History repeating itself: cha-cha again

In 1967, Marcos suffered one of four failures in his political career--he failed to amend the 1935 Constitution through constitutional means. The attempt at changing the charter would have fast-tracked his path to glory without shedding any blood. However, the people failed him. It was only in 1972 when he achieved what he wanted--absolute power through a constitutional dictatorship.

Forty years past and now we see another attempt at charter change. Arroyo, the beneficiary of an illegitimate power grab, wants to change the charter, ostensibly to address one major issue--the increasing Bangsamoro insurgency. Spokesmen of Arroyo are now going the rounds, convincing the people of the necessity of changing the charter to honor the commitment of the government in granting ancestral domain to the Bangsamoro people. Peace adviser Jesus Dureza revealed that the administration decided to again revive the Cha-cha train to honor its commitment last November 2007 to the MILF on the granting of ancestral domain.

I studied the Constitution and found that, yes, the GRP needs to amend the Charter to accommodate the ancestral domain issue. However noble the intention is, unfortunately, this cha-cha thing came at the worst time. It came at a time when Arroyo is nearing the end of her term. Obviously, people will suspect the real intention of the government in reviving cha-cha. It likewise verified earlier reports and suspicions that Arroyo and her gang of thieves want to use the Bangsamoro Question to justify a change in the structure of government. And we know who will benefit from such a change--Arroyo.

Marcos used the Communist bogey in justifying martial law. Now, Arroyo is using the Bangsamoro for her own nefarious scheme. It is quite obvious that Arroyo will use all means to justify a change in the charter.

This early, there are reports that government will use its barangay network to again, muster enough signatures for cha-cha. Late January, Congress thru Cong. Ortega (an Arroyo stooge) will revive cha-cha talks on the committee level.

Reports reaching NPR revealed that government is preparing its security forces to provoke the MILF for another round of war. Expect bombings in the name of cha-cha to again hug the headlines. Expect a "rise" in "terrorist" activities, ostensibly to prove to the Filipino people on the necessity of charter-change.

Opposition groups know about this Arroyo scheme. That's why these camps floated the issue about certain personalities running for 2010. What will these groups do in the event that Arroyo, indeed, force her way for cha-cha? Apparently, Arroyo does not want elections in 2010.

What would Roxas and the Liberal Party do? How about the Nationalista Party of Senator Villar? And more so, Lakas?

It seems that 2008 will be quite an interesting year for all political forces because this early, this administration has shown that it will do everything in its power to perpetuate itself beyond 2010.

Civilian or Military rule?

Why is there a debate on who’s better to rule this country—civilians or the military? Some columnists say that the reason why some people disagree with what happened in 29 November 2007 is the apparent fear of some civil society members on the prospect of military rule. Why will we fear military rule when, for all intents and purposes, civilian rule has proven to be quite ineffective in governance? Also, this debate should not be discussed at this point because it is quite evident that we have’nt yet succeeded in weakening Arroyo.

After the November 29 siege of the Peninsula, momentum has considerably lessened. Like magic, talks about the ZTE, the palace bribery and the rising graft incidence have all but vanished. We don’t see Senators scrambling to initiate the ZTE probe. Nor do we see Cayetano or Escudero hammering Malacanan for a repeat bout. Even the presidentiables, namely Villar, Roxas and Legarda have all clammed up. Why?

The inability of these personalities to finish what they have started in the first place shows their true character. This tendency to grandstand for the sake of their political careers bolster public demands for the abolition of this “hallowed” chamber. Obviously, these senators were asked by the palace not to rock the boat, when, senators should consider the primary interest of the public to know than national security.

Going back, for the past few years, civilians have proven to be quite ineffective in governance. What’s wrong with testing military rule? Those who argue against military rule use the Marcos dictatorship as an example.

The Marcos dictatorship is not, I say, not an argument against military rule. This form of governance was not purely military. It’s a civilian-led dictatorship. Filipinos have not tried military rule. And to write against it at this point is premature.

What groups should need to ask themselves is this— how will they strengthen their ranks in the fight against Arroyo. What are the common tasks and points they need to push this fight to its logical conclusion?

Wittingly or unwittingly, these armchair revolutionaries are allowing themselves to participate in the psywar being done by the ruling clique. By using their time and resources debating on who's better, these groups should instead sit down and strategize. Arroyo is slowly regaining her bearings and it will be just a matter of time before she regains full strength. When that happens, two scenarios are sure to happen: No-elections and continued conjugal dictatorship.

Its time to act rather than talk.