Before moving to Manila two years ago, a Filipino lawmaker told me about election-related violence in his country.
At I listened to him, I could hardly believe my ears.
Now, I have come to understand that ballot-snatching, intimidation of voters and even assassinations are a sad reality in many parts of the Philippines. According to official sources, so far more than 60 people have been killed and many more injured in election-related violence.
With some 17 000 public positions up for grabs on May 10, the stakes are indeed high. While the media focus their attention on the national contests for the presidency, the vice presidency and a dozen senatorial slots, the vast majority of electoral battles are fought out on the local level. It is here that dozens of well-armed private armies operate and most of the violence occurs.
In discussions with Filipino friends and colleagues, I have discerned what could be termed a love-hate-relationship toward politics and politicians. On the one side, Filipinos say they are proud of their democracy, particularly the so called people-power revolution of 1986 that toppled the Ferdinand Marcos dictatorship and stands at the beginning of a global wave of democratization. On the other hand, the same people don't hide their revulsion for the political leadership of the country and the political system as a whole.
Perhaps in no other country do commentators write so disrespectfully about the political class as in the Philippines. One could assume that the public (and publicized) disgust of all things political would lead to political disenchantment and abstention. Interestingly, the opposite is the case; the Philippines has a tradition of high turnouts on election day.
Among the important issues taken up by political commentators during the ongoing electoral campaign has been the impact of the media on the voters. Most agree that this time the media -- and specifically TV -- play a decisive role. While the proliferation of television is proof of a certain economic advancement, observers deem that the spread of television has not been beneficial for the quality of the political discourse.
The dominant TV-channels no longer cater for the shrinking middle-class, but focus their attention on the members of the growing lower classes. Having followed the campaign from the beginning I have come to the conclusion that -- as a rule of thumb -- neither media nor politicians have a high regard of the intelligence of their audiences. Many politicians have turned their campaign rallies into entertainment shows. The media by and large seem to condone this practice, and sometimes journalists even participate in the political circus.
More than once candidates have told me that the voters are not interested in political issues and platforms but are solely attracted to political events by free food and entertainment. Should this indeed be the case, then no one else is to be blamed but the politicians themselves who are the creators of such vote-getting methods. There are many examples in the Philippines and other economically depressed countries where principled politicians attract voters with issue-based campaigns and don't rely on "bread and games."
With just over two weeks left, for all practical purposes the battle for the presidency has boiled down to a fight between President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and former movie-star and high-school drop-out Fernando Poe Jr. Not only foreigners are puzzled how a candidate of the likes of Poe could become a serious contender for the highest position of the land in the first place.
Poe's much celebrated popularity is just one part of the answer. For decades, the Philippines has been governed by what may be termed professional politicians. In the eyes of many Filipinos their governance has not helped improve the lot of the great mass of the people. Many of the mainly poor Filipinos now rooting for Poe argue that their quality of life has actually gotten worse than better. Some statistics validate than assertion.
"All these past decades, where we have the so-called educated and experienced leaders, where have they brought the country? We've become the basket case of Asia," says Rod Reyes, a senior Poe aide.
According to recent opinion polls, Arroyo has not only caught up with Poe but actually gained a small lead. Meanwhile, the newest concern of political observers in Manila is a close outcome comparable to the result of the recent presidential elections in Taiwan.
"In that case, our country would be in turmoil", said a political analyst at a recent briefing in Makati City. "I am really afraid of a Taiwan scenario. Our people would not accept it, that's frightful."
Unlike Taiwan with its highly automated elections, vote-counting in the Philippines remains a largely manual exercise. Counting and processing the votes in this archaic fashion is not only time-consuming, but also susceptible to many forms of electoral fraud. Not surprisingly, poll-watching and protecting the votes traditionally play an important role in the
electoral strategies of all candidates and political parties. The opposition has accused the president of plotting to rig the elections.
For all I know, Arroyo has thus far not reacted to what in most other democracies would be considered an outrageous allegation. But in the Philippines, in the run-up to elections the contenders are accustomed to all sorts of attacks and accusations. Much of what the candidates say is actually not taken at face value. Elections and campaigns follow their own rules. It is heartening that concerned citizens and a small group of enlightened politicians are working to change these rules for the better.
Ronald Meinardus is the resident representative of the Friedrich-Naumann Foundation in the Philippines and a commentator on Asian affairs.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS