The Persistence of Insurgency in the Philippines

by Roy Q. Lagarde

The raid in Albuera, Leyte, about 570 km southeast of Manila, started at 8:30 p.m. local time January 6 when a leader of New People’s Army (NPA) rebel group shouted, “attack!” No one was hurt when 15 rebels stormed a police station adjacent to the municipal hall but they carted away 21 pieces of M-16 rifles and nine .38 caliber pistols deposited at the police’s armory. Few meters away from the station were around 40 more insurgents serving as lookout. To slow down any pursuing rescue team, they burned tires and strewn rocks and other rubbish on the road as they fled aboard two vans and a multi-purpose cab. Nine days after, 4 soldiers were killed and eight were injured in an ambush in Motiong, Samar province. This recent attack is reportedly intended to give a punch to the government forces as rebels made good on their vow to intensify offensives.

It has been more than year now since the negotiations between the Arroyo government and the communist rebels aimed at ending the five-decade-long conflict was suspended with still no substantial progress in sight. Peace remains as vague as ever. A framework to guide the actual peace talks in fact have already been made ever since the past administrations but clashes of opinions and apparent distrust on both sides is on top.

In August 2004, the National Democratic Front (NDF) postponed formal negotiations with the government “to comply with its obligations” according to the Hague Joint Declaration approved in 1992 and other agreements. It proclaims the need for peace talks to address the roots of the conflict and arrive at reforms. At least three substantive issues awaited discussion: constitutional reforms, socio-economic reforms and disposition of forces that are the core of the present armed conflict.

President Arroyo announced her plans for furthering peace talks as one of the key issues to be tackled by her government this year. Whether the process will move on, it remains to be seen. Apparently, the peace dialogue with the National Democratic Front (NDF) is at a crucial juncture. In fact, Luis Jalandoni, NDF spokesman admitted that the chance for peace talks is already dim. The rebel group had broken off formal negotiations last year and cited government’s failure to honor agreements it had forged with them.

Prejudicial questions

In 1995, the Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG) was mutually approved to protect the panelists. On October 5, 2005, however, the government suspended the JASIG as a response to the NDF’s persistent refusal to peace negotiations and continued atrocities committed by the rebel forces. Just last January 10, communist rebels attacked three mobile phone transmission towers. The government also condemned the use of landmines by the rebels in their offensives as violation of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL). With the move, 97 NDF personnel covered by the JASIG with standing warrants of arrest can be arrested and the suspension of their criminal proceedings can be lifted

Testing the government’s sincerity to pursue peace, the NDF is desirous that the government resolve the following issues before the Gov’t-NDF talks are resumed:

Terrorist listing. The NDF demands the government to at least speak out against the US and European “terrorist” listing of the CPP-NPA-NDF. “Instead of protesting US intervention, the Arroyo regime in fact invites it,” the CPP said in a statement.

Indemnification of human rights victims. Almost 10, 000 victims of human rights violations under the Marcos dictatorship have won their case in the US Court of Hawai. But NDF protested that the government reamin “unjust to these victims by preventing them from seeking justice” in the Philippines.

Release of political prisoners. During the formal peace talks in Oslo on June 22, 2004, the NDF negotiating panel presented a list of 270 political prisoners and asked for their release. Of high priority are some Mamburao farmers, the sick and the elderly, women and children, and those whose release orders were signed already by President Arroyo in 2001 but have not yet been released to date.

Acts of killings. The NDF urged the government to make effective steps to stop the killings of human rights advocates and militant leaders and members. Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights documented more than 400 extra-judicial killings and 130 disappearances since Arroyo assumed power in January 2001.

Host country

Little headway has been made. Norway would not align itself with the US and European list of terrorist organizations. “It is a positive development. This means that Norway is still willing to continue their role as third-party facilitator in the peace talks between the GRP and the CPP-NPA,” says Deputy Chief of the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Rene Sarmiento.

The Norwegian government is considering possible setback in its role as neutral facilitator had it aligned itself from the said terrorist listing. Norway has been active participating settlements all over the world.

The first round of the resumption of peace talks was held in Oslo in April 2001. The GRP and the NDF Peace Panel approved to cooperate in finishing the Comprehensive Agreement on Social and Economic Reforms within six months from June 2001. Unfortunately, during the second round in June 2001, the GRP postponed indefinitely the peace talks until 2004 because of the killing of Colonel Rodolfo Aguinaldo by the NPA.

The Norwegians are very much interested in the progress of the peace process. They were concerned when the talks were disrupted because of Aguinaldo’s death. But Norway has always been open to host the talks whenever the two parties are ready.

More road blocks

There seems to be a bigger problem. Negotiations were said to resume in October 2005 but were postponed again after the communist rebels called for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s resignation following a jueteng expose and the alleged wiretapped tapes that implicated the President in poll fraud.

The CPP-NPA-NDF has been encouraging mass movement for the ouster of President Arroyo. “She is declared by the people as unfit to govern because of loss of trust and credibility due to evidence of massive cheating in the elections, corruption and subservience to the US.”

The NDF proposed that the Arroyo administration should be replaced a transitional council composed of representatives of different mass movements and the broad united front but stated that they are not going to participate in such council. “Such council shall be the field of work of the legal democratic movement.”

But the government is still determined to push the peace negotiation this year.

Whether the mired negotiations between the Government and the NDF will succeed, it’s still anybody’s guess. “There’s a sparkle of hope for as long as there are Filipinos who call as absurd the killing of Filipinos by Filipinos,” says a peace advocate. But the roads for a resolution to this one of the world’s oldest insurgency problem are present, and peace advocates said that every administration should pursue, even if it has to keep its patience to the limit for its quest for a genuine reconciliation with all anti-government groups in the country.

The NDF has yet to decide again with the invitation of the government for another round of dialogue— and the scenarios are not that invigorating.

Digging the roots

Inspired by Soviet communism, it was in 1930 when the maiden Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) was organized and aimed to establish a Soviet-type government in the Philippines. They also formed a military arm known as “Hukbalahap,” which kept the resistance throughout the Japanese occupation and contributed significantly to the return of the United States in 1944.

At its most basic, the ideal of communism is a system in which everyone is seen as equal and wealth is distributed equally among the people. There is no private ownership.

After the War, the Huks took part in the formation of the independent government in 1946, and participated in the political arena. Its winners, however, were not allowed to take seats in the legislature because they were communists. Hence, they resumed their armed struggle calling themselves as Hukbong Magpapalaya ng Bayan (HBM). The CPP then, was re-established on 1968 following Maoist ideology in analyzing the “chronic crisis” besetting the country. They cried foul against US intervention in Philippine politics and denounced landlord domination of the country’s economy. It was during the Marcos period that the CPP sympathizers and members started to increase and mutated into an armed struggle thru the NPA, CPP’s military arm formed in 1969, against Marcos dictatorship. Its political arm or the umbrella organization of all leftists-oriented groups in the country—the NDF, was set up in the 1970s. At its climax in the 1980s, the NPA controlled more than 25,000 troops and drew middle-class support for fighting the Marcos regime. Its ranks at present, however, dwindled to an estimated 8,000 but still the rebels have become more active in conducting offensives with government forces in the previous months.

Immediately after former President Aquino came to power in 1986, she started talks with the NDF but the negotiations collapsed in 1987. More dialogues have been made by the next administrations—from Ramos to Arroyo, but so far, they have not been successful.

Communism in Eastern Europe collapsed for a number of reasons. One factor was because it had no political basis or support. It was riddled with economic problems and, in comparison to capitalism, was a complete failure. More so, like their former comrades in Russia and Eastern Europe, communism is dead in the hearts and minds of its people in China. Now, even communist party leaders are conceding that private enterprises are there to stay as an “important part of the socialist, market economy.” Why has communism lingered like a malady in the Philippines?

While much of Asia has discarded communism for capitalism, resilience of communism still persists in the Philippines. The reasons are simple, according to analysts. Poverty and social inequity are growing, and the political levers are held by the landowning Philippine elite, which has dragged its feet on agrarian reform since the restoration of democracy in 1986. Even our government’s counter- communist insurgency efforts have been characterized by brutality and corruption and some people are of the belief that a section of the military feels it is in its interest not really to totally defeat insurgencies, because it gives them something to do—financial gains if you may.

At the end of the day, it can be argued that the best panacea to insurgency is good governance. On the premise that communism thrives on conflict or contradiction, it was the bad governance of Marcos that gave it a lift, on the same breath that it plummeted during the administration of Ramos. It is no wonder therefore that this Arroyo government is an encouragement to the growth of communist insurgency in the country.