Analysis
The Making of a Garrison State

Dancing to the beat of the war drums by George W. Bush, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo continues to pursue her own war against terrorism through a national plan. Seen from all angles, the plan unveils the signs of a militarist state that should concern all Filipinos.

BY BOBBY TUAZON
Bulatlat.com

Two of the alleged victims of Macapagal-Arroyo’s war on terrorism: Rosa C. Guadiana, 18, (left) who  went missing while returning home in Catarman, northern Samar on Aug. 22; and Domingo de las Alas (middle), who also disappeared on Oct. 5 in Batangas on his way to Camp Crame. Guadiana is the daughter of an alleged NDF leader in Eastern Visayas while De las Alas is a Bayan Muna municipal coordinator. Suspect ( police sketch, right) in the abduction of Guadiana reportedly came from Camp Lukban army headquarters in Catbalogan    Photos courtesy of Karapatan

Is the Macapagal-Arroyo government building a garrison state in the guise of fighting “terrorism”? And is this state machinery, with the support of the U.S. government, being put up to ensure the President’s election in 2004?

The pieces that make up this possible scenario include the launching of the “war on terrorism” by the President in the wake of U.S. President George Bush’s “Operation Enduring Freedom” in October last year, the plan to recruit more soldiers, paramilitary forces and policemen and the unprecedented increase in the budget of both the defense and police agencies.

Macapagal-Arroyo also announced the building of a “Strong Republic” followed by her full endorsement of anti-terrorism bills pending in both Houses of Congress. In recent moves, her security officials called for the implementation of a national ID system for all Filipinos as a means, they argued, of averting terrorist threats. Almost at the same time, police officials blacklisted at least six major schools in Metro Manila as possible “terrorist enclaves” for reason, they said, that these institutions have been traditional turfs of militants.

Government’s anti-terrorist program is not only a hodge-podge of spontaneous plans but is well laid-out in what a Bulatlat source describes as a “National Plan to Address Terrorism and Its Consequences.” Crafted by top administration, defense and police officials a few months ago, the plan resurrects martial law orders and sets into motion what appears to be a xerox copy of Bush’s own “homeland security” program. The U.S. president’s program, drawn up after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, has been criticized as having the makings of a fascist state and a grave threat to civil liberties.

Specifically, the new national plan against terrorism revives Executive Order 727 issued by the dictator Ferdinand Marcos in 1981. The EO provides for the creation of a “peace and order council” in all levels of government that would command all anti-terrorist efforts. The council gives powers to police and Armed Forces officials that, since Marcos’s time, have subordinated civilian authority to these entities.

‘Terrorists’ as ‘criminals’

Although the anti-terrorism bills have yet to be enacted into law, the plan already assumes all “terrorist acts” as “criminal.” Nevertheless, the presidential plan expects Congress to dance to the same beat by passing anti-terrorism bills. The bills, particularly HB 3802 authored by Ilocos Norte Rep. Imee Marcos, have been criticized as an affront to the Bill of Rights that would make all types of legitimate dissent “terrorist” and “criminal.”

Just like in Bush’s “homeland security” plan, the Macapagal-Arroyo government’s version authorizes the Cabinet Oversight Committee on Internal Security (COC-IS), which is chaired by the executive secretary, to administer the implementation of all policies and actions against terrorism. On matters of terrorism, many departments are also integrated to undertake parallel efforts including intelligence, monitoring and actions.

The DILG, particularly its police agency, for instance, is tasked to update its list of suspected terrorist fronts and, together with other units, to prepare legal actions. One such list identifies Bayan Muna, Karapatan and other militant cause-oriented organizations as targets of monitoring.

The national plan also classifies terrorist activities as “police matters” although it also mandates the Armed Forces to step in once such activities escalate into a crisis. In actual operations, it is the AFP which has assumed the lead role especially in the light of the labeling of the New People’s Army (NPA) as a “terrorist group.”

Just the same, and particularly on a nationwide scale, it is the police and Armed Forces that assume key roles in government’s anti-terrorist campaign. Indeed the plan reactivates the peace and order councils and the disaster coordinating councils where police authorities have a commanding presence. Especially in local crisis situations, local executives readily submit themselves a la martial law to the authority of the police and military officials. This national matrix practically allows the military and police agencies virtual powers over a function that by edict is supposed to be under the civilian bureaucracy.

Collaborating with U.S.

Most of all, however, the national plan places emphasis on working closely with U.S. authorities in terms of training, intelligence and security. It also reiterates the President’s earlier decisions allowing U.S. forces access into the country’s airspace and facilities and providing logistical support such as food supplies, medicine and medical personnel.

Aligning government’s anti-terrorism campaign with that of the U.S. government is expected considering the President’s all-out support to Bush’s “war on terrorism” which has targeted the Philippines among some 80 countries where terrorism is supposed to be active. In both the U.S. and Macapagal-Arroyo security parlance, there is no longer any distinction between “terrorism” and “guerrilla movement” or rebellion. Their respective hit lists of so-called “terrorist organizations” include the Communist Party of the Philippines and its New People’s Army. Philippine defense and police officials have gone further by labeling their alleged front organizations as “terrorist” and “criminal.” This demonization of legal groups – groups that became instrumental in catapulting Macapagal-Arroyo to where she is now in early 2001 – has resulted in the killing of several mass leaders and activists nationwide.

It is in this light that Macapagal-Arroyo’s “national plan to address terrorism” should be seen as part of her national strategy to support the Bush government’s campaign to purge the country of the Leftist threat in the pretext of fighting terrorism. Bush’s national security strategy (NSS) which he issued last September expressly provides for ousting unfriendly governments as well as supporting friendly regimes to make the world safe from “rogue states” and “terrorist sponsors.” In the last APEC summit in Mexico, the U.S. president congratulated Macapagal-Arroyo for her support and pledged American support all the way.

The national plan against terrorism is nothing but the President’s expression of her all-out support to Bush even if this means placing the nation’s constitutional freedoms and civil liberties under threat. It should be a concern not only for the militant groups but for all freedom fighters, civil libertarians and the rest of the nation as well. Bulatlat.com

We want to know what you think of this article.