E·N·Q·U·I·R·Y
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL
A not so courageous act
Sunday, 10 03, 2004
It went off smoothly and looked a bit too easy when the eight leaders of the mutiny at Oakwood admitted their fault and publicly apologized for it before their Commander-in-Chief. Fourteen months of incarceration must have softened them up, and reduced them to cringing miscreants who have been overwhelmed by a deep sense of shame over the mutiny that they waged. Plainly a move to curry favor with their former nemesis, the televised act of contrition caught their lawyer completely unawares that he ruefully exclaimed: “Such unprincipled cowardice!”
Whether Trillanes, et al. made the move with the assistance of counsel or not is no longer the issue. After all, they went headlong into the mutiny last year without legal counsel; in the same vein, they could retract their previously good intentions without any prodding from, or even against the counsel of, their lawyers.
What counts now are the answers to some troubling questions. Was their admission of naivete - “We did this in our honest, though naive desire for change” - under duress? Did the commander-in-chief reach out, found their weakness, and persuaded them to change their mind? Why would Trillanes, et al., after so much initial bravado, admit to a miserable lack of proper understanding of the consequences of their actions? Why have they given up too easily and too soon the accolades given them for their bravery last year? What is so compelling as to force them to now admit to their guilt and apologize, given that the Supreme Court reportedly has already ruled in their favor on the matter of jurisdiction? If it is not finances or a promised amnesty that made them reconsider their heroic stand of last year, what else then? And, why now? How can Trillanes, et al. forget too soon that the terms agreed upon for their laying down their arms were not followed, so that there is all likelihood that the terms for their admission of guilt and their apologies could suffer the same fate?
Looking back to the tense hours of the mutiny in July last year, one can only praise Trillanes, et al. for their act of courage, to bring to the fore the underlying causes of disquiet among the military: corruption, corruption and more corruption. Now they are saluting in public their commander-in-chief, with contrite hearts, forsaking everything that they mutinied for. This must be a very discouraging act to the 316 others who went along with Trillanes, et al. to Oakwood, and very disheartening to the thousands who expected this bunch of idealists to pursue till kingdom come their dream of a reformed military establishment.
Trillanes, et al. have taken their contrition into dangerous territory. By surrendering their idealism to the very object of their grievances, the mutineers have derogated themselves into fighting men who are no better than mercenaries. This softening up exposes the threat of the heavy hand going down hard on them. Plead guilty, apologize, and betray your leaders, or else…. This about-face speaks less of the mutineers’ nobility of intentions - and much more of the Commander-in-Chief’s firm grip on the trigger of the gun and lock of the purse.
Will the Oakwood mutineers’ act of contrition write finis to further acts of those who have a legitimate grievance to ventilate? Hardly.
On the contrary, it would encourage more disgruntled soldiers to vent their anger on the ringleaders of the corruption. That snappy salute of Trillanes, et al. was a finely honed knife that cut deep into the hearts of thousands of others who cannot accept the admission of guilt and the profession of apology. The smoldering anger within them that was dissipated by the mutiny is still there. One day, that anger might just explode again one more time, with or without Trillanes, et al.. Absent any real government action to address the problems that were denounced last year - the report and recommendations of the Feliciano Commission notwithstanding - the seeds of mutiny will continue to flourish.
Already, it is evident that there is lack of sincerity behind that triumphal smirk in the countenance of the Commander-in-Chief. One week after the apologies, we are nowhere any nearer to hearing any acknowledgment of responsibility coming from those under whose watch the corruption and other causes of the mutiny were committed and still continue to be committed. Ever since the mutiny, no positive action has been taken to address the causes of military restiveness. Those who broke away from formation, as it were, to speak up for reforms have been told to stand down and remain at ease.
Can we hope that Trillanes, et al. might have assured themselves that, like them, those who fight and run away live to fight and win some other day? Are they telling their comrades-in-arms that, for the expedient moment, this is merely a case of apologize-now-mutiny-again-later?
I suppose not. We have had enough of adventurism that have only made their leaders heroes today and bums tomorrow. Only the danger that slowly simmers and suddenly explodes and eventually triumphs like EDSA1 is good enough. In a democracy such as ours, where a few self-righteous men could easily toy around with our noble aspirations, another failure is just too much to bear. The mutineers themselves said as much in their apology: “…, as succeeding events have shown, the Filipino people did not agree with our means of expression. As a result, we humbly faced the consequences of our actions and moved on.”
Which is why it is nauseating to see a government that is capable of doing everything good and yet does nothing. A government trembling at the frightening verity that it is still in place, because those it governs abhor the violent means offered to remove it, unfortunately cannot reciprocate with good governance. A government that is perfectly in control and can resist all attacks on its moorings should be enlightened enough to govern well. But nothing seems to be the answer to such a call. The will to do good is simply not there. While the mouth professes goodness the heart has become insensitive. Dense. And there lies the danger.
This government may be so dense as not to feel the inarticulate cry of the disgruntled. Out of fear of further fracturing the military or because of her weakness of character, the commander-in-chief would certainly wimp out of a genuine application of military justice for the Oakwood mutineers, effectively ensuring a sequence of coup attempts to be waged against her. One of them just might finally succeed. This government need not wait for cataclysm to set in. It has all the chances to set things right.
Will the Oakwood mutineers’ act of contrition write finis to further acts of those who have a legitimate grievance to ventilate? Hardly.
On the contrary, it would encourage more disgruntled soldiers to vent their anger on the ringleaders of the corruption. That snappy salute of Trillanes, et al. was a finely honed knife that cut deep into the hearts of thousands of others who cannot accept the admission of guilt and the profession of apology. The smoldering anger within them that was dissipated by the mutiny is still there. One day, that anger might just explode again one more time, with or without Trillanes, et al.. Absent any real government action to address the problems that were denounced last year - the report and recommendations of the Feliciano Commission notwithstanding - the seeds of mutiny will continue to flourish.
Already, it is evident that there is lack of sincerity behind that triumphal smirk in the countenance of the Commander-in-Chief. One week after the apologies, we are nowhere any nearer to hearing any acknowledgment of responsibility coming from those under whose watch the corruption and other causes of the mutiny were committed and still continue to be committed. Ever since the mutiny, no positive action has been taken to address the causes of military restiveness. Those who broke away from formation, as it were, to speak up for reforms have been told to stand down and remain at ease.
Can we hope that Trillanes, et al. might have assured themselves that, like them, those who fight and run away live to fight and win some other day? Are they telling their comrades-in-arms that, for the expedient moment, this is merely a case of apologize-now-mutiny-again-later?
I suppose not. We have had enough of adventurism that have only made their leaders heroes today and bums tomorrow. Only the danger that slowly simmers and suddenly explodes and eventually triumphs like EDSA1 is good enough. In a democracy such as ours, where a few self-righteous men could easily toy around with our noble aspirations, another failure is just too much to bear. The mutineers themselves said as much in their apology: “…, as succeeding events have shown, the Filipino people did not agree with our means of expression. As a result, we humbly faced the consequences of our actions and moved on.”
Which is why it is nauseating to see a government that is capable of doing everything good and yet does nothing. A government trembling at the frightening verity that it is still in place, because those it governs abhor the violent means offered to remove it, unfortunately cannot reciprocate with good governance. A government that is perfectly in control and can resist all attacks on its moorings should be enlightened enough to govern well. But nothing seems to be the answer to such a call. The will to do good is simply not there. While the mouth professes goodness the heart has become insensitive. Dense. And there lies the danger.
This government may be so dense as not to feel the inarticulate cry of the disgruntled. Out of fear of further fracturing the military or because of her weakness of character, the commander-in-chief would certainly wimp out of a genuine application of military justice for the Oakwood mutineers, effectively ensuring a sequence of coup attempts to be waged against her. One of them just might finally succeed. This government need not wait for cataclysm to set in. It has all the chances to set things right.
No comments:
Post a Comment