Kapur Surya Foundation

Where Is President Rodrigo Duterte Taking The Philippines?Author(s): VINOD SAIGHAL

Source: World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues , Vol. 21, No. 1 (SPRING
(JANUARY-MARCH) 2017), pp. 152-157
Published by: Kapur Surya Foundation

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48531515

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Kapur Surya Foundation is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues

This content downloaded from

142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 WHERE IS PRESIDENT RODRIGO DUTERTE
TAKING THE PHILIPPINES?

President Duterte of the Philippines has launched a wide-ranging campaign

of extra judicial killings, directed at criminals and drug traffickers, in
violation of constitutional norms and legal procedures. Bolstered by wide
popular support he has also initiated a strategic shift of his country away from
the traditional neo-colonial protector the US, towards China and Russia.
He has thereby distanced himself from ASEAN and acknowledged the rising
status of China in the west Pacific. The advent of the Trump administration
in Washington and the close links between the US and the Philippine armed
forces may halt his far reaching moves.

VINOD SAIGHAL

T
he Philippines leader President Rodrigo Duterte has not let grass grow
under his feet. On the face of it within a few short weeks of coming to
power he took decisions on policies—internal as well as external—that
would have serious long-term consequences for the democratic make-up of his
country as well as the geopolitical situation in the region. Many of the decisions
could have an element of irreversibility were he to last out his full term as president,
which seems likely and even have a second term given his current popularity.
Well before he was elected and in the run up to the presidential elections,
Duterte announced far and wide that extra-judicial killings could become the
order of the day under his presidency. In executing these policies he would not
be accountable to anybody within the country nor would he brook outside
interference. He has lived up to both in letter and spirit. At the moment things

152 WORLD AFFAIRS SPRING 2017 (JANUARY – MARCH) VOL 21 NO 1

This content downloaded from

142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 W H E R E I S P R E S I D E N T RO D R I G O D U T E RT E TA K I N G T H E P H I L I P P I N E S ?

are going his way. The scale of his electoral victory and the fact that his support
from the underprivileged is adulatory—almost devotional—has enabled him
to ride rough over the little opposition, mostly articulated so far in a subdued
manner from legislators and traditional power centres in Manila. Duterte does
not feel obliged to consult them. While the elite in his own country and leaders
and establishments in the West look askance at his demagoguery and outlandish
pronouncements, his popularity rating within the Philippines continues to
grow. Being assured of a groundswell of support, especially in executing harsh
measures, he seems unmindful of criticism.
On the face of it, Duterte appears to be overturning long held policies of
his predecessors rather brusquely and without consultation with stakeholders.
Nevertheless, it is more than likely that he is playing his cards shrewdly, taking
his cue from other global leaders who
have consolidated power. In some According to most estimates, the
ways the president seems to have taken extra-judicial killings allowed
a leaf out of Donald Trump’s book by Duterte have crossed the
when he throws out remarks that other 7000 mark and he shows no
leaders, notably in a democracy, would signs of letting up on them. The
hesitate to make. For example, his
opposition seems to have been
pronouncements on former President
Barack Obama bespoke an absence of terrified into silence although
any pretence at statesmanship—now evidence has appeared that many
or in the future. According to most private scores have been settled
estimates, the extra-judicial killings in the process and the police
allowed by Duterte have crossed the seem answerable to no one other
7000 mark and he shows no signs of
than the top.
letting up on them. The opposition
seems to have been terrified into silence although evidence has appeared that many
private scores have been settled in the process and the police seem answerable to
no one other than the top. Unsubstantiated stories have emerged that in certain
coastal villages fishermen have killed rivals after declaring them to be smugglers.
Nobody seems to know how far this trend would be allowed to continue or
whether it would be possible to reign in the marauders at a later stage. According
to the latest inputs from Manila on the unending judicial killings, 2016 may
have ended but the hunting season is far from over with the war on drugs causing
a heavy toll on peasant and farmer groups, labour unions, indigenous groups,
social reform activists and other human rights advocates. They are gunned down

VOL 21 NO 1 (JANUARY – MARCH) SPRING 2017 WORLD AFFAIRS 153

This content downloaded from
142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 VINOD SAIGHAL

as drug addicts or pushers either by the police, army or private security groups
and the uneducated supporters of the government whose words the Duterte
administration accepts as gospel truth (Dona Z Pazzibugan, “Militants also
Victims of War on Drugs”, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 10 December 2016, online
at http://newsinfo.inquirer.net).
Moreover, unlike the European Union and the United States of America
(US) which have been critical of the president’s actions, China and Russia have
not made statements against Duterte’s counternarcotics agenda. Both countries
have assiduously cultivated the president, hoping to wean him away from the US.
The lack of criticism from within on account of fear and tacit support without
from two powerful players has encouraged the president to carry on his brutal
anti-drugs programme. In fact, he has boasted that while he was mayor he used
to physically throw criminals (their criminality having been exclusively decided
by him) out of helicopters. Such remarks seem to have stirred some segments of
the legislature—although only a few—and some powerful senators from earlier
ruling dispensations to talk about impeachment but as things stand, it is unlikely to
gather pace. However, as reported in the press about two hundred and fifty families
of those killed by the police for being drug peddlers have gone to court to demand
proof as well as records of their supposed crimes. So far there has been no response.
If the courts take up this matter, thereby encouraging others to follow suit, it could
embarrass Duterte because his popularity notwithstanding, the families wishing to
proceed against the extra-judicial killings are from the lowest rungs of society. In
the same vein, some members of the elite who have expressed horror at Duterte’s
claims might also implead themselves in the cases and/or support the bereaved
families through financial aid, by hiring detectives to investigate the disappearances
and by persuading the best lawyers to take the cases pro bono.
By his boastings, as is his wont to burnish his “tough guy” image, the president
may have unwittingly opened a can of worms. In the process the fear factor that
has kept his opponents silent could disappear. Meanwhile the number of victims
keeps growing. Having allowed the genie of extra-judicial killings to escape from
the bottle, a reversal may not be easy. The police—his principal law-enforcers—
may be reluctant to give up their new found freedom and the president may
then find himself in a bind. In January this year, Duterte was forced to order the
police to disband and rebuild anti-drug units following the killing of a South
Korean businessman by rogue officers. Nonetheless, the president has vowed to
forge ahead with his war on drugs until the last day of his term. In a country with
the largest Catholic population in Asia, which the Pope visited to tumultuous

154 WORLD AFFAIRS SPRING 2017 (JANUARY – MARCH) VOL 21 NO 1

This content downloaded from

142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 W H E R E I S P R E S I D E N T RO D R I G O D U T E RT E TA K I N G T H E P H I L I P P I N E S ?

applause not long ago, Duterte’s abusing of the head of the church in Rome,
calling him unmentionable names did not provoke an uprising. While the
populace might have been too shell-shocked to react spontaneously, the hurt
and anger may remain and could surface on another occasion. The president
did finally tender an apology and the pontiff in Rome graciously pardoned him.
Undeterred however the president has gone after bishops seeking compassion in
dealing with the drug problem.
Externally President Duterte seems to have thrown caution to the wind by
giving marching orders to the American military—again a complete reversal
of the policies of his predecessors. In the process, he has befriended China,
disregarding the verdict of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea Tribunal and putting the future security of the Philippines in the hands of an
erstwhile adversary. From all accounts
emerging in military and diplomatic Duterte has explained that his
circles in and around the Philippines, antipathy towards the US is
the foreign policy decisions have due to the charge of human
been neither collective nor taken after rights violations under his
prolonged consultations. Nevertheless, counternarcotics campaign and
these gut decisions have serious
alleged threats to suspend
geopolitical consequences. To cover
himself, Duterte has explained that his Philippine development assistance.
antipathy towards the US is due to the For him Washington’s gratuitous
charge of human rights violations under comments were akin to external
his counternarcotics campaign and intervention in his domestic
alleged threats to suspend Philippine policy and an affront to
development assistance. He repeatedly
Philippine sovereignty.
voiced his contempt for Obama. For
him Washington’s gratuitous comments were akin to external intervention in his
domestic policy and an affront to Philippine sovereignty. In sum the president
wishes to modify if not cancel Manila’s patron–client relationship with the US.
Duterte however has changed his tune with the coming of Donald Trump to the
White House. The US military is unlikely to be pushed out any time soon.
By summarily asking the US to get out and holding a hand out to China,
Duterte has pushed the region into geopolitical turmoil. Full details of the quid
pro quo, if any, from China have not emerged, other than Beijing agreeing to
Filipino fishermen being allowed back into waters from which they had been
excluded or pushed out. It is possible that the Chinese have promised large

VOL 21 NO 1 (JANUARY – MARCH) SPRING 2017 WORLD AFFAIRS 155

This content downloaded from
142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 VINOD SAIGHAL

investments, something which would be welcomed in the country. Unsurprisingly,

Beijing would be the biggest beneficiary of the policy changes of the Philippines
government. Evicting the Americans from the archipelago would go a long way
in establishing Chinese ascendancy over the South China Sea, forcing regional
navies to reassess the situation. The US’s Southern Pivot strategy to counter
China (Australia is too far south) seems to have slipped out of its control and
moved in the direction of the adversary. It should be conceded that Duterte
might have made a shrewd move for the long-term security and prosperity of his
country, sensing that Beijing may be the strongest power in the coming years.
While the outcome of the US presidential elections may not have been taken
into account, the president now seems to feel that a kindred spirit has come
to the White House. It is evident that Duterte like many leaders around the
world has concluded that Donald Trump cannot be taken for granted. He now
seems to be hedging his bets and may even change course to an extent, going by
the latest statement of his defence minister in January 2017 that the US would
be allowed to strengthen its bases in the country and accordingly construction
activity has been permitted. Moreover, his military heads opined, as others did of
the previous regime that being allowed to fish in the waters of the Scarborough
Shoal is not a sufficient recompense for the geopolitical and geostrategic change
that the president was setting in motion. The long-term consequences of an
alignment with China for the security of the Philippines could be grave.
The geopolitical ramifications for the US and its allies in the region
could border on the alarming depending on how far the Philippines military
establishment, which has remained silent to date, allows the president to change
direction to a point from which a return to the earlier status quo may not be
possible. Opposition could emerge internally at the jettisoning of traditional
alliances established during or in the aftermath of the Second World War. This
opposition may be bolstered by former president Fidel V Ramos, whom Duterte
requested to lead the negotiations with China, resigning as the head of the
negotiating team. What will become of the relations with Japan, Vietnam, South
Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, India and especially the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)? The last will be the most affected. The
Philippines government may not have second thoughts about opting out of
policies worked out collectively with ASEAN partners over the decades. These
include the Code of Conduct and several other collective decisions taken for
dealing with China, especially about the conflicting claims of several ASEAN
countries over islands simultaneously claimed by Beijing. These common policies

156 WORLD AFFAIRS SPRING 2017 (JANUARY – MARCH) VOL 21 NO 1

This content downloaded from

142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 W H E R E I S P R E S I D E N T RO D R I G O D U T E RT E TA K I N G T H E P H I L I P P I N E S ?

would be severely compromised were the Philippines government to change

direction. Unless Duterte is obliged by his armed forces and the foreign policy
establishment to back down on his initial overtures to the Chinese, the two-
fold action of the Philippines government in abandoning traditional allies and
partnering with China could deal a severe blow to ASEAN solidarity, even throwing
doubt over the future of the association. There would be no more collective
decisions for dealing with China which
looms large over ASEAN. To date the Unless Duterte is obliged by his
hold outs from collective decisions armed forces and the foreign
were Cambodia and Laos although policy establishment to back
of late Malaysia and Thailand have down on his initial overtures to
also had some reservations. With the the Chinese, the two-fold action
Philippines potentially going over to of the Philippines government
the other side or at least keeping its
own counsel on matters of regional
in abandoning traditional allies
policy, the grouping’s cohesion and partnering with China could
could be shattered. Brunei, India, deal a severe blow to ASEAN
Indonesia, Myanmar, Singapore and solidarity, even throwing doubt
other countries may then reassess their over the future of the association.
relations with the Philippines. It is not
inconceivable, that as is his habit President Rodrigo Duterte might have acted in
haste. The comment below from a high-ranking personality in the Philippines
encapsulates the dilemma.

“Academics, businessmen, upper and middle class will generally agree ... and
even the military who are for the US will welcome criticism over Duterte’s
foreign policy adventures. The majority of Filipinos were dismayed over his
pushing the US away in favour of China. ... Former President Fidel V Ramos
who encouraged Duterte to run and then was appointed special envoy to China
in September has resigned. He did not even join the delegation to China when
the president went there. Ramos’s falling out over Duterte’s foreign policy is seen
as a good sign by thinking Filipinos and the local foreign policy establishment.
At least one has raised a strong opposing voice. Other statesmen, if they are still
left, might follow”.

VOL 21 NO 1 (JANUARY – MARCH) SPRING 2017 WORLD AFFAIRS 157

This content downloaded from
142.3.100.128 on Sat, 19 Feb 2022 07:22:40 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms