Amiel, finally I got the 37-page papers you asked me to read and comment on. Whew. Since I am leaving for Benguet tonight and there is no wifi in our tribe, I am posting my initial comments here.
____
By RainB
The Intengan Papers you are talking about was endorsed by the National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales, and was echoed to the AFP units all over the country and was given a seminar course to the National Defense College in 2006. Now, since the NSA is a civilian executive portfolio thus not part of the ranks, I can only assume that the authority and permission to give this seminar were given by the Commander-in-Chief. Archie as Director of the Center for Strategic Studies was “hired” by the National Security Adviser as consultant. In short, he works for PGMA, tasked to craft the foundations for the National Security Act which provides the blueprint on how the government shall proceed in a revolutionary situation to stop rebel forces from seizing control of the state. Some people call him a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Amiel, these are my comments and I am certainly more than willing to engage in a dialogue with you on this matter. I must, however, state on the onset that the Center for Strategic Studies is a personal initiative of Father Intengan. It is different from the Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs from which I got my training as a socio-political investigator. We were funded by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES), which is actually a partner of the NDCP Institute for Strategic and Development Studies (ISDS), if I am not mistaken, developed by your Dad.
My field is electoral politics and right now I am involved in political mapping to create a green-vote (for the environmentalist coalition) and a gay-vote (a personal initiative to help Danton Remoto become a senator). The reason why I highlighted the difference is because Archie’s mental processes and analysis are always colored by his ideologies as a Christian Socialist, previously aligned with the political parties of President Ramos and JoeDeV, but right now focused on party-list representatives.
Thus, even if he was my boss before, I lost track of Archie’s involvement specially his job as consultant to the Office of the National Security Adviser and one of GMA’s think-tank. Since I chose to specialize in political mapping, I don’t dare to put across a pretension that I am an expert in national security (diyos kopo). Since General Cabanlig was in fact a former commanding officer of the GSC (and president of NDCP) and he trained future generals, then I assume you have a breakfast -table access to a real expert in national security. (Besides, there is a three-decade of difference between Archie and me (lol). But, since you asked me to comment on his paper, and you are my idol, eh ano pa ba magagawa ko? Hehehe.
1. I agree with his premise that the Armed Forces of the Philippines is “Defender of the Nation, Guardian of Democracy, and Servant of the People”. Even your Dad would not question that. For a good reason, Archie had to reiterate the constitutional, historical and legislative basis of this title. This, in fact, is where my agreement with him ends.
2. I question his analysis that the Philippines is in a revolutionary situation. In political studies, three phases are defined as stages of revolution: 1)revolutionary mood (where there is emotional agitation and unrest among the citizens); 2) a revolutionary situation (collapse of the government structures, corruption, inefficiency etc), 3) revolutionary crisis (break in the ranks of the AFP, take-over of government, seizure of the state). Amiel, if you read thoroughly the papers, Archie and GMA agree that the Philippines is in the second stage of revolution, a premise which I emphatically dispute. For two reasons:
a. The “stages of revolution” was founded on the thesis of Crane Brinton who wrote Anatomy of a Revolution in 1938. It is a pre-Leninist theory and, for me, as obsolete as patriarchy. It assumes that there is a national political consciousness. We love our country Amiel but I don’t think that we have a national political consciousness as a people, for pete’s sake. As to why Archie still adheres to a dilapidated social construct is a sign of his refusal to change his views. He has become a relic of the democratic-communist war. He is like those wartime Japanese paper money – high in value, but useless in the market.
b. Even if we will follow the revolutionary theory, I still don’t agree with the analysis. If we are truly in a revolutionary situation, then the Lozada expose should have agitated the masses to overthrow the government. But, save for a few thousand who rallied in Makati, the rest of the country chose to assume the posture of a spectator and didn’t care. If we are in a revolutionary situation, people like Tim Yap, Cristy Fermin, Gabby Concepcion were liquidated for being hindrances to the revolution. No, we are not. There is no unrest, there is indifference.
Archie cited three factors most important in bringing about the specific character of the present Philippine crisis: first, the approaching exhaustion of the ecological carrying capacity of the Philippines; second, rapid change; third, globalization.
I must admit that all three are present – but all these three are present in ALL countries of the world, thereby Archie is saying there is a global crisis. If that is the case, then it is not so much a problem of national security but a matter of foreign affairs and the agenda of a global community.
3. Now, as to Archie’s analysis of the AFP, I will say something that might your Dad might object . I believe there is truth to the premise that there is corruption in the military and inefficiency in the ranks. The whole governmental system is so corrupted I don’t think such a big unit like the AFP can be protected from that. BUT, both corruption and inefficiency are INTERNAL AFFAIRS of the AFP. They should police their own ranks. It should not be the basis of a National Security agenda.
4. Archie considers the AFP Generals as naives when it comes to ideology. He proposes that the ranks should be given political education so that each army, each navy, each marine force, each airforce staff, will have the capacity to analyze the situation from the framework of political spectrum and comparative ideology. I find that insulting and silly. Our generals, corrupt some of them maybe, are intelligent people who are equipped with the full understanding of the situation from the point of view of the state which the AFP serves. It should not be drawn into the ideological debate of the revolutionary forces otherwise it might weaken its stance as Guardian of Democracy.
5. The efficiency of the AFP is always anchored on the fidelity to the rank; it is not dependent on the political knowledge of its members, but always on their obedience to the command. We are asking for trouble if we train our soldiers to analyze first before going to war. That is neither their job nor their concern.
Hay naku Amiel ang haba na ng sinabi ko anyway, let me end this with my stance on Archie and my objection as to why he serves as national security consultant to the GMA. Archie, always intelligent and sharp, is loyal to his ideology and blind to what he calls extramental reality (reality outside the mind of the believer). It is not his fault that he is like that.
It is, however, the fault of the President - why would she hire a known ideologue to construct the country’s national security agenda?
My answer is simple – Archie’s ideology helps GMA cling to the presidency even without the mandate of the people. She needs him. Archie is her survival mechanism.
Simple.
____
By RainB
The Intengan Papers you are talking about was endorsed by the National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales, and was echoed to the AFP units all over the country and was given a seminar course to the National Defense College in 2006. Now, since the NSA is a civilian executive portfolio thus not part of the ranks, I can only assume that the authority and permission to give this seminar were given by the Commander-in-Chief. Archie as Director of the Center for Strategic Studies was “hired” by the National Security Adviser as consultant. In short, he works for PGMA, tasked to craft the foundations for the National Security Act which provides the blueprint on how the government shall proceed in a revolutionary situation to stop rebel forces from seizing control of the state. Some people call him a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Amiel, these are my comments and I am certainly more than willing to engage in a dialogue with you on this matter. I must, however, state on the onset that the Center for Strategic Studies is a personal initiative of Father Intengan. It is different from the Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs from which I got my training as a socio-political investigator. We were funded by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES), which is actually a partner of the NDCP Institute for Strategic and Development Studies (ISDS), if I am not mistaken, developed by your Dad.
My field is electoral politics and right now I am involved in political mapping to create a green-vote (for the environmentalist coalition) and a gay-vote (a personal initiative to help Danton Remoto become a senator). The reason why I highlighted the difference is because Archie’s mental processes and analysis are always colored by his ideologies as a Christian Socialist, previously aligned with the political parties of President Ramos and JoeDeV, but right now focused on party-list representatives.
Thus, even if he was my boss before, I lost track of Archie’s involvement specially his job as consultant to the Office of the National Security Adviser and one of GMA’s think-tank. Since I chose to specialize in political mapping, I don’t dare to put across a pretension that I am an expert in national security (diyos kopo). Since General Cabanlig was in fact a former commanding officer of the GSC (and president of NDCP) and he trained future generals, then I assume you have a breakfast -table access to a real expert in national security. (Besides, there is a three-decade of difference between Archie and me (lol). But, since you asked me to comment on his paper, and you are my idol, eh ano pa ba magagawa ko? Hehehe.
1. I agree with his premise that the Armed Forces of the Philippines is “Defender of the Nation, Guardian of Democracy, and Servant of the People”. Even your Dad would not question that. For a good reason, Archie had to reiterate the constitutional, historical and legislative basis of this title. This, in fact, is where my agreement with him ends.
2. I question his analysis that the Philippines is in a revolutionary situation. In political studies, three phases are defined as stages of revolution: 1)revolutionary mood (where there is emotional agitation and unrest among the citizens); 2) a revolutionary situation (collapse of the government structures, corruption, inefficiency etc), 3) revolutionary crisis (break in the ranks of the AFP, take-over of government, seizure of the state). Amiel, if you read thoroughly the papers, Archie and GMA agree that the Philippines is in the second stage of revolution, a premise which I emphatically dispute. For two reasons:
a. The “stages of revolution” was founded on the thesis of Crane Brinton who wrote Anatomy of a Revolution in 1938. It is a pre-Leninist theory and, for me, as obsolete as patriarchy. It assumes that there is a national political consciousness. We love our country Amiel but I don’t think that we have a national political consciousness as a people, for pete’s sake. As to why Archie still adheres to a dilapidated social construct is a sign of his refusal to change his views. He has become a relic of the democratic-communist war. He is like those wartime Japanese paper money – high in value, but useless in the market.
b. Even if we will follow the revolutionary theory, I still don’t agree with the analysis. If we are truly in a revolutionary situation, then the Lozada expose should have agitated the masses to overthrow the government. But, save for a few thousand who rallied in Makati, the rest of the country chose to assume the posture of a spectator and didn’t care. If we are in a revolutionary situation, people like Tim Yap, Cristy Fermin, Gabby Concepcion were liquidated for being hindrances to the revolution. No, we are not. There is no unrest, there is indifference.
Archie cited three factors most important in bringing about the specific character of the present Philippine crisis: first, the approaching exhaustion of the ecological carrying capacity of the Philippines; second, rapid change; third, globalization.
I must admit that all three are present – but all these three are present in ALL countries of the world, thereby Archie is saying there is a global crisis. If that is the case, then it is not so much a problem of national security but a matter of foreign affairs and the agenda of a global community.
3. Now, as to Archie’s analysis of the AFP, I will say something that might your Dad might object . I believe there is truth to the premise that there is corruption in the military and inefficiency in the ranks. The whole governmental system is so corrupted I don’t think such a big unit like the AFP can be protected from that. BUT, both corruption and inefficiency are INTERNAL AFFAIRS of the AFP. They should police their own ranks. It should not be the basis of a National Security agenda.
4. Archie considers the AFP Generals as naives when it comes to ideology. He proposes that the ranks should be given political education so that each army, each navy, each marine force, each airforce staff, will have the capacity to analyze the situation from the framework of political spectrum and comparative ideology. I find that insulting and silly. Our generals, corrupt some of them maybe, are intelligent people who are equipped with the full understanding of the situation from the point of view of the state which the AFP serves. It should not be drawn into the ideological debate of the revolutionary forces otherwise it might weaken its stance as Guardian of Democracy.
5. The efficiency of the AFP is always anchored on the fidelity to the rank; it is not dependent on the political knowledge of its members, but always on their obedience to the command. We are asking for trouble if we train our soldiers to analyze first before going to war. That is neither their job nor their concern.
Hay naku Amiel ang haba na ng sinabi ko anyway, let me end this with my stance on Archie and my objection as to why he serves as national security consultant to the GMA. Archie, always intelligent and sharp, is loyal to his ideology and blind to what he calls extramental reality (reality outside the mind of the believer). It is not his fault that he is like that.
It is, however, the fault of the President - why would she hire a known ideologue to construct the country’s national security agenda?
My answer is simple – Archie’s ideology helps GMA cling to the presidency even without the mandate of the people. She needs him. Archie is her survival mechanism.
Simple.
Posts
