WHEN PRESIDENT Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was swept into power last January during the EDSA II protest, hopes were high that finally the Philippines would be rid of corruption and personality-led politics. But sadly less than a year later, GMA is beset with allegations of corruption, of going slow in hunting down corruption, and a husband who seems intent on bringing her down no matter what.
Add to all of these problems the constant rumors of military coups that regularly sweep the nation, and you have the ingredients that nearly take the Philippines to the edge of being a real banana republic.
After vigorously going after the alleged drug-related crimes of Sen. Panfilo Lacson, and GMA warning that the country was in the grip of narco-politics, her administration has curiously gone silent on this issue. Perhaps more worryingly, her husband, Jose Miguel “Mike” Arroyo, seems determined to get as many of his friends appointed to cushy government positions. As Neal Cruz so rightly pointed out in a recent column in the Inquirer, Mike Arroyo tries hard to be in the media spotlight as much as his wife is. The obvious problem here is that she’s the president and he’s not. GMA should have learned the lesson that former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto learned when her extremely sleazy husband Asif Zardari helped have her government be dismissed. To this day, Zardari is sitting in a Karachi jail on corruption charges, while she fled the country to escape arrest. Does GMA want the same fate?
Already the People’s Consultative Assembly (PCA), a church-based civic group that helped install GMA last January, issued a warning this week to GMA that she should get rid of all presidential appointees linked to her husband within 30 days. If she doesn’t comply, they threatened to ask for her removal “by whatever worthy” means.
GMA must be worried by this sudden outburst of an NGO, especially given the fact that she has relied upon a broad coalition of NGOs to give her administration the semblance of moral ascendancy and popular support. What has obviously happened, is that GMA has not been able to maintain the squeaky-clean image she had after plunging into the daily grind of Philippine politics, which is hardly known as a place of high morals and good intentions. Add to that a persistent husband, who must constantly be pestering her for government appointments for his friends, and peddling her name to try and land juicy business deals (remember the failed telecommunications deal he was linked to?), and you have a recipe for disaster.
GMA must resist all of these competing forces and remain focused on her original goals of ridding Philippine politics of patronage and corruption. I know how hard it is to resist the persistent and emotional appeals of a loved one, but the president must block out these emotional blackmail attempts by the first gentleman. Filipinos have had enough personality-driven politics to last several lifetimes with the Marcoses and the Estradas.
****
Is torture ever acceptable?
THE UNITED STATES is seriously considering whether or not it can torture some of the suspects it arrested following the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. Reports say the FBI is growing restless because more than a month after the attacks, and key suspects have refused to divulge any information they may have.
The FBI is also thinking of using a truth serum on these suspects, but if they were tortured they would have to be first sent to a country whose laws allow torture. Not to worry, because the US has many willing allies, among them Israel, where torture is permitted.
An extremely interesting article discussing the legal ramifications of torturing the suspects appeared in the Oct. 19 issue of the online magazine Slate (http://slate.msn.com/). “Tortured Justice” by Dahlia Lithwick reveals that Philippine intelligence agents tortured a terrorist in 1995 to gain vital information on planned bombings of US airliners over the Pacific: “There is no doubt that torturing terrorists and their associates for information works. In 1995, Philippine intelligence agents allegedly tortured Abdul Hakim Murad, whom they arrested after he blew up his apartment making bombs. The agents threw a chair at Murad’s head, broke his ribs, forced water into his mouth, and put cigarettes out on his genitals, but Murad didn’t speak until agents masquerading as the Mossad threatened to take him back to Israel for some real questioning. Murad named names. His confession included details of a plot to kill Pope John Paul II, as well as plots to crash 11 US airliners into the ocean and fly an airplane into the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. His co-conspirator Ramzi Yousef was later convicted for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.” Lithwick concludes that although US citizens have many layers of legal protection against being tortured under the US Constitution, foreigners do not. Chilling indeed.
****
When censorship is a good thing
I CAN’T believe I would ever be espousing censorship, but the recent US government request to US television networks to curtail broadcasts of Al-Qaeda video announcements was a necessary step.
The US government justified their request by claiming that secret messages, intended for Osama Bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda operatives around the globe, might be contained in these video announcements. I think a curtailment is necessary not for that reason, but because they are so full of hate and venom. The latest one released a few weeks ago, had Bin Laden’s Kuwaiti right-hand man spewing the most vitriolic anti-Western hate I have ever heard. It was chilling, upsetting and absolutely revolting to watch. Why Al-Jazeera insists on broadcasting every little piece of hate that Al-Qaeda spews forth is beyond comprehension.
France and Germany have both long banned hate-speech, and perhaps it is time the US does the same. It is true that nowadays most people have the right to think whatever they like and to express it. We also have the right and responsibility to not listen to it and broadcast it. Al-Qaeda is projecting an entirely wrong picture of Islam and Muslims to Westerners, many of whom already think we Muslims are out to get them. Thankfully saner voices are speaking out, such as the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, who on Wednesday reiterated that it was not all right to kill non-Muslims in Muslim countries. We need more moderate and right-thinking Muslims to come forward and speak out against the violence and bloody-mindedness of Bin Laden and his followers. Change the channel please!
