The largest demonstrations here against the US-led war with
Iraq have been marked by prayer more than protest. While the usual leftist
crowds are certainly in attendance, toting familiar placards denouncing the war
as "imperialist", their ranks are outnumbered by more unusual
attendees: housewives.
Middle-class Filipinos have come out in force to protest the war, largely at
the encouragement of Catholic Church leaders. Manila Archbishop Jaime Cardinal
Sin has deemed the war illegal under the United Nations Charter and, worse,
immoral under the rubric of Christian principles. Sin's call for peace has been
echoed in the homilies of many a parish priest. Small wonder, then, that in
this majority-Catholic nation the largest anti-war demonstrations have been, in
fact, prayer rallies.
A moral opposition
The largest such rally in the Philippines to date billed
itself as "The Nationwide Prayer Assembly for Peace". Held late last
month at Luneta Park in Manila, the gathering boasted an attendance of 50,000
people (though police put the figure at 15,000). While various leftist factions
turned out in large numbers, this was unmistakably a religious event.
Church groups made it an outing, Catholic schools made it a field trip, and
housewives heeded the call of their parish priest. Sister Theresa Lorenzo
accompanied students from Mary Help Christian School in Canlunbang, Laguna:
"We came as a way of witnessing and proclaiming what we have in our
hearts, and what these young people would like to tell our president."
Across the country, peace advocates continue to congregate in the hundreds and
thousands. Like the Luneta Park rally but on a smaller scale, these pious
demonstrations seem, foremost, an affirmative expression of religious faith.
Only as a consequence of this do they represent a conscientious objection to
the war in Iraq.
These prayer rallies illustrate the Catholic Church's tremendous power not only
to mobilize but to unite. Protestant and Muslim religious leaders, usually
discordant leftist factions, and politicians of various parties gather under
the Church's aegis.
This may be because the Church is the best platform for an opposition rooted in
moral evaluation. Whether religious or not, the various groups opposed to the
war agree that it is unjust. "This is an aggressive war," Bishop
Teodoro Bacani told the Luneta Park crowd; it would only be justified by God
"as a last resort ... and as a defensive war", and, of course, it is
neither.
And whether religious or not, that so many Filipinos have rallied behind the
Church's position, in the way the Church has expressed it, would suggest that
most Filipinos who oppose the war do so not because they believe it flouts
international law, threatens global stability, or is bad for national interest.
They oppose the war because they see it as immoral.
A political agenda
Religion and politics have never been completely separate in
the Philippines. In cases where the Catholic Church deems that the government
has forfeited its moral mandate, it will assert itself. The most spectacular of
these assertions were the People Power Movements of 1986 and 2001 that deposed,
respectively, presidents Ferdinand Marcos and Joseph Estrada.
Likewise, there is politics behind all the prayer that marks Church-sponsored
peace rallies. The Church and other groups that form the moral axis of the
Philippine peace movement hold the government accountable to explicitly moral
standards.
Since the prayer rallies began some months ago, their political agenda has
expanded. It now includes opposition to the current military campaign against
the insurgent Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in Mindanao, as well as to
the prospect of a new deployment of US troops on Philippine soil as part of the
Balikatan military exercises.
The existence of a coalition against war in Iraq has made it easier for peace
advocates to target other issues consistent with a peace agenda. Hence,
opposition to one war has naturally broadened to include opposition to other
wars and to war in general. Bishop Bacani exhorted the crowd in Luneta Park:
"Let us oppose war in Mindanao, in Iraq, and oppose war whenever and
wherever."
This is a movement with enormous moral and, therefore, political clout. It uses
its clout to discredit two individuals in particular: President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, for her support of the war on Iraq, and Defense Secretary
Angelo Reyes, who is believed to have instigated renewed hostilities in
Mindanao as well as campaigned for a combat role for American soldiers in the
upcoming Balikatan exercises.
According to Miriam Colonel of the All-Out Peace coalition, a group was being
formed specifically to work for Reyes' ouster. It would be called NO WAR,
standing for National Outrage of Women against Reyes.
A moral accounting
The same Church-led coalition agitating for peace had swept
Arroyo into office on the tide of the 2001 People Power Movement. Now with her
administration's moral mandate quickly dissipating - and with it her chief
political backing - she remains hard-pressed to accommodate the demands of the
peace movement. Her attempts at accommodation, however, have only resulted in
tepid positions that invoke peace in name and not in substance.
Archbishop Cardinal Sin has urged Arroyo to remain "a faithful daughter of
the Church" and declare Philippine neutrality toward the war in Iraq.
Despite having initially come out squarely behind the United States, as the
chorus of opposition mounted, Arroyo aligned her position behind that of the
United Nations. Nevertheless, when war broke out, Washington counted the
Philippines as a member of the "coalition of the willing" even before
Arroyo did, publicly at least. She equivocated until the last minute:
"Perhaps at zero hour itself it is very difficult to come to a very
definite and real consensus in which everybody agrees ... In the meantime let
us pray. Up to zero hour we are still praying for peace."
Arroyo's position toward the war in Mindanao has been similarly confounding.
While she has backed Reyes' military campaign against the MILF, including the
offensive that sparked current hostilities, she has insisted that her policy is
one of "active defense" intended to maintain the peace. "The government
will not stop searching for peace, but it will not allow any group to disturb
the peace and order of Mindanao ... It is not all-out war that is taking place
in Mindanao. What is going on in Mindanao is active defense." Meanwhile,
as the military campaign rages on, preparations for peace talks with the MILF
in Kuala Lumpur are being eagerly pursued.
It would seem the president is straining herself by trying to do two things at
once: talking the talk of peace while marching to the drums of war.
People power for peace?
While the previous People Power movements succeeded in
deposing presidents, this one failed even to dissuade one. Arroyo accommodated
but did not capitulate to a single point on the peace agenda: the Philippines
remains among the coalition of the willing, the military campaign in Mindanao
continues, as will the Balikatan exercises. If Arroyo were to run for
reelection next year, the peace movement might claim to have secured her
defeat. But she isn't. Instead, all the innumerable prayer rallies seem to be
accomplishing is to vocalize an opposition that goes unheeded despite its
numbers.
To be sure, the Philippine peace movement is limited in many ways. For one, it
lacks internal coherence. Its unity is born out of opposition. Without the
rallying points of war in Iraq and Mindanao, the groups that compose the peace
movement would probably fragment into their usual disunity. It would be hard to
imagine communist groups subordinating themselves to Church leadership in the
long term.
For another, the movement lacks a positive agenda. Peace makes a fine rallying
cry as long as it remains short on specifics. As it is being used,
"peace" does not mean much more than a blanket opposition to war.
While keeping things simple allows for maximum appeal, the movement runs the
risk of portraying things simplistically, if not naively.
Nevertheless, despite its limits, one cannot ignore the phenomenon: tremendous
numbers demonstrating against war not only in the Philippines but across the
world. To the demonstrators, the US is further squandering its moral mandate
with this war. While the protests and prayer rallies may subside once this war
concludes, a general, intractable, and deepening resentment toward the United
States may remain. And, given the next occasion - which is sure to come - be
aroused over and over again.