Category: history

japan and duterte ganged up on “comfort woman”

when the “comfort woman” monument sa manilabaywalk was unveiled, not too far away from the japanese embassy, it was the day 77 years ago that japan launched a surprise attack on the philippines, some ten hours after the attack on pearl harbor.  it was also the feast day of the immaculate conception, december 8, 2017, which may or may not have anything to do with the bronze sculpture’s madonna-like vibes, kaya lang ay mas malungkot, and looking lost.  our (very own) lady of perpetual angst.  i love it, too, that she’s kind of sexy.  all nuances covered.  bravo, jonas roces!

“The blindfold symbolizes injustice or the continuous desire for justice,” he said, referring to the demands of surviving comfort women for an official apology and compensation from Japan, both of which have remained ignored.

The statue’s dress, embellished with images of the perennial grass “cadena de amor” (coral vine), stands for the women’s resilience, Roces said. He added: “Since Japan is the ‘Land of the Rising Sun,’ the statue turned its back to the sea where the sun sets.”

read xinhuanet.com‘s Philippines unveils World War II sex slave statue in Manila.  former president, now manila mayor, joseph “erap” estrada wasn’t present at the ceremony but a representative read his message lauding the installation of the historical marker in manila.

“Like others before it, this reminds us of a chapter in our past. Whether it reminds us of an event, a place, or an honored person, it is nevertheless worthy to be remembered for its impact on our nation. This morning we remember the plight of the comfort women,” Estrada said in a speech read by his representative during the unveiling ceremony.

“While we cannot erase all of their pain and suffering, we can at least do our humblest best to show them that they are not alone. Through this marker, we are expressing our intention never to forget what they went through, and to do all we can to make sure such a tragedy never happens again,” he added.

the japanese government protested, of course.  and president duterte?  he started out fine, actually, and then he flip-flopped.  read carolyn arguillas’ Duterte on ‘Comfort Women’ monument: from “it’s freedom of expression” in January to “fine” if on private property.

DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 30 April) — In January this year, President Rodrigo Duterte acknowledged Japan as the largest contributor of aid to the Philippines and thanked it for its many contributions to the country but on the issue of the then newly-installed ‘Comfort Women’ monument along the baywalk of Roxas Boulevard in Metro Manila, for which the Japanese government expressed regret…

He told MindaNews …. on January 12 that when the Japanese Minister of Internal Affairs and Communication Seiko Noda paid a courtesy call on him in Malacanang on January 9, he informed her that he “cannot stop the relatives or even the comfort women still living, from their freedom to express what they are expressing through the statue.”

“That is a constitutional right which I cannot stop. It’s prohibitive for me to do that,” he said.

FAST FORWARD three months.  march 28  manila-shimbun.com reported that the monument had been vandalized.   april 23 teresita ang see via business world reported that there was a backhoe parked beside our “comfort woman”.  april 26, president duterte left for singapore to attend an ASEAN summit.  april 27, close to midnight, DPWH started drilling.  by sunrise she was gone.  

april 29 when duterte returned, nagmaang-maangan siya.  wala siyang alam.  ni hindi raw niya alam na mayroong comfort woman monument.

“Whose initiative was it? I really do not know. I don’t even know that it exists.”

and then he stopped joking.

put simply: his sympathies lie with japan.  he caved in. nagpa-bully sa japan.  the first ever leader of a sovereign (“sovereign”) nation to take down a “comfort woman”.  without shame.

…  “if there is what you would call a memorial for an injustice committed at one time, it’s all right but do not use — it is not the policy of government to antagonize other nation. But if is erected in a private property, fine. We will honor it. And the Japanese government and people would understand it that there is democracy here, freedom of expression is very important,” Duterte said.

“But do not use government because it would reflect now on — kung ginusto ba natin (if we wanted it). It’s practically the same in South Korea, ‘yung comfort women. Pero so much water has passed,” he said.

“Masakit kasi uli- ulitin mo na tuloy (It’s painful if you keep repeating it). And you start to imagine how they were treated badly. But Japan has apologized to the Filipinos. And they have certainly made much more than… in terms of reparation,” he said.

… The President said the Japanese “has paid early for that,” that reparation “started many years ago so huwag na lang natin insultuhin” (so let’s not insult them).

masakit?  sobra naman, sir!  sino ba talaga ang nasaktan?  at hanggang ngayon, sino ba talaga ang nasasaktan?

insulto?  grabe naman, sir!  hindi pang-insulto ang “comfort woman” monument.  every place in the world that a “comfort woman” statue rises — in parks, public spaces, even passenger buses, in south korea, america, europe, australia, canada —  it is not to insult but to REMIND japan that the world has not forgotten, will not forget, the horrors forced on “comfort women” made to serve as sex slaves of japanese soldiers during the second world war.  it would be an insult to japan ONLY IF such horrors did not happen and we were all just making it up.

read ‘Comfort Women’ Denial and the Japanese Right by Julie Higashi, Yoshikata Veki, Norma Field and Tomomi Yamaguchi.

It is a remarkable thing to behold, the extent to which the issue of “comfort women” galvanizes the Japanese right more than two decades after the first Korean survivor appeared in public. The hopeful moments of the Kono Statement (1993) and the Murayama Statement (1995) seem to belong to a remote past. Circumscribed though they were, those official statements by the then chief cabinet secretary (Kono Yohei) and prime minister (Murayama Tomiichi) squarely acknowledged the grievous consequences of imperial Japan’s acts of aggression not only on the Japanese people but their Asian neighbors, and most pertinently with respect to “comfort women,” the involvement of the Japanese military.

That the “comfort woman” system has been documented1 as entailing the Japanese military, meaning that it can in no way be written off as an enterprise of private brokers, is one of the several interlocking points that exercise rightist revisionists. Another is the use of the term kyosei renko, or “forced mobilization”: the women, often young enough to warrant characterization as “girls,” were recruited, transported, and made to serve against their will. The lure of promised employment in the dire circumstances produced by colonial rule-trickery, in other words-was part of the coercive character of this system. Acknowledging systematic coercion, in turn, is to acknowledge that the system was indeed one of “military sexual slavery,” underscoring the cynical deception of the “comfort woman” euphemism. (The term continues to be meaningful as historical referent, and specifically, as verbal coalescence of willful, flagrant deception.) [emphasis mine]

the cynical — willful, flagrant — deception.

how kind it is na nga of the victims, and the world, to not dispute, let japan get away with, the euphemism “comfort women” for the actual SEX SLAVES the women were.  but it’s not enough for the government of japan that simply refuses to formally publicly acknowledge the war crime, and to directly apologize and make reparations to the “comfort women”.

what japan wants is for the the victims, and the world, to simply forget the matter, for all kinds of reasons, among these, that “comfort stations” were a necessary evil in a time of war.

read ‘Comfort women’ and history by dan steinbock:

Until recently, the extent of Japan’s wartime sexual slavery has been downplayed. According to conservative historian Ikuhiko Hata, there were barely 20,000 “comfort women” in the 1930s and 19s and they were largely willing prostitutes, with no or minimal direct involvement by Japanese military.

… In reality, the number of Japan’s wartime sex slaves is estimated at some 200,000 women. According to Chinese scholars in Shanghai, in which a “comfort station” was established in the Japanese concession already in 1932, the real number of “comfort women” may have been as high as 360,000 to 400,000.

… Most women were from areas occupied by Imperial Japan, particularly China and Korea, but also the Philippines. There were also “comfort stations” in Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan, Indonesia, Singapore, East Timor and other Japanese-occupied territories. Additionally, hundreds of women in the region were involved from the Netherlands and Australia.

in japan misogyny goes back a long long way.

Economically, Japan is one of the world’s 10 most competitive countries, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF). Yet, its ranking in the WEF Global Gender Gap Report is deplorable. In gender equality, Japan is not among the top 10, not even among the top 100 but 114th (!); well behind Myanmar, India and Nepal, and barely ahead of Ethiopia and Nigeria.

Forced silence about wartime sexual slavery is part of a broader legacy of sexual discrimination that casts a long shadow over the position of women, their human development and economic potential in Japan.

long shadow indeed.   and while prime minister shinzo abe and his party are at the helm, expect no apologies or reparations, only more bullying.  abe is the grandson of nobusuke kishi, a famous “war-criminal”-“war-hero” who was part of the tojo war cabinet during world war 2.  he believed in the racial superiority of japan in this part of the globe.

…  starting in 1933, Kishi attacked democracies and praised Nazi Germany as Japan’s model.  … In 1937, Kishi signed a degree calling for the use of slave labor in Manchukuo and northern China.  The enslavement of men paved the way for the exploitation of Chinese and Korean women as sex slaves and the expansion of sexual slavery into Japan’s occupied colonies in Asia. … a believer in the Yamato race theory, Kishi thought that the racially superior Japan was destined to rule Asia “eternally.” [emphasis mine]

world war 2, that ended with the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki by imperialist america, was a disaster for japan, the imperialist wanna-be.  kishi and his ilk were imprisoned as  class A “war crime suspects” for over three years.

In the 1950s, America was in the midst of the Cold War. So, in Japan, many war leaders were enlisted by the US to suppress Japanese communists and socialists. That’s how Kishi was released from the Sugamo Prison and became known as “America’s Favorite War Criminal.” He played a key role in the creation of the “1955 System,” which made the Liberal Democratic Party the dominant political force in Japan and America’s key ally – until today.

in fact japan has a history problem, one complicated by america’s patronage since the post-war era.  where would loser japan be today if not for winner america’s special treatment after the war.  read robert dujarric’s Japan’s history problem

… Japan is always judged based on how West Germany (and later a reunited Germany) has faced its Nazi past since the chancellorship of Willy Brandt (1969-1974). This contrast makes Japan look very much like an underperformer. There is no photograph of a Japanese prime minister bowing in Nanjing to match the famous shot of Brandt kneeling in Warsaw. Tokyo lacks a counterpart to the giant Holocaust Memorial in Berlin. Japanese governments have taken a narrow legalistic approach to requests for compensation to the sex slaves and forced laborers of Imperial Japan, whereas Germany has generally been more forthcoming in paying for claims. German leaders do not engage in self-destructive debates about the definition of invasion. Angela Merkel would not offer tokens of respect to shrines honoring men hanged following the Nuremberg Trial. Berlin does not order its diplomats to protest against the erection of memorials to victims of the Nazis.

To some Japanese, it seems unfair to benchmark their country to Germany. For various reasons, Germany is an outlier when it comes to its relationship with its darkest era. Moreover, one of the roots of Japan’s perceptions of history is the legacy of U.S. policy. The United States did not “purge” Japan with the same intensity as it denazified Germany. Albert Speer, who ran Germany’s armaments industry (and its slaves), was sentenced to twenty years behind bars. His counterpart in Japan, Nobusuke Kishi, was quickly released by U.S. authorities, and then rose to be prime minister (when the CIA funded the ruling Liberal Democratic Party). The Showa Emperor (Hirohito) not only escaped indictment, but was even spared testifying at the Tokyo Trials. In his later years, U.S. President Richard Nixon welcomed the Emperor on Japan’s first imperial visit to America. Washington granted amnesty to the murderous physicians of Unit 731. These actions were perfectly logical at the time, but they obviously had consequences for Japanese interpretations of the Showa War. If president Eisenhower and the U.S. Congress had welcomed a former member of Hitler’s cabinet to Washington as they did Prime Minister Kishi, it would have sent to Germans the message that the Nazi era was not that bad after all.

Japan cannot escape this juxtaposition with Germany. Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany were Axis allies. Both were defeated by the same coalition in World War II. Due to this doomed marriage, Hitler’s Germany is unavoidably the nation that comes up when discussing Showa Japan.

This link will not go away. Posthumous divorces are not recognized in the civil code. The Japanese Cabinet’s actions in dealing with the 1931-45 conflict will always be graded on a “German scale.” Cases of partial “historical amnesia,” though they are the norm worldwide, are thus perceived as particularly odious. They also undermine Japan’s interests by needlessly increasing anti-Japanese sentiment.

japan needs to face facts.  the longer that takes, the many more “comfort women” memorials will rise, and eventually we might even dare call them the “sex slaves of japan”.

meanwhile, our own lady of perpetual hurt stands by the door of the sculptor’s studio in antipolo, patiently waiting to be returned where she deserves to stand, in that public space, her back to the bay, facing the land of the rising sun.

*

Blinkmanship by michael tan
8 Facts You Should Know About Filipino Comfort Women by cody cepeda
Ang-See on comfort woman statue’s removal: Where’s our moral dignity? 
Put statue back where it belongs by isabel escoda
ON THE “CONTROVERSIAL” WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL AT ROXAS BOULEVARD
Remembering Japan’s war dead: Shrines in the Philippines by teresita ang see
Over 400 Memorials to Japanese Soldiers in the Philippines – Protesting the shameful act of the Japanese Government, forcing the removal of a single memorial to the “comfort women”!! – PETITION

noise barrage 1978, first People Power show

The people first made their presence known, loud and clear, five years into martial rule, on the 6th of April 1978. It was the eve of elections for Members of Parliament who would sit in the Interim Batasang Pambansa or National Assembly. Under pressure from the U.S. government, Marcos had allowed Ninoy to head a new party, Lakas ng Bayan (LABAN) and from his prison cell to run for a seat in opposition to KBL’s frontrunner Imelda. A month before elections, Defense Minister Enrile went on TV and charged Ninoy of being both a communist and a CIA agent.

Ninoy demanded equal TV time and got it. It was his first ever appearance on public television in almost six years and the nation was enthralled (the streets were empty, everyone was indoors watching TV) and shocked at how much weight the once chubby senator had lost. For people who voted him into the Senate in ’71 there was a poignant sense, long overdue, of how terribly he must have suffered, and continued to suffer, under Marcos rule. And yet the man had lost neither his ardor nor his bite and the people took little convincing that Enrile lied, Ninoy was neither a communist nor a CIA agent.

Except for that one TV appearance, Ninoy’s campaign was left to his wife Cory and seven-year old Kris, whose rallying cry was, “Help my Daddy come home!”  On April 6, the eve of elections, Ninoy’s secret admirers from left, right, and center responded under cover of darkness with the historic noise barrage. At 7:00 P.M. on the dot, we took to Manila’s streets yelling, “Laban!” and making the L sign with thumb and index finger, accompanied by car horns shrieking, pots and pans banging, whistles blowing, sirens wailing, church bells pealing, alarm bells ringing, never mind if the dreaded military picked us all up. We had no idea then that it was organized by Communist Party leader Filemon Lagman a.k.a. Popoy,  and if we had known, we would have joined anyway just to spite the dictator.

The noise barrage did not win Ninoy the election that was marked by massive cheating, but it told him in no uncertain terms that there were Filipinos out there like him, anonymous but increasing in numbers, who were yearning for freedom.  These people were not to surface for another five years. [EDSA UNO (2013) “Marcos Times” pp 24-25]

March for Our Lives, ‘78 Laban Noise Barrage, and the fight vs. Duterte

from cj puno to cj sereno #lookback

cj sereno’s quick rise to the judiciary’s highest post in 2012 was far from auspicious, coming as it did on the heels of the ignominiously controversial impeachment and conviction of her immediate predecessor, cj renato corona, in 2011.

and then, again, the reverse might also be true:  that pNoy’s appointment of sereno was auspicious because it was a matter of righting a wrong — the corona appointment by outgoing prez gloria arroyo was a (post)midnight appointment, expressly prohibited by the constitution; it was for incumbent prez benigno aquino III to appoint the replacement of cj reynato puno who was due to step down may 17 2010.

(Article 7, Section 15) “Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.”

katatapos ng may 10 2010 elections, obvious winner na si pNoy, pero presidente pa si gloria, when on may 12 she appointed corona sc chief justice — ni hindi pa bakante ang posisyon — with the backing of the puno supreme court, no less (even if puno himself abstained), and some very powerful figures in legal and political circles.

it was the culmination of a scheme initiated as early as december 2009 by arroyo diehard, rep matias defensor, so the backstory goes.  read marites danguilan vitug’s Inside the JBC: The appointment of the Chief Justice in 2010.  

Those who rallied for the appointment of a Chief Justice despite the ban during the election period stood on shaky ground. Their main argument hinged on an imagined scenario that revolved on a forthcoming novel experience. With the country’s first-ever automated polls, they foresaw confusion and a deluge of election protests that would eventually reach the Supreme Court. It was important, therefore, to have a Chief Justice to preside over the resolution of these contentious cases.

more than a decade earlier, says marites, cj andres narvasa was faced with the same kind of pressure but he withstood it.

Chief Justice Andres Narvasa refused to convene the JBC to fill up a vacancy on the Court because it fell during the appointments ban. He fiercely stood his ground despite pressure from Malacañang.”

unfortunately, cj puno was (is?) made of different stuff.

In March … In a 9-1 vote, the Court decided to exempt itself and the rest of the judiciary from the appointments ban. President Arroyo could appoint the next Chief Justice.

so accommodating of cj puno, diba? making an exception for arroyo, on such flimsy grounds, when an acting chief justice would have done as well during the transition.

what if

what if puno had done a narvasa instead.  what if he had stood firm about following the constitution?  he would have saved nation the aggravation and expense (!) of the corona impeachment and trial and, even, this whole sereno shebang.  i guess it tells us whose side former cj puno was really on then, and whose side he’s really on now, as he shepherds the crafting of a draft constitution.  (gma, is that you?)

matakot tayo.  magtanong tayo.  ano ba talaga ang agenda ni ex-cj puno?  who / what convinced him to be part of this scheme to sell charter change and federalism as the solution to all our problems, which are legion and complicated.  does it not bother him that many think him a sad sell-out?  is he?  pa-executive session executive session pa ang consultative commission (just heard it on dzmm).  what’s all the secrecy all about?  what do they think they’re cooking up.  other than more chaos and anarchy, mabuhay ang elite rule?

what if cj puno had insisted, first, on an intense multi-media information campaign, and shown some semblance of taking the time to listen to and discuss with the people.  twould  be great to have a national conversation about this.  and it’s what we need.

but back to cj impeachments  

if puno had not played along with arroyo, and if arroyo had not appointed corona cj when she did, then pNoy would have had to choose from a list that could not have yet included sereno dahil i-a-appoint pa lang niya ito as associate justice in august 16 2010.

malamang ay napilitan si pNoy to choose from the eminently more qualified and next-in-line, and the supremes might not now be so restive and vulnerable to political nudges from left right and center, what a shame.

which brings me to the 2012 sereno appointment and the perception that it was a good, an auspicious, beginning, because a matter of righting a wrong.  i have a real problem with this.

the wrong done was the midnight appointment, the wrong was done by president arroyo with the complicity of cj puno and the supremes.  BUT the wrong found and for which corona was punished — undeclared wealth — had nothing to do with the midnight-appointment itself that was a brazen violation of the constitution.

bakit ganoon ang nangyari?  because no one dared take gma to court?  or it was easier, took less courage, if a lot of money, to find fault with corona, anything that would get him out of the way?

in my final analysis, corona was faulted and removed for accepting the arroyo appointment — he could have said no, it was against the constitution, he’d take his chances with the new prez.  ironically enough, sereno too might well be faulted and removed for accepting the aquino appointment — she could have said no, she was too young, she had no court experience.

neither anticipated that their SALNs would be under scrutiny.  after all, according to senator rene saguisag who helped craft the law, violation of the SALN law was NOT an impeachable offense until the enrile senate sitting as an impeachment court dared declare it so in the 2011 trial.

in any case, pareho lang si corona at si sereno, it would seem.  and she, too, deserves her day/s in court, let the chips fall where they may.

at itigil na please ang quo warranto eklat na iyan, mr. solicitor-general.  nagmamalinis naman masyado ang duterte admin.  after six months of impeachment hearings in the lower house that practically tore apart the cj, let s/he who is without sin cast the next stone.  i would so like to meet him  and shake his hand.

non-violent tactics #EDSA’86

read UP professor amado mendoza jr‘s ‘People Power’ in the Philippines, 1983-86,  chapter 11 of the book  Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present by adam roberts & timothy garton ash, published by oxford university in 2009.

… It might have been expected that the Marcos regime would be overthrown violently by the ongoing communist insurgency or a military coup.  Scholars of regime change have long argued that neo-patrimonial dictatorships are particularly vulnerable to violent overthrow by armed opponents.

The peaceful outcome in the Philippines is therefore a puzzle.  Thompson argued that Marcos’s removal was the result of moderate forces successfully out-manoeuvring the different armed groups.  Boudreau acknowledged the competitive and complementary relationship between the armed and unarmed anti-dictatorship movements, but believed that the creation of an organized non-communist option that regime defectors could support was decisive. [180-181]

very interesting, and informative of poltical mindsets circa ’83-’86:

Exiled to the US in 1980, Senator Aquino returned in August 1983 hoping to persuade an ailing Marcos to step down and allow him to take over.  His brazen assassination at Manila international airport unleashed a broad civil resistance movement which eventually outstripped the communist insurgency in terms of media coverage and mass mobilization.  The Catholic Church, led by Cardinal Jaime Sin, played an active role in bringing together the non-communist opposition and Manila’s business elite.  Pro-opposition mass media outlets were opened and a citizens’ electoral watch movement was revived.  Aquino’s death also prompted US State Department officials to assist political moderates and pressure Marcos for reforms.  Marcos tried to divide the opposition anew through the 1984 parliamentary elections.  While some moderates joined a communist-led boycott, others (supported by the widowed Corazon Aquino) participate—and won a third of the contested seats despite widespread violence, cheating, and government control of the media. 

Emboldened moderates consequently spurned a commnist-dominated anti-dictatorship alliance in 1985 to form their own coalition.  While Marcos called for ‘snap’ presidential elections, they united behind Mrs. Aquino’s candidacy.  The communists, hoping to worsen intra-elite conflicts, called for another boycott.  Military officers associate with Enrile formed the Reform the Armed Forces Movement (RAM) and tacitly supported Aquino’s candidacy while preparing for an anti-Marcos coup.  Faced by a vigorous opposition campaign, Marcos resorted to fraud and systematic violence.  The combination of a now unmuzzled press and the presence of election observers sparked large-scale civil disobedience.  The Church declared that Marcos has lost the moral right to rule.

The end-game was precipitated by a RAM coup attempt.  Pre-empted by loyalist forces, rebel officers led by Enrile and Ramos defected to Aquino on 22 February 1986 and recognized her as the country’s legitimate leader.  These events led to an internationally televised standoff between loyalist troops and millions of unarmed civilian protesters who had gathered to protect the rebels.  As the regime came under pressure, it lost the will to survive.  Defections mounted and the Reagan administration finally withdrew its support.  On 25 February 1986, the Marcos family and entourage were airlifted to exile in Hawaii.  [182-183]

indeed non-violence won the war, but whether or not it was the result of deliberate strategies and manoeuvres by the non-communist anti-marcos moderates remains to be known.  what deserves mention is that ninoy was on non-violent mode when he came home from exile in aug ’83, his homecoming speech citing ghandi no less:

According to Gandhi, the willing sacrifice of the innocent is the most powerful answer to insolent tyranny that has yet been conceived by God and man.

perhaps he had discussed gandhi and non-violence with cory, who may have relayed the message to ninoy’s brother butz, whose august twenty-one movement (ATOM)’s protest rallies were decidedly non-violent from start to finish.

so was cory’s huge Tagumpay ng Bayan rally in luneta where she declared victory in the snap elections, sabay launch ng non-violent civil disobedence and crony-boycott campaign that coryistas couldn’t wait to be part of.  by day six of the boycott, the economy was reeling and the crony-business community was looking to negotiate, but with whom?  day seven of the boycott (EDSA saturday), enrile and ramos defected.  hmmm, di ba.  enrile was a top crony, next only to danding.  with whom na nga ba?

as in august ’83, butz rose to the occasion that EDSA saturday night.  it was butz who first sounded the call for people to come to EDSA and shield the defectors with their bodies, no guns.  cardinal sin seconded the call for a nonviolent solution an hour or so later, and cory the next day, from cebu.  ATOM was all over EDSA, butz dealing directly, facing off, with police general alfredo lim (who was ordered to disperse the crowds) and then marine commander alfredo tadiar (who was ordered to ram through! the crowd).

i’ve always wondered who, if any, advised cory and butz on non-violent tactics.  that luneta rally was sheer genius.  bentang benta sa moderate forces who liked the drama of non-violence:  nasa bahay ka lang pero feeling part of the struggle ka, and feeling revenged na rin on the regime — goodbye manila bulletin hello inquirer, goodbye san miguel beer, hello lambanog, goodbye cocacola, hello buko juice — what fun.  and that call to EDSA to shield the rebels from the dictator’s forces was inspired — was it pure butz?  was he winging it? — basta walang armas, be ready to die!  and the people were.  ready to die.  (huwag ismiran, mocha uson!)

contrary to popular perception, however, enrile did not defect to join cory nor did he recognize her as the duly-elected president right away.  enrile wanted to be president, and the aborted coup plot set for 23 feb 2 AM would have quickly installed him in malacañang.  in short, he meant to beat cory in a race to the palace,  una-unahan lang.  but ver got wind of honasan’s plans, and honasan got wind of ver’s plans (arrest orders, among others), which drove enrile and RAM to hole up in camp aguinaldo, better to die fighting, while hoping against hope to win the people’s support — after all, he was more qualified to be president.

but by day two, EDSA sunday, the day the people stopped the tanks in ortigas, it was clear that the people were there for cory — shielding enrile yes, but chanting cory’s name, wearing cory’s colors, waving cory’s flags — and it was obvious that they expected cory and enrile to join forces vs. marcos.  sometime over that long night, enrile and ramos, separately, met with cory in her sister’s house in greenhills.  i suppose that’s when the two asked for the top defense positions, an end to the crony-boycott, and immunity from suit in exchange for their armed support.

it disappoints, of course, that prof mendoza characterizes the dictator’s response during the key days as “inexplicably lame and non-violent.”  as though there had been no real threat of violence?  which is to diminish, even if unintentionally, the people’s role in that stunning revolt.

the dictator’s orders were neither lame nor non-violent.  on day 3, EDSA monday, twice marcos gave orders to bomb camp crame, except that air force col. sotelo and the entire 15th strike wing defected instead, and col. balbas and the marines (like commander tadiar the day before), after much delaying, defied orders, and returned to barracks instead.

true, the dictator’s forces could have struck immediately at the rebel military “before a protective civilian cocoon had been mobilized to protect them”, but marcos actually thought he could woo enrile back to the fold.  he had no idea that there was no turning back for enrile who was off on a new trip, navigating uncharted waters, and reinventing himself.

of course, he regretted giving way to cory, but i’m glad he did.

of course cory must have regretted giving him immunity, and i’m sorry she did.

next time, we the people should have a better sense — in real time —  of what’s happening behind-the-scenes and what’s being promised / compromised in our name.  we shouldn’t make bitaw too quickly or trust in our leaders so blindly.  i would think that non-violent engagement can be sustainable and long-term.