THE PHILIPPINES IN THE FIRING LINE
AMERICA’S "SECOND FRONT IN THE ‘WAR ON TERROR’" AND THE IMPACT ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was installed as president in 2001 as a result of a People Power uprising that ousted Joseph Estrada from Malacanang. But not only did she fail to address the issues that were raised during People Power 2, her regime unleashed fascist attacks against the people and continued to violate human rights and international humanitarian law with impunity.
In less than three years, the Arroyo regime has committed 3,339 cases of human rights violation with 188,013 victims; 18,535 families; 81communities; and 540 households.. The type of violations and the corresponding number of victims are broken down as follows*:
|
HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS UNDER ARROYO ADMINISTRATION |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From January 21, 2001 - September 25, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Victims |
|
|
|
|
Types of Violation |
# of Cases |
Individual |
Family |
Household |
CommunityOrg'n |
|
|
Violation of Right to Life |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Killing (summary execution, Assassination, Massacre, Death due to strafing, |
231 |
326 |
|
|
|
|
|
indiscriminate firing and bombing/shelling/aerial bombardment) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frustrated Killing |
40 |
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
Enforced Disappearance |
36 |
56 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Torture |
118 |
188 |
|
|
|
|
|
Physical Assault or Injuries |
153 |
1,297 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Denial of Medical Attention |
26 |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
Strafing, indiscriminate firing and bombing/shelling/aerial bombardment |
124 |
14,883 |
34 |
1 |
28 |
|
|
Violation of Other Rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illegal Arrest (Unlawful, Arbitrary and Unjustified Arrest) |
354 |
1,219 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
Arbitrary/Unlawful and Unjustified Detention |
215 |
762 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Incommunicado |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Violation of Rights of Arrested or Detained Persons |
5 |
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
Illegal Search and Seizure |
234 |
6,115 |
49 |
120 |
13 |
|
|
Unlawful, Unjustified or Arbitrary Subjecting to Checkpoints |
2 |
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Coercion (Use of civilians in police/military operations as guide and/or as shield, |
265 |
4,564 |
|
2 |
1 |
10 |
|
forced recruitment/conscription, forced labor/involuntary servitude, forced/fake surrender) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threat/Harassment/Intimidation |
824 |
26,374 |
659 |
6 |
21 |
|
|
Inhumane, Cruel and/or Degrading Treatment or Punishment |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forcible Evacuation/Displacement |
163 |
113,215 |
15,187 |
340 |
25 |
|
|
Hamletting |
4 |
1,236 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
Forcible Reconcentration |
7 |
896 |
219 |
|
|
|
|
Demolition |
3 |
200 |
70 |
|
|
|
|
Food and other Economic Blockades |
6 |
1,337 |
157 |
|
|
|
|
Restriction or Dispersal of Mass Actions, Public Assemblies, Gatherings |
2 |
130 |
|
|
|
|
|
Violation of Domicile |
75 |
791 |
11 |
134 |
|
|
|
Desecration of Place of Worship or Offending Religious Rites/Practices |
9 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
Denial of Decent Burial, Refusal to Tender Remains and Desecration |
9 |
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
of the Remains |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Victims |
|
|
Mosque. |
|
Types of Violation |
# of Cases |
Individual |
Family |
Household |
CommunitySch.,Ofc |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Use of Schools, Medical, Religious and Other Public Places for |
1 |
400 |
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
Military Purposes and Endangerment of Civilians |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Violation Against Property |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Destruction of Properties |
115 |
12,069 |
716 |
71 |
22 |
3 |
|
Divestment of Properties |
155 |
8,975 |
595 |
70 |
13 |
|
|
Violation of Sectoral or Specific Rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rape or Sexual Abuse/Sexual Harassment |
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Assault/Breaking of Picket Lines |
151 |
5,155 |
|
|
|
|
|
Violation of Rights of Hors de Combat |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are 3,339 cases of human rights violation with 188,013 victims; 18,535 families; 81communities; and 540 households. |
|
|||||
|
compiled by KARAPATAN Alliance for the Advancement of People's Rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of July 2004, there are 248 political detainees all over the country.
Like its predecessors, the Arroyo regime committed these violations in its attempts to defeat the CPP-NPA-NDF and MILF, as part of its efforts to defend and promote the interests of foreign monopoly capitalists, the comprador bourgeoisie, and big landlords, and while trying to suppress the mounting opposition to its rule and the ever growing legal democratic movement.
Immediately after taking over from the Estrada administration, the Arroyo regime embarked on a desperate attempt to prop up the economy through loans while pursuing the very same imperialist-dictated policies of liberalization, deregulation, and privatization, which led to the crisis. Around 63% of the current public debt was contracted from 1997 onwards. It aggressively promoted the labor export policy even to the extent of sending OFWs in war-torn Iraq. It also leaned heavily on the AFP and PNP for support in order to stabilize its rule, suppress dissent, and wage war against all its enemies, including the CPP-NPA-NDF, the MILF, and restless elements within the AFP and PNP.
The Arroyo regime was so battered by the worsening economic, political, and social crisis confronting the semi-colonial, semi-feudal system that it was forced to announce, in 2002, that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was not running for president in the May 2004 elections. This worsening crisis provides the context to the human rights situation. While the so-called “war against terrorism” and the pursuit of a “strong republic” provide the particularity of the human rights situation during the previous three years of the Arroyo regime and which will probably define the situation in the next six years.
The Arroyo regime’s war against terrorism is in support of and an imitation of the war on terror being waged by its U.S. imperialist master.
U.S. imperialism’s war on terror was conceived in 1990 by ultra-rightists within the administration of George W. Bush, the father of the current U.S. president. The U.S.SR had just fallen and the Cold War had ended. Without any challenge to its political and military power, U.S. imperialism sought to assert its hegemony in order to further its interests over its economic competitors. Richard Haas, a member of the National Security Council and director of policy planning in the U.S. State Department declared that it is necessary for Americans to “reconceive their role from a traditional nation-state to an imperial power”. In 1992, then Defense Secretary Dick Cheney with Paul Wolfowitz, now deputy secretary of defense, and I. Lewis Libby, now Vice-President Cheney’s chief of staff came up with a top-secret blueprint for world domination called the “Defense Policy Guideline” (DPG). The DPG envisioned a world that is dominated by the unilateral and pre-emptive Use of U.S. military power and the preservation of Pax Americana that will remain unchallenged throughout the 21st century. The plan was further elaborated with the Project for a New American Century under Bush Jr.’s administration.
In order to justify an increase in U.S. military presence around the world after the end of the Cold War, Bush Sr.’s administration came up with its “rogue states” policy. The succeeding Clinton administration followed this up with its list of “terrorist states” namely, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Cuba, and North Korea. And Bush Jr. came up with its “axis of evil”. After the supposed communist threat subsided with the end of the Cold War, U.S. imperialism creatively raised the hype about the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.
The plan was being implemented at a time when the world was reeling from a crisis of overproduction. Until March 2000, the U.S. was able to maximize its politico-military hegemony and its lead in high technology to rise above the crisis affecting Europe and Japan, the two other centers of capitalism. But in March, 2000, the “new economy” bubble of the U.S. burst and it plunged into a deep recession. The crisis impelled the U.S. to aggressively pursue its drive for world domination. The September 2001 attacks provided the pretext for the war on terror.
The war on terror is a ploy to justify U.S. wars of aggression that are being launched to:
· Pump prime the U.S. economy by providing business to the military industrial complex
· Control the sources of oil and other raw materials as well as the markets for U.S. capital and products
· Increasing U.S. military presence round the world by a new basing strategy whereby some permanent overseas bases will be replaced or downgraded in favor of small “forward operating bases” in many new locations. Added to these are the “forward operating locations” or prearranged but unmaintained staging areas which can be occupied quickly by U.S. forces in a conflict situation. Complementing these are the semi-permanent basing arrangements through continuous. joint military exercises as well as training of surrogate troops.
· Break all resistance and opposition to imperialist globalization
To quote Thomas Barnett, a Professor at the U.S. Naval War College and an advisor to the Defense Department, “If we map out U.S. military responses since the end of the cold war, we find an overwhelming concentration of activity in the regions of the world that are excluded from globalization’s growing Core-namely the Carribean Rim, virtually all of Africa, the Balkans, the Caucasus., Central Asia, the Middle East and Southwest Asia, and much of Southeast Asia. If a country is losing out to globalization or rejecting much of the content flows associated with its advance, there is a far greater chance that the U.S. will end up sending forces at some point. Conversely, if a country is largely functioning within globalization, we tend not to have to send our forces there to restore order to eradicate threats…” In sum, it is always possible to fall off this bandwagon called globalization. And when you do, bloodshed will follow. If you are lucky, so will American troops.”
The Arroyo regime’s war against terrorism is meant to support the objectives of U.S. wars of aggression in exchange for Aid, loans, and a share of the crumbs. U.S. military aid increased ten-fold in 2001 compared to 2000. By 2003, the country was the world’s 4th biggest recipient of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and the world’s 2nd biggest and Asia’s biggest recipient of the International Military Exercise and Training Program (IMET).
The 2003 FMF grants were in support of four mobility systems, counter-terrorist modules mainly for three Light Reaction Companies or Light Infantry Battalions, engineering spares and a regional counter-terrorism program. The IMET fund went to the U.S.-based training of over 160 AFP personnel. Excess Defense Articles transfers included: 15,000 M16 rifles, 33 ½ -ton trucks, threeUH-1H helicopters, Humanitarian Assistance Program/Excess Property, and a Cyclone Class Ship. In October 2004, Bush further committed U.S.$ 25 million for army engineering spares, 20 UH-1H refurbished helicopters plus. 10 refurbished airframes for Use as spare parts, and another U.S.$ 10 million in Presidential Draw down Authority from existing U.S. military inventories.
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo inherited a weak state. It came to power by virtue of extra legal means, People Power 2, which is beyond the normal processes of administration change. The economy was plunging deeper into crisis especially after the 1997 Southeast Asian financial crisis. The economic crisis exacerbated the political crisis that was not resolved with the ouster of Estrada. In fact, the contradictions within the ruling class further intensified resulting in threats of coup d’ etat, the massive gathering of Estrada forces at Edsa that culminated in the siege of Malacanang, the Oakwood mutiny, and the ATO tower takeover. Likewise, the legal democratic movement became stronger especially after the ouster of Estrada. Eventually, the Junk GMA movement slowly gained ground. The revolutionary movement of the CPP-NPA-NDF was advancing.
Instead of reorienting the policies of liberalization, deregulation, and privatization, which plunged the country deeper into crisis, the Arroyo regime fast tracked the implementation of these policies. It showed its total puppetry to U.S. imperialism by unabashedly supporting the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Thus., it was imperative for the Arroyo regime to “strengthen” the weak state to repress the unrest of the masses who will bear the burden of the deepening economic crisis. The strong republic was conceived in order to preemptively strike any threat to its rule, suppress dissent, and wage an all-out war against the CPP-NPA-NDF and MILF.
The grip of the Arroyo regime to power was further weakened as it had to resort to massive corruption and fraud in order to legitimize its continued stay in Malacanang. In the end, it failed to secure a fresh mandate and its supposed “victory” further exacerbated the political crisis and created doubts on the credibility of elections as a process.
The war on terror and the strong republic had and will have the following effects on the human rights situation:
1. increasing U.S. military presence and intervention
In 2000, the Joint U.S. Military Assistance Group and soon after, the Mutual Defense Board was revived. President Arroyo and U.S. President Bush approved a Joint Defense Assessment (JDA) of the AFP including its recommendations and implementation plan in October 2003. The JDA identified ten key areas of intervention including the critical security areas of planning, training, doctrines development, and logistics procurement. Although its projected objective is to reform, enhance, and modernize the AFP, it is a means to more strongly align the AFP with U.S. military doctrines, strategies, techniques, needs, and practices.
Aside from the military aid and the IMET, considerable influence is exerted by the U.S. through 13 regular bilateral conferences and training. There are also the 18 joint military exercises held regularly.
A new series of joint training exercises in North Cotabato started last July 26 and ended on August 14, 2004. North Cotabato was selected because of the reported presence of the MILF, which is being accused of collaborating with the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI). There are reports coming from KARAPATAN SOCSKSARGEN Region (South Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat and Sarangani Provinces in Mindanao) of the presence of US troops in Sarangani province.
The closer ties between the U.S. and RP military is laying the basis for direct U.S. military intervention in the Philippines. The U.S. Special Operation Forces (SOF) are already training the AFP in counter-terrorism campaign planning, intelligence/operations fusion, psychological operations, civil-military operations, and field tactics. For example, the Force Reconnaissance Companies involved in military operations were trained by U.S. SOF.
Another manifestation of increasing U.S. direct intervention in the Philippines is the terror listing by the U.S. and the European Union of the CPP-NPA and of NDFP consultant, Prof. Jose Maria Sison. This is part of the efforts towards demonizing revolutionary forces, as what was done to Islamic fundamentalist groups, and pressuring them to surrender by blocking all political, financial, and material support that may be given to them.
2. intensifying all-out war against the CPP-NPA-NDF and the MILF
Massive military deployment and operations were monitored in Southern Tagalog (39 battalions, most especially Mindoro (9 battalions), Cagayan Valley (5 battalions and 1 brigade), Western Mindanao (10 battalions), Socsargen (10 battalions), Eastern Visayas (9 battalions), Southern Mindanao (3 brigades), North Central Mindanao (3 brigades), Central Luzon (6 battalions), Bohol (4 battalions) and Cebu (2 battalions). A battalion of Scout Rangers under the command of Col. Noel Buan, former POW, intelligence officer, and one of the key officers responsible for the massive militarization in Mindoro Oriental, was recently deployed in Negros Occidental.
While the basic doctrine of Clear, Hold, Consolidate, and Develop and the Triad Operations, which include Intelligence, Operations, and Civilian-Military Operations are being implemented (under the Oplan Makabayan or Operation Plan Nationalist, the regime’s counter-insurgency program), certain adaptations and adjustments in tactics were revealed. Common among the reports is the employment of Reengineered Special Operations Teams or RSOT, which was deployed under another counter-insurgency plan, Oplan Bantay Laya, in 2003. Complementing the squad-size RSOT units are platoon size mobile units in contiguous communities as well as numerous small detachments.
Parallel to the RSOT operations are combat and security operations employing company to battalion size coordinated operations; establishment of an intelligence network up to the barangay (village) level; and CAFGU/CAA (paramilitary formati