Severe test for Philippines

Press, 6 February 1986, Page 16

Severe test for Philippines

Tomorrow’s election in the Philippines will have important repercussions for the Pacific as well as for the troubled archipelago. JOHN LAIRD, formerly a Reuter correspondent in Bangkok and later a correspondent for Associated Press, reports for “The Press” from Manila.

Uncertainty hangs in the air of this bustling capital as the Philippines approaches the severest political test in its 39 years of independence: the presidential election tomorrow will pit the ailing but entrenched President Ferdinand Marcos against the politically inexperienced Corazon (Cory) Aquino, widow of the slain opposition leader, Benigno Aquino. Campaign rhetoric from both sides has raised the temperature of the contest to such an extent that some foreign diplomats here fear a degree of turmoil after the election. Mrs Aquino has vowed to put Mr Marcos on trial should she win, saying that there are probably thousands of Marcos victims in the Philippines. Mr Marcos has warned that civil war would result from such an action, and has accused Mrs Aquino of being close to the country’s communist movement. He has vowed not to allow her to win.

Observers have formulated three possible scenarios for the election, and events following it: © Mr Marcos wins the poll from ballot casting that is perceived to be reasonably free from interference. Predictions are that this would lead to a relatively stable situation after the election, with the Marcos machine still in place but with the present economic decline likely to continue and with the possibility of a deeper crisis later.

© Mr Marcos wins amid widespread cries of vote-buying and voter intimidation. Predictions are that this would polarise the country, with a big defection of moderate opposition to the Left, and increased political strife to the benefit of the communists.

© The opposition wins and is installed in power. Predictions are that the inexperience of Mrs

Aquino and differences among the opposition groups now supporting her would lead to some internal Government turmoil and conflict with vested interests set up under Mr Marcos. However, such a victory would break the present monopoly of power and leave room for political and economic reform.

Another possibility being talked about here is that Mr Marcos may use his power to change the outcome of the election. For example, section 77 of the electoral law allows him to withdraw either his name or the name of his vice-presidential running mate up until noon of election day. Mrs Aquino has already charged that Mr Marcos may step down in favour of his wife, Imelda, thus attempting to set up a family dynasty in the Philippines.

The law also allows the National Assembly 15 days to officially announce the winner after voting takes place, and allows another 10 days before the president is sworn in. Mr Marcos would retain power and control of the army during this period. The Americans have become deeply involved in this election in their former colony, and have drawn charges of political interference in the pro-Govern-ment press here. Two affronts to President Marcos have been singled out: well-timed articles in the American press questioning his record as a war hero; and widely-publicised allegations to a United States Congressional panel that the Marcos family has skimmed off hundreds, if not thousands, of millions of dollars from the Philippines and secretly invested it in the United States. The United States Ambassador to the Philippines, Stephen Bosworth, drew charges of interference over a speech to a Manila

Rotary meeting on January 29, which the pro-Govemment press called "insulting to the sovereignty of the Philippine Government” and “foreign intervention in the election.” Mr Bosworth had cited the controversy over the issue of equitable access to media by both candidates, had deplored increasing electoral violence (14 campaign workers had been killed at that point), and had referred to “innumerable rumours of irregular election activities — alleged bribery of poll watchers and inspectors, of attempts at vote buying, and armed persons intimidating prospective poll inspectors and voters.”

Like it or not, whatever Government emerges after tomorrow will continue to depend heavily on the United States for national recovery. The Philippines has a foreign debt of $U535,000 million, mostly to United States banks, and the gross national product has declined by around 4 to 5 per cent in each of the last two years. The line from Washington has been that “we believe we can work constructively with any democratically-elected Government in Manila,” in the words of the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, Paul Wolfowitz. He made it clear, however, that the administration expects big changes from the next Government:

“Our Philippine policy rests on the basic judgment that fundamental political, economic, and military reforms are needed urgently — first to restore stability, growth, and confidence; and, second, to halt the growth of a brutal and dangerous communist insurgency.”' Although many observers see disaffection for the Marcos regime as partly responsible for rapid growth in the insurgency in recent years, the wily President has managed to make his “procommunist” charges stick to Mrs Aquino in much of the public mind. He has repeatedly charged that she would introduce com-

munists into her cabinet; Mrs Aquino denies she ever said that, but has been thrown on the defensive. Mr Marcos has also been able to exploit her political inexperience as an issue. The President has also tugged the Government’s financial strings to his advantage: lowering the price of petrol and petroleum products, ordering large sums of Government money released to pay sugar planters and workers, drastically lowering interest rates on current loans to

planters, and exempting agricultural co-operatives from income and sales tax until 1991, among other measures.

Foreign diplomats agree that in many ways the Philippines is a. “dream gone wrong.” In the 1950 s and 1960 s it was an economic leader in South-East Asia. It had one of the best-educated workforces in the region and a high rate of literacy. When Mr Marcos took power in 1965, he was immensely popular, and was supported by Filipinos in 1.972 when he declared martial law, enabling him to disarm the gunmen who were terrorising society.

The plunge into continuing political and economic crisis came in August, 1983, with the assassination of the opposition leader, Benigno Aquino, while he was in military custody at Manila airport.

However, there are rays of hope in this election. An independent citizens’ watchdog organisation, the National Movement for Free Elections, has increased in strength since its appearance in 1984, and hopes to field 100,000 observers to compute tallies and keep a close watch on the movement of ballot boxes.

The winner of the election is hard to pick — some observers guessing that the opposition has an edge, some putting more faith in the enormous Marcos machine. Whatever the outcome, this election promises to be a candidate for international media event of the year, with more than 1000 foreign journalists expected by polling day.