Far-reaching implications of the young turks' coup attempt

Raymund Jose G. Quilop, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Asia News Network, Manila

The rebellion staged by the 296 soldiers who occupied the Oakwood serviced-apartments building in the heart of Makati City's central business district the whole of Sunday is by far the shortest coup attempt ever staged by a faction of the Philippine military against a civilian government in the Philippines. But its implications are twofold and far-reaching: First, to Philippine society, more particularly, to the state or government; and second, to what is considered as Philippine democracy.

This action by a small segment of the Philippine military probably validates a long-standing perception that the Philippines is a weak state. It is weak in the sense that the foundation of its authority, particularly for the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, continues to be questioned by certain sectors of society, thereby making it unable to consolidate its hold on power.

Without an electoral mandate, the Macapagal administration has spent a great portion of its being in office trying to consolidate its authority, particularly since its legitimacy, although upheld by the Supreme Court of the Philippine, has been questioned by the political elite of the country who are allied with the ousted President Joseph Estrada, by his supporters from the masa (masses) sector, and most recently by a faction from the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

The Philippine state is regarded as weak in the sense that the state, specifically this administration, remains unable to live up to the basic characteristic of a state-the monopoly of coercive authority. In the words of Max Weber, what makes the State a State is its being the only organization in society that has the right to "to enforce its decisions, using force if necessary." But such right becomes useless or, worse, taken for granted by the very people the state is supposed to govern when it fails to show that it has the capacity to exercise such right.

The decision of the government to extend by another two hours the 5 p.m. deadline it had given the rebel soldiers for their return to the barracks or "face reasonable force" may have given the impression that the government had reservations in actually using force. Worse, some may be thinking of the government as being completely unable to use force at all.

While the use of force should of course be the court of last resort, so to speak, and the government should be ready to negotiate with the rebel soldiers, giving a definite deadline without strictly enforcing it gives the impression of a weak government. It would have been better for the government not to issue a definite time for the soldiers' "surrender."

Fortunately, the negotiations positively led to the rebel soldiers returning to barracks. A State or a government that fails to exercise its exclusive right to use force would never be taken seriously by societal elements that would continue to challenge its authority.

But beyond its implications regarding the strength of the Philippine State, the Sunday coup attempt has more fundamental implications to Philippine democracy, a key element of which is the acceptance of the military and, therefore, its subordination to civilian political leadership. The number of soldiers who questioned the authority of the government is relatively small and could rightfully be considered as being a small faction in the military establishment.

Yet, their mutiny signifies that there are elements within the Philippine military that continue to question civilian political authority. What makes it more disturbing is the fact that the group is led by young captains, who in a few years time would be occupying higher positions in the Armed Forces and would eventually become key decision makers in the military. While their staying in the service may eventually temper their tendency to be "insubordinate" to the government, the possibility of their taking a similar move could not be totally dismissed.

This latest action by a segment of the Philippine military clearly shows that the Philippines indeed has a "politicized military." Prof. Felipe Miranda of the University of the Philippines points out that a politicized military is one "where a significant proportion of military men consider it appropriate for the military to be involved in overall government and even to be markedly influential in specific concerns involving national security."

While the group that occupied Oakwood could not rightfully be considered as a significant proportion of the military, one could not help but think that there may be a bigger number within the Armed Forces that considers it appropriate for the military to be involved in the political affairs of the state. Such perception is well founded given the Philippine experience with what are now known as EDSA People Power I and II uprisings, in which the military played a significant role in forcing incumbent presidents to step down from Malacanang.

The military's involvement in these two events in Philippine history could be attributed to the way military officers are socialized both within the Philippine Military Academy and in the Armed Forces itself. As an observer of Philippine military affairs notes, the socialization of an army officer corps is a key factor in making an army "willing to subordinate itself to civil authority." An officer corps socialized into accepting its status as being subordinate to civil authority may be relatively expected to respect civilian supremacy and enforce policies formulated by civilian political leaders.

Socialization, however, does not occur only inside the military academy. The political and military environment they become part of after graduation equally shape their mindsets, with civilian political leaders playing a great role in shaping their outlooks. It has been noted, for example, that the late president Ferdinand Marcos' practice of promoting officers based on their personal loyalty to him encouraged military officers to engage in political maneuvers to endear themselves to him.

The involvement of the military in non-military functions has also induced military personnel to become involved in political and policy decision-making functions, thereby greatly contributing to the process of politicizing the military. Such a role civilian political leaders play in shaping the mindsets of military officers has once again resurfaced yesterday, what with the perception that there are political leaders who may have convinced the young officers of the Armed Forces to do what they did last Sunday.

The writer is an assistant professor of political science at the University of the Philippines in Quezon City and is a researcher/analyst of the Office of Strategic and Special Studies, Armed Forces of the Philippines.