, as always, didn’t deliver on their promise to make things better for everybody.

For many who have been victimized by the doctrine of political-correctness, they probably misinterpreted the unity between the Left and the Lumad as a violation of privacy and autonomy of the latter. For them, political advocacy is carried out with minimal interaction with the grassroots. Solidarity is practiced through volunteerism, and the victims are empowered through charity. Applied to the Lumad situation, they probably couldn’t understand why activists are espousing ‘hard’ political demands, instead of working with the government to address the basic needs of the Lumad communities.

A brief integration, or even discussion with the Lumad would have sufficed to provide context to the situation. How can the Lumad welcome state-sponsored reforms when state-sponsored activities (agribusiness, logging, mining, militarization) displaced them from their communities? But alas, many are probably comfortable already in echoing the opinion of Manila-based commentators that the Lumad are stubborn as they continue to protest against the government.

The stereotype of the ideal victim is shattered by the fighting Lumad who are now encamped in Metro Manila through the Manilakbayan campaign. Many expected the Lumad to be helpless, meek, and exotic but the Lumad who arrived with the Left are assertive, combative, and political. Some are probably asking: Did the Left corrupt the Lumad?

This thinking is reflected in a government report which rebukes both the military and the NPA for recruiting the Lumad. What exactly is the government expecting? That the Lumad will continue with their weaving and dancing, even if mining operations are already destroying their homes? That the Lumad will sing praises to the government, even if soldiers are attacking their schools and communities? That Lumad warriors will quietly ignore the desecration of their culture?

Then there are those who question the appropriateness of adopting the Leftist agenda to address the Lumad issue. Spare the Lumad from Marxist slogans, they insist. Perhaps some of these scholars are thinking that the Left is hijacking the Lumad cause.

But if the Leftist agenda is the most comprehensive in achieving social transformation, then the Lumad will also benefit in the broader national political struggle. To be fair to my fellow activists, no Marxist technical terms are mechanically imposed in the Lumad campaign. The slogans, demands, and action programs of the campaign reflect popular themes. No communist utopia is required to realize the wishes of the Lumad. End military abuse, stop destructive mining, respect ancestral domain, land reform, human rights – these are not just Leftist assertions; these are democratic programs guaranteed by the laws of the republic!

Finally, the Left’s active participation in the Lumad campaign is another reminder of how the Philippine Left has managed to survive and thrive despite the non-stop attacks of its ideological enemies. It has organic ties with the grassroots, it mobilizes the marginalized, and it links and unites various sectors to establish a strong and dynamic people’s mass movement from the rural to the urban. Compare the Left to bourgeois parties which are scandalously corrupt, inept, and insensitive to the plight of the poor.

Despite the repression it continues to endure, the Left remains immersed in the everyday struggle of the masa. And this is clearly demonstrated in the Left’s resolute commitment to fight alongside the Lumad in defending our land from plunderers, oppressors, and modern day fascists.

Posted in nation, reds | Tagged , | Leave a comment

What our people need: Food, not free wi-fi

By admin | December 31, 2015

Written for Bulatlat

Since Internet connectivity is equated with modernity and innovation, it is no surprise to see politicians providing free Wi-Fi to their constituents.

National agencies and local government units are scrambling to provide free online services while prospective election candidates are already promising to expand free Wi-Fi connections in their territories.

In Manila and several cities in the nation’s premier urban region, road works are presented as part of a program to build a ‘Wi-Fi City’. Some leaders who claim to be tech-savvy are pushing for a better Internet penetration to address inequality, inadequate services, corruption, and other social ills.

That Internet access improves communication and interaction with government leaders is obvious to all. That it can help empower individuals and small businesses is also easy to understand.

But to name it as the ultimate solution to the problems besetting the Philippines reflects a simplistic mindset. To assert that our daily suffering is caused by a slow and unreliable Internet distracts the public from confronting the other fundamental evils that plague our nation.

Free Wi-Fi is cool but it is no game changer. We can help poor families survive by making sure they have food on the table rather than simply giving them Wi-Fi access.

A developing country like the Philippines has to address basic problems such as intergenerational poverty, widening income gap between the rural and urban, jobless economic growth, and rapid deterioration of its natural habitats. All of these require offline interventions. These issues should be the priority of elected leaders and the private sector.

In the case of poverty, a troubling indicator is rising incidence of hunger. The Philippines is endowed with fertile lands but many of its people are food-poor. As the El Nino phenomenon leads to prolonged drought, even farmers in rural Philippines cannot produce enough to feed their own families. The sad and heartbreaking reality is that the people who produce our food – farmers and fishers – are the poorest sectors in the country.

The main challenge, therefore, is not how to develop apps for these troubled sectors but to resolve the causes of their deprivation. Historic inequities cannot be reversed by merely establishing cyber connections and making impressive data sets. Political empowerment, especially in the grassroots, is the key factor to substantially alter the unjust structures that oppress our people.

But is it right to frame the issue this way? Does it have to be an extreme binary between food and free Wi-Fi? Why can’t we assert that both are equally necessary?

Because there is real danger that if we draft a development program that highlights both food security and Internet access, the latter will be given prominent attention by influential urban-based opinion-making institutions such as the media and academe. Similarly, young urban voters who earn higher incomes than their rural counterparts will be more interested in discussing the same topic. Political parties which are targeting this large demographic might focus on issues raised by the digital generation at the expense of other equally valid concerns of rural voters and the rest of the digitally-excluded segments of society.

Also, more and more politicians are learning to recognize the potential of the Internet as a “weapon of mass distraction” which they can exploit to hide either their failures or the vulnerabilities of the political economy.

Hashtags about Internet trends are hip while chatting about the new fisheries code is interesting only for experts and affected sectors.

A politician can simply promote Internet access by clinching a deal with a local telco. But how about food security? This cannot be easily achieved by implementing cash transfers and other dole out programs. Politicians must offer a comprehensive plan which should involve several reforms such as enacting better trade policies, greater incentives to boost rural productivity, linking the countryside with the urban market, promoting sustainable production, and creating decent jobs for marginalized populations. In the case of Manila, the government has to explain why it plans to demolish all public markets or why it barred small fishers from catching fish in the municipal waters.

Between negotiating a free Wi-Fi service with favored telcos on one hand and implementing a thorough land reform to develop a vibrant domestic economy on the other, which do you think politicians will choose? The former delivers instant results and quantifiable public feedback while the latter involves complex inter-agency negotiation, legislation, and decisive political intervention.

Food or free Wi-Fi? The popular response is to choose both. Politicians will prefer the program that can garner more votes and higher public rating. But why subscribe to the mentality of politicians when we can forcefully assert that free Wi-Fi is welcome but we also have primary needs and rights that the state should first provide. Internet connectivity is quite meaningless to a starving farmer and a worker displaced by a development project in the city. In other words, free Wi-Fi in a poor community is like giving a cocktail dress to a homeless person.

To compete in the knowledge economy, the essential resource is our people who need to be healthy, happy, and highly-skilled. Free Wi-Fi can enhance their abilities and provide them with broader opportunities but the assumption is that they already have access to basic education, food, clean water, and decent shelter. Food or free Wi-Fi? Choose life over virtual life.

Posted in media | Tagged , , | Leave a comment