I was never terribly impressed with the presidency of Cory Aquino. I wanted her to go one way and never quite forgave her when she went down another path. My thoughts on her presidency – at least those I bothered to write down during the first half of her term – chronicle the growing disappointment shared by many Filipinos, the frustration over Cory’s seeming inability to break through the entrenched forces of elitism and privilege, the sense that Cory was betraying the great reform agenda that defined her relationship with the Filipino nation.
Nothing has changed in the way I understood the Aquino regime and I dust off these decades-old words and phrases, reproduce them below and once more present them for the public record. After all, if we should remember Cory’s presidency, we should do so first by firmly situating it in its time in history.
But I call attention to something that may not be apparent from the writings below. Through this estrangement with the Aquino presidency, I never doubted the sincerity of Cory Aquino herself. Even when regard for her regime was at its lowest and indignation over its policies at its peak, I never ceased to be awed by her personal courage and heroism, and her remarkable capacity for sacrifice. Having long ago put away the spectacles of the armchair revolutionary, I have grown to realize that it was precisely these personal qualities of Cory Aquino that the people instinctively responded and related to. It was there all the time: Cory made history precisely because she was, above all and beyond doubt, a kind and decent human being.
Now Cory belongs to history, and the God of history has accepted her sacrifices and looked kindly upon her, not because she was president at a crucial juncture in the national saga, but because she was a good person, utterly selfless and utterly courageous. I have always told myself that I was not a fan of Cory Aquino, and I could not even admit to those closest to me the profound sadness and sense of loss I felt at her passing. But that changes today, as I write and post this. Today I grieve because a good person is gone.
-o0o-
Unpublished (and unused) draft speech for the president at the convening of the 1986 Constitutional Commission. May 29, 1986, Malacanang. Three months ago, legions of Filipino men, women, and children, reaffirmed in bold strokes the unchanging lesson of the ages: that no tyrant, no matter how powerful, could resist the forward march of the people…The people celebrated the triumph of their revolution. They sang and danced in the streets and in their homes. But they knew that their revolution was an unfinished one. Even as the revolution conclusively destroyed the masthead of the old order, it installed its own government to lead the nation towards a new democratic regime…It is precisely because of this paramount commitment to the people that we are now embarking on the project of creating a new Philippine constitution.
This government was installed by the monumental energy of people’s power. It is now the fighting faith of my administration to lead in the organization of our people as the initial step in their empowerment…Only when we succeed in bringing the people into the center of national life, could we begin to reap the fruits of popular democracy. Only then could we expect the contending forces in Philippine society to resolve their differences in the democratic arenas within the civil order. Only then could we leave forever, the days of strife and bloodshed.
The role of the presidency will not end with the commission’s appointment. It is my intention to use all the powers of my office to preserve the independence of the commission, and the integrity of the drafting process. No effort will be spared to guarantee that the men and women of the commission will perform their functions with only the well-being of the nation in their hearts and minds, and only according to the dictates of their consciences and better judgments.
In the interest of preserving the democratic character of the drafting process, public debate will be protected and promoted. The people and their organizations, and all other interest groups will enjoy official access to the commission. The full participation of media will be institutionalized. And non-governmental bodies wishing to formulate alternative draft-constitutions shall be more than welcome.
But let me warn those who even now, are scheming to exert covert and undue influence and pressure on the commission members – you will be facing the wrath of the people, and the wrath of my government. I assure my countrymen that any attempt to coopt the commission and transform it into a tool of elitism and privilege, shall be met with punitive measures from your government.
-o0o-
From “Laws Exist for Man’s Sake” Philippine Law Register, UP College of Law, 30 January 1987. The Aquino government, swept to power by an intensely anti-Marcos rising, has staked its political life on an apparently libertarian constitution. It substantially defangs the executive, guarantees latitude for the exercise of political rights and recognizes the central role of an organized people. But reflective of its political sponsor’s reluctance or inability to directly resolve the major problems of neocolonialism, peasant land-hunger and poverty, the draft constitution’s provisions on the national patrimony and sovereignty, land reform, social justice, nuclear weapons and the U.S. bases are saddled with a plethora of qualifications and limitations as to render them nothing more than intentions as unenforceable as they are good. In addition, open-ended phraseology and vague references to “national interest” provide gaping loopholes for power-elite maneuverings.
The Aquino government, based on popular support and initiating a precedent-setting reform movement, has nevertheless failed to carry-on its crusade to those areas most critical to its popular base. This predicament has been translated into the central contradiction of the Aquino constitution: it encourages popular initiative and organization even as it fails to effectively respond to popular demands and aspirations.
The February Revolution which made possible the draft constitution, was the awakening of the Filipino people to their power. This awakening neither resolved all their problems nor fulfilled all their dreams. But it was a first step, an initial victory…It is a law of grand rhetoric and emasculated promises. But it is also a law which affirms the principle of people power so beautifully lived-out at EDSA; it enshrines the people’s victory and provides room for greater victories.
Ratification should not be founded on a fool’s dream of an ideal society springing to life from the pages of the constitution. Rather, it must be animated by a desire to seek every chance to accelerate the process of transition and social reordering toward a truly humane society maintained through a truly humane legal order.
-o0o-
From “Martial Law Again?” Midweek, 23 September 1987. If there is one lesson the Aquino government should learn from the events of November, it is this: an army which perceives itself as the new saviour of the Republic, is an exceedingly dangerous threat to a civilian center not yet firmly anchored on the great masses of the people.
Its clearly populist-reformist platform notwithstanding, the Aquino regime’s subordination to world capitalism can only erode its popular base. Its reformist agenda, on the other hand, cannot imbue it with the initiative to decisively neutralize its own army which has repeatedly attempted to overrun the center. It would seem that the only way out of this problem is for the regime to make an unreserved bid for the masses’ trust and loyalty by breaking from imperialism and by dismantling all militarist and other obstacles to full social democracy. Otherwise, the Aquino government will always be subject to pressure to capitulate to militarism and, eventually embrace a re-emergent fascism.
-o0o-
From “How to Really Crush a Coup”, Midweek, 17 January 1990. In 1986, “people power” spelled the difference in what would have been a purely military confrontation. Marcos unearthed a military conspiracy, but was defeated by mass civilian mobilization. It would seem that the beneficiary of that mobilization, the Aquino administration, has forgotten the difference. It has increasingly relied on the military organization to repulse each succeeding coup attempt. Conversely, “people power” as a direct and active political response has been increasingly marginalized. In 1989, American planes and not “people power” spelled the difference. By requesting military assistance from them, President Aquino gratuitously offered the Americans an unequalled opportunity to further undermine Philippine national sovereignty.
In a perverse sense, the request for assistance made sense. “People power” was not around and government did not have the air power to enforce its military option. The result is as perverse. President Aquino confirmed to the world her regime’s vulnerability to conspiracies hatched within its own armed forces. The historical record of US imperialism leaves no doubt that this is a point of vulnerability which it would further exploit, far beyond the bases negotiations. After all, American-sponsored coups are not historical novelties. And with “people power” out of the way, such coups should be, as the Americans would say, “easy as pie.”
At the core of the military rebellion is an honest ideological conviction that military government is this nation’s path to salvation. Neither is the problem limited to the mutineers of the moment. The coup’s demands are appropriated by the highest echelons of the legitimate military establishment long after the coup itself has been crushed. These demands range from welfare concessions to the military, executive and congressional reorganization, heightened military influence in policy-making with less congressional interference, to a more hawkish approach to popular dissent. Having been saved from the coup by these “loyalists”, government could hardly do anything but oblige.
The executive initiative of declaring a state of national and legislative concurrence therewith is proof of how Philippine coups even of the unconsummated variety provide crucial stimuli for the rightward movement of the Aquino government.
On balance, the government’s policy of depending on the military for defense against a coup emanating from within the military itself, is as logical and safe as relying on one hand to wrest the other from the throat.
If it is still possible, President Aquino must reestablish her links with the people. This is her only alternative to being held hostage by her own generals and US Phantom jets. Malacanang must take to heat the strategic lesson of February 1986: the Constitution merely sets forth the principle of civilian supremacy over the military. But it is guaranteed by a citizenry confident of its own independent power, and willing to use it against military buccaneers in actual political confrontation. It is this display of readiness, rather than a thousand lectures on democracy, which will check and finally reverse the adventurist tendencies in the armed forces.
“People power” of the EDSA vintage cannot be re-created. Its forms, intensity, and directions were peculiar to that historical moment. The painstaking establishment of organs of popular power at the grassroots level must replace the spontaneity of 1986. In turn, these organs are possible only if government genuinely and consistently upholds the fundamental rights and welfare of the majority of Filipinos. This is admittedly more difficult than passing off administration and church-sponsored rallies as evidence of “people power.” But it is the only way. Beyond occasional mass gatherings at EDSA during elections and semi-religious affairs, an ideological return to EDSA is necessary. And sooner or later, the people will return to their power, with, without, or even despite government.
Raffy Aquino, 04 August 2009
Pasig City