Authoritarianism Is Not Efficiency : Philippine Coup Isn’t Justifiable; Democratic Commitment Is

As a sense of normality begins to return to Manila after last week’s attempted coup, President Corazon Aquino’s firmness and resolve have been made clear.

But both challenges and opportunities lie ahead. The full effect of the coup attempt on the cohesion and effectiveness of the Philippine armed forces, a vast majority of which remained loyal to Aquino, is yet to be felt. Its very instigation reveals the deep schism that remains between the military and Aquino’s civilian government.

The coup attempt almost certainly will exacerbate suspicions between these two power centers, at least in the short run. But there is reason to hope that its firm defeat will foster the development of a more professional military, fully subservient to civilian rule. The process of healing will take time, but it is essential if the government is to devote its full attention to the serious economic and security problems it faces. A professional, competent military working closely with elected authority in a spirit of mutual trust is essential to any democracy facing threats like that posed by the Philippine communist insurgency.

What can the United States do to help this process along? It is paramount that we continue to support the democratic process and reject clearly and without hesitation all extralegal attempts to seize power. President Reagan acted properly and quickly in doing just that by expressing his “unqualified support” for Aquino in her hour of difficulty. Had the coup succeeded, the United States, pursuant to Section 513 of the 1987 Foreign Assistance Act prohibiting aid to countries whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree, would have cut off all aid to the illegal government. This would have had a devastating effect on Philippine economic-recovery efforts.

Americans and Filipinos alike should reject the notion that democracy is inconsistent with efficient government in times of crisis. Coup leader Gregorio Honasan’s apparent frustrations with the perceived inefficiency of the government’s counterinsurgency effort and his unhappiness with Armed Forces Chief of Staff Fidel V. Ramos’ leadership do not justify the actions that the colonel took. One has only to look at the damage caused by martial law under the rule of Ferdinand Marcos to know that authoritarianism in the name of efficiency just doesn’t work. It is in neither Philippine nor U.S. interests; democracies once destroyed are too hard to resurrect.

Democracy is inherently an inefficient and messy process, requiring free debate and an implicit faith in the people to do the right thing. It may not be the most efficient way of doing business, but it is the only way to preserve freedom and ensure public accountability and rule by law. It may not always result in good policies, or ones that particularly please us, but policies that don’t work are more apt to be corrected than not.

Aquino knows this, and, as the mutiny unfolded, it became clear that the great majority of members of the armed forces know it, too. They chose, at great peril and probably with some ambivalence, to put their lives squarely on the side of freedom.

We in the United States should not confuse Philippine criticism of the Aquino administration, a logical outcome of the restoration of political institutions, with widespread political disaffection from her rule.

By all accounts, Aquino remains widely popular. The United States must avoid being manipulated by Philippine politicians who seek to enlist us in the factional struggles and succession jockeying that, with the convening of the new Congress in July, have already begun in earnest and are certain to continue with renewed intensity in the months ahead. American television networks, for example, were not particularly helpful by falling all over themselves to interview Marcos--the very individual responsible for the sorry state of the Philippine political system and economy today. Such attention only lends false credibility to the Filipinos’ worst fears: that Washington would back a return bid for power by the former dictator.

Finally, the United States must remember that, while the immediate crisis is over, the problems in the Philippines are many and serious. In the months ahead Washington will be called on to support in tangible ways Aquino’s efforts to strengthen the roots of the democratic political institutions, bring about sustained economic growth and defeat the menacing communist threat.

These goals will require sustained, high levels of economic and security assistance. In particular, efforts to strengthen the military’s capabilities and professionalism must be well funded. Even in these days of budget austerity it would be far better, and certainly less costly over the long run, for us to help the Philippines surmount its problems now. Otherwise we may see a far more serious communist challenge to that fledgling democracy, and to our own vital security interests in the Philippines, some years down the road.