MIM Notes 228                   February 15, 2001

Mass protests force corrupt Philippine president to step down

On January 20 a united front of progressives and bourgeois 
opposition groups forced Philippine President Joseph Estrada to 
step down from office. Only four days earlier, Estrada loyalists 
had voted to squelch evidence of corruption in Estrada's 
impeachment trial. In protest, the impeachment prosecutors 
resigned, and as many as three million Filipinos marched to EDSA, 
the site of the "People's Power" uprising that overthrew former 
dictator Ferdinand Marcos in 1986.

Seeing that Estrada was isolated -- even in bourgeois circles -- 
and fearing the mobilized masses, the reactionary Armed Forces of 
the Philippines (AFP) withdrew its support from Estrada on the 
19th. Estrada beat a tactical retreat the next day, handing over 
administration of the government to vice-president Gloria 
Macapagal-Arroyo. As MIM Notes goes to press, however, Estrada 
still claims that he is officially president, and rumors of a 
counter-coup persist.

Bourgeois pundits in the imperialist countries are split on the 
victory of so-called "People's Power II." Some were fed up with 
rampant corruption and shared concerns that Estrada's unpopularity 
threatened stability; they welcomed Estrada's downfall. The 
Philippine military's defection is evidence that the u.$. 
government is in this camp. As a Filipino senator noted recently, 
the AFP does "what America says."(1) Showing some foreign 
investors' hopes, the Philippine Peso -- which lost 22% of its 
value relative to the dollar during 2000 to reach a record low -- 
rebounded sharply after Macapagal-Arroyo was sworn in.

Other pundits moaned that "People's Power II" actually undermined 
democracy in the Philippines. It was the military that Estrada 
heeded, they argue; Estrada was "democratically elected," and 
"constitutional procedures" were violated in his ouster.

MIM does not doubt that the military's support of the mass 
movement changed Estrada's mind about staying in office. But it 
was the pressure of millions of Filipinos which isolated Estrada 
in the first place -- opportunists in the military joined with 
them only when it was clear Estrada's position was untenable, much 
as they did when the u.$. withdrew its support from Marcos. So 
unlike bourgeois formalists we do see a kernel of democracy in 
"People's Power II." If anything, the fact that Estrada proved to 
be a cruel and corrupt tyrant and could not be removed by 
"constitutional procedures" only proves that bourgeois democracy 
doesn't work. The mass movement in the cities launched by militant 
organizations and the advancing armed revolution in the 
countryside gave the events of "People's Power II" their 
democratic character -- not any ballot box.

The ouster of Estrada doesn't solve the basic problems in the 
Philippines. As the founding chairpersyn of the Communist Party of 
the Philippines (CPP) Jose Maria Sison notes, "The crisis is not 
simply due to the corruption and repressiveness of the Estrada 
ruling clique. These are in fact the consequences of imperialist 
domination. The crisis is due to the fundamentally oppressive and 
exploitative workings of the ruling system of big compradors and 
landlords who are servile to foreign monopoly capitalists.

"The evils of this system will continue to inflict suffering on 
the people and incite them to wage all forms of revolutionary 
struggle. The revolutionary forces and people will continue the 
struggle for national liberation and democracy against foreign 
monopoly capitalism, feudalism, and bureaucrat capitalism."(2)

Estrada's downfall

Since he became president three years ago, Estrada boldly 
implemented many policies which hurt the people of the 
Philippines. His "tough guy" image exposed him as a callous lackey 
for the local reactionary classes and foreign imperialists.

One of his first acts as president was to pass the Visiting Forces 
Agreement (VFA), which grants Amerikan troops run of the country, 
essentially turning the Philippines into a u.$. military base.(3) 
He broke off peace talks with the Communist-led New People's Army 
(NPA), and refused to release political prisoners, despite the 
NPA's gesture of goodwill in releasing captured government troops. 
During his tenure, the AFP carried out summary executions and 
other crimes which violated a humyn-rights agreement signed by the 
Republic of the Philippines and the armed revolutionary 
movement.(4)

Last year, Estrada launched "all-out war" against the Moro people 
in the southern Philippines, against their just aspirations for 
self-determination, and against another agreement his government 
signed. Within months, more than one million people had been 
displaced from their homes and herded into refugee camps. The AFP 
carried out "indiscriminate shellings with 105-mm howitzers, 
bombings by OV-10 Bronco warplanes, and strafings by MG-520 
helicopter gunships." These warplanes and cannons were supplied by 
the u.$. government -- and the "all out war" began just after 
joint training exercises between the AFP and the u.$. military 
ended.(5)

These were a few of the actions which sparked discontent and 
opposition to the u.$.-Estrada regime. The catalyst which led to 
the mass rallies of 16-20 January was Estrada's impeachment trial 
for corruption. Estrada was charged with taking kickbacks from an 
illegal gambling operation, pocketing ransom money from a 
kidnapping gang, and other forms of corruption. He deposited over 
$60 million in a bank account under a false name. It's an open 
secret that Estrada bribed eleven Philippine senators to scuttle 
his impeachment.(1) On January 16 those senators voted to exclude 
testimony on some of Estrada's shady bank accounts.

Who is Macapagal-Arroyo?

Because the president and vice president are elected separately in 
the Philippines, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo came from the Estrada's 
bourgeois opposition. Of course the transfer of power from one 
bourgeois faction to the next does not mean that the basic 
character of the Manila government has changed. In fact, already 
last summer there were rumors that Macapagal-Arroyo was closer to 
the united $tates than Estrada, at least in geopolitical terms. 
Perhaps Estrada's I-don't-take-no-orders image didn't sit well 
with Washington. Like many previous Philippine presidents, 
Macapagal-Arroyo was educated in the united $tates. She attended 
Georgetown University, and was a classmate of Bill Clinton.(6) Her 
record as a Senator and a member of the Aquino cabinet also shows 
that she supports pro-imperialist policies, such as those proposed 
by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

Upon taking office, Macapagal-Arroyo said that she wanted to "end 
the politics of patronage."(7) However, within the first week of 
her term, militant activists and even some middle class groups 
denounced her cabinet as a bunch of "trapos," or traditional 
politicians.(8) Furthermore, Macapagal-Arroyo is herself a 
"trapo;" she is the daughter of former Philippines president 
Diosdado Macapagal.

When asked what kind of president she would be, Macapagal-Arroyo 
said she would follow the example of her father.(7) This is bad 
news for the Filipino people -- Diosdado Macapagal was a CIA asset 
who received campaign funds from the united $tates. He also passed 
policies in favor of foreign monopoly capital. He gave the newly-
created World Bank and International Monetary Fund large roles in 
the Philippines economy.(9)

But regardless of where Macapagal-Arroyo persynally stands, the 
fact remains that the government of the Republic of the 
Philippines is made up of representatives of the local exploiting 
classes and compradors (middle-people for foreign imperialists). 
The Philippines National Police and AFP are still in the hands of 
the exploiting classes as well. (For example, in August of 2000 
the bourgeois media in the Philippines reported that the AFP was 
giving local landlords funds to create their own armed vigilante 
groups.)

Where to go from here?

The Communist Party of the Philippines issued a statement calling 
on all "democratic and progressive groups" in the Philippines to 
fight for an eight-point "people's agenda." This list included 
calls for the immediate prosecution of Estrada and his cronies and 
recovery of their ill-gotten wealth in order to fund programs that 
are genuinely for the poor; Genuine land reform for the peasant 
masses; Release of all political prisoners; and Abrogation of the 
Visiting Forces Agreement and opposition to u.$. intervention in 
the country's internal affairs.(10) MIM calls on progressives in 
the united $tates to support these demands, especially opposition 
to the VFA and u.$. intervention. In solidarity with the struggle 
for genuine land reform, we are also gathering signatures on a 
petition opposing the harassment and murder of peasant activists 
in the Philippines. We encourage our readers with access to the 
Internet to download and distribute this petition.(11)

At the same time as it calls on progressives in the legal arena to 
support these demands, the CPP is intensifying the revolutionary 
armed struggle in the countryside for the long-term purpose of 
overthrowing the ruling system of big compradors and landlords 
under the control of u.$. imperialism.

Notes:

1. "Philippines deserves help against Estrada," Los Angeles Times, 
19 January 2001.

2. "Congratulations to the Filipino people, carry the struggle 
through to the end," 20 Jan 2001.

3. "Philippine puppet government welcomes return of Amerikan 
occupying troops," MIM Notes 189, 1 Jul 1999.

4. "U.$.-backed Philippine army massacres Mawab Four," MIM Notes 
194, 15 Sep 1999.

5. Liberation [official publication of the National Democratic 
Front of the Philippines], Apr-Jun 2000.

6. San Francisco Examiner, 20 Jan 2001.

7. "Gloria Arroyo: A president in waiting," Agence France Presse, 
20 Jan 2001.

8. Philippine Daily Inquirer, 25 Jan 2001.

9. William Blum, "The CIA: A Forgotten History," Zed Books: 
London, 1986, p. 43; Jose Maria Sison, "The Philippine 
Revolution," Taylor and Francis: New York, 1989, p. 24.

10. Philippine Daily Inquirer, 24 Jan 2001.

11. www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/cal/LoocPetition.pdf.