Editorial
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:10:00 12/05/2010
WHO IS the enemy, exactly? The New People’s Army, of course, according to the Philippine Army. And who is the NPA? Again, according to the Army, it could be anyone, particularly if he has already been killed in an Army operation. More importantly, anyone who gets caught in the crossfire is just unlucky—and none of it is the Army’s fault.
On December 2, Army soldiers in San Francisco, Lucena engaged in a gun battle with gunmen who had hijacked a bus after robbing a hardware store. Three civilian passengers on the bus were killed and in the immediate aftermath, the Army actually identified those three casualties as—you guessed it—members of the NPA, armed communist guerrillas.
Except that they weren’t. The police would make the correction later on, but the Army still maintained that NPA operatives had indeed been spotted in San Francisco. The Army seems to think it was an understandable error. The three civilians were unlucky enough to have been mowed down in the crossfire, but the military almost turned them into enemy combatants; it was a good thing that the police sorted it out, and maybe the military has gotten too used to identifying anyone it kills as communist insurgents, as if that is reason enough to forgive the killings.
Maybe we have let the military get away with using the red scare card just one time too many. Not only have we been slow to ask questions about the identity of casualties but perhaps we also let the Army shoot first and ask questions later.
Another recent tragedy involved one of our best and brightest: botanist Leonard Co was shot dead, along with two others, in yet another alleged crossfire between the military and communist insurgents on November 15 in Leyte’s Kananga town.
In the aftermath, the local Army commander, Lt. Col. Federico Tutaan, said he regretted the deaths but justified the government soldiers’ presence in Kananga—they were, of course, hunting communist rebels in the area. “It was just too unfortunate that our men, the NPA members and the civilians were in the same place at the same time,” Tutaan said. “It was a legitimate military operation. But we are very, very remorseful over what happened.”
Again, the hunt for the bogeyman that is the communist NPA is carted out to explain away what may actually be another lapse in judgment on the part of the military. Maybe it is time to ask the questions again. Does the act of identifying the deadly encounter as a legitimate military operation make up for the fact that civilians are killed? Are we so used to the idea of innocent people dying as collateral damage every time the Army allegedly engages the insurgents? When will the numbers add up to action on our part?
The Commission on Human Rights has been keeping itself busy, looking into the often bloody result of encounters between the Army and the NPA. But the impunity, the sheer brazenness of the military classifying each and every encounter resulting in civilian deaths as a legitimate military operation may have been a product of our own indifference.
Perhaps it is our fault that the military gets away with this kind of thinking. We live in our own world, untouched by the idea of immediate danger or the loss of loved ones by accident, so we are content to let the military do whatever it deems necessary for its primary objective: to protect the people—even if it results in the death of those same people, as long as it is, of course, a legitimate military operation.
We have neglected those questions for way too long. Perhaps it is something inherent in us. So we have been taught to trust and support our authorities, even if we occasionally have to turn our heads and hide our disbelief in some of the military’s more implausible explanation. Much is expected of those we have entrusted with the duty of defending us, and it is required that they meet those expectations, perhaps even surpass them. We must not make excuses for them. Too many people have gone missing without proper accounting. Too many people remain in military custody. After all, if you ask the military, every town is crawling with insurgents and every casualty is an NPA agent.
The military serves an important purpose, but it must achieve that purpose without subterfuge or recklessness. It must admit errors when errors are committed, and stop hiding behind the ambiguous menace of the communist movement. We rely on the military for this, but we must learn to ask the right questions and it must give us the unobscured answers. The military must defend us, yes, and it must start by telling us the truth.
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
No crossfire
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 04:11:00 11/22/2010
Some old habits die hard; in the case of the country’s security forces, the excuses they learned under Marcos and military rule (in those dark days, the police was “integrated” into the Armed Forces) were reinforced during the ascendancy of the military in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s latter years in office, and today continue to be in heavy use. When suspects or alleged rebels die in mysterious circumstances, and they happen to be armed, chances are the deaths will be classified as coming from a “shootout” or an “encounter.” When the victims are civilians, and definitely unarmed, their deaths will be reported as the unfortunate result of a “crossfire.”
It was almost inevitable, then, that the deaths of one of the country’s leading botanists, Leonardo Co, and two of his companions, forest guard Sofronio Cortez and farmer Julio Borromeo, around noon a week ago today, were attributed by the AFP to crossfire from an alleged encounter in the forests of Kananga, Leyte between troops of the Army’s 19th Infantry Battalion and the communist New People’s Army.
Unfortunately for the military’s version of the story, two more of Co’s companions survived, and their eyewitness accounts are not only riveting; they are different from the AFP’s.
Policarpio Balute, 33, recalled the crucial moment in an interview with the Inquirer’s Joey Gabieta. “During that time, we kept on cracking jokes to Doc’s amusement [referring to Professor Co]. It was raining. Then suddenly, we heard successive bursts of gunfire. The doctor asked us all to lie down on the ground so we would not be hit.”
He added: “I saw the doctor, raising ... both hands, crying, pleading for them to stop firing at us. But his pleadings were ignored by them as they kept on firing towards our direction.”
In an earlier interview, Balute said there was no answering fire. He could not see who was shooting at them from 30 or 40 meters away but, as an early Inquirer report put it, “did not hear any responding volley of shots from any direction that could indicate that the soldiers and rebels were engaged in battle.”
In his second interview, Balute said he did not know if NPA rebels were in the area. He did say that “At that time, we were the only people there.”
To insinuations that Co and company should not have been in the area in the first place, both the company that hired them and Co’s grief-stricken colleagues in academe issued pointed rejoinders.
The Energy Development Corp., part of the Lopez group of companies, released a statement confirming that it had in fact notified the military, through the 8th Infantry Division, that Co would be working in the area. “What we know is that EDC informed the Philippine Army Command responsible for security in the area of Professor Co’s planned route and activities, and had received positive confirmation for them to proceed before they entered the area.” In another statement, EDC identified Co as a biodiversity consultant for the EDC, helping the company implement its “Binhi” reforestation program; Cortez as a member of the Tongonan Farmer’s Association; and Borromeo as belonging to EDC’s Community Partnerships Department.
At a University of the Philippines tribute to Co, colleague Perry Ong, a wildlife biologist, said experts like Co had “lasted this long” doing risky research and work because they precisely did not take any chances. Co would not have been in the area if the military had not been notified, he said. “We go to far-flung places. We wouldn’t have lasted this long if we were reckless or adventurous and just went to a place [without clearance from authorities]. The mere fact that I’m alive and that he was alive up until Monday ... We have been in the forests for 20, 30 years, and we were able to come back alive. Our motto was always ‘safety first.’”
If there was in fact no rebel force that engaged soldiers of the 19th Infantry Battalion on Nov. 15, then we can be certain that that Army unit’s motto was the old military classic: “Shoot first, ask questions later.”
We join our voice to the growing chorus of outrage, and call on the police in the area, the Armed Forces top brass, the Commission on Human Rights, and even the Senate to conduct in parallel a speedy and impartial investigation. The military has said it will cooperate, and has expressed its regrets at the unfortunate loss of life. That’s a start; let no one mistake it for the end.
First Posted 04:11:00 11/22/2010
Some old habits die hard; in the case of the country’s security forces, the excuses they learned under Marcos and military rule (in those dark days, the police was “integrated” into the Armed Forces) were reinforced during the ascendancy of the military in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s latter years in office, and today continue to be in heavy use. When suspects or alleged rebels die in mysterious circumstances, and they happen to be armed, chances are the deaths will be classified as coming from a “shootout” or an “encounter.” When the victims are civilians, and definitely unarmed, their deaths will be reported as the unfortunate result of a “crossfire.”
It was almost inevitable, then, that the deaths of one of the country’s leading botanists, Leonardo Co, and two of his companions, forest guard Sofronio Cortez and farmer Julio Borromeo, around noon a week ago today, were attributed by the AFP to crossfire from an alleged encounter in the forests of Kananga, Leyte between troops of the Army’s 19th Infantry Battalion and the communist New People’s Army.
Unfortunately for the military’s version of the story, two more of Co’s companions survived, and their eyewitness accounts are not only riveting; they are different from the AFP’s.
Policarpio Balute, 33, recalled the crucial moment in an interview with the Inquirer’s Joey Gabieta. “During that time, we kept on cracking jokes to Doc’s amusement [referring to Professor Co]. It was raining. Then suddenly, we heard successive bursts of gunfire. The doctor asked us all to lie down on the ground so we would not be hit.”
He added: “I saw the doctor, raising ... both hands, crying, pleading for them to stop firing at us. But his pleadings were ignored by them as they kept on firing towards our direction.”
In an earlier interview, Balute said there was no answering fire. He could not see who was shooting at them from 30 or 40 meters away but, as an early Inquirer report put it, “did not hear any responding volley of shots from any direction that could indicate that the soldiers and rebels were engaged in battle.”
In his second interview, Balute said he did not know if NPA rebels were in the area. He did say that “At that time, we were the only people there.”
To insinuations that Co and company should not have been in the area in the first place, both the company that hired them and Co’s grief-stricken colleagues in academe issued pointed rejoinders.
The Energy Development Corp., part of the Lopez group of companies, released a statement confirming that it had in fact notified the military, through the 8th Infantry Division, that Co would be working in the area. “What we know is that EDC informed the Philippine Army Command responsible for security in the area of Professor Co’s planned route and activities, and had received positive confirmation for them to proceed before they entered the area.” In another statement, EDC identified Co as a biodiversity consultant for the EDC, helping the company implement its “Binhi” reforestation program; Cortez as a member of the Tongonan Farmer’s Association; and Borromeo as belonging to EDC’s Community Partnerships Department.
At a University of the Philippines tribute to Co, colleague Perry Ong, a wildlife biologist, said experts like Co had “lasted this long” doing risky research and work because they precisely did not take any chances. Co would not have been in the area if the military had not been notified, he said. “We go to far-flung places. We wouldn’t have lasted this long if we were reckless or adventurous and just went to a place [without clearance from authorities]. The mere fact that I’m alive and that he was alive up until Monday ... We have been in the forests for 20, 30 years, and we were able to come back alive. Our motto was always ‘safety first.’”
If there was in fact no rebel force that engaged soldiers of the 19th Infantry Battalion on Nov. 15, then we can be certain that that Army unit’s motto was the old military classic: “Shoot first, ask questions later.”
We join our voice to the growing chorus of outrage, and call on the police in the area, the Armed Forces top brass, the Commission on Human Rights, and even the Senate to conduct in parallel a speedy and impartial investigation. The military has said it will cooperate, and has expressed its regrets at the unfortunate loss of life. That’s a start; let no one mistake it for the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)