Political pundits have been abuzz this week in Manila, comparing the failed business-military coup in Venezuela last week to the EDSA II coup that took place last year. In what must have been the shortest-lived coup ever, populist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was deposed for less than two days before being restored to power on Sunday.

Sen. Rodolfo Biazon warned on Tuesday that deposed President Joseph Estrada might try to do a Chavez on May 1, of course with military backing. As “proof” for his theory, Biazon, who is himself a former general, said that there was grumbling within military ranks over President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s choice to head the military. Arroyo’s hints that she is leaning toward appointing Southern Command chief Lt. Gen. Roy Cimatu as the new chief of staff has not gone down well in some military quarters.

The Daily Tribune, a pro-Estrada newspaper headed by Niñez Cacho-Olivares, in an editorial entitled “Learning from Venezuela,” said: “An episode in the Philippines akin to the dramatic occurrence in Venezuela may have to be necessary to undo the constitutional aberration of Gloria Arroyo’s takeover of power from Joseph Estrada.

“To date, questions linger over the process of succession that was supposedly key to Gloria’s assumption of power .… When the Venezuelan elite and a few military commanders staged a coup against the populist President Hugo Chavez and installed Pedro Carmona, a businessman who led anti-Chavez demonstrations, the plotters from the very start knew they would be clutching at straws in defending the constitutionality of the takeover,” says the Tribune. “While all’s well that ends well in Venezuela, with a democratically elected president back in power, the situation is far from settled here in the Philippines. The deposed president never said he resigned and a resignation paper was never produced. The unresolved questions on the transfer of power... would remain an aberration that would hound future administrations.”

I beg to differ with the Tribune’s analysis of both coups. In the first place Estrada was never pals with the communists, unlike Chavez who is best friends with Cuba’s dictator Fidel Castro. Indeed, thousands of Cuban doctors and teachers were sent to Venezuela to work in exchange for Venezuelan oil supplies. Although Estrada professed to back pro-poor policies when he was in power, that hardly meant he was going to tax the rich more to give more to the poor. Chavez, in contrast, is much more into pro-masses rhetoric and was hinting at taking more control over Venezuela’s vital oil supplies.

Undoubtedly, Chavez’s increasingly strident rhetoric had Washington on high alert, watching every single move of Chavez. It is not surprising that it was the head of the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce, Pedro Carmona, who took over briefly when Chavez was deposed for one-and-a-half days.

Notably, it was the upper ranks of the Venezuelan oil company that was rankled when Chavez dismissed 11 top managers of the company a few weeks ago. This was the final anti-capitalist act of Chavez that gave the green light to the business community to plot the coup and execute it. Undoubtedly, the United States gave the green light to go ahead with the coup attempt, wishing all the time that a pro-business leader would be installed instead of the populist and hard-to-control Chavez.

The New York Times has been running a series of articles over the past few days quoting anonymous Bush administration officials who have admitted to having been in contact with the coup plotters days before the coup attempt. Assistant Secretary of State for Latin America Otto Reich, a well-known hawk and anti-Castro Cuban immigrant to the US, allegedly even pleaded with the coup leaders to leave the Venezuelan Congress in place when they took over. Of course, they ignored his advice and dissolved the Congress.

Which brings me to the main difference between Estrada and Chavez: One is being tried for massive corruption, the other is not. Unlike Estrada, Chavez has not to date been caught with his hand in the cash register taking millions of dollars in bribes. This is a key fact that makes all the difference. Chavez may be disliked by the business community and the US government for his pro-poor leanings and friendship with Cuba, but he hasn’t been shown to be corrupt yet.

I don’t think the Philippine military will be swayed to back another coup on May 1. Although Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo’s accession to the presidency leaves much to be desired, she seems to have captured the support of most Filipinos and has managed to control the rampant corruption that flourished under the Estrada administration.

****

OFWs, not GMA, should be on peso bill

THE BROUHAHA that has erupted over the new 200-peso bill, and whether or nor President Arroyo should appear on it, is a healthy one.

The government only this week announced its plan to issue the new bill on June 12, Independence Fay, with former President Diosdado Macapagal on one side and his daughter, the current president, on the other. Opposition Rep. Gilbert Remulla of Cavite was the first to object to GMA’s face appearing on the new bill, saying that no president had appeared on Philippine currency while in office except for the late Ferdinand Marcos.

The president reacted to this on Wednesday saying she really didn’t care whether her face appeared on the currency or not. That’s all fine and easy to say now, but I want to know why the whole issue of who would appear on the new currency wasn’t put before Congress and the public before this week? According to news reports, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas approved plans for the new bill in April 2001, a year ago. President Arroyo approved the new bill and design shortly afterwards.

The BSP is now saying that it doesn’t have enough time to redesign the printing plates for the new bill in time for a June 12 launch. Which leaves only President Arroyo to blame for this whole mess. She knew Estrada supporters and others would object to her likeness being sworn in on EDSA appearing on the bill, yet she kept mum about it until it was too late to change the design.

The BSP should go ahead with the original design, showing both Macapagals, but print only a limited run. These would then become collectors’ items, while a new 200-peso bill without GMA on it could be produced later.

Perhaps OFWs, the saviors of the Philippine economy, could figure on the new bill? They deserve it much more after all, don’t you agree?

****

Comments or questions? Email the author at: [email protected].

****

Visit the author’s website at http://www.manilamoods.com to read past columns and those of guest writers.