Optimist once an exile

Press, 9 February 1989, Page 19

Optimist once an exile

CH’NG POH TIONG, a Singapore writer, meets Raul Manglapus, the 70-year-old Foreign Secretary of the Philippines whose political activities started when he was 19:

“There is a great parallelism between jazz and democracy. In a traditional jam session where you sit down and improvise, you each have your own idea, but somehow you also have a theme. “By following that theme, no matter how different your idea is, in the end you make a harmonious-sounding entirety out of the exercise.

"In democracy, you have your own ideas, but want a theme — national progress — like what we are now recovering. We all have many ideas, different ideas: a free press, where people attack each other every day. But in the end, we’re moving. We are presenting not only a very successful story, but a story that is inspiring." Statesman, lawyer, writer, musician, composer, but most of all, thinker (and some say, stirrer), Raul Manglapus has always had an unyielding passion for jazz, and democracy. When he was only 19, he gave a stirring oration demanding land reform on behalf of the dispossessed. Although then only an academic exercise, (the young student was taking part in an inter-varsity contest), the speech mapped out the path the future professor, senator, exile, and foreign secretary was to travel. Raul Manglapus has always defended democracy and the disadvantaged. Tortured by the Japanese as a prisoner-of-war from 1942 to 1944, he regained freedom in an escape and lived out the war as a newspaper correspondent.. Years later, he was to go through another kind of imprisonment when Ferdinand Marcos imposed martial law in 1972. For 15 years, Manglapus lived the life of an exile in the United States. "I was then leader of the Opposition in the constitutional convention. I had received invitations to go to California for speaking engagements. So I left without realising that the day after, martial law was going to be declared. We knew that Marcos was planning something, but we didn’t think it would happen yet. We thought maybe early the next year. , Although Manglapus was safely in the United States, his. wife, Pacita, and their sons were in Manila. Later, when Pacita Manglapus and the rest of the family asked to join him in exile, they were refused permission. They escaped, island hopping by light plane and boat until they

finally landed in Tawau, Sabah, in eastern Malaysia. With the help of Senator Ong Yoke Lin, then president of the Malaysian Senate and a former ambassador to Washington, the Manglapus family were reunited in the United States.

During his exile, Raul Manglapus lectured extensively. At Cornell University, he was a visiting professor and a senior research associate. The former professor of constitutional law was also a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace, and a fellow at Harvard’s Center For International Affairs. He wrote books and organised the Movement For A Free Philippines to unite all exiles against Marcos. His efforts did not go unnoticed. “In 1978, General Fabian Ver (Marcos’ right-hand man), got someone to try to assassinate me in Chicago. The whole episode was reported in the ‘New York Times.’ The F. 8.1. also knew about it. But the would-be assassin confessed to me what he was asked to do. He will not, however, now admit it because Ver is now in the U.S.”

Manglapus’ relationship with the United States has always been something of a love-hate affair. He is often accused, unfairly, of being anti-American. The conclusion is simplistic. In 1954, Manglapus was the secretary-general of the founding conference of S.E.A.T.O. (SouthEast Asian Treaty Organisation), the now-defunct U.S.-inspired group that advocated regional security. It is also not true that Manglapus is per se against the U.S. bases in Clark and Subic Bay.

"Contrary to impressions, I have never made any statement either before or since I’ve become Foreign Secretary, asking for the immediate removal of the U.S. bases. My involvement with S.E.A.T.O. shows that I am for the idea of collective defence. I have never denied that.

“The trouble with this arrangement (the U.S. 'bases) is that it is. not collective. It is collective benefit but the defence arrangement is only bilateral between the Philippines and the U.S., and I don’t think it is fair to our country to be alone exposed for the rest of the region, and to be alone left with this very domesti-cally-divisive issue.” The anti-American tag is usually pinned on Raul Manglapus by ultra-conversatives, American

or Filipino. When negotiating last October’s financial package for the bases, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. accused Manglapus of running away with the idea that whatever figure the Philippines asked, the U.S. would pay. Not amused, the Foreign Secretary shot back and reminded the U.S. not to regard Filipinos as little brown brothers.

Not all Americans see Manglapus as anti-U.S. In his first year of exile, the Ford Foundation awarded him, a fellowship to research the turn-of-the century period of Philippine-U.S. relations. Instead of producing a thesis, Manglapus wrote “Yankee Panky,” composing the entire libretto, lyrics and music. The musical comedy played to some critical acclaim in New York last September; His composing talent aside (at 19, he wrote his school song), Manglapus also plays the piano, drums and vibrophone with the Executives, a jazz combo he founded in 1960.

Preferring traditional jazz, the likes of W. C. Handy, Glenn Miller and Benny Goodman, Manglapus’ jam-mates have included Thailand’s King Bhumibol and Kampuchea’s Prince Sihanouk (a black-and-white montage in his living room also includes a picture taken with Duke Ellington).

An episode during the June, 1987 Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) foreign ministers meeting in Bangkok reveals the warm feeling the Thai king has for the Philippine Foreign Secretary. At a reception to mark his reign’s forty-third year, the King (who plays the saxophone and clarinet), made a speech to the assembled regional foreign ministers.

After the regal overture, His Highness made a bee-line for Manglapus and in a low but very dignified voice confided, “I don’t know if you’ve heard, but I now play the trumpet.” The Thai monarch also revealed that he also now has a group (apart from the court orchestra) of all-brass instrumentalists, mainly trumpets, that he plays with. Raul Manglapus recalls with much affection the time King Bhumibol visited the Philippines in 1963. The executives were invited to play in the Thai Embassy.

The music went on till 2 or 3 in the morning. The next day, recovering with a siesta, Manglapus (then a senator) was awakened by the maid.

She told him that the Thai ambassador’s wife was at the gate. Rousing himself, the young senator met the diplomat’s wife. “It’s very embarrassing for me. But His Majesty would like another jam session tonight,” she said.

Just as with music, Paul Manglapus learns his languages by ear. He speaks nine Filipino dialects, French, Italian, Japanese (learnt from his captors), Portuguese, and also speaks and reads Latin, Spanish and English.

One of his ambitions is to learn Malay. He was picking up Mandarin not long ago. Today, Raul Manglapus lives in a rented house in one of Manila’s suburbs. While many times more comfortable then the squalor many of his countrymen have to endure, for a top cabinet minister his home may only properly be described as modest.

His carefully-catalogued books testify to a keen mind. Law, philosophy, religions, politics, the arts, and "Brideshead Revisited.” His children, four sons and a daughter, lived many of their formative years in the United States. Only one son, Junior, is now permanently back in the Philippines, having started a prawn hatchery business partnership.

Manglapus has an effortless ability to bring home the point, whether into a comfortable American home unconvinced about more U.S. aid or a Filipino squatter’s hut numbed to politicians’ promises. The 70-year-old politician is convinced that the Philippines will succeed — from negative growth in the last years of the Marcos tyranny to 7 per cent in 1987 and 8 per cent in 1988.

Q: With a new President in the White House, do you see any change in Philippines-U.S. relations? “I think that there will be a certain amount of continuity in the foreign policy of the U.S. There are certainly things that we ourselves would like to see continue, the policy that former President Reagan had been following regarding agreements with the Soviet Union, which have resulted in the lessening of world tensions.

Q: How is all this to benefit the

Philippines? “I think that any reduction of tensions, the idea of mutuality of military withdrawal should it ever materialise, would be of very positive benefit to the Philippines. We alone are carrying the burden of hosting U.S. military bases in South-east Asia. It is not easy politically to bear this burden because it is a very explosive and emotional domestic political issue in this country in view of the Philippines’ unique historical relationship with the U.S.

Q:Before you went to Washington last October to negotiate a financial package for the Clark and Subic Bay bases, you were trying to canvass support from some Asean countries for the U.S. military presence in the Philippines? “Contrary to impressions given, I did not go around canvassing support for the Philippine bases from some Asian countries. I did say that it’s not a fair arrangement. I also said that if it is true what the U.S. has been saying that the other countries in South-east Asia would like the bases to stay, then I said it’s time for these countries to say so openly. And not only that, but to share in the political responsibility for these bases.

Q: How do you perceive that political responsibility?

“Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore is the only head of government that has ever spoken out candidly on this matter. We appreciate his openness. The only other official that is not the head of government to say something similar was the Defence Minister of Malaysia. “In Europe, for example, the burden of hosting American bases for the defence of Europe is not shouldered by one country alone. There’s a whole network of U.S. bases in many countries. But here in this country we are alone.

“And so with due respect to Prime Minister Lee, let me say again that we are very appreciative of what he has said, nevertheless that falls short of what we feel we deserve, the sharing of burden.

“When I say share in the political responsibility, I mean of course somewhat more than just an open statement of support for the American military presence. What we mean is that we should all sit down and formally declare on these bases — whether we

like them or not. If we like them, then let’s say so formally and say that we share in the political responsibility even if these bases stay here in the Philippines only and are not redistributed among the other countries in South-east Asia. The countries should say so formally, and they are to be held responsible, along with the Philippines,- for the presence of the bases. But this is what is not happening.” Q: How stable is the Philippines?

Q: How stable is the Philippines? “We have had escapes from both the Right and the Left because of the failings of our, shall we say, armed forces prison system. Nevertheless, I think this is even more important evidence of our stability — that in spite of the escapes of major figures like army renegade Honasan, that the threat from the right nobody takes seriously. “Now the threat from the Left is going to stay for a little longer. The threat here, if I were to use medical terms, is not terminal, it is chronic. It is chronic and will be there for a while until we are able to resolve with finality and decisiveness our social and economic problems. Q: Was your schooling in Jesuit-run Ateneo de Manila instrumental in your outlook on life?

“The Jesuits felt that you cannot be a completely educated man unless you appreciate the fate of the lesser people in society. That is why I feel that it is not necessary for liberation theology to go to Karl Marx and use his analyses to arrive at the same conclusion which we already arrived at before, namely "that the poor had to be helped, and to organise themselves.” Q. The indictments of the Marcoses in the United States for embezzlement. Is that a coup for the Foreign Department? “I wish I could claim it as a coup for our department, but the credit must go to the P.C.G.G. (Philippine Commission on Good Government). For a long time, the P.C.G.G. was trying to sue the Marcoses and try them extraterritorially in the U.S. for violation of Philippine laws. “The idea to try them in the Philippine Embassy there was even suggested. You see, without a successful lawsuit, the Swiss banks would not release the funds.” Q: How much is at stake? “Who really knows? Billions!”