When the year-long kidnapping of the American missionary couple Gracia and Martin Burnham, and of Filipino nurse Ediborah Yap, was over, the news was flashed around the world last Friday. Far from being a triumphant rescue by the Philippine military, it was a messy one done, in the words of the US ambassador to the Philippines, in dense jungle and driving rain. Martin and Ediborah were both killed in the operation. Initial reports said that the Abu Sayyaf had executed both when they realized they were under attack. Later reports changed that story and said they had been shot in the crossfire.
Whatever the truth may be, Gracia was shot in the leg, and turned out to be the sole survivor. What is galling about the whole story is that at the end according to Gracia herself, she, Martin and Ediborah were being guarded by only 10 teenage Abu Sayyaf rebels, of which only seven were armed. It is true though that when they were first kidnapped in May 2001, over 200 Abu Sayyaf men guarded them. But that number quickly dwindled, until it reached last week’s number of 10.
Many observers of the rescue attempt have been reluctant to blame the Philippine military for its deadly outcome, claiming that jungle conditions made the situation especially hard to resolve. I find this hard to believe. While the Philippine military finds it easy to round up hundreds of Abu Sayyaf suspects in Basilan based on them having names similar to those of Abu Sayyaf rebels, or because they sport a goatee, it cannot find and rescue hostages for over one year! At one point last December, the military was supposed to have cornered the Abu Sayyaf and their hostages within a 3-kilometer square area in Basilan. Even then, the kidnappers managed to give the military the slip and move somewhere else.
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo tried to score political points by spending the night in Lamitan town, Basilan, Ediborah’s home town, and celebrating Independence Day there yesterday morning. Of course, this was supposed to be a symbolic-laden event meant to honor Ediborah and also to show the Abu Sayyaf how unafraid the president and the government are of them. Many of Lamitan’s townspeople thought otherwise, blaming the military for a botched rescue attempt. (Readers should remember that the Abu Sayyaf kidnappers swept through Lamitan town last year, snatching up Ediborah as another kidnap victim, and seeking refuge in the town’s hospital. This is where some claim the Philippine military allegedly accepted millions of pesos to let the Abu Sayyaf escape with their victims.)
The town’s parish priest Cirilo Nacorda, himself a former Abu Sayyaf kidnap victim, is a harsh critic of the Philippine military, saying that they need more involvement of the US military troops now in the Philippines to finish off the Abu Sayyaf. This is not a popular viewpoint in the Philippines because of strong nationalistic feelings, but he may be right.
In the meantime, both the Philippine and US governments should launch full-scale investigations on the botched rescue attempt so as to identify what went wrong and how such long standoffs can be avoided in the future. Unfortunately, US Ambassador Francis Ricciardone said Washington does not plan a formal investigation on whether the rescue attempt was done properly. That is shortsighted. The Abu Sayyaf are still around and more Americans could be kidnapped in the future in the Philippines. Shouldn’t the US government learn something from the death of Martin Burnham? Or did he die in vain? I hope not.
* * * *
No Saudi employers rewarded by DOLE
PHILIPPINE Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Rafael E. Seguis wrote to me this week to clarify some points made in my May 31 column “Why Sto. Tomas is wrong on OFWs”.
I’m glad to now report that the Philippine Department of Labor and Employment did not award Saudi employers who had been the subject of complaints by Filipino workers. I had reported that 52 Saudi employers, including some errant ones, had been given certificates of appreciation by DOLE, on the occasion of Labor Secretary Patricia Santo Tomas’ official visit to the Kingdom. This was not the case, according to Seguis, who clarified that some errant employers were also invited to a dinner as a way of encouraging them to improve their relations with their Filipino workers.
“The dinner hosted for selected Saudi employers on 25 May 2002 was mainly an occasion to express appreciation to the Saudi employers who continue to believe in the capability and talent of the Filipino workforce and encourage them to provide more jobs for Filipino workers. We also wanted to urge major employment providers who were subjects of complaints by some Filipino workers to improve their relations with Filipino workers. None of these guests received an award, period,” wrote Seguis.
Seguis further complained that I quoted Sto. Tomas out of context when I criticized her for saying that OFWs should stop feeling kawawa for themselves and take the responsibility for their own destinies. I think I made it clear in my original column that while I in theory agreed with her, the reality of life here as a runaway or stranded worker is extremely harsh. Harsh enough to make anyone feel kawawa. I was offended by the way the secretary was quoted as saying that there were only 4,000 OFWs in distress in the Kingdom, and that this number was small. I beg to disagree with the ambassador, and I think many OFWs agree with me on this.
Ambassador Seguis did agree with me though on the need for Saudi laws to provide more protection to housemaids: “The Embassy, though, agrees with your view that domestic workers should enjoy the mantle of protection of the Saudi labor code. The Embassy hopes that the reforms in the Saudi labor law will eventually encompass these workers, who are most vulnerable to potential abuses and contract violations.” In a further attempt at damage control, after so many negative stories appeared during Sto. Tomas’ visit to the Kingdom, the Philippine Embassy in Riyadh released the official talking points transcript of Sto. Tomas’ talks with Saudi Minister of Labor Ali Al-Namlah. The embassy later released a question and answer sheet to further clarify some of the points that were criticized by the press and labor groups in the Philippines.
Nevertheless, the bulk of what has been reported by myself, Arab News and Saudi Gazette about Sto. Tomas’ visit to the Kingdom has been accurate: That unskilled OFWs have seen their minimum wage in Saudi slashed to $150 a month; that quit-claim documents signed in the Kingdom (and authenticated by Philippine diplomatic missions) will be upheld by Philippine courts; that centers for runaway male workers will not be allowed, and that domestic helpers will receive self-defense training in Manila funded by Saudis.
The question and answer sheet tries to put a positive spin on the unskilled worker’s wage issue by pointing out that only 3 percent of OFWs in the Kingdom are unskilled. It further goes on to say that since their wages will now be linked to the daily minimum wage of a non-agricultural worker in the National Capital Region, unskilled workers in the Kingdom will see their wages rise in coming years!
“Basing the wage of the unskilled OFWs on NCR’s minimum wage rate, the Philippine delegation found it more advantageous in the long run because as the minimum wage in the NCR increases, the minimum salary of the unskilled OFWs also appreciates. Hence, it is most likely that in the next three to four years, the minimum wage of the unskilled workers would be even more than the current cap of $200,” says the question and answer sheet.
I’m skeptical about this positive gloss put on the wages that unskilled OFWs will earn. What happens if the peso depreciates to say 60 pesos to the dollar? Instead of pegging a minimum wage on a weak foreign currency, foreign labor providers should push for a Saudi minimum wage paid in riyals. That way we wouldn’t end up with some unskilled workers earning only SR300 ($80) a month.
