The Philippine

Government: Military and

Politics
Rafael Kieran Monday AB Philo

Introduction:

The Philippines just as any other nation state needs a proper military and not only this but
the military must work in coordination with the civil government in order to push the national
will and achieve national progress. That is why there must be a symbiotic relationship between
the government and the military, with the politics of each be properly checked and scrutinized.
The current situation in the country is that the military is under the control of the civil
government yet lapses in management, and from time to time the sparks of friction from the two
is observed. The role of the military in the country has been ever changing and evolving, from
the times of the datus and rajahs to the highlight of the military during the Marcos era, and to
now on which it faces incessant internal and external threats. That is why it is important to
understand the history and the different events or roles on which the military was involved
together with the government. A better understanding of the country’s military history and
position makes for a broader and more precise understanding of the state itself.

Topic Outline:

General Objectives:

The study generally aims on giving a better comprehension on the Philippine military
history, framework, scene and its connection to the civil government. It tries to describe these
from the events in which the military and government played parts of and how it affected the
nation. The study will try to drive away from the common showing of information and data by
statistical means and lean towards personalities and important events in order for which to catch
the interest of the students and young readers. In its case it will not forget to state vital dates and
information, and also will try not to reduce the concept of the Philippine military to be as simple
and short while sacrificing the seriousness and importance of raw facts and data.

Specific Objectives:

1. The study aims to give a better understanding on the Philippine military’s past
and present state.
2. The study desires to achieve a brief but reliable and precise review on the major
events in which the Philippine military is a part of.
3. To have a better apprehension on the connection between the Philippine
government and the military.
4. To give and review the past and present issues facing the military and its
association with politics.

Keywords:

Military – the organ of the state that possesses the monopoly of the legitimate use of
violence. In civil-military relations it refers to the officer corps rather than the entire
organization. Given the hierarchical organization of the armed forces, the officer corps is the one
that interacts with the government.

Politics - The activities associated with the governance of a country or other area,

especially the debater conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.

Philippine Politics – The politics in the Philippines takes form in a representative

democracy, a unitary and presidential government with separation of powers.

Civilian control – The subordination of the military to the civilian political authorities,
such as the president, and the array of oversight bodies in the legislature, judiciary, and other
government agencies specifically given this function. It means government control over the
armed forces.

Military Intervention – the assumption by the armed forces of roles and functions that
belong to the civilian political authorities or the civilian government. It ranges from military
blackmail, conspiracy to topple civilian government, mutiny, coup d’etat, and other forms of
military takeover of the government initiated or supported by the military, in whole or in part.

Military Role –the management of the instruments of violence to defend the state against
external aggression. In developing societies the military role has included the provision of
internal defense against domestic armed threats, and also peace and order.

Security sector – the array of bodies participating in the exercise of the defense of the
state. They include the uniformed services (the military, police, paramilitary forces, the
intelligence community), the government offices that possess oversight functions over the
uniformed services (the president as commander in chief of the armed forces, the National Police
Commission or NAPOLCOM, legislative committees).

Discussion:

Issues and Challenges:

The military has been a major part of a state. It made effects on both the society and
government, and no less it has been for the Philippines. Since the pre-colonial and the colonial
period there have been evidences on the presence of military groups or militaristic institutions in
the country. The frictions between tribal groups gave rise to skirmishes and small scale wars that
is fought by small armies headed by the village chief which is either the datu or rajah. This is a
proof that the military tradition of the country dates back even further back the Spanish
colonization. During the colonization, the revolution created the revolutionary army of the
Katipunan which was the forbearer of the revolution in the country, headed by a military leader
Emilio Aguinaldo. Fast forward to the present, the military is under civilian control and the
president as the commander-in-chief.

There have been and still multiple issues and challenges that the military is facing. The
connection of the military to politics made even more controversies and issues. There are also
times when the military has gone radical and does not honor the civilian control over it. Because
of these the history of Philippines has changed. It was during the Marcos period that the military
made an image of itself to the society. Constitutions prior to martial law stated that the military is
the armed agency of the government and it operated under the principles of civilian control and
the supremacy of civilian authority over the military at all times. However this changed over
time, during the reign of Pres. Marcos the military was a partner in national development and
eventually growing into a part of governance.

In general, therefore, the presence of democratic institutions including regular elections,

military subordination to civilian authority and its confinement to a defined set of functions
helped preserve Philippine democracy prior to 1972. It all changed during the time of Pres.
Marcos. First we must understand the issues and challenges before the Marcos period, prior to
the reign of Marcos, the principles of democratic civilian control and supremacy of civilian
authority over the military governed the relationship between the government and the AFP. The
challenges that the military were facing during the time was in the form of counterinsurgency
against the agrarian-based “Hukbong Bayan Laban sa mga Hapon” or known simply as
HUKBALAHAP or HUK. They were formerly a guerilla group against the Japanese during
world war two, yet after that due to misunderstandings between the government they staged a
rebellion, known as the Hukbalahap rebellion against the Philippine government in 1946.
Primarily the role of the military revolved around the triad of external defense, internal security,
and peace and order.

During the martial law and dictatorship period of former Pres. Marcos the condition of
civil-military relations changed. The military became a partner of Martial Law and authoritarian
rule. The military assumed new functions, such as judicial and administrative sort. Its political
functions included top-ranking officers serving as chief executives of local government units and
regional peace and order development councils. This close partnership of the dictator president
and the military gave rise to the rise of military power overlapping civilian authority which led to
the abuse of power by the military and countless controversies. The military’s role as a partner in
Martial Law and authoritarian rule was enhanced further by its key role in combating the twin
armed conflicts that surged following the regime change in 1972, namely, a Maoist communist
insurgency under the newly established Communist Party of the Philippines, its armed wing (the
New People’s Army) and its National Democratic Front (CPP-NPA-NDF); and ethnic separatism
led by the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). The use of coercion in governance was
palpable in these conflicts, highlighting the military’s function as the holder of the monopoly of
the use of legitimate force in society, and exposing it to the dangers of committing human rights
violations during the internal security operations. Human rights violation was the major issue
during the time of Marcos and even up to now the horrors of that time is not yet resolved.

Marcos also unified all the uniformed services under the Armed Forces of the Philippines
or the AFP. Formerly under the operational and administrative control of the local chief
executives (city and town mayors, and governors), the police was reorganized as the NPF, also
headed by the chief of the Philippine Constabulary or PC, the fourth major service command of
the AFP. Thus he centralized all the armed components of the government under his control as
commander in chief of the armed forces. This made that the control of the military was directly
under the control of one civilian individual, without the oversight of democratic institutions, this
led to individualistic desires of one man to be fulfilled by the military. The combined effects of
these political and military developments on governance were seen in the destruction of
democratic political institutions, decline in military professionalism and cohesion and the
personalization of civilian control and civilian authority in the person of Marcos.

It is important to know that the Philippine military’s entry into political governance in
1972 was upon invitation by its civilian commander-in-chief, and strictly speaking was not
military intervention in politics. Moreover, there is a major difference between the military role
expansion during Ramon Magsaysay’s tenure as defense secretary and president in the1950s and
during the martial law. In the former, the civilian oversight institutions were in place to ensure
civilian control. In the latter, civilian oversight institutions were destroyed and civilian control
was vested in the person of Marcos.

In the restoration of democracy in the country from the Marcos dictatorship the military
played a key role. In the so called “People Power” revolution of 1986 the leaders of the military
defected from the government control and joined the peaceful revolution. Juan Ponce Enrile the
minister of defense and the Vice-Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Fidel V. Ramos joined the
rebels and the revolution together with their groups. Shortly after that a number of high-ranking
military officials joined in, including the Air Force and the Navy. The ones who joined
completely disobeyed the orders of at that the time the Chief of Staff of the military General
Fabian Ver who was loyal to Marcos to the end. These series of events led to the falling down of
Marcos and his expulsion from the country. This restored some positive image to the military yet
it was not the end of the issues facing the military. The years that follow saw the rise of coup
attempts and mutinies. This was due to the destabilize government from the transition between
the totalitarian rule of Marcos to the democratic leadership of Corazon Aquino. Factions in the
military with their allies from the civilian sectors, however, challenged the new constitutional
order. They launched a series of coups in the 1980’s, culminating in the December 1989 failed
coup. Measures were made by President Aquino with the help of the civilian government to
prevent its reoccurrence. Yet coup attempts persisted after a brief lull during the Ramos and
Estrada administrations. They resumed during the Arroyo administration. An example of this is
the Manila Peninsula siege on November 29, 2007 in which a group of mutineers led by former
soldier and now Senator Antonio Trillanes seized the hotel and called for the ousting of former
President Arroyo. Their cause was the incessant corruption not only in the government but in the
military hierarchy, in which the resources for the military and for the soldier was drastically
depleted in such a way that even the boots that the privates were wearing are so worn down that
they cannot be used.

Today, the military is not facing much issues and challenges but the on-going peace
process of the Bangsamoro peace agreements is one for the military and the army has been
focusing its logistics and resources on the war ravaged regions of Mindanao. We may also set
into focus the resources and the budget given to the military, at the present we see a rise in the
funding for the military. One of the reasons of it may be the ever growing tension between the
Philippines and China on the disputed islands in the West Philippine Sea. This called for the
modernization of the military together with the help of the country’s closest ally the United
States. This made agreements like the VFA or Visiting Forces Agreement possible. Recently the
enhanced defense cooperation agreement between the two countries, which states that the USA
may place temporary military bases in the country which is seen as preventive measure due to
the Philippines’ tensions with China.

All uniformed personnel, the army, the navy, police force, or simply the military is an
important part of the state and the presence of issues and challenges are inevitable. It is only up
to the military and the government in how they handle pressure and the demands of time. It is
only through the close coordination between the civilian authority and the military that progress
and, peace and order may be accomplished and realized.
 Summary and Conclusions:

The military must always be a part of national progress of a state, for they serve as the
safeguards from internal and external threats yet that may also be the cause of those threats. The
only way that for this to be realized is through agreements and respect for civilian authority. The
Philippines is no stranger to these phenomena of military and civilian frictions. Our historical
background shows us the important roles of the military for our country. This may be seen
positively or negatively but undoubtedly they played their part. The examples of the EDSA
revolution and the multiple mutinies show that the relationship between the military and politics
is not perfect. Still, changes for the betterment of each may be the key in unlocking a symbiotic
relationship between the two.

It just goes to show that in order for our country to progress it must have a good
relationship with its armed personnel. Our country’s recent history is laden with the agreements
and disagreements between the military and politics in spite of these, we as a nation rise up and
makes stable the situation. It is only through our national cooperation and that includes the
harmonious relationship of the military to our government that we can progress to new horizons
of a better country for the military but most of all for the people of the Philippines.
References:

1. Morada et al. Intro to Philippine Politics & Governance.

2. Guinto, Joel. "U.S., Philippines Sign Defense Pact Amid China Tensions."
Bloomberg. April 28, 2014. Accessed October 12, 2014.
3. "Lakas Ng Bayan: The People's Power/EDSA Revolution 1986." University of
Alberta. Accessed October 12, 2014.
4. "People Power Revolution." Wikipedia. Accessed October 12, 2014.
5. Jeff Goodwin, No Other Way Out, Cambridge University Press, 2001, p.119, ISBN 0-
521-62948-9, ISBN 978-0-521-62948-5
6. De Leon Sr., Hector, and Hector De Leon Jr. Textbook on the Philippine Constitution
(2011).