No Philippines apocalypse yet

Press, 19 December 1985, Page 14

No Philippines apocalypse yet

From “The Economist,” London

How many communist guerrillas are there in the Philippines? About 12,500, according to the Government; perhaps 20,000, say American diplomats in the Philippines; more than 30,000, according to Mr David Durenberger, chairman of the United States Senate’s Intelligence Committee. How effective are they?

They are short of arms and money, say journalists and others who have met members of the communist New People’s army (N.P.A.). They control “or are contesting control” of nearly 20 per cent of the population, says Mr Durenberger. The “facts” get murkier. What do the guerrillas believe in?

Their literature is nationalist as much as communist; it is antiAmerican, of course, but also rejects Russian interference. The guerrillas are “avidly courting the

Soviet Union,” according to this month’s “Commentary,” a conservative high-brow magazine published by the American Jewish Committee. How long will it take to defeat the guerrillas? About a year, says President Marcos. At least a decade, according to his Defence Minister. The next three years will be crucial, according to America’s Central Intelligence Agency. There are communist guerrillas in the Philippines and they operate, with varying degrees of strength, in much of the country, particularly in rural districts on the southern islands of Mindanao and Samar. That much is known; the rest is mostly guesswork. Some of it is self-serving. President Marcos has been adept at using the threat of communism to extract large amounts of military aid from the Ameri-

cans. The'Philippine Government claims that its figure of 12,500 guerrillas is a careful tally of communists, each known by name to the army.

It is probably no more reliable than other published figures. But it is nicely judged: high enough to suggest that the communist threat must be taken seriously, but low enough to support Mr Marcos’s contention that it is being contained.

This is the sort of factoid expected of the Philippines Government. But equally suspect are the assertions used to support the arguments of some Americans that the Philippines will go the way of Iran or Vietnam, and that the guerrillas of the N.P.A. are like Kampuchea’s Khmers Rouges. The Catholic Philippines does not offer the revolutionary tinder of Muslim Iran; neither does it have a communist neighbour exporting revolution and supplies as China did to the Vietcong; and,

brutal though the guerrilla war is on both sides, no communist leader has emerged with the murderous credentials of Kampuchea’s Pol Pot.

Communism is a possible threat to the Philippines, but the Philippine communists have been a failure so far. In a country with high employment, a corrupt Government, and an often undisciplined army that menaces the people it is supposed to protect, the guerrillas have been able to recruit at most 30,000 people out of a population of 55 million.

Throwing out the Americans from their two huge military bases may sound like powerful propaganda, but many Filipinos admire America; more than 10 million Filipinos have relatives in the United States, many of them sending back money that makes life easier to bear. Lieutenant-General Fidel Ramos,. who acted as armed forces Chief of Staff while General Ver

was on trial, has reduced the communists’ chances of taking over the country. Soldiers are getting shod, lorries are being repaired, orders are more often being obeyed. General Ramos has become rather too popular for President Marcos’s liking and will probably be shunted off. His reforms, welcomed with enthusiasm by other professionally-minded officers, are likely to be continued. Any good news in the Philippines is bad news ffor the communists; but even if Mr Marcos and his friends continue to bleed the economy for their own benefit, the “masses” are unlikely to rise in any great numbers. It took them more than 300 years to rise successfully against the Spaniards. Don’t expect apocalyptic happenings in the Philippines; any changes, whether for the worse or the better, are likely to be, as they have been in the past, grindingly slow. Copyright, "The Economist.”