Feb 27, 2011

No EDSA I if Marcos conducted genuine, credible snap election

By Sen. Gregorio Honasan
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 03:25:00 02/23/2011

Filed Under: Edsa 1, People power, Politics, Dictatorship,history

(Editor’s Note: The following is an account given to Inquirer reporter TJ Burgonio by Sen. Gregorio Honasan of the events that led to the EDSA People Power Revolution on Feb. 22-25, 1986. Honasan was then an Army colonel and one of the leaders of the Reform the Armed Forces Movement (RAM) whose aborted coup attempt on Feb. 22 sparked the massing of millions of Filipinos summoned by Jaime Cardinal Sin and Butz Aquino to EDSA to protect the breakaway group led by then Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and then Lt. Gen. Fidel V. Ramos at Camp Aguinaldo and Camp Crame.)

MANILA, Philippines—The EDSA People Power Revolution might not have happened had the Ferdinand Marcos administration conducted genuine elections 25 years ago.

We were supposed to mount our operation in December 1985, but when Marcos announced a snap presidential election on Feb. 7, he offered what we thought was a release valve. It was an opportunity for the government to hold clean, credible and honest elections.

We thought there was hope. But when they started tampering with the election returns and the computer people walked out, led by then Col. Eduardo “Red” Kapunan’s wife Linda, whom we had to secure. That event became the tipping point.

Looking back, had EDSA I not taken place, we could have failed to moderate a lot of the institutional damage. At that time, the perception was that the damage was so severe. The Commission on Elections and the Batasan Pambansa were just rubber stamps.

These were perceptions that were beginning to be given life in the light of what was happening. In the countryside, we had an insurgency problem that was festering, and within the Armed Forces of the Philippines, there were abuses of discretion, abuse of authority, and to some degree, corruption, although not in the same light as this “pabaon”—send-off money for retiring AFP chiefs of staff revealed in recent congressional investigations.

Inevitable

People power was bound to happen sooner or later.

We collectively, including Marcos, would have reached our threshold for staying in power despite the obvious absence of control. In the case of the people, considering perceptions that the government then was not enjoying full support and trust, they would have reached their threshold. The challenge then was to allow these thresholds to converge at the same time.

You’re talking here of thresholds. If you’re alone and you’re few and you reach your threshold, of course you lose. You’re either killed, you’re incarcerated or you’re isolated from the very same society that you seek to reform. So the idea was to organize and communicateto the majority so that you could reach your thresholds together.

Had that process continued, it would have been only a matter of time before these thresholds were reached collectively by a majority of our people. It was bound to happen. It was inevitable. It’s history.

2 factors

One way or the other, Marcos would have been forced to leave or would have left voluntarily. Of course it meant more years, until we developed this threshold. So it was only a matter of time, I thought then.

Had Marcos stayed on, two things had to be factored in. First, the President was sick. I don’t know how Marcos, confronted with his own mortality, would have the capacity to institute fundamental reforms.

Second, the succession. Even then we were already talking about the tendencies toward forming a political dynasty in the highest level of power. Then First Lady Imelda Marcos was the governor of the Metropolitan Manila Authority. She was also the minister of human settlements. So, there were indications. Now, I don’t know how this would have impacted on the institutional damage. 


The essence of power is your ability to control the variables. Validate the information that’s coming your way as leader. When you lose that, then everything deteriorates. You relegate all those powers to a cordon sanitaire, the power cliques that develop around leaders, not only in our case but in the case of leaders worldwide.

EDSA lessons

EDSA I would have been unsuccessful without the military.

It has been proven time and again that you can have a political component in the streets or somewhere else, but unless you have a polarization of the situation, wherein you have a political component and a military component that would induce a balance of forces, political and military forces, then you have nothing. There is no decision; you will continue demonstrating in the streets, rallying, unless a military component surfaces.

And it has been proven in our history, twice, or three times because of the so-called “EDSA Tres” when the followers of then President Joseph Estrada took to the streets to protest his ouster in January 2001, now called EDSA II.

Did the reforms sought by RAM converge with the gains of EDSA I?

Right now, our miscalculation was in believing that these reforms could happen because of a single event. EDSA I was relatively bloodless, and compared to other revolutions in other countries, easy. Everyone thought it was a very clear opportunity for fundamental changes, and that it would happen soon. Now after one generation, it appears we have a long way to go.

Join in nation-building

At this point in my life, there is little room for regret. In fact, my preoccupation now is building for the nextgeneration, helping.

Nobody, including the assassinated father of President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III, ever said it was going to be easy. The late Sen. Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. said all leaders after President Marcos would have quite a formidable task.

We can’t give up. People power has to be manifested in some imaginative, innovative way. Not in the streets, but in the hearts and minds of our people.

We have to keep plodding on and working hard. We can’t relegate this to the task of one man, even a president. All of us, no exception, must go outside our comfort zones and participate in nation-building or rebuilding, recognizing that the minimum requirement is sacrifice. Unless we are prepared to do that we’ll keep on reminiscing what would have happened after EDSA 1986.

We can’t stop. We can’t say, “Forget the whole thing.” In my case, I was born here, I intend to die here. And if possible I will convince my children and grandchildren to stay here. This is such a beautiful country, with all its problems.

No comments:

Post a Comment