The Philippines is a dangerous place for dissidents, particularly those perceived as left-wing activists. Since President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo took power in 2001, hundreds of left-wing activists, human rights workers, clergy, unionist, and farmers have been killed in apparent targeted assassinations. Local rights groups say that more than 800 dissidents have been murdered since Arroyo took office.
Both the United Nations and a recent report by a Philippine government commission headed by retired Supreme Court Justice, Jose Melo, looking into the wave of political assassinations linked the extra-judicial killings to rogue elements of the military. The government report said that members of the military allowed and encouraged the killing of “enemies of the state.” Though the findings might suggest some form of direct government involvement, the report found no evidence that the killings had been state- sanctioned. However, government complicity in the killings may be the result of the Arroyo administration turning a blind eye to, or inaction in, staunching the assassinations. Many of those killed were considered left-wing activists and may have been linked to a decades-long Communist insurgency involving the outlawed Communist Part of the Philippines (CPP) and its 7,000 member-strong armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA). An estimated 40,000 people have been killed as a result of the insurgency. The report noted that the Philippine Army’s former head of counterinsurgency, General Jovito Palparan, and other elements of the military “are responsible for the recent killings of activists” who were considered by the military to be enemies of the state.
The Philippine military has rejected the report, and security officials countered that the killings of left-wing activists and the related clamor over rogue military death squads are CPP and NPA internal purges and propaganda. The military has also insisted that some of the killings are the result of military engagements with Communist insurgents. The Arroyo government has been accused of smearing opponents as left-wing, communist, and thus associated with rebels.
Forecast: A Politically Inconvenient and Possibly Destabilizing Crisis
The UN and government reports will undoubtedly put pressure on an already embattled Arroyo government to rein in a military that seems to have cultivated a culture of virtual impunity. This will be no easy task for a President who has weathered two attempts at impeachment by political opponents and an alleged coup attempt by members of the military. A confrontation with the politically powerful Philippine military—a strong influence in local and national politics—is not in Arroyo’s political or executive interests in the run-up to mid-term elections in May. Further, Arroyo may be reticent to crack down on a military battling, however allegedly ruthlessly, Communist insurgents threatening state security.
Her reckoning with a potentially coup-inclined military, or a perception that she is sweeping the matter under the rug, may serve as catalysts for near-term political instability: the military is unlikely to submit to censure and punishment, while perceived unwillingness or inability on the part of Arroyo to do just that will be met with popular, political, and international anger. Arroyo will need to strike a delicate political balance in brokering a ‘legitimate’ resolution to the crisis that avoids both provoking destabilizing military and popular resistance. This will likely involve compelling a high-profile, but politically expendable, military leader to fall on his sword and/or compelling the military to rein in anything approximating political assassinations to demonstrate that the government is addressing the issue. Balancing these actions, Arroyo will likely seek to avoid more incisive or wholesale investigations, reforms, or punitive measures against military elements allegedly linked to killings that would be perceived as a more fundamental and provocative threat to the military.
