APEC and the Anti-Terror War

What gave the recently-concluded APEC Summit in Santiago, Chile an anti-“terror” color? What are the implications of the Philippines’ being chosen to head the APEC Countertterrorism Task Force – both for its home front and for the Asia-Pacific region? Rita Baua, head of the Philippine Chapter of the International League of People’s Struggle (ILPS), shared her analysis and comments in an interview with Bulatlat.

BY ALEXANDER MARTIN REMOLLINO
Bulatlat

In its Summit, held Nov. 17-21 in Santiago, Chile, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) tackled not only regional trade which is supposed to be the organization’s sole concern, but also the U.S.-led war on “terror.” As some observers have noted, what should have been an economic summit became an anti-“terror” summit.

This is a far cry from the APEC 2001 Summit, in which the member countries merely registered an expression of support for the U.S. war on “terror.” This year the anti-“terror” war is part of the APEC’s main agenda.

The Philippines has recently also been chosen to chair the APEC Counterterrorism Task Force, with Chile as vice chair.

What gave an economic summit an anti-“terror” color? What are the implications of the Philippines’ being chosen to head the APEC Countertterrorism Task Force – both for its home front and for the Asia-Pacific region?

How must the people’s movements react to the developments that should be expected to follow the Santiago Summit?

Rita Baua, chair of the Philippine Chapter of the International League of People’s Struggle (ILPS), shared her analysis and comments in an interview with Bulatlat. The ILPS is at the forefront of international anti-globalization and anti-war movements.

The APEC is supposedly an economic formation: why in the first place, then, did it take up the anti-“terror” war in its recent Summit?

Ostensibly, the APEC leaders came up with this task force in order to “secure the flow of goods” and “to dismantle terrorists that “threaten and directly challenge the free, open, and prosperous economies.”

The anti-“terror” aspect was highlighted in APEC 2004 due to the challenges posed by some forces against the U.S.: rival capitalist countries, countries asserting their own national integrity as independent producers of commodities, and national sovereignty, i.e. China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), countries fighting the U.S. which has or is trying to control their natural (billions of barrels of oil of Iraq), anti-imperialist movements which point to the U.S. as the main enemy of people’s aspirations to control their own economic system or who protest against imperialist globalization that privatizes, liberalizes, and deregulates their countries’ domestic capital and natural and human resources.

In economic terms, does the APEC have anything to gain from talking of the war on "terror"?

No, because much of the resources of the U.S. and its allies will be spent on the war against “terror”. In the Philippines, for instance, the budget is tilted in favor of the military, the increase in the salaries of the soldiers, more weaponry, etc, versus the social needs of the vast majority of the citizens like cheap medicines, low rates for hospitalization, low tuition fee for the students, etc. Many of the organized and spontaneous protests being staged are also directed against high prices, low wages, oil price hike. These are deadly issues, but the people are fighting back now.  Just take the transport strike which was joined in by unorganized drivers of jeeps and buses who see no relief in sight to their economic (troubles).

The Philippines and Chile serve as chair and vice chair of the APEC Counterterrorism Task Force, respectively. Does it signal the complete mending of ties between the Bush and Arroyo administrations partly damaged by the Philippine government's pull-out of Philippine troops from Iraq?

Let us always bear in mind that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, including the past administrations that were beholden to the U.S., will always act in the interest of the U.S. The Arroyo regime has not deviated from its puppetry even as it withdrew the motley group of Filipino troops from Iraq at the height of the Angelo de la Cruz hostage crisis.  Arroyo merely wanted to save her neck from the wrath of the people and her possible overthrow early on in her second term.  But with the hostage crisis seemingly over with the return of Angelito Nayan and Angelo de la Cruz, the Arroyo regime has been mending its fence with the Bush regime. 

For instance, in the past hostage crisis over Nayan and the capture of Roberto Tarongoy, both groups that have held them have demanded the withdrawal of the Arroyo administration for the U.S. war against Iraq and Afghanistan. But instead of heeding this, the Arroyo administration made a roundabout way of dealing with the hostage takers through the latter’s contact and also to impose a “media blackout.”

Migrante forces were right in holding a rally immediately after the release of Nayan because as long as the Arroyo administration is supporting the Coalition of the Willing with the U.S., there will be more Filipino hostages by these groups in said countries.

Then, to further assuage the piqued U.S., President Arroyo has accepted being the head of the APEC Counterterrorism Task Force.  The demands of this task force will seal her commitment and utter puppetry to the U.S.

The Philippines has sent "peacekeeping" troops to Haiti, a country whose conflict we have absolutely nothing to do with. Do you also see an eventual return of Philippine troops to Iraq?

Yes, what is overriding with the Arroyo regime is its utter puppetry to the U.S.  When the U.S. soldiers’ deaths will mount in the days ahead, the U.S. will be asking its allies for more support, even if it means the deaths of troops from the Coalition of the Willing.

Besides, with the crisis going on unabated in the Philippines, the Arroyo regime will be forced to seek support and aid from the U.S.  But of course, the condition will be the Philippine commitment to the U.S. war in Iraq.

By its chairing the APEC Counterterrorism Task Force, the Philippines will surely be playing a more aggressive role in the U.S.-led anti-“terror” war. What specific forms could the Philippines' performance of this “task” take?

The Arroyo regime, through retired Gen. Benjamin Defensor, who will head the technical committee of said task force, boasted that the methods it will use in the region have been “successful” in the Philippines. 

Some of the specific tasks it will do in the region would be:

To stress on the orientation that human rights of suspected “terrorists” are secondary only to the region’s war on “terror” to secure their trade.  Karapatan (Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights) figures of human rights violations against peasants, workers, Moros including their communities bear out such orientation. Some of the aforementioned have been killed outright, tortured, made to disappear or imprisoned because they are suspected members or leaders of the CPP-NPA (Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army), ASG (Abu Sayyaf Group), Jemaah Islamiyah, etc.;

To send its troops in the region which the U.S. and its allies deem as “terrorists” or belonging to the “axis of evil”, i.e. the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, etc. that are challenging the “democratic” countries of the U.S., etc. We once sent troops to Korea in the name of “protecting democracy” under the leadership of the U.S. Ramos was once a part of that military contingent. The government could once again send troops to the DPRK;

To help the intelligence agents of the U.S. and its allies in identifying “ terrorists” (read: anti-imperialist, democratic, progressive, patriotic groups ) in the region. The Arroyo regime is collaborating with the U.S. and some schengen countries in Europe in drawing up a list of “terrorists” who should not be allowed to enter the countries of the U.S. and the schengen countries.  Later on, this will expand to Asia;

To project the “invincibility” and “strength “ of the U.S. in the region in order that masses of its people will not challenge, fight, and resist the U.S.  As the principal U.S. agent and puppet in the region, Arroyo will go overboard in doing this role. But this will prove to be her undoing and will even isolate her from other Asian leaders who have shown a bit of independence and territorial integrity viz the U.S.

How do you see this affecting the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP)’s peace negotiations with the National Democratic Front of the Philippines ( NDFP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF)?

As everybody knows, there are two revolutionary armed movements in the Philippines – the CPP-led New People’s Army which is anti-imperialist, anti-feudalism and anti-bureaucrat capitalism; and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front which is anti-imperialist and is fighting for self-determination.

These are the groups that are directly threatening the existence of so-called “free, open, and prosperous economies” that are a result of the policies of liberalization, privatization, deregulation of the commodities, goods, services produced by the workers and peasants in the Philippines.

The U.S. agenda in the Asia Pacific region is to use the Philippines as its launching pad for U.S. intervention and aggression against any country.  But as long as the two armed revolutionary movements of the CPP-NPA and the MILF are thriving and growing strong, and the broad sections of Philippine society are now critical of U.S. economic and political policies in the Philippines, then this cannot be achieved.

The GRP’s peace negotiation with the NDFP is on hold because of the sovereignty issue being raised by the NDFP regarding the “terrorism” issue by the U.S., the European Union, the Netherlands, Canada, Australia against the NDFP chief political consultant and now the ILPS chairperson, Jose Maria Sison. Although the NDFP is willing to continue talks in spite of its vigorous protest of the Arroyo regime’s non-action in raising the “terror” tag against Joma, the GRP, under the influence of the hawks (Angelo Reyes, Golez, and others) within her cabinet and of course the U.S., has not resumed said talks. So, who is really serious with establishing peace in the country?
 

On the other hand, the MILF is being accused by the U.S.-Arroyo regime of harboring the JI and the Abu Sayyaf groups in its areas; this baseless accusation has been used as a pretext by U.S.-Filipino troops to enter the MILF areas, which is against the principles of this armed revolutionary movement, and its agreement with the GRP.

Do you see a greater push for the Anti-Terrorism Bill in the Philippines?

Defintely yes, the Arroyo regime is bent on pushing for Charter change, specifically the privilege to be given to foreign investors.  But this is opposed by anti-imperialist groups and alliances, and a broad number of people.

In order to suppress such groups, the U.S.-Arroyo regime will have to push for the Anti-Terrorism bill. Said bill will include the death sentence, the punishment of groups meeting (three people meeting can be ground for arrest and long detention), national ID system, etc. which the Arroyo regime and her retinue of national security advisers think will strike fear into the hungry, poor, sick, physically weak workers and peasants.

Unfortunately for President Arroyo, more workers and peasants are now organized through different means, and they have a growing influence among the broad masses of the people, and I firmly believe that in due time, she will face stiff opposition once she attempts to take up this bill in Congress and the Senate.

How about the possibility of a move to amend the Philippine Constitution to again allow permanent foreign military bases in the country?

As I previously mentioned, the U.S. agenda for the Philippines is to once again build its military bases here.  I saw the airport of General Santos City. It has a long runway, but only two commercial planes use it twice a day. So what is the purpose of such runway if not to use it as part of the infrastructure for the military bases it wants to establish, so that it could control our economic resources and to attempt to crush two revolutionary movements in the Philippines?

The Philippines remains a strategic country for the U.S., enough for it to launch wars of intervention and aggression in the region which is one of the resources-rich and economically robust regions in the world.  The U.S. wants to haul in the region’s accumulated capital and investments.

Therefore, the Arroyo regime seems hell bent on allowing the U.S. troops and facilities to use any area in the Philippines. If not for the strong opposition of anti-imperialist, nationalist and patriotic groups, the Arroyo regime could have allowed the ACSA (Acquisition Cross Servicing Agreement) to be approved only on the executive level. ACSA would have made the Philippines one huge military base. 

The Arroyo regime has not dropped this plan altogether and will try to have this passed at the Executive level.  Some of the senators are opposing this because they assert that it is the Senate that should study and approve or disapprove agreements and treaties entered into by the Phil. Government with other countries and regions.

How will the Philippines’ heading the APEC Counterterrorism Task Force affect, if ever, the international scene?

This will make the Philippines the chief agent in the region in terms of pushing the U.S. agenda of terror. I remember that when the U.S. war on Iraq started two years ago, the U.S. organized a coalition to help it in said war. One of the leaders that the U.S. immediately called up was PGMA for her cooperation. I remember that she approached several leaders in Asia about said coalition. 

Finally, how should the people’s movement in the Philippines and the rest of the Asia-Pacific region confront developments that could arise in the wake of the Santiago conference?

The people’s movement in the Philippines and other countries in the region should sustain their struggles against imperialist domination, in spite of the “terror” tag it will get from the U.S. The people’s movement should not be awed nor overpowered by the propensity of the U.S. and its cohorts to label it “terrorist.”

The U.S., in spite of its high-tech weaponry, its vast resources, and alliances, is still a paper tiger. It is facing a huge problem in Iraq where the people are resisting mightily and waging a life-and-death struggle. The U.S. is facing a growing stiff opposition from its citizens, including relatives of the more than 1,000 U.S. soldiers slain in an unjust war.

The people’s movement in the Philippines is joining broad anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, anti-U.S. war, anti-U.S. militarism, anti-foreign debt, anti-foreign mining, etc. alliances in the region and the rest of the world in order to strengthen itself and the alliances themselves in confronting U.S. terrorism and globalization. I remember the anti-U.S. war protests joined in by 30 million all over the world, two years ago. This shows that the world is really confronting this evil being done by the number one terrorist in the world today – U.S. imperialism. Bulatlat

BACK TO TOP ■  PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION  ■   COMMENT

© 2004 Bulatlat ■  Alipato Publications

Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.