iraq solidarity campaign

Filipino Anti-War Groups Picket Korean Embassy, Demand Withdrawal of Troops from Iraq

2005-09-28T01:07:00.000-07:00

September 23 -- Members of the Iraq Solidarity Campaign (ISC) picketed the Korean Embassy in Manila's central business district to demand the withdrawal of Korean troops from the US-led coalition occupying Iraq.

"US and Korean troops out of Iraq" and "No to an illegitimate foreign policy from an illegitimate president!", read the group's banner.

Among the protesters were seven representatives from the Korean community in the Philippines. Fr Robert Reyes, more popularly known as the "running priest" and a long-time anti-war advocate, was also present.

He was joined representatives from the ISC, a broad coalition of social movements, political parties, religious organizations, women's groups, NGOs, and other organizations and individuals that has been campaigning for an end to the US-led occupation of Iraq.

Organizers of the picket said they chose to focus on the Korean government this time because it has 2,800 troops in Iraq -- the third largest contingent in the US-led coalition after the United States and the United Kingdom. The ISC has marched to the US embassy on several occasions in the past.

"We denounce our fellow Asians' participation in the illegal occupation of another Asian people's land," said Cora Fabros, an ISC member. "The Korean troops -- under the command of the US -- are depriving the Iraqis of true sovereignty and democracy."

The protest action was part of an international day of action called for by US anti-war groups who are organizing what could be the biggest march against the war in the United States since Bush was re-elected. Anti-war coalitions in the UK, Japan, Korea, Greece, Turkey, and other countries are also scheduled to hold protest actions.#

STATEMENT ON THE LONDON BOMBINGS

2005-07-17T20:49:00.000-07:00

IRAQ SOLIDARITY CAMPAIGN- PHILIPPINES
Manila, 15 July 2005

As calls for the Philippine President's resignation gain ground, we at the Iraq Solidarity Campaign-Philippines pause to join the world in mourning the tragic deaths of dozens of innocent civilians in London. We offer our sympathies to those who have suffered from last week¹s bombings; even as we extend our compassion for all those who continue to suffer under war and domination in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, as well as in Southern Thailand, Aceh, Mindanao, and many other places around the world. Each life lost in London is as precious as any life lost because of war anywhere in the world.

As many of us said after 9-11, after similar incidents of violence in Manila and across the country, and after the Madrid bombings: Our grief is not a cry for war.

We condemn as depraved opportunism efforts to use the attacks to justify vengeful wars and occupations, to foment racism, and to impose repressive security measures. A senior British investigator has said that there is not enough evidence to make "even a sensible guess" as to who was responsible and yet government officials and the media have put the entire Muslim community under suspicion. We oppose the questioning, arrest, and detention of suspects on the bases of their ethnicity or religion.

We reject any move capitalizing on the London bombings to continue or to intensify the "war against terror," to purse militarization, and to entrench draconian anti-terror legislation and other measures around the world.

We renounce the racism and hypocrisy of all those who call the attacks in London as 'terrorism' but who consider the death of between 20,000 to 100,000 Iraqis as a result of the war and occupation as merely "collateral damage."

While we abhor and condemn any attacks against innocent civilians, we also cannot clear British Prime Minister Tony Blair of any responsibility because of his leading role in the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

We in the Philippines have also suffered from similar cases of violence which could likewise not be dissociated from embattled President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's complicity in US-led wars abroad and at home.

This most recent episode of violence proves that the US,' the UK's, and their allied governments', including the Philippines' response to terrorism has not stopped bloodshed; on the contrary, they have exacerbated it and they have dragged us all into a cycle of bloodletting. We at the Iraq Solidarity Campaign call for an end to this cycle of violence by calling for a stop to the so-called "war against terror;" an end to the occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine; and an end to a drive for global domination that spawn injustice and suffering.#

Where Next for the Anti-War and Anti-Globalization Movements?

2004-09-20T03:46:00.000-07:00

Speech at the Assembly in Beirut, Lebanon, Sept. 17, 2004

By Walden Bello*

We are assembled here in Beirut at a critical moment. It is a moment marked by crosscurrents:In Iraq, the US gets deeper and deeper into a Vietnam-style quagmire, with the number of American soldiers killed since the March 20, 2003 invasion passing the 1,000 mark in the first week of September

Yet in Palestine, the Zionist Wall continues to be built at the rate of a kilometer a day.
A year ago, on September 14, 2003, some of us in this hall were in Cancun, Mexico, dancing with joy at the Convention Center as we celebrated the collapse of the Fifth Ministerial Meeting of the World Trade Organization. Today, the WTO, the supreme institution of corporate-driven globalization, is back on its feet with the adoption last month of the Geneva Framework Document designed to speed up the economic disarmament of developing countries.

In New York a few weeks back, we saw massive repudiation of George W. Bush and his pro-war policies by over 500,000 people that marched in the streets of New York. Yet, today, polls show that the same George Bush has a 10 per cent lead over John Kerry in the lead-up to elections the results of which will have a massive impact on the fate of the world in the next few years.

The future, comrades, is in the balance, as we meet in this historic city, with its glorious history of resistance to Israeli aggression and American intervention. As you know, many more people wanted to come to Beirut to be with us. The size, breadth, and diversity of our assembly here today underline the strength, the power of our movement.

It would be useful to briefly review our history over the last decade to gain an appreciation of where we are today.

March from Marginalization

Less than 10 years ago, our movement was marginalized. The founding of the WTO in 1995 seemed to signal that globalization was the wave of the future, and that those who opposed it were destined to suffer the same fate as the Luddites that fought against the introduction of machines during the industrial revolution. Globalization was going to bring prosperity in its wake, and how could one oppose the promise of the greatest good for the greatest number that the transnational corporations, guided by the invisible hand of the market, were going to shower the world?

But the movement stood firm in the face of the scorn of the establishment during the 1990’s, when the boom in the world’s mightiest capitalist engine—the US economy—appeared to be destined to go on and on. It was steadfast in its prediction that, driven by the logic of corporate profitability, the liberalization and deregulation of trade and finance would bring about crises, widen inequalities within and across countries, and increase global poverty.

The Asian financial crisis in 1997 provided sudden, savage proof of the destabilizing impact of eliminating controls from the flow of global capital. Indeed, what could be more savage than the fact that the crisis would bring 1 million people in Thailand and 22 million people in Indonesia below the poverty line in the space of a few weeks in the fateful summer of 1997?

The Asian financial crisis was one of those momentous events that removed the scales from people’s eyes and enabled them see cold, brutal realities. And one of those realities was the fact that the free market policies that the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank imposed on some 100 developing and transitional economies had induced, in all but a handful of them, not a virtuous circle of growth, prosperity, and equality but a vicious cycle of economic stagnation, poverty, and inequality. The year 2001 brought us not only Sept. 11. 2001 was also the year of reckoning for free-market fundamentalism—the year that the Argentine economy, the poster boy of neoliberal economics, crashed, while in the United States, the contradictions of finance-driven, deregulated global capitalism wiped out $4.6 trillion in investor wealth—half of the US’ gross domestic product—and inaugurated a period of stagnation and rising unemployment from which the world’s central capitalist economy has not recovered till today.

As global capitalism moved from crisis to crisis, people organized in the streets, in work places, in the political arena to counter its destructive logic. In December 1999, massive street resistance by over 50,000 demonstrators combined with a revolt of the developing governments inside the Seattle convention center to bring down the third ministerial of the WTO. Global protests also eroded the legitimacy of the IMF and the World Bank, the two other pillars of global economic governance, albeit in less dramatic fashion. Anti-neoliberal mass movements brought new governments to power in Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, and Bolivia. The fifth ministerial meeting in Cancun, an event associated in many people’s minds with the altruistic suicide of the Korean farmer and Via Campesina activist Lee Kyung-Hae at the barricades, became Seattle II. And, in November last year, in Miami, the same alliance of civil society and developing country governments forced Washington to retreat from the neoliberal program of radical liberalization of trade, finance, and investment that it had threatened to impose in the western hemisphere via the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

Fighting against Empire

The fight for global justice and equity has been one thrust of our movement. The other has been the struggle against militarism and war. For the movement against imperial intervention, the 1980’s and 1990’s were not good decades. National liberation struggles retreated, lost momentum, or were compromised in many parts of the world. Of course, there were exceptions, as in South Africa, where the ANC came to power; Palestine, where the first Intifadah handed Israel a political and military defeat; Lebanon, from where the US fled in 1983 after 241 American Marines perished in the bombing of their base located just a few kilometers away from here, and from where the Israelis were gradually squeezed out over the next decade; and, not to forget, Somalia, where the destruction of a US Ranger unit in Mogadishu forced the Clinton administration to terminate its military intervention in October 1993.

The ideologues of globalization promoted the illusion that accelerated globalization would bring about the reign of “perpetual peace.” In contrast, our movement warned that as globalization proceeded, its economically and socially destabilizing effects would multiply conflicts and insecurities. Driven by corporate logic, globalization, we warned, would herald an era of aggressive imperialism that would seek to batter down opposition, seize control of natural resources, and secure markets.

We were proved right, but it took us some time to gain our bearings.

We were still too disoriented by the events of September 11, 2001, and by the internal politics of Afghanistan to enable us to respond effectively to the US invasion of that country. But it was soon clear that the so-called War against Terror was simply an excuse for implementing a quest for Absolute Military Supremacy or, in Pentagon jargon, “Full Spectrum Dominance.”

In late 2002 and early 2003, the movement finally swung into action, becoming a global force for justice and peace that mobilized tens of millions of people throughout the world on Feb. 15, 2003, against the planned invasion of Iraq. We did not succeed in stopping the American and British invasion, but we have surely contributed to delegitimizing the Occupation and made it increasingly difficult for invaders that have brazenly violated international law and many rules of the Geneva Convention to remain in Iraq.

The New York Times, on the occasion of the Feb. 15, 2003, march, said that there are only two superpowers left in the world today, the United States and global civil society. Let me add that I have no doubt that the forces of justice and peace will prevail over the contemporary incarnation of empire, blood, terror, and greed that is the USA.

Iraq, the Resistance, and the Movement

Our movement is on the ascendant. But our agenda is massive, our tasks formidable. To name just a few: We have to drive the US out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We must stop Israel’s increasingly genocidal policies against the Palestinian people. We must impose the rule of law on outlaw, rogue states like the US, Britain, and Israel. Moreover, we have some way to go before becoming a critical mass that will decisively affect the struggle for national liberation in Iraq.

Let me explain. Over the last few months, there have been two defining events in Iraq. one was the expose of systematic sexual abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison facility outside Baghdad. The second was the uprising in Fallujah in April.

The Abu Ghraib scandal, which has angered most of the world and shamed most Americans, stripped the last shred of legitimacy from the US presence in Iraq. The uprising in Fallujah, which saw Iraqi men, women, and children fighters defeat the elite of Washington’s colonial legions, the US Marines, was the turning point of the Iraqi war of national liberation. Fallujah was followed by uprisings in other cities like Najaf and Ramadi. It showed that the Iraqi resistance is not one carried out by remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime but one that is widespread, popular, and on the ascendant.

Let me read you a recent account from the New York Times on the conditions in Ramadi and Falluja, which are pretty much a microcosm of Iraq at this point. It says that “American efforts to build a government structure around former Baath party stalwarts…have collapsed.” Instead, both cities and much of Anbar Province, “are now controlled by…militias, with US troops confined mainly to heavily protected forts on the desert’s edge. What little influence the Americans have is asserted through wary forays in armored vehicles, and by laser-guided bombs…[But] even bombing raids appear to strengthen the [militias], who blame the Americans for scores of civilian deaths.”

The question, friends and comrades, is no longer whether Washington will eventually be defeated by the Iraqi resistance. It will be defeated. The question is how long it will hang on to an impossible situation. on the resolution of this issue, our role in the global peace movement has a very important bearing.

Washington hangs on despite the daily attacks on its troops by the resistance. Given this situation, the victory of the Iraqi people’s resistance will definitely be hastened by one thing: the emergence of a strong global anti-war movement such as that which took to the streets daily and in the thousands before and after the Tet Offensive in 1968. So far that has not materialized, though opposition to the US presence in Iraq is the dominant global sentinment and disillusionment with their government’s policies in Iraq has now spread to a majority of the US public.

Indeed, at the very time that it is most needed by the people of Iraq, the international peace movement has had trouble getting into gear. The demonstrations on March 20, 2004, were significantly smaller than the Feb.15, 2003, when tens of millions marched throughout the world against the projected invasion of Iraq. The kind of international mass pressure that makes an impact on policymakers—the daily staging of demonstration after demonstration in the hundreds of thousands in city after city—is simply not in evidence, at least not yet.

Perhaps a major part of the reason is that a significant part of the international peace movement hesitates to legitimize the Iraqi resistance. Who are they? Can we really support them? These questions have increasingly been flung at the advocates of an unconditional military and political withdrawal from Iraq. Let us face it: the use of suicide as a political weapon continues to bother many activists who were repelled by statements such as that of the Palestinian leaders who proudly asserted that suicide bombers were the oppressed people’s equivalent of the F-16. Let us face it: the fact that a large part of the resistance in both Iraq and Palestine is Islamic rather than secular in inspiration continues to bother many western peace activists.

Yet there has never been any pretty movement for national liberation or independence. Many progressives were also repelled by some of the methods of the “Mau Mau” movement in Kenya, the FLN in Algeria, the NLF in Vietnam. What progressives forget is that national liberation movements are not asking them mainly for ideological or political support. What they really want from the outside, from progressive like us, is international pressure for the withdrawal of an illegitimate occupying power so that internal forces can have the space to forge a truly national government based on their unique processes. Until they give up their implicit conditioning of their actions on the guarantee that a national liberation movement tailored to their values and discourse will be the one to come to power, many peace activists will continue to be trapped within a paradigm of imposing their terms on other people.

Let me be clear. We cannot promote conditional solutions--even one that says US and Coalition troop withdrawal only if there is a UN security presence that takes the place of the Americans. The only principled stand is: Unconditional withdrawal of US and Coalition military and political forces now. Period.

But if the future in Iraq itself continues to hang in the balance, the Iraqi resistance has already helped to transform the global equation.

The US is weaker today than it was before May 1, 2003, when Bush declared victory in Iraq. The Atlantic Alliance that won the Cold War no longer functions, largely because of the division over Iraq. Spain and the Philippines have been forced to withdraw their troops from Iraq, and Thailand has now quietly followed suit, contributing further to US isolation. The situation in Afghanistan is more unstable now than last year, with the US writ extending only to the outskirts of Kabul. Militant Islam, which the US now considers its enemy no. 1, is now more vigorously spreading throughout Southeast Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East. In Latin America, we now have massive popular anti-neoliberal and anti-US movements in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, and Bolivia that are either in government or are making it difficult for governments to maintain their neoliberal, free market policies. Hugo Chavez has frontally challenged imperialism in its own backyard, and he remains in power owing to the organized support of the Venezuelan people. More power to him and the Venezuelan people!

Owing to its hubris, the US is suffering from that fatal disease of all empires—imperial overstretch. Our role, to echo that great Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara, is to worsen this crisis of overextension, not only by creating or expanding movements of international solidarity against the US in Iraq, the US-Israel axis in Palestine, and the creeping US intervention in Colombia. It is also by giving birth or reinvigorating struggles against the US imperial presence in our own countries and regions. For instance, the struggle against the US bases in Northeast Asia and the renewed US military presence via the so-called War on Terror in Southeast Asia is one that we from East Asia must rededicate ourselves to.

Towards a New Global Economic Order

Struggle against imperialism and war is one front of our struggle. The other front is the struggle to change the rules of the global economy, for it is the logic of global capitalism whose fountainheads are the US, the European Union, and Japan that is the source of the disruption of society and of the environment. The challenge here goes beyond simply disempowering institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization, though this task must not be underestimated—witness, for instance, the recent resurrection in Geneva of the WTO, which many of us thought had suffered a major blow to its foundations in Cancun.

The challenge is that even as we deconstruct the old, we dare to imagine and win over people to our visions and programs for the new. Contrary to the claims of the ideologues of the establishment, the principles that would serve as the pillars of a new global order are present. The primordial principle is that instead of the economy, the market, driving society, the market must be--to use the image of the great Hungarian scholar Karl Polanyi—“reembedded” in society and governed by the overarching values of community, solidarity, justice, and equity. At the international level, the global economy must be deglobalized or rid of the distorting, disfiguring logic of corporate profitability and truly internationalized, meaning that participation in the international economy must serve to strengthen and develop rather than disintegrate and destroy local and national economies.

The perspective and principles are there; the challenge is how each society can articulate these principles and programs in unique ways that respond to their values, their rhythms, their personality as societies. Call us post-modern, but central to our movement is the conviction that, in contrast to the belief common to both neoliberalism and bureaucratic socialism, there is no one shoe that will fit all. It is no longer a question of an alternative but of alternatives. And unless there is a new global order built on the principles of justice, sovereignty, and respect for diversity, there will be no real peace.

Two Challenges

But let me end by returning to our urgent task, which is to defeat the US in Iraq and Israel in Palestine. We are all here not to celebrate our strength but, most important, to address our weaknesses over the next few days.

Let me just say that one of the challenges that we will be addressing is how we get beyond spontaneous actions, beyond coordination that remains at the level of coordinating international days of protest. The enemy is extremely well coordinated at a global level and we have no choice but to match that level of coordination and cooperation. But we must match it in with a professionalism that respects our democratic practices—indeed, we must confront it in ways that turns our democratic practice into an advantage.

The other challenge that I would like to highlight is that of closing the political and cultural gap between the global movements for justice and peace and their counterparts in the Arab and Islamic worlds. This is a gap that imperialism has exploited to the hilt, with its effort to paint most of our Arab and Muslim comrades as terrorists or supporters of terrorism. We cannot allow this situation to continue, which is the reason we are holding this meeting in Beirut. Indeed, let me say that unless the global movements and the Arab movements forge tight, organic ties of solidarity, we will not win the struggle against corporate-driven globalization and imperialism.
So, friends, the future of the struggle is in the balance—a balance that will be affected by what happens here in Beirut in the next few days. Will we advance, stay in place, or retreat? The answer is one that depends on each one of the over 300 registered delegates that have come here from all over the world. I am cautiously confident. Why? Because I know the goodwill is there, the tolerance for differences is there, and the political will is there to achieve unified action to overcome the forces of injustice, oppression, and death.

Thank you.

*Walden Bello was awarded the Right Livelihood Award for 2003. The prize is better known as the Alternative Nobel Prize. Bello is executive director of the Bangkok-based research organization Focus on the Global South and a professor of sociology and public administration at the University of the Philippines

2004-08-15T19:37:00.000-07:00

"It's time we abandon the empire" Herbert Docena of Gathering for Peace and the Iraq Solidarity Campaign at a forum on Philippine Foreign Policy at UP. 12 August 2004. Photo by joseph p.

On the Side of Empire?

2004-08-12T21:33:00.000-07:00

By Herbert Docena

In 1948, George Kennan, then a director of planning at the US State Department, wrote what has become a classic quote among foreign policy circles. “We have about 60 per cent of the world's wealth but only 6.3 per cent of its population,” he said. Our real task in the coming period (willbe) to maintain this position of disparity... We will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming...The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.... The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”

These days, as we are forced to assess our country’s foreign policy in light of the Angelo dela Cruz episode, we should listen to Kennan: Let’s dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming. Now is the time for a clean break in our foreign policy and reviewing it requires nothing less than an honest and accurate assessment of the world we’re living in.

Refusing to be hampered by slogans, many foreign policy analysts and commentators around the world have been left with no choice ¬ what with the invasion of Iraq ¬ but to refer to the United States using the “e”-word: “Empire.” Even in the United States, where most commentators have developed an allergy to the word, many people have now taken to open talking about their country as an “Empire.” In fact, one of the most-talked-about books in the US these days is Niall Ferguson’s Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire. A professor of history at the New York University, Ferguson looks back in history and argues “not merely that the United States is an empire, but that it has always been an empire.”

The best way then for us to begin charting a new direction for our foreign policy is to come to terms with what we’re dealing with and to not see the world through ideological blinders. We can argue over the semantics and the nuances of the label. We can debate about the differences among the Roman, British, and American styles of empire. In talking to the press or in diplomatic circles, we can call it by other names. We can try to be polite and talk about “unilateralism” or “dominance” or “hegemony” even if we actually mean “imperialism.”

But in seriously rethinking our foreign policy, let us listen to Kennan and deal in straight power concepts: How else do we explain the actions of a superpower that, according to former State Secretary Madeleine Albright, will be “multilateral if we can but unilateral if we must;” that flouts international law and goes unpunished; that over the past century, according to the US Congressional Research Service, has engaged in over 200 military interventions abroad; that has a military presence in over 100 countries in order to, as the Pentagon itself puts it, “impose the will of the United States and its coalition partners on any adversaries.”

We live in a world in which a sole superpower does not hesitate to use its being the world’s sole superpower in order to remain as the world’s sole superpower. The United States is the strongest, most powerful empire in history ¬ more powerful than both the Roman and British empires ¬ and it does not hesitate to use its massive economic and military might to advance and defend its interests around the world. The first step in re-examining our foreign policy is to acknowledge this; to deny it is to conduct foreign policy ¬ in another planet. Whether we like it or not, our foreign policy will have to respond to this reality.

Angelo dela Cruz has merely forced us to confront the overarching question for our foreign policy yet again: Are we on the side of Empire? Or more precisely, should we continue to be on its side? This in turn leads us to the bigger question: Do we want to live in a world with Empire? And does being on the side of Empire help us in building that world? Our answer to these questions will determine our response to day-to-day concerns: Should we still send troops to Iraq? Should we be "major non-NATO ally"? How do we deal with China and our neighbors? It depends on whether we are on the side of Empire. On a pragmatic level alone, the cost of sidling up to the United States far outweighs the benefits. Sure, we get millions of dollars in military aid and trade concessions. But even NEDA Secretary Romulo Neri himself has admitted that the amount of aid we get from the US has been “overrated.” Professor Raymund Quilop of the National Defense College of the Philippines has confirmed that the war materiel we get are hand-me-downs that the US needs to throw away anyway. Instead of making us more secure, our being a major non-NATO ally has only made us become the target of reprisals as the enemies of the United States also become our own. If for every ten bombs we get from the United States, we also make ten new enemies determined to bomb us, does that make us secure?

Part of the “assistance” we get from USAID should be banned, not welcomed.
This aid usually comes in the form of grants for projects that aim to transform our laws and institutions to become more favorable to foreign investors to the detriment of our economy. Remember the USAID-funded AGILE.

Despite our much-vaunted special relationship with the US, our trading relationship with them remains unequal and unbalanced.

It is not only that the costs exceed the benefit but that the ones who get the benefits are not the same ones who bear the costs. The case of Angelo dela Cruz and our support for the invasion of Iraq is a case in point: in exchange for equipment for the military, reconstruction contracts for some Filipino businessmen, and support for Arroyo’s presidency, we endangered the lives of millions of our Overseas Filipino Workers in the Middle East. It is the businessmen who get their million-dollar contracts and the generals who get their guns ¬ but it is the likes of Rodrigo Reyes, the forgotten Filipino driver killed in Iraq, who pay with their lives. The interests of the military, the interests of business, and the interests of the President should not be equated with the “national” interest.

But no matter what the benefits are, it is simply wrong to support the illegal and immoral actions of Empire. We should not get the things we get from the US by helping it illegally invade another country. The price of the military equipment we receive from the US should not be the sovereignty of other people. It is precisely by being identified with the US’ aggressive and self-interested military aggressions and interventions in pursuit of empire-building that we become legitimate targets of those branded as “terrorists.” By partaking in the invasion of Iraq in exchange for contracts, we lost the moral high ground, making it difficult for us to tell the “terrorists” that what they are doing is reprehensible. We cannot be an accomplice to an illegal war that has killed over 10,000 innocent civilians and preach compassion.

The foreign policy consensus is that it’s better to be on the side of Empire because it’s always better to be on the side of the powerful. We’re just a weak, impoverished country after all and the world out there is nasty, brutish, and short. We don’t like it that way and it could all be better but that’s just the way it is and let’s just get the most from it. We don’t necessarily approve of how the US runs the world and how it treats us but the alternative to not being on its side is so much worse. The question, however, is this: If we really believe that as a country, we would really be much better off in a world without empire, then doesn’t our support for Empire perpetuate precisely the kind of world that we don’t want to live in? Empires don’t last without loyal vassals like us. The Empire needs us more than we need it.

George Kennan said their task is to maintain the disparity; ours therefore is to dislodge it. It was time we withdrew from the coalition occupying Iraq. It is also now time we abandon the Empire.

* Herbert Docena is a foreign policy analyst with Focus on the Global South, an international policy research center based in Bangkok. This essay was presented at the forum “Hostaged? Philippine Foreign Policy after Angelo dela Cruz” in UP Diliman last August 12.

A Filipino's Guide to Iraq

2004-08-11T01:34:00.000-07:00

BRIEFING PAPER #1
Iraq Solidarity Campaign - Philippines

What is now happening in Iraq?

In March last year, without any UN authorization and in violation of international law, the United States, along with other coalition members including the Philippines, invaded Iraq. They cited the supposed danger posed to the world by Iraq's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and its alleged links with Osama bin Lade despite evidence available even then that such claims were unfounded. A year after, the pretexts used to justify the war have all been proven to be lies.

Meanwhile, between 11,000 to 13,000 Iraqis and up to 1,000 coalition troops have been killed.
Still, the occupation continues. The United States and the remaining members of the "Coalition of the Willing," continue to attempt to wield ultimate power over the country. Despite the so-called "transfer of sovereignty" last June 30, Iraq is still neither sovereign nor independent. The occupation has not ended.

But the resistance is also growing. Iraqis have launched a war of national liberation to drive out the occupiers and to regain their freedom. According to a recent survey, a staggering 92% of Iraqis view all occupation forces as "occupiers" not as "liberators." Up to 55% of Iraqis now want the US and all the coalition forces to leave. The best way to understand how the Iraqis feel and what they are doing is to look back to our own history. When the US occupied the Philippines last century, Filipinos like Apolinario Mabini and Macario Sakay also fought back. This is why we should think of ourselves as yesterday¹s Iraqis and why we should see the Iraqis as today's Filipinos.

What did Angelo dela Cruz have to do with all that?

The abduction of foreign hostages in Iraq is part of the Iraqi resistance fighters¹ tactics to pressure foreign governments into withdrawing their support for the US-led occupation of their country. As a member of the US-led coalition, the resistance saw our troops in Iraq not as a "humanitarian mission" but as unwelcome "occupiers" helping the United States occupy their country. While the Filipino soldiers may have built roads or schools, they did so in an attempt to help the US achieve its political objective of making the occupation more acceptable to the Iraqis.
Why did President Arroyo support the war in the first place?

President Arroyo was quite straightforward: in justifying the war, she herself said that she sent our troops to Iraq so that Filipino businessmen can get reconstruction contracts and so that our OFWs can be employed there by reconstruction contractors. In other words, the Philippine government wanted to profit from the occupation of another country. Iraqis know that.
On a more general level, President Arroyo supported the war as part of her administration's relationship with the United States. Only the US and Arroyo know exactly what's the deal. But as in the past and as in the case with other countries, the US usually gets what it wants from other governments by offering them military aid, loans, trade concessions or other forms of inducement. The US has also been documented to support pro-US candidates during elections and to protect their regimes once in power.

But Angelo and the other OFWs in Iraq are merely trying to earn a living.
Should we be against that?

Our workers should only have been sent to Iraq at the invitation of an independent Iraqi government and at their own terms not by the occupiers and not without the Iraqis' consent. It does not help that many of our OFWs in Iraq are employed by such contractors as Bechtel and Halliburton infamous American corporations which are currently being investigated in the US for corruption and which many Iraqis see as profiting from the destruction of their country. The risk now, in fact, is that an independent Iraqi government could decide to ban our workers' in the future because of our government¹s participation in the invasion and occupation of their own country.

Iraqis want to begin rebuilding their own country and they will most likely need our help. But they can't start unless the occupation ends.

OK, let's assume for the sake of argument that the Iraqis are right to resist the occupation. But isn't beheading prisoners wrong?

First of all, we have to understand that the resistance is composed of many different factions with varying aims and different strategies and little coordination and communication among themselves. A united front against the occupation, with an over-all command structure, has yet to emerge. What is clear, however, is that the demand for an end to the occupation has widespread and popular support among Iraqis.

We don't have to approve of all of their tactics to understand why they resort to kidnappings and beheadings: Faced with the overwhelming military superiority of the US and the coalition-members, Iraqis think that one way to fight back is to resort to non-conventional forms of warfare. While beheading hostages is regrettable, the kind of violence being used by the occupiers in Iraq should not be equated with the violence of the resistance.

One side uses force to illegitimately occupy another people; the other side uses it to assert their legitimate right to self-determination.

Wait, but what's this I heard in the news that sovereignty has been transferred to the Iraqis, that the occupation has actually ended?

On June 28, Coalition Provisional Authority chief Paul Bremer handed over blue envelopes not sovereignty to officials of the "interim government" in ceremonies which, they claimed, marked the end of the occupation. But there was never a "transfer of sovereignty" and the occupation has not ended, as proven by the following simple facts:

1 The "interim government" to which sovereignty was supposedly handed over was installed and chosen by the United States not by the Iraqi people. The "Prime Minister" Iyad Allawi a self-confessed CIA and M16 paid operative, as well as scores of its other officials, were handpicked by the United States. The US chose Allawi and his men precisely because they agreed to the US' conditions. Allawi and his men, for their part, chose to be installed by the US because they would not gain power if the choice were left to the Iraqis. The fact that the resistance continues only indicates that this "interim government" has no legitimacy in the eyes of many Iraqis.

2 All 140,000 plus US troops, and the 20,000 soldiers of the remaining "coalition members," are still in Iraq and intend to stay there indefinitely. They will not take orders from anyone but the US and will not be answerable to the Iraqis. If a GI shoots an Iraqi boy after mistaking him for a pig, this GI will be above the law because all the troops staying behind as well as the thousands of contractors profiting from the reconstruction are immune from prosecution.

3 The "interim government" has no real meaningful power. It is held hostage by the presence of the US-led forces: should it do anything against the wishes of the US, the coalition troops can just march out of their bases anytime and oust them. It cannot represent the will of the Iraqi people because their very survival depends on ignoring and acting against what the Iraqi people want. A majority of the Iraqis want the US to leave something the "interim government" will not demand because its very existence depends on the US' continuing presence.

The "interim government" does not even have the power to enact its own policies because the Coalition Provisional Authority has left behind an array of laws which the US does not want the "interim government" to overturn. Even if it now has authority over Iraq's oil revenues, the new "interim government" has little control over the funds because the US has used up almost all of it and has entered into long-term commitments which the "interim government" does not have the authority to revoke.

All this indicate that there was neither a "transfer" nor "sovereignty" during the June 28 "transfer of sovereignty" in Iraq.

So it's not perfect. But the situation is so messy and complicated so it's not going to be easy. Besides, the US has scheduled a step-by-step process for giving Iraqis more control. I heard that elections are even scheduled for next year.

True, it's not easy. But any solution should come from the Iraqis themselves. The political process for determining the Iraqis' new government should be determined by the Iraqis and should be respected. The US should have no role in it whatsoever. The Iraqis have been saying all along that they want free, general, and direct one-person, one vote elections. But the US has been against that all along.

Instead, the US has imposed a political process that addresses its own interests rather than that of the Iraqis. The US is against any general elections because it is are fully aware that any directly elected independent government will demand that they leave. According to the US-imposed timetable, elections will not be held until after the US has had enough time to put in place all those guarantees that will ensure that it can influence the outcome of the elections. In Iraq, as in Nicaragua, Venezuela, and many other countries around the world, the US is currently funding, training, and building up political parties and NGOs that are intended to participate in the coming elections. US support will give them a tremendous edge over other parties.

But hey, I heard that even the UN itself has said that the occupation is over. Surely, we should trust the UN on this one?

True, in a resolution passed last month, the United Nations Security Council voted 15-0 to welcome "the end the occupation" and to recognize the "interim government" as the representative of the Iraqi people. But even if the UN Security Council voted to declare that the earth is flat, we all know that it is not. Sure, the UN Security Council did not endorse the invasion of Iraq last year; but even if it did, would it have made the war right? Let us remember that Security Council members vote according to their own geo-political calculations. Germany's, France's, and Russia's desire to get a piece of the biggest reconstruction business opportunity since World War II played a part in their estimates. Remember too that countries are not immune to blackmail and intimidation. In the run-up to war last year, the US was documented to have bullied or coerced countries to vote in favor of war.

The US might not have succeeded then but that does not mean that it always fails.
What was all that "transfer of sovereignty" fuss all about then?

All that was about propaganda. The US needs to convince the world that the occupation has ended because it needs more troops and funds from other countries two things which the US could no longer afford to provide on its own. They also need to persuade the Iraqis that the occupation is over so that they'll stop fighting. As a Pentagon official admitted, "The transfer of sovereignty clearly will have an impact on security because you rid yourself of the 'occupation' label. That is one of the claims that these so-called insurgents make; that they are under American occupation. So you remove that political claim from the ideological battle.

But why would the US still want to stay in Iraq if no weapons of mass destruction have been found and so many of its soldiers are dying there?

Good question. A US Senate committee, as well as National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice and Secretary of State Colin Powell as well as UK Prime Minister Tony Blair have all confirmed that the reasons given for going to war were all lies. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and Saddam Hussein had no links with al Qaeda. This was never a war to defend the world from "WMDs" or "terrorists." It was always a war to secure the world's second largest reserves of oil, to open up the domestic markets of the Middle East, and to establish US military presence in a very important and very strategic region all in an attempt to perpetuate and extend the US' military, economic, and political domination of the world. If these were the real reasons for the invasion, then we shouldn't expect the US to just pack up and leave just like that. Too much is at stake.

But how does the US still intend to achieve those objectives?

The US has been forced to give up a certain degree of control over Iraq as direct occupying powers. But they still hope to call the shots from behind the scenes. They and not the "interim government" will continue to exercise real power in Iraq by bombs and dollars: through its indefinite military presence and its control over the $18 billion reconstruction fund for Iraq. The presence of around 160,000 foreign troops in Iraq will be like a knife held before any Iraqi government¹s neck; the reconstruction funds, on the other hand, will be more than enough incentive for some Iraqis to do as the US pleases.

The CPA may have been dissolved but power will continue to be exercised from the American embassy where the former CPA used to be. Leading the biggest US embassy in the world, with the world's biggest CIA station, is none other than former US ambassador to the Philippines John Negroponte who is accused of organizing the destabilization of the progressive revolutionary government of Nicaragua in the 1980s. Hidden within the various ministries in Iraq are scores of USAID consultants literally drafting Iraq's laws and policies on a blank slate ala AGILE in the Philippines. (In fact, Development Alternatives International, which was behind AGILE, is also now operating as USAID contractor in Iraq.)

Scattered across the country are scores of USAID contractors funding and training NGOs and other civil society organizations in order to set up the kind of civil society that will actively support or passively accept the US' preferred policies. All these to ensure that the occupation continues even after "independence" is granted. Given the striking parallelisms between our post-"independence" history with what the US intends to accomplish in Iraq, we may still be today's Iraqis and they may yet be tomorrow's Filipinos.

What should happen then?

Iraqis themselves say that they want all the foreign forces to leave and for the occupation to end. Only by ending the occupation can Iraqis begin the difficult task of rebuilding their own country. They should be given the space to decide for themselves how they will start anew how they will form their own government, how they will settle their differences, how they will cast judgment on the dictatorship, etc without any self-interested interference from outside. Any help from other countries, including possibly the presence of peacekeeping forces, should be decided on by the Iraqis themselves and on their own conditions. The United States and all those party to the invasion and occupation should be held accountable and responsible for their obligations.
Does the resistance stand a chance at all? We're talking of the world's only superpower here.
The US may enjoy tremendous military advantages over the Iraqis but that's not all that it takes to win a war. On the battle for hearts and minds, the US has decisively lost. According to a survey, as many as 81% of Iraqis now have "no confidence" in the occupation forces.

While the Iraqis may have been initially grateful for the ouster of Saddam, they now feel betrayed: the US promised to give them "democracy," but they have blocked the holding of free general elections. Instead, the "interim government" which the US installed has imposed martial law. The US promised them respect for human rights; instead, as in the case of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal where detainees were forced to perform sexual acts, they have been tortured and abused. The US promised to help them reconstruct their country; but until now, electricity has not even been fully restored because US contractors put profit above the needs of the Iraqis.
As a result of all this, the US has squandered the one thing that could have defeated the resistance: the Iraqi people¹s support. The US may have far more bombs and bullets but the resistance has popular backing. This was also the decisive imbalance in power that accounts for the defeat of the world¹s only superpower 30 years ago in Vietnam. But as in Vietnam, the Iraqis need the world¹s support.

Why should I care?

Though Iraq is far away, what is happening there affects us even here in the Philippines, as the plight of Angelo dela Cruz proves. Pragmatically speaking, our OFWs will be safer and more welcome in Iraq if they were sent there at the invitation of the Iraqis themselves. The longer the occupation continues, the longer our OFWs who are already there would continue to remain in danger.

More than this however, we should be concerned about what happens in Iraq because it is one of the most flagrant and most destructive violations of international law and international norms in recent years. The US' single-minded and unilateral pursuit of its interests in Iraq and in other parts of the world has been and remains to be the biggest threats to global peace and justice. Instead of making the world safer from al Qaeda-type "terrorists" for instance, the US is unleashing a far more lethal and more violent kind of "state terrorism" and provoking even more retaliation from "terrorists." Victory for the US in its illegal and immoral war and occupation in Iraq will only lead to more instability, and suffering not just for Iraqis but for people around the world.

No one country no matter how powerful should be allowed to illegally invade and occupy a country, kill over 10,000 civilians knowingly, and plunder its resources. As a member of the international community, so much of our aspirations as Filipinos depend on the achievement and maintenance of global peace. Genuine social and economic development not just for Filipinos but for all people in the world, the greater availability of food, housing, and shelter and the absence of deprivation, conflict and misery all these are conditional on making the world a world of equality and justice. If we allow the US to succeed in Iraq, we might as well say goodbye to all that.
To stand against the war in Iraq is to stand for peace, justice, and a better future for the world.

What can I do?

Join the Iraq Solidarity Campaign, a broad multi-sectoral coalition of organizations and individuals calling for an end to the occupation of Iraq.

The ISC conducts workshops, trainings, and film screenings for a deeper understanding of the issues. It also organizes press conferences, mass actions, and other protest rallies to express its positions. For more information, write to Cora Fabros at nonukes@tri-isys.com or visit www.iraqsolidarity.blosgpot.com <http://www.iraqsolidarity.blosgpot.com/> .

2004-07-19T22:03:00.000-07:00

Members of Iraq Solidarity Campaign light candles and hold vigil for Angelo dela Cruz. Welcome Rotonda. July 10, 2004. Photo by Joseph P.

AND NOW, TO END THE OCCUPATION:
Gov't Must be Held Accountable for Supporting Illegal War; Restitution Possible Only by Ending Occupation

We at the Iraq Solidarity Campaign welcome the government's decision to pull out the troops from a country where they should never have been sent to in the first place. Our gratitude, however, is not reserved for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. It was her, after all, who by supporting an illegal war and occupation put Angelo dela Cruz in harm's way. It was her who by holding the people's welfare hostage to her and the United States' interests held the life of dela Cruz on her hand. No: we cannot thank the President for putting aside the knife that she herself had held so close to Angelo's neck.

Instead of thanks and praise, we must continue to lavish blame and censure on our President. She must be held accountable and sanctioned for taking the country to an illegal and immoral war. We call on Congress to launch a full inquiry into Arroyo's decision to be part of the US-led "coalition of the willing" and to investigate the lies which she peddled for justifying her support for the war. It must not continue to be said that the President was merely 'duped' by Bush: Despite easily available evidence then proving that the war was based on lies, she willingly allowed herself to be lied to for her own reasons. She, in turn, consciously and deliberately lied to the Filipino people and she must not now be allowed to get away with it. These were not any other lies: they have killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians and have put in real danger the lives of Filipinos around the world.

The withdrawal of troops from Iraq is not enough. An illegal occupation founded on lies must not be allowed to continue a minute longer. In order to begin paying for its support for the war, the Philippine must first and foremost, apologize to the Iraqi people for being part of an invading force and an unwelcome occupying army. It must explicitly and unequivocally condemn the occupation and work towards the full restoration of independence and sovereignty in Iraq.
As a current member of the UN Security Council, the Philippine government must officially call on the United States and the coalition to immediately end the occupation and press for the observance and enforcement of international laws and obligations. For its part, the government must withhold any official recognition of and refuse to resume any diplomatic ties with the illegitimate 'interim government' imposed by the US on the Iraqi people. Only at the invitation of a legitimate Iraqi government independently installed by the Iraqi people should the Philippine government resume giving opportunities for our OFWs to help Iraqis rebuild their own country.
We call on the Filipino people to use this experience as an occasion for re-examining our foreign policy and for questioning whether the government's alliance with the United States serves the people's interests.

Our plight being colonized by the United States puts us in a unique position to understand what the Iraqis are going through. We must not be party to inflicting on others what we ourselves experienced. As last century's Iraqis among the first people to be directly occupied by the United States, we call on the Filipino people, to extend solidarity with today's Filipinos the Iraqis who continue to be occupied by the United States today.

--------------
Pahayag ng Iraq Solidarity Campaign sa Pilipinas
Hulyo 19, 2004

Wakasan ang Pananakop: Papanagutin at Pagbayarin ang Gubyerno sa Iligal na Gyera sa Iraq

Bumabati ang Iraq Solidarity Campaign sa desisyon ng gubyerno na pauwiin ang mga sundalo mula sa bansang na unang-una’y di sila dapat ipinadala. Pero hindi para kay Presidente Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo ang aming pasasalamat. Dahil siya ang naglagay sa peligro kay Angelo dela Cruz sa pamamagitan ng pagsuporta sa iligal na gyera at pananakop sa Iraq. Siya ang may tangan sa buhay ni dela Cruz sa pamamagitan ng pagbihag niya at ng US sa kapakanan ng mamamayan. Hindi kami kailanman magpapasalamat sa Presidente sa pag-atras ng patalim na siya mismo ang nag-umang sa leeg ni Angelo.

Sa halip na pasalamatan, kailangang patuloy na batikusin ang Presidente. Papanagutin at parusahan siya sa pagsangkot ng bansa sa iligal at imoral na digma. Nananawagan kami sa Konggreso na maglunsad ng puspusang imbestigasyon sa desisyon ni Arroyo na maging bahagi ng “coalition of the willing” na pinamumunuan ng US at sa mga kasinungalingang inilako niya para bigyang-katwiran ang suporta sa naturang gyera. Kailangang tigilan na ang pagsasabing nalinlang lang ni Bush ang Presidente: sa kabila ng maraming ebidensya na nagpapatibay noon na puro kasinungalingan ang pinagbatayan ng gyera, kusang-loob siyang pumayag na maloko dahil sa pansariling dahilan. Matapos ito, sadyang nagsinungaling si Arroyo sa mamamayang Pilipino at di ito dapat basta na lang palampasin. Hindi lang ito simpleng kasinungalingan: kinitil nila ang mahigit 10,000 mamamayang Iraqi at inilagay sa panganib ang buhay ng mga Pilipino sa iba’t ibang panig ng mundo.

Di sapat ang pagpapauwi ng mga sundalo mula sa Iraq. Di dapat magtagal ng kahit isa pang minuto ang isang iligal na gyerang nakabatay sa puro kasinungalingan. Para masimulan ang pagbabayad nito dahil sa pagsuporta sa gyera, kailangan munang humingi ng paumanhin ang gubyerno ng Pilipinas sa mamamayang Iraqi sa pagsali nito sa pwersang lumusob at nakibahagi sa hukbong nanakop sa Iraq. Dapat tahasan at malinaw na kondenahin ang okupasyon at magpunyagi para sa pagpapanumbalik ng kasarinlan at soberenya ng Iraq.

Bilang miembro ng UN Security Council, dapat manawagan ang gubyerno ng Pilipinas at ang koalisyon na kagyat na wakasan ang okupasyon at itulak ang pagkilala at pagpapatupad ng mga pandaigdigang batas at obligasyon. Sa bahagi ng gubyerno ng Pilipinas, di muna dapat nito kilanlin at huwag pumasok sa diplomatikong ugnayan sa iligal na “pansamantalang gubyernong” ipinataw ng US sa mamamayang Iraqi. Matapos lamang ang malayang pagtatatag ng mga Iraqi ng lehitimong gubyerno saka dapat ipagpatuloy ng gubyernong Pilipino ang pagbibigay ng oportunidad sa ating mga OFW na tumulong sa mga Iraqi na ibangon ang kanilang bansa.

Nananawagan kami sa mamamayang Pilipino at gamitin ang okasyong ito para muling balik-aralan ang ating patarakang panlabas at usisain kung nagsisilbi sa interes ng mamamayan ang pakikipag-alyansa ng gubyerno sa US.

Ang karanasan natin sa pagiging kolonya ng US ay naglalagay sa atin sa isang natatanging pusisyon na unawain ang dinaranas ngayon ng mga Iraqi. Di tayo dapat makibahagi sa pagpapalasap sa iba ng atin mismong naging karanasan. Nananawagan kami sa mamamayang Pilipino, maituturing na mga “Iraqi” noong nakaraang siglo dahil kabilang sa mga pinakaunang direktang sinakop ng US, na makiisa sa mga “Pilipino” ngayon – ang mamamayang Iraqi na patuloy sinasakop ng US hanggang sa kasalukuyan

The ‘terrorists’ in Iraq

2004-07-18T21:05:00.000-07:00

Support for the illegal war – not pull-out of troops – exposes us to ‘terrorism’

By Herbert Docena*

My former professor Winnie Monsod is still spooked. In her column last year, she lent her well-deserved reputation to the government by unequivocally supporting the invasion of Iraq. That’s when I dug up my Econ 191 notebook, wondering whether I missed any lesson: My former professor had ignored a basic tenet of economic research – consider all evidence – by saying, despite all evidence available even then, that Iraq was a big threat to the world and deserved to be bombed.

Despite all available evidence that the war she supported was wrong, Monsod continues to stick to her conclusion. On national television last night, she once again joined the chorus of voices saying the Philippines should continue supporting the occupation by not withdrawing its troops from Iraq. Other leading proponents of this view would include former President Fidel Ramos, National Security adviser Roilo Golez, as well as Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and US ambassador Francis Ricciardone. My former professor may not be calling the shots but she provides intellectual backing for those who do.

By conceding to “terrorists” and showing that the government could be cowed, her argument goes, the government may have saved one life. In exchange for that one life, however, are the lives of so many other OFWs in Iraq and in the Middle East who would now be fairer game to “terrorists.” Simple cost-benefit analysis, my former professor would have said, convinced that her view is the cool rational choice.

But she’s missing the point. It was the Philippine government’s conscious and calculated decision to support the illegal war in Iraq – not the panicked and half-hearted decision to withdraw the troops – that has exposed us to “terrorism.” While the OFWs in Iraq are non-combatants, they had become a target of the Iraqi rebels because they were sent there by the government as part and in service of an unwelcome occupying army, rather than at the invitation of a free and independent Iraq.

If the US’ foreign policy in the Middle East is at the root of the rise of extremism in the region, as many academics and observers contend, then it is the Philippines complicity with the US – not the pull-out of troops – that has made us a target of extremists’ retaliation. Like all those who share her view, my former professor fell for something she taught us to avoid: She has confused the flow of causality. Her equation is therefore wrong.

What Monsod and others who spout her argument are in effect saying is that the government should have obstinately stood its ground and refused to pull out the troops – even if it were wrong to send them to Iraq in the first place – just so as not to give the appearance of “giving in to the ‘terrorists.’” If only to project an image of a government that will not budge, they counsel sticking to the current policy no matter what – without questioning whether that policy is actually still worth defending. In light of the fact that the war the Philippines is supporting was based on lies, what Monsod and others are effectively saying is that dela Cruz should have been left to die for a mistake.

No self-respecting government should bow to blackmail and coercion. But no self-respecting government should also be party to an illegal and immoral war and occupation. It is the utter indefensibility and vulnerability of the government’s policy on Iraq that the hostage-takers exploited. The President was left with no choice but to cave in to their demands – not because she was “soft” to “terrorists” – but because she was standing on a ground so shaky that it collapsed beneath her.

Kidnapping and beheading poor and innocent migrant workers caught in the crossfire of a war for national liberation is regrettable and while majority of Iraqis support the demand of dela Cruz’s captors for all foreign troops to leave their country, many of the Iraqis I met in Iraq are also mortified by their tactics. Because of its complicity in the killing of over 10,000 innocent Iraqis and the denial of the Iraqis’ right to self-determination, however, the Philippine government has put itself in a position in which it has no moral ascendancy to condemn “terrorism.” For if “terrorism” is the use of violence in order to induce a population to submission, then many of the Iraqis I met are merely using the same standards to consider all occupation forces, including the Philippines, as the “terrorists” that they’re defending themselves from in their own country. It is this view of the Philippines – not the pull-out of troops – that is putting Filipinos in the line of fire.

Some positions are based on such rigorous arguments and strong evidence that they’re worth lending one’s reputation to; the continuing occupation of Iraq does not count among them. Some causes are so noble that they’re worth standing by and dying for; support for an illegal war is not one of them.

* Herbert Docena was Solita Monsod’s former student in her Economics 191 class at the UP School of Economics. As research associate with the policy research institute Focus on the Global South, he conducted research in Iraq with the Baghdad-based Iraq International Occupation Watch Center (www.occupationwatch.org).

Pullout US troops Now! - radical youth

2004-07-15T23:15:00.000-07:00

PRESS RELEASE
July 14, 2004
Samahang Demokratiko ng Kabataan (SDK)

Reaction to US State Department advice to keep RP troops in Iraq:
Clean up your act

In reaction to a statement by US State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher who stated that the United States wants the Philippines to keep its humanitarian contingent after its scheduled pullout on August 20, the radical youth group Samahang Demokratiko ng Kabataan (SDK) today emphasized that the United States government “should be the one to clean up its mess by being the first to leave Iraq”.

SDK chairperson Carlo Cleofe said, “The continued stay of foreign troops in Iraq is the main reason for the armed resistance for Iraqi freedom. The life of Angelo dela Cruz hangs in the balance because the Bush administration has led the invasion of Iraq”.

Cleofe criticized the US government for “having the gall to advise against a decision to pullout Philippine troops”. He added, “In the first place, the country is in a brink of a tragedy caused by the unjustified war of aggression of the US-led coalition forces”.

He also censured the Arroyo administration for its “all-out support to the invasion of Iraq, which is now being questioned by the committee of the US Senate”. Last week, the US Senate Intelligence Committee said that the justification for the invasion of Iraq was based on false or overstated CIA analyses.

Cleofe explained, “President Arroyo must pullout all Philippine troops not only to save the life of a fellow Filipino. But more so, we should not take part in an unjustified war that has slaughtered and maimed thousands of innocent Iraqis. Up until now, no weapon of mass destruction has been found in Iraq”.

SDK is demanding the “complete pullout” of foreign troops in Iraq, the establishment of a truly democratic Iraqi government and the immediate trial of the US government for its war crimes before the International Criminal Court.

Cleofe concluded, “Despite the violent dispersal of protesters yesterday at Plaza Miranda, we will continue to initiate mass actions to press for the complete pullout of foreign troops in Iraq. We will not be cowered by this dastardly act”.

PGMA MUST NOT PLAY WITH ANGELO’S LIFE, PROMISE TO WITHDRAW SHOULD BE KEPT’

2004-07-14T02:35:00.000-07:00

PRESS RELEASE
IRAQ SOLIDARITY CAMPAIGN
13 July 2003

Government only has itself to blame for ‘loss of credibility’
PGMA MUST NOT PLAY WITH ANGELO’S LIFE, PROMISE TO WITHDRAW SHOULD BE KEPT’

In light of vague and conflicting statements coming from government officials on the withdrawal of the country’s troops in Iraq, the Iraq Solidarity Campaign (ISC) urged President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo not to endanger Angelo dela Cruz’s life by keeping her commitment to pull out immediately.

The ISC is a broad multi-sectoral coalition calling for an end to the continuing occupation of Iraq by the United States and coalition partners including the Philippines.

“We’re hearing different pronouncements from different government officials. This could be interpreted as bad faith by dela Cruz’s captors,” warned Corazon Fabros, an ISC member from Gathering for Peace. “God forbid that they once again decide to back out from releasing dela Cruz and instead proceed to kill him out of pique.”

“Sadly, President Arroyo does not exactly have a spotless record in terms of telling the truth and sticking to her promises,” Milette Morante of the Kilusan ng Pambansang Demokrasya, an ISC member organization, pointed out. “Any attempt to deceive Iraqis and Filipinos on the pull-out could very well lead to a tragedy.”

The ISC insists that there is no excuse for the immediate repatriation of Filipino troops in Iraq. “There’s only 50 of them. They could all fit in one bus! How can they not all leave immediately? The excuse that it’s logistically impossible for all of them to leave at once is pure non-sense,” said Rasti Delizo of SANLAKAS, another ISC member-organization. “We should never have been there in the first place. A pull-out is definitely long overdue.”

The ISC welcomed the government’s decision to withdraw the troops but maintained that this was not a case of giving in to the demands of “terrorists” but to the demands of majority of Iraqis, as confirmed by surveys. “As part of the US-led occupation forces in Iraq, we have become unwanted guests in the Iraqis’ own country. We can’t tell our hosts when we want or don’t to leave. In the end, this is about proper manners,” said Herbert Docena from the Iraq International Occupation Watch Center.

A researcher who has been to Iraq twice since the invasion, Docena requested the government and the media to quit calling the troops in Iraq as a “humanitarian contingent” because any “humanitarian” work must be seen as such by those the mission claims to be helping. “Many Iraqis I met think of all foreign forces as helping the United States more than the Iraqis.”

“The fact that Ambassador Ricciardone has come out to demand that the Philippines retains its troops reveals who really wants us to stay in Iraq. “Certainly not the Iraqis and definitely not many Filipinos,” says Docena.

The ISC maintains that the decision to withdraw troops is not squandering the government’s credibility in international relations. “In fact, by withdrawing support for an illegal occupation, we are regaining our credibility in the eyes of the Iraqis and in the eyes of our own people,” Fabros said.

The ISC scored Senators Franklin Drilon and Manuel Villar, as well as former National Security Adviser Roilo Golez, for suggesting that the government should keep the forces in Iraq – even if such a policy is now proven to be misguided – just to salvage the government’s credibility. “What do they want us to do? Stick to a wrong policy just to save face? Is our credibility worth dela Cruz’s life,” Delizo asked.

“Those who supported the illegal war were the ones who have put us in this extremely awkward situation,” said Morante. “If they think credibility was lost by responding to the captors’ demands, then they –- and not dela Cruz – should be the ones to pay the price.”

The ISC now calls on the government not just to withdraw its troops but to explicitly call for the end of the US-led occupation of Iraq. “It should refuse to recognize the illegitimate ‘interim government’ rejected by many Iraqis. Diplomatic relations should only be established with a legitimate government chosen by Iraqis – not the United States,” Docena said. “This is one way for reversing our mistake of supporting the invasion.”

Stop the Killings, Stop the War!

2004-07-14T01:47:00.000-07:00

Stop the Killings, Stop the War! ISC vigil for Angelo dela Cruz at Bustillos Church. 12 July 2004. Photo by Joseph P.

Candles for Angelo

2004-07-14T01:43:00.000-07:00

Candles for Angelo. ISC holds vigil at Bustillos Church. 12 July 2004. Photo by Joseph P.

Not our War!

2004-07-14T00:21:00.000-07:00

Not our War! Little girl joins vigil for Angelo dela Cruz at Mabuhay Rotonda, 10 July 2004. Photo by Joseph P.

War Now, Pay Later

2004-07-13T21:25:00.000-07:00

In choosing the wrong side yet again, President Arroyo may also be jeopardizing the country¹s future relations with an independent Iraq. Much more than Angelo dela Cruz¹s life is at stake.

By Herbert Docena*

IN A DILAPIDATED HOSPITAL IN BAGHDAD just before the war last year, I met a nurse who suddenly started crying uncontrollably when she learned I'm a Filipino. She suddenly remembered her colleague - one of the thousands of Filipino nurses who were hired by the Iraqi government in droves in the 70s.

They had become very close and somehow, the torrent of memories with her old Pinoy friend became too much too bear and the tears just started flowing.

I went back to Iraq for the third time last March and the reaction - when I told another Iraqi that I was Filipino - was markedly different: After asking whether the Philippines is part of the Coalition of the Willing, he threatened to kidnap me.

He let me go. But his hostility towards those who are participating in the occupation of his country is widely shared - not limited to marginal elements in Iraqi society. While most Iraqis I met expressed horror at the tactic of kidnapping and beheading hostages, majority of them - as confirmed by formal surveys - agree with Angelo dela Cruz¹s abductors demands.

According to a recent survey commissioned by the Coalition Provisional Authority itself, a staggering 92% of Iraqis view all occupation forces ¬ including our soldiers - as occupiers not as liberators. Up to 55% of would actually feel safer if all of the foreign troops leave.

Our soldiers are, quite simply, not welcome in the Iraqis own country. For many of the Iraqis I met, the foreign contingents in Iraq - even if they¹re building schools or attending to the sick - are helping the United States more than they are helping the Iraqis. No matter how often President Arroyo repeats - and how blindly the media conveys the official line - that the Filipino troops in Iraq are on a humanitarian mission, the Iraqis clearly do not view them as such. Instead, a dominant majority of them see our troops - and unfortunately, our workers as well - as accomplices to an occupation that has already killed over 10,000 innocent Iraqis. This majority - and not just the hostage-takers - are the ones to whom the President will be giving in by pulling out the Filipino troops.

If those who demand that our troops go home are terrorists, as Vice President Noli de Castro implied, then almost all of the Iraqis are terrorists - and mighty proud of it. Iraqis resisting the occupation in various ways see themselves as terrorists only in the same way that Andres Bonifacio or Apolinario Mabini would have identified themselves as such. In characterizing those who want our troops withdrawn as terrorists, the Arroyo government is parroting the US choice of labels, thereby betraying through which lens the government sees the people that they claim to be helping. While the Iraqis may not all agree on the same tactics, their ultimate objective of ending the occupation and regaining their independence is seen not as terrorism but as a war for national liberation.

And in that war, they just might win. Politically, the United States has lost the one thing that could have allowed them to continue the occupation: legitimacy. Having squandered the Iraqis gratitude and relief at Saddam¹s removal, the US could no longer count on Iraqis to consent to their continued stay. According to the same survey, as many as 81% of Iraqis now have no confidence in the occupation forces. While the resistance’s military capacity looks pathetic beside the world’s sole superpower, even Pentagon officials have now been quoted as saying that the “insurgency” could not be defeated militarily because it has widespread support and popular backing. No less than the influential RAND Corporation, a prestigious think-tank whose analyses and recommendations are closely heeded by US officials, has urged Washington to admit that it is facing a full-blown nationalist insurgency.

"What the Americans can't understand is that this is a revolution," another Iraqi I interviewed told me. "Everyone is involved. Those who can't fight will give money. Those who can't give money will give medicine. Those who can't give medicine will give food. Those who can't give food will give blood."

Should the Iraqi resistance prevail, President Arroyo would once again have gambled the national interest on the wrong side. She sold the war to the public by promising that support for the war would translate to thousands of job opportunities as the country is given a share in what analysts consider the biggest post-war reconstruction business opportunity since World War II.

That, however, was predicated on the success of the US¹ war aims in Iraq - something which has become less and less tenable by the day. Should the resistance succeed in driving out the coalition forces from their country, how would the Iraqis remember us Filipinos during those trying times? What would the foreign policy be of a truly sovereign Iraqi government - not one installed by the US - towards the Philippines?

The stakes are large and the consequences far-reaching but the plight of our OFWs in that scenario is illustrative. Like dela Cruz, our workers will once again bear the brunt: What are the chances that the Iraqis, looking back to the dark days of the occupation, would welcome our workers with open arms?

Somewhere in the collective memory of Iraqis is a list of those who were on their side. What are the chances that the Iraqis would forget our governments’ collaboration with the US-led occupation and its eagerness to profit from the Iraqis’ subjugation?

After almost two decades of separation, the nurse I met still remembers her friendship with her Filipino colleague. Betrayal, however, is much harder to forget.

* Herbert Docena is a Filipino analyst with the Bangkok-based policy research institute Focus on the Global South (www.focusweb.org). He conducted research in Iraq as part of the Baghdad-based Iraq International Occupation Watch Center (www.occupationwatch.org).

Messages of Solidarity for Angelo dela Cruz

2004-07-10T00:09:00.000-07:00

The War in Iraq brings death to Overseas Filipino Workers. ISC activists carry mock coffin during 21 May rally at the US Embassy. Photo by Joseph P.

FROM THE GLOBAL ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT:
As of 3 PM, 10 July 2004

CANADA:
To the government of the Philippines:

I urge you to withdraw your troops from Iraq immediately. The occupation of Iraq is illegal and immoral. The peoples of the world have spoken out loudly against it and our governments should heed the will of the people.

The majority of the Iraqi people are asking the US and all coalition troops to leave their country immediately because the occupation is threatening the survival of Iraqis. They cannot leave their homes, or even stay at home for that matter, without the risk of violent death or injury. This is a shame on the aggressors who are invading their country. No outside military force or business interest is helping to make the country secure after the brutal invasion and occupation of Iraq. On the contrary, the coalition forces intruders are making it more chaotically unsafe. This is an outrage!

I lived in Baghdad for 6 months early in the US occupation and I can tell you as an eye witness that what is being done to Iraq is morally grotesque. There is no way for foreign military powers to help, except to leave Iraq today. Every day you keep your troops in Iraq amounts to another crime against humanity.

Sincerely,

Stefa Shaler
Vancouver, BC, Canada
_________________________________________
Please transmit my message to the Phillipine Government. I am writing to encourage your government to reconsider its support of the United States'occupation in Iraq.

It is clear that the US invasion has caused terrible harm, and the US Senate report today shows that the justification for war on Iraq was completely false.

I join peace-loving people around the world in urging as strongly as possible that every country get military forces out of Iraq, immediately.²

- K.Gunn, Ottawa, Canada

______________________________________
Dear President Arroyo: Please immediately withdraw your troops from Iraq. The stakes are very high. For one man, Angelo de la Cruz, and his family, everything is at stake. For the world, what is at stake is whether we will continue in a direction of ever greater oppression and violence or move towards our hope of justice and peace. For Iraqis, it is self-determination and the dream, at last, of peace and freedom. For your own country and yourself, it is a question of whether you will stand up against pressures which have, for far too long, played out their destructive violence on the lives of people in the Philippines.

- Mary Foster, Iraq Solidarity Project, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
_______________________________________

Dear President Arroyo: Angelo de la Cruz is one of tens of foreigners and tens of thousands of Iraqis whose lives have been put in jeopardy by the illegal occupation in
which you are participating. While we recognise the pressure the Philippines is coming under to participate in the so-called war on terror, the occupation in which you are participating will only give global oppressors more power to dictate the terms of life for people around the world. We urge you to take the opportunity of the threat on de la Cruz's life to withdraw your troops from Iraq, where they are participating in the
hostage-taking of an entire people.²

- Block the Empire (Montreal, Quebec)
______________________________________

Dear IHRTP colleagues from Iraq and the Middle East, Please forward this URGENT ALERT to any of your NGO contacts in Iraq. Any assistance that you can extend to help save the life of an innocent Filipino civilian and overseas contract worker and release him from being hostaged--will be greatly appreciated. We're running against time. I will also appreciate if you keep mo posted on this. Thanks a lot and best regards,²

- Sammy Gamboa, Canadian Human Rights Foundation
_______________________________________

Dear Friends, Our organization calls on all governments to end their support of the USA-UK war of occupation in Iraq. The Philippine government should immediately end its connection with this unjust and cruel war and not allow its citizens to be endangered. If your government and others were to divert funds and resources spent on the military to social and health needs, the world would be a safer place and we would be closer to true human security.

- Theresa Wolfwood, Barnard-Boecker Centre foundation, Victoria, CANADA

_______________________________________

FRANCE:

Widraw all the troops from irak!!
Release Angelo dela Cruz!!
Fillipino governement is responsible for the safety of Angelo dela Cruz. In sending troops and poor workers in Iraq, this governement like Bush or Blair is guilty!!

Guilty to help the american administration to occupate and plund Iraq and guilty to lie to his own people when this governement say it is to help and give freedom to the iraqis.
Angelo dela Cruz is victim both from his abductors and his government !

Angelo dela Cruz is now a victim of the occuppation !!
Release Angelo dela Cruz
Widraw all the troops from Iraq

- Thomas Sommer, International Civilian Campaign for the Protection of Palestinians
_____________________________________
JAPAN:

Dear President: We received the news of Mr. Angelo dela Cruz¹s detention in Iraq with great concern. Also we are also greatly concerned that your government declared
that it would not give in to the demands of the "terrorists" in Iraq, and rejected the withdrawal of its troops.

We are informed that Mr. Angelo dela Cruz is a truck driver working for reconstruction contractors. He is one of over 4,000 Filipino workers in Iraq who because of the lack of employment opportunities in the Philippines have been left with few other choices than risk their lives abroad in order to live and feed their families If you do not withdraw your troops, we are afraid not only Angelo dela Cruz but the lives of many Filipinos working in Iraq will be in jeopardy.

In Iraq, the U.S.-led occupation forces is responsible for the killing of over 10,000 innocent Iraqi civilians by the illegal war. According to a survey commissioned by the United States occupation authorities themselves, four out five Iraqis want all the foreign armed forces to leave their country.

By withdrawing your troops, you will not be giving in to the demands of "terrorists". Your decision of troops withdrawal and retraction of your support to the U.S.-lead illegitimate war not only will save your own people but also be welcomed by the Iraqi people.

We are informed that thousands of Filipino people are in the streets urging your government to withdraw Philippine troops and to stop supporting the war. We are convinced that all Asian governments that have supported the U.S. war should retract their support for the U.S. and withdraw troops from Iraq. There are no reasons why Asian countries should be partner to the United States in a scheme that make us an enemy of another Asian people, Iraqi people in this case. In Japan we are pressing the Japanese government headed by Prime Minister Koizumi to call back its military forces from Iraq.
Your brave decision will set a good example to other Asian governments mobilized for U.S. strategic interests and earn admiration of the people all over Asia as did your government's earlier decision to get U.S. bases out.

We sincerely and in a sense of extreme urgency request you to act to save the life of Mr. Angelo dela Cruz.²

- Asian Peace Alliance (APA) Japan
________________________________

We support millions of Filipino people in their demand for the withdrawal of the Filipino forces from Iraq. We, of course, stand against abduction of civilians or terrorism against them. But nothing justifies the ongoing occupation and operation of the foreign forces in Iraq. It is entirely wrong to sacrifice a life of an innocent citizen in order to maintain the unjust occupation.

It is now fully proved that the attack on Iraq by the US and its allies was conducted on the false ground. The sovereignty of Iraq should be returned to the people of Iraq with any further delay. The occupation of Iraq by the foreign forces, which the Iraqi citizens in consensus abhor, should be ended out of hand, and the reconstruction of Iraq must be conducted under the UN control.

We call on the Filipino government to give top priority to the life of the hostage, and make a decision to withdraw its forces from Iraq, standing for the cause that peace be restored and that the sovereignty be given back to the Iraqi people.

-Yayoi Tsuchida, Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombds
_________________________________________
We really hope to see Angelo dela Cruz back home to his family.
We all share Filipino peoples' feeling, for our friends had been also captured in Iraq in April.

There is no justification, form the beginning, for sending troops to Iraq.
To take right decision, the earlier the better.

We have been trying to pull our soldiers back to Japan.
Withdraw all the foreign troops from Iraq for peace, justice and to save lives.

in Solidarity

Asako KAGEYAMA
Hokkaido Asia, Africa, Latin America Solidarity Committee
__________________________________________
KOREA:

Dear IRAQ SOLIDARITY CAMPAIGN-Philippines: The People's Action Against the Dispatch of Korean Troops to Iraq sends you greetings in solidarity.

It was with great sadness that we received the news about the Filipino man who was taken hostage in Iraq. We want to express our sympathy to his family. We recently went through a similar experience when we were devastated by the death of Kim Seon Il in Iraq. So many lives have been lost because of this illegal war that the US and its allies
launched against Iraq.

We also want to lend our support to your voice and solidarity to your actions calling for the withdrawal of the Philippine government's support of the US-led occupation of Iraq. This hostage taking must not continue, but these kinds of acts result from the unjust occupation of Iraq by foreign forces, including the Philippines, and led by the US.

Iraqi people do not want the Philippines to send troops to Iraq or to continue supporting the occupation. Such actions deprive the Iraqi people of their legitimate right to self-determination.

We struggle with you for the end of the occupation and the immediate withdrawal of Philippine and Korean military forces from Iraq.

- People's Action Against the Dispatch of Korean Troops to Iraq, an umbrella organization of 365 Korean groups opposed to sending Korean troops to Iraq

_______________________________________

We are very sorry to hearing the news that a Filipino contract worker, Angelo dela Cruz has been held hostage in Iraq. We hope he can be released soon and can meet his family and friends. We strongly condemn the US administration and it's allies including the South Korean Government and the Arroyo Government in Philippines for this tragedy. However the kinnapping is a terrorism action, yet it happened because of the war and occupation of iraq by the US and the coalition forces against iraqi people's will. Therefore we believe that the only fundamental solution which can briing safe and freendom for the Filipino workers, Iraq people who are suffering from the war and occupation and is immidiate withdrwal of foreign troops and end the occupation of Iraq.

This war and occupation is for the US hegemony and oil. The ordinary people like Angelo dela Cruz and South Korean worker Kim sun il who was killed recently, are sacrifying for the rich and the powers. Not only Bush adminstration but also South Korean and Philippines government drive and support this war and occupation for their sake. They are war criminals. However, there is a hope can stop the war, occupation and this tregedy. Strong anti-war movement all around the world have achieved some victory like in Spain and the other countries. War performers are so unpopular at the moment in US, UK and South Korea as well. If we build strong anti-war movement together with Iraq people and people in the world. We can stop the war and occupation. We will keep our strrugle against our own government who virtually killed Kim sun il. We belive this is the most powerful solidarity with Philippines anti-war movements. Let's fight all together

CungChan Choi on behalf of All Together and Globalize from Below
_____________________________________________
NEW ZEALAND:

The Chagossian Support Group Waiheke Island urges the Government of the Philippines to withdraw their support of the United States led illegal war in Iraq. The US Senate Intelligence Committee blamed the CIA and fellow spy agencies for "a series of failures" which one Democrat senator said had led to a war that the US Congress would not have voted for had the intelligence been accurate. Like the Chagossian people, who were kicked off their homeland to make room for a United States base, it is ordinary people who are used as cannon fodder and are increasingly at risk with their lives for the political and economic benefits of a selected few.²

- Martini Gotjé, Chagossian Support Group Waiheke Island

_______________________________________________

PAKISTAN:

We demand that the Filipino government, alongwith all other foreign governments, immediately withdraw its troops from Iraq and end the occupation led by the imperialist government of the United States. Working people in Pakistan support all anti-imperialist movements and deplore the fact that it is working people, whether Pakistani, Filipino, Iraqi or American that are dying in George W. Bush's dirty war.

- People's Rights Movement
______________________________________________

PORTUGAL:

FREE ANGELO DE LA CRUZ! NO BLOOD FOR OIL! NO FOREIGN TROOPS IN IRAK!²

Susana Osorio (journalist) and Ramiro Osorio (architect) and 1534 Portuguese Friends of Filipinas

_____________________________________________

TURKEY:

All over the world governments are putting human security to peril in the name of state security. The peace and anti-war movements are working in collaboration to resist this. We strongly believe that Angelo de la Cruz should not pay for the atrocities of the war-mongers and we call on the Philippines government to withdraw from Iraq.²

- Muge Sokmen, World Tribunal on Iraq Coordinating Committee Turkey

______________________________________________

UNITED STATES:

It is said that rich people make wars. Poor people pay for them in blood and money. It has certainly been true that poor Iraqis -- indeed almost all Iraqis -- have paid dearly for the war. Poor workers from the United States who can't get a job in the civilian economy join the military and they are killed and wounded. And now poor Filipinos like hostage Angelo de la Cruz are forced to sacrifice for Bush's plan to conquer the Middle East.

We in the International Action Center in the United States, one of the organizations in the anti-war movement, send our solidarity to the Filipino people who are demonstrating July 10 against the sending of Filipino troops to Iraq. We join in their demand on the government of the Philippines to withdraw its unit from Iraq and to cease playing a role in the illegal occupation of that country.²

- John Catalinotto for the International Action Center, USA

_________________________________________________

We here in the United States bear responsibility for the fact that Angelo dela Cruz's life is hanging in the balance. Our government should have never dragged our troops and the "coalition of the coerced" into this war, and we should not be sending thousands of our unemployed to do the rebuilding that the Iraqis themselves are totally capable of doing. We stand in sympathy with Angelo de la Cruz and his family, and we stand in solidarity with the many thousands of Filipinos who tried to stop your government from
collaborating with this illegal invasion and are now trying to force your government to end this collaboration. We are now at a time in history where the majority of Iraqis, Americans, Filipinos and world public opinion are calling for an end to the occupation and understand full well that Iraq will never be sovereign until it is no longer occupied by both foreign troops and foreign companies profiteering from the spoils of war. We call on the government of the Philippines to sever its ties with this occupation and in the process, to spare the life of Angelo de la Cruz. We call on our government here in the United States to bring our troops home and let Iraqis get on with the job of rebuilding their beleaguered nation.²

-Medea Benjamin of Global Exchange, Code Pink: Women for Peace, also a member of the US largest anti-war coalition United for Peace and Justice

____________________________________________________

To the Filipino government: I am concerned about the welfare of Angelo de la Cruz. So many innocent people have already died in this cruel and unnecessary war in Iraq. Please do not allow one more avoidable death of one of your country-men! Withdraw your troops from Iraq. Iraqis don¹t want them there just as they don¹t want our U.S. troops there either. This unjust war should never have began, but now that it has, we have to end it as soon as possible. There is still hope for Angelo de la Cruz, don¹t let him die!!²

- Berit Westby, 144 Pheasant Run, Louisville, CO 80027, USA

__________________________________________________

A member of my family served in Iraq as a member of the US Army Reserve. We know firsthand how misguided and immoral the war is and urge all governments to withdraw from Iraq now.²

- Laura Costas

_________________________________________________

Please bring all Phillipine troops home. The war in Iraq is imoral, illegal, murderous, and I am ashamed of my government.

- Libby Hunter, Michigan USA

_________________________________________________

Dear President Macapagal: In January 1996, I had the privilege of hearing your lecture to student members of the U.P. Economic Club. At the time, I was a Visiting Research Fellow and Fulbright Scholar in the Department of Political Science at the U.P.-Diliman. At the time, we met very briefly since I brought a letter for your ailing father, the former President Diosdado Macapagal.

I was very concerned to read and hear about the plight of Mr. Angelo dela Cruz. Having been captured, he is now a prisoner in Iraq, and his family is worried about the possibility that Mr. Cruz will be executed as a pawn in George Bush's Middle Eastern adventures. News of the possible tragedy is being broadcast on the radio, television and World Wide Web.

Mr. Cruz reminds me of so many Filipino colleagues and friends. Like so many of his kababayan, apparently Mr. Cruz, too, was driven by economic deprivation to work overseas. But having taken that risk, now Mr. Cruz is at risk of losing his life because his job has become enmeshed in the U.S.-led war in the Middle East. Kawawa naman siya!

Please reconsider your earlier "blank check" support to Bush. I see no evidence that Mr. Bush cares about the plight of the ordinary Filipino.
Instead, he cares about re-election.

Ordering Filipino soldiers and other Filipinos who are physically supporting U.S. military operations to leave Iraq will show that, in the words of Ang
1987 Konstitusyon_ that the Republic of the Philippines truly exercises "isang malayang patakarang panlabas." Please take the next step.

- Vincent K. Pollard, Ph.D., Hawaii
______________________________________
UNSPECIFIED COUNTRY:

My heart goes out the family Angelo dela Cruz and the people of the Philippines who are demanding the withdrawal of Filipino troops from Iraq with the hopes of saving his life.

It is my opinion that these troops should not be in Iraq in the first place, as the occupation is based on bogus reasons that have been conjured up to justify this crime against the people of Iraq, which in reality is unquestionably a blatant aggressive act intended to expand United State¹s military and economic control over the Middle East.

The peoples of the Philippines and elsewhere do not want their governments to be a party to this crime against humanity. The fear mongering, misinformation, and out and out lies that the media unquestionably reports will not deter us from stopping this war and the massacre of innocent victims.

- Anet Henrikso

KPD Press Release

2004-07-10T00:01:00.000-07:00

July 9, 2004
Reference: Ms. Sonia Soto, KPD Secretary General

Militants Demand GMA:
Give Filipino OFWs Jobs Here!
Save Angelo dela Cruz, Pull-Out Filipino Troops from Iraq Now!

" GMA is responsible for carrying out the death sentence on Rodrigo Reyes and now Angelo dela Cruz, plus on many other Filipino workers and soldiers with her continued support to Bush' war in Iraq,"

This was the angry statement of Sonia Soto, national chairperson of the militant Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya (KPD), who led a vigil today the Mexico, Pampanga town hall where around 200 participated to pray for Angelo dela Cruz, the Filipino OFW hostage by Iraqi militants. De la Cruz and his family hails from Mexico, Pampanga.

Similar protests-vigil will be held in Mariveles, Bataan and Subic, Zambales to condemn GMA for 'sentencing to death' our fellow Filipino OFW Angelo dela Cruz with GMA's continued refusal to withdraw Filipino troops from Iraq.

" The imminent beheading of Angelo dela Cruz, another Filipino OFW, by Iraqi militants signals the height of violence directed against those who support the US' war on Iraq. Arroyo boasted that the Philippines will benefit from the jobs that will be created in the US reconstruction of Iraq. But all the OFWs got was a death sentence upon their heads," said Soto where already 2 OFWs, Rodrigo Reyes and Raymond Natividad, were killed from the spate of attacks of Iraqi militants against US and coalition forces, which included RP troops in Iraq.

Soto added that " after over 4,000 Iraqi civilians killed, 600 US soldiers killed and now 2 killed plus another Filipino OFW's life in peril, Arroyo must be crazy to still justify her support to the US' war against Saddam's weapons-of-mass-destruction (WMDs) as humanitarian and legitimate."

Soto also seconded the Filipino OFWs for condemning Arroyo for failing to create jobs that "Arroyo should apologize to the families of Rodrigo Reyes and now Angelo dela Cruz for endangering their lives in Iraq in exchange for her failure to provide jobs here."

KPD further explained that " Arroyo should recognize the Iraqi people's legitimate resistance to the US' occupation of Iraq. Although the Iraqis appreciate the ouster of Dictator Saddam Hussein, they vehemently protest the invasion of the US, and other troops sent to assist the US."

" The US-led and Philippine backed occupation of Iraq is nothing but terrorism in itself, a subjugation of a country to plunder its resources. We hold GMA culpable for the deaths of Rodrigo and Raymond, and now Angelo dela Cruz's imminent beheading should GMA still refuse to pullout our troops and workers from Iraq," concluded Soto. ###

INTERNATIONAL GROUPS JOIN CALL FOR PULL-OUT OF RP TROOPS

2004-07-09T21:54:00.000-07:00

Demand to save Filipino worker¹s life echoed worldwide:
INTERNATIONAL GROUPS JOIN CALL FOR PULL-OUT OF RP TROOPS

(Manila, July 10) - VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS and concerned citizens from around the world are appealing to the Philippine government to save Angelo dela Cruz¹s life by withdrawing Filipino troops from Iraq.

³We call on the government of the Philippines to sever its ties with the occupation of Iraq and in the process, to spare the life of Angelo de la Cruz,² wrote Medea Benjamin of the San Francisco-based international human rights organization Global Exchange. ³We call on our government here in the United States to bring our troops home and let Iraqis get on with the job of rebuilding their beleaguered nation,² Benjamin, who is also a member of the US¹ largest anti-war coalition United for Peace and justice added.

³It is said that rich people make wars. Poor people pay for them in blood and money. It has certainly been true that poor Iraqis -- indeed almost all Iraqis -- have paid dearly for the war. Poor workers from the United States who can't get a job in the civilian economy join the military and they are killed and wounded. And now poor Filipinos like hostage Angelo de la Cruz are forced to sacrifice for Bush's plan to conquer the Middle East,² observed John Catalinotto of the International Action Center also from the US.

A Korean umbrella coalition of 365 organizations opposed to sending Korean troops to Iraq wrote to express sympathy with the Filipino people for experiencing what they have also recently went through. A Korean worker in Iraq, Kim Il-Sun, was also beheaded last month after the Korean government refused to withdraw its troops.

³This hostage taking must not continue, but these kinds of acts result from the unjust occupation of Iraq by foreign forces, including the Philippines, and led by the US,² the group said. ³Iraqi people do not want the Philippines to send troops to Iraq or to continue supporting the occupation.
Such actions deprive the Iraqi people of their legitimate right to self-determination.²

Mary Foster of the Iraq Solidarity Project from Montreal, Canada, appealed to the President, to consider the consequences. ³The stakes are very high.
For one man, Angelo de la Cruz, and his family, everything is at stakeŠ For your own country and yourself, it is a question of whether you will stand up against pressures which have, for far too long, played out their destructive violence on the lives of people in the Philippines.²

These are just four of the messages that the Iraq Solidarity Campaign Philippines (ISC) has been receiving by e-mail from around the world after news broke out of the abduction of the Filipino worker. The ISC is a coalition of Filipino individuals and organizations calling for the ending of the occupation of Iraq. It has links with the anti-war organizations from all over the world that mobilized the historic 15-million march against the war on Iraq last February 15, 2003 the biggest coordinated global demonstration in history.

The messages are coming from all corners of the world. ³This is an indication that Filipinos are not the only ones who are very worried about dela Cruz¹s fate,² said Herbert Docena, an ISC member. ³It also shows that the demand to end the occupation and to pull out Philippine troops is not just being made by dela Cruz¹s abductors but also by Iraqis and by the majority of people from around the world.²

³The Filipino government is Fillipino government is responsible for the safety of Angelo dela Cruz,² wrote Thomas Sommer of the Paris-based International Civilian Campaign for the Protection of Palestinians. ³But he is a victim of both his abductors and his government,² Sommer added. ³In sending troops and poor workers to Iraq, the Arroyo government is as guilty as Bush or Blair in illegally occupying Iraq.²

Another letter-writer from New Zealand pointed out that in wars, it is poor people like dela Cruz who always get caught in the middle. ³It is ordinary people who are used as cannon fodder and are increasingly at risk with their lives for the political and economic benefits of a selected few,² Martini Gotje said.

>From Portugal, the Friends of Filipinas, a network with over 1,500
>members,
was direct to the point: ³No blood for oil! No foreign troops in Iraq!²

³While we recognise the pressure the Philippines is coming under to participate in the so-called war on terror, the occupation in which you are participating will only give global oppressors more power to dictate the terms of life for people around the world,² noted the Canadian group Block the Empire. ³We urge you to take the opportunity of the threat on de la Cruz's life to withdraw your troops from Iraq, where they are participating in the hostage-taking of an entire people.²

Americans are especially empathic in calling for the Philippine government not to allow dela Cruz to die. ³Please do not allow one more avoidable death of one of your country-men! Withdraw your troops from Iraq. Iraqis don¹t want them there just as they don¹t want our U.S. troops there either. This unjust war should never have began, but now that it has, we have to end it as soon as possible,² wrote Berit Westby from Colorado.

One American from Hawaii, Vincent Pollard, who said he met then UP Economics Professor Arroyo as a Fulbright scholar in UP Diliman, urged the President to take back her ³blank check² of support to Bush. Wrote Pollard: ³Mr. Cruz reminds me of so many Filipino colleagues and friends. Like so many of his kababayan, apparently Mr. Cruz, too, was driven by economic deprivation to work overseas. But having taken that risk, now Mr. Cruz is at risk of losing his life because his job has become enmeshed in the U.S.-led war in the Middle East. Kawawa naman siya!²

³Ordering Filipino soldiers and other Filipinos who are physically supporting U.S. military operations to leave Iraq will show that, in the words of the 1987 constitution, the Philippines truly exercises "isang malayang patakarang panlabas," Pollard pointed out.

Another American wanted to share what she learned from having a family member who served in Iraq as a member of the US Army Reserve. ³We know firsthand how misguided and immoral the war is and urge all governments to withdraw from Iraq now,² said Laura Costas, also from the US.

³Please bring all Phillipine troops home,² Libby Hunter from Michigan pleaded. ³ The war in Iraq is imoral, illegal, murderous, and I am ashamed of my government.²

These messages from around the world will be read today during the protest vigil being organized by the Iraq Solidarity Campaign and other political formations at the Welcome Rotonda starting at 5 PM. (Iraq Solidarity Campaign press release, July 9, 2003)#

Bush and GMA’s War is not the Filipinos’ War:

2004-07-09T21:15:00.000-07:00

Filipino held hostage in Iraq. Picture from AP/Al Jazeera television. Lifted from www.bbc.com

IRAQ SOLIDARITY CAMPAIGN
Press Statement
9 July 2004

IT IS THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT THAT IS HOLDING ANGELO DELA CRUZ HOSTAGE
With one hand, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo yesterday held the hand of Angelo dela Cruz’s wife. With her other hand, she was holding a knife close to dela Cruz’s neck. It is Arroyo, with her continuing and unconditional support for the US-led occupation of Iraq, who is holding dela Cruz – and all Filipinos – hostage.

The Philippine government should not have supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq in the first place. Contrary to the US’ claims, Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction and it had no links with al Qaeda. From the very beginning, the war was a war for oil and for the domination of the Middle East. By supporting this illegal war, the Philippine government became complicit in the oppression and subjugation of Iraqis. Alongside the United States and the other members of the coalition, the Philippine government is responsible for the killing of over 10,000 innocent Iraqi civilians. By continuing to support the occupation, the Philippine government is depriving Iraqis of their legitimate right to self-determination.

Bush and Arroyo’s war is not our war. But by sending Filipino troops to be part of the occupation forces in Iraq, the Philippine government has endangered the lives of all Filipinos – especially our brothers and sisters in Iraq. Angelo de la Cruz is sacrificial lamb, a Filipino twice victimized. As one of the millions of Overseas Filipino Workers who have been forced by the lack of employment opportunities in the Philippines to work abroad, de la Cruz is a victim of the governments’ failure to assure decent work and livelihood for its citizens in their own country. As an OFW in Iraq, de la Cruz is a victim of Arroyo’s deliberate political strategy of selling her support for the war by luring Filipinos with the promise of jobs in Iraq.

The Philippine government says we should not give in to the demands of the “terrorists” in Iraq. If they are “terrorists,” then a majority of the Iraqis are “terrorists”: According to a survey commissioned by the United States occupation authorities themselves, four out five Iraqis want the occupation to end and they want all the occupation forces – including the Philippine troops – to leave their country. In withdrawing our troops, we will not be giving in to the demands of “terrorists,” we will be giving in to the demands of the Iraqis. If this is not the Filipinos’ war, then we must give in to the demands of Filipinos not to fight a war that is not our own.

We call on President Arroyo to save dela Cruz’s life by bringing our troops home and by withdrawing her support for the occupation. If she doesn’t, the responsibility of dela Cruz’s death will fall on her. It is our President who will be beheading a fellow Filipino.#

ISC Actions

2004-07-08T21:57:00.000-07:00

ISC intensifies campaign to bring home troops and end the occupation of Iraq. 20 March 2004. US Embassy. Photo by Joseph P.

Emergency Meeting of Iraq Solidarity Campaign
July 9 (Friday) 6:00 PM
PRRM Building Lounge, Mo. Ignacia
cor Sct. Lozano, Quezon City
Contact: Cora (0922-802-0677)

The following have scheduled mobilizations -
please support, participate and invite your friends:

Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya (KPD)
July 9 (Friday) 11:30AM @Mediola
Contact: Mitzi (0927-521-1418)

Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL)
July 9 (Friday) 5PM
Prayer Rally at Tomas Morato cor. Timog
Contact: Josua (0917-794-2431)

Bukluran ng Manggagawa sa Pilipinas (BMP) and SANLAKAS
July 9 (Friday) Start 5PM VIGIL
Welcome ROTONDA
Contact: Sonny (0920-655-8382)

Partido Manggagawa (PM) and others
July 10 (Saturday) 11AM
QRF @Mendiola
Contact: Teody (0916-226-3052)

Iraq Solidarity Campaign and Alternatiba
NOISE BARRAGE AND VIGIL July 10 (Saturday) 5pm
Welcome Rotonda

Fears grow for Filipino hostage

2004-07-08T20:10:00.000-07:00

Filipino held hostage in Iraq. Picture from Al Jazeera television. Lifted from ww.bbc.com

Fears grow for Filipino hostage

The Philippines' top diplomat in Iraq has confirmed that a Filipino national has been taken hostage there. The man was shown surrounded by masked gunmen on a videotape broadcast by Arabic satellite channel al-Jazeera.

The video said he would be killed unless Manila withdrew its troops from Iraq within 72 hours.

Philippines President Gloria Arroyo has stopped any more Filipinos going to work in Iraq in response to the incident.

Ricardo Endaya, the Philippines charge d'affaires in Baghdad, did not give the hostage's identity.

But he said the Philippines authorities had been indirectly in touch with the kidnappers.

Filipino workers planning to travel to Iraq have been forced to turn round

"Technically, we are not yet negotiating with the hostage takers, but we have already established lines of communication with them through intermediaries," Mr Endaya said in a television interview.

President Arroyo earlier imposed a ban on all travel to Iraq after the news broke.

The Philippines has 51 soldiers and police in Iraq. Several thousand Filipino civilians work there.

Unknown group

Al-Jazeera showed a videotape of three gunmen and a man dressed in an orange jumpsuit kneeling in front of them.

Behind them was a banner that said the group's name was the Iraqi Islamic Army - the Khaled bin al-Waleed corps. It has not been heard of previously.

The channel reported that the group claimed it had already killed an Iraqi security guard accompanying the Filipino, who it said worked for a Saudi Arabian company linked to US forces.

The Associated Press news agency reports that the videotape displayed the hostage's Philippines identity card, which gave his name as Hafidh Amer, suggesting he may be a Muslim.

The seizure of the Philippines national is the latest in a spate of kidnappings of foreigners in Iraq.

On Tuesday, al-Jazeera apparently received a video of an Egyptian truck driver taken hostage in Iraq by a group calling itself the Iraqi Legitimate Resistance.

The Associated Press said it had seen the video, in which a man, who identifies himself as Alsayeid Mohammed Alsayeid Algarabawi, stands surrounded by armed, masked men.

Meanwhile, there is still no news of a Lebanese-born US marine reported killed at the weekend but who is, according to his family, alive and has been freed.

The Philippines assumes presidency of UN Security Council: Should stand for global peace and justice

2004-07-06T22:58:00.000-07:00

Little girl opposes the war in Iraq. US Embassy in Manila. 20 March 2004. Photo by Joseph P.

Letter to Philippine President on U.N. Security Council

4 June 2004

Her Excellency GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
President, Republic of the Philippines
Malacanang Palace. Plaridel Street,
San Miguel, Manila 1005

Your Excellency:

Assuming the presidency of the United Nations Security Council is a proud and momentous occasion for the Philippines. But it is also an immense responsibility and a rare opportunity for our country to influence the course of events in the world today. As Filipinos, we share in relishing this moment and, as citizens of the international community, we welcome this duty to make difficult decisions affecting global peace and security. As we fulfill our role, let us bear in mind that our actions in the Security Council should not just represent the will and voice of the Filipino people, but likewise the entire international community.

Today, the most important issue of peace and justice facing the United Nations is that posed by the invasion and occupation of Iraq. As president of the Council, the Philippines is uniquely positioned to help the Iraqis regain independence and restore respect for international law in the world.

To do this, the Philippines should insist on and only vote in favor of a resolution that includes:

 An acknowledgment of the illegality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq

The weapons of mass destruction are nowhere to be found and the stated justification for waging the war has proven to be a lie. The United Nations must not accord legitimacy to the occupation even if the act has already been committed. The Iraqis deserve a public apology and the world demands accountability.

 A timetable for the complete and unconditional withdrawal of all coalition troops from Iraq.

The illegal occupation must immediately end and all the foreign troops including Philippine troops must immediately withdraw. A multinational force should only be deployed to Iraq upon the invitation of a democratically installed Iraqi government and should be placed under the command of the Iraqi people.

 A demand for the United States and members of its coalition to fulfil their obligation as occupying powers in reconstructing Iraq.

Under the Geneva Convention, the occupying powers are legally and morally obliged to bear the full cost of humanitarian assistance, reconstruction, compensation, and reparations to the Iraqis for the physical, social, economic, ecological, and cultural destruction caused by the war. Iraqs oil revenues should not be used to foot the bill of the reconstruction and all that the Iraqis are entitled to should not be characterized as aid or a loan.

 A genuinely independent and democratic political process for the selection and installation of a government that is truly representative of the Iraqi people.

The Iraqis must be allowed to fully exercise their right to self-determination without any external interference or pressure. They should be free to choose the manner of constituting their government. Any decision about the need for international assistance and the form it will take rests solely with the Iraqi people.

 A commitment to the restoration of unconditional and unlimited sovereignty to the Iraqi government by the occupying powers.

The Iraqis have absolute and sovereign right over their territory and over their resources. Any previous decisions or laws enacted by the occupying forces shall not be binding on the Iraqi people. They should have complete control over their oil revenues.

A UN resolution without all of these demands will not solve the problems in Iraq because it will not end the occupation and will not restore the Iraqis¹ sovereignty. The current draft circulated by the United States satisfies none of the requirements above. Should said resolution be tabled for a vote, the Philippines must, without hesitation, vote No. To vote in favor would be to consent to the continuing illegal occupation of Iraq and be complicit in depriving the Iraqi people of genuine freedom and democracy.

Rarely is the Philippines given the position to play a decisive role in international affairs. We should not forfeit this opportunity. Last year small countries such as Angola, Guinea, and Cameroon earned their place in history and gained worldwide respect for refusing to bow down to the United States pressure for them to sanction an illegal war.

As we assume the presidency of the United Nations Security Council, the Philippines should stand proudly for global peace with social justice.

IRAQ SOLIDARITY CAMPAIGN – PHILIPPINES

Copy furnished:

H.E. TEOFISTO GUINGONA, JR. (Vice President, Republic of the Philippines)
H.E. LAURO L. BAJA, JR. (Permanent Representative Philippine Mission to the U.Na.)
Hon. DELIA DOMINGO-ALBERT (Secretary, Department of Foreign affairs)
HON. MANUEL VILLAR, JR. (Chairperson, Senate Foreign Relations Committee)
HON. JOSE APOLINARIO LOZADA, JR. (Chairperson, House Foreign Affairs Committee)

ARROYO AN ACCOMPLICE TO ABU GHRAIB TORTURE!

2004-07-06T22:55:00.000-07:00

ISC 'street presscon' at the United States Embassy in Manila. 21 May 2004. Photo by Joseph P.

Anti-war coalition steps up pressure on Philippine government to withdraw support to the war

FILIPINO ACTIVISTS CALL ARROYO AN ACCOMPLICE TO ABU GHRAIB TORTURE

MANILA (May 21)- Anti-war activists in the Philippines denounced the Arroyo administration for its silence over the atrocities committed by US Soldiers against Iraqi prisoners of war. In a statement issued in a rally in front of the US Embassy in Manila last Friday, activists from the Iraq-Solidarity Campaign (ISC) said “The torture in Abu Ghraib prison should have been met with gravest condemnation by the Philippine government, being a signatory to the Geneva convention and other international conventions and treaties on human rights. It instead chose to remain silent and by doing so became a silent accomplice to these atrocities.”

”President Arroyo should be also be charged for being accomplice to Bush in the mass murder of Iraqi civilians and the death of 2 Filipino OCWs," added DJ Janier of Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya (KPD).

Echoing the guilty verdict handed down by the world tribunal on Iraq, ISC also implicated President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo along with US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair of war crimes in Iraq and crimes against humanity.

Stepping up the pressure on the Philippine government to withdraw its support to the illegal war and occupation, around 200 activists marched to the US Embassy with banners and placards calling “ Bush, Blair and Arroyo, guilty of war crimes,” and “GMA (Gloria Macapagal Arroyo) and BUSH Butchers of Baghdad”.

The activists were greeted by a phalanx of anti-riot policemen about two blocks away from the US Embassy. Deciding to hold their ground, the activists conducted a sit-down, street press conference, where the
representatives of the Iraq Solidarity Campaign (ISG) delivered their messages.

“The lives of around 4,000 Filipino overseas workers are at serious risk in Iraq. The GMA government should see to it that these workers are brought home without delay” said Edwin Bustillos of the Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL). Romy Castillo of Partido ng Manggagawa (Workers Party) decried the situation that forces Filipinos to go abroad and face life-threatening conditions to secure their livelihoods. “The government should work to provide opportunities at home so that Filipino’s won’t have to leave their
families and risk their lives just to earn a decent income” said Castillo.

The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) earlier reported that more Filipinos in Iraq are expected to signify their intention to return home despite the Philippine government's stand to delay the forced evacuation of the 4,000 workers and 51 peace-keepers in the war-torn country.

Last week, two batches of Filipino OFWs returned to Manila. The first batch of returning OFWS included the remains of Filipino truck-driver Rodrigo Reyes, the first Filipino casualty in Iraq.

Activist Priest Father Robert Reyes of Peace Camp called Bush and Arroyo “Shameless! in perpetuating this illegal war and the occupation of Iraq”. Fr. Reyes prayed for the souls of the thousands of civilians killed in the war including the 2 Filipino workers and for the safe return of the thousands more overseas Filipino workers (OFWs)still in Iraq.

" It is unforgivable that Bush's greed pushes on this war of aggression when even the American people have condemned this act. We should respect the Iraqi people's right to self-determination. The US may have helped in overthrowing the Saddam dictatorship, but wants to install itself as Iraq's next ruler or colonizer," explained Rasti Delizo of Sanlakas.

The members of the Iraq Solidarity Campaign vowed heigthened actions in the days to come as the US prepares to “hand-over full-sovereignty to the Iraqi people” by June 30, 2004.

The Iraqi Solidarity Campaign was formally formed as an alliance of political blocs and organizations after the outbreak of widespread uprising in Iraq at the beginning of April. It calls for the ending of the US-led
occupation and the withdrawal and evacuation of Philippine troops and workers from Iraq.# (ISC)

Collaborators not welcome in Manila

2004-07-06T22:38:00.000-07:00

two women anti-war activists from the iraq solidarity campaign struggle to unfurl a banner that reads "Collaborators not welcome in Manila". May 3, 2004.Photo by Joseph

'COLLABORATORS NOT WELCOME IN MANILA'
Activists shame Iraqi Governing Council minister, derail Iraq business forum in Manila

MANILA (May 3) - Filipino anti-war activists disrupted the presentation of a visiting Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) minister in a business forum, calling her a "collaborator" and an "illegitimate" representative of the Iraqi people.

The forum, entitled "Rebuilding Iraq: Challenges and Opportunities for Business," was organized by the Asian Institute of Management, a graduate school for business, and the German foundation Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. It was attended mostly by academics and businessmen.

As IGC minister for municipalities and public works Nesreen Berwari stood up to approach the rostrum, four women members of the newly formed coalition anti-occupation coalition Iraq Solidarity Campaign - Philippines held up placards saying "IGC Illegitimate" and "IGC = American Puppets."

Two other members tried to unfurl a banner that read "Collaborators Not Welcome in Manila" but they were quickly accosted by the hotel's security personnel. The placards were also confiscated. The activists then stood up and filed out of the room, chanting "IGC illegitimate, US puppets."

They were chased out of the room by the security personnel then joined around 150 other members of the coalition who had massed up outside the conference venue to denounce the the IGC ministers' visit.

Panelists, which included former Philippine finance secretary Roberto de Ocampo, were visibly surprised and flustered. Senatorial candidate Amina Rasul, an AIM fellow who was directly responsible for inviting Berwari, dismissed the protesters as "fringe elements," even as past surveys showed that majority of Filipinos opposed the invasion of Iraq.

Berwari's visit came in the wake of the death of a Filipino worker in Iraq, the first casualty among the 3,000 workers based there.

"Ms Berwari has no right to speak on behalf of the Iraqis because she was chosen by the United States, not by her people," said Rasti Deliso, one of the organizers of the action.

"More importantly, she has no right talking about business opportunities in Iraq because legitimate economic policies still have to be put in place by a sovereign and independent Iraqi government."

"We Filipinos, like the Iraqis, are very hospitable and gracious hosts,"
said Milette Morante, one of the women who disrupted the meeting. "But like the Iraqis who do not welcome the occupying forces, we Filipinos do not welcome collaborators in our country."

The IGC is the body established by the United States as the temporary governing entity of Iraq. Its 24 members were all chosen by the United States.

Herbert Docena, a researcher who just came back from a one-month stay in Baghdad working with the Iraq International Occupation Watch Center, underscored the illegitimacy of the Iraqi Governing Council. "When I was in Iraq, many of the Iraqis I spoke with think of the IGC as a big joke," said Docena.

"This has been confirmed by a Gallup survey saying that 75% of Iraqis believe that the IGC members merely follow the dictates of the United States, as well as by a BBC survey saying that Iraqis trust the hated Saddam regime more than they trusted some IGC members."

"The Philippine should therefore have nothing to do with this body and should refuse to recognize any Iraqi government not chosen by the Iraqis themselves," Docena said.

Even as the protesters were driven out of the conference room, Berwari continued to be hounded by questions during the open forum.

Referring to Berwari's assurance that power will be transferred to Iraqis on June 30, Joseph Purugganan from Focus on the Global South asked, "What kind of power will be transferred when all of the laws enacted by the occupation forces will remain binding on the next government and when the coalition soldiers will stay on indefinitely in permanent military bases?"

Because of the disruption and the type of questions from the floor, the minister failed to touch on business opportunities in Iraq -- the intended focus of the event.

The Iraqi Solidarity Campaign was formally formed as an alliance of political blocs and organizations after the outbreak of widespread uprising in Iraq at the beginning of April. It calls for the ending of the US-led occupation and the withdrawal and evacuation of Philippine troops and workers from Iraq.# (ISC)

END U.S. OCCUPATION OF IRAQ! BRING HOME PHILIPPINE TROOPS NOW!

2004-07-06T22:14:00.000-07:00

Statement of Iraq Solidarity Campaign (Philippines)

We, representatives of various organizations in the Philippines, have formed ourselves into a solidarity alliance called “Iraq Solidarity” in support of the Iraqi people’s intensifying struggle against the illegal occupation of their land and to demand the withdrawal of US, British and other allied troops from Iraq. From our own government, we demand the immediate pullout of Philippine troops in Iraq.

We raise these demands as the body count to this illegal war and occupation continue to pile up. In the first three weeks of April alone, more than 1,000 Iraqis, most of them civilians, and at least 110 U.S. soldiers have been killed.

Support the Iraqi Peoples’ Resistance

Over the past few weeks, we have seen the conflict in Iraq intensify as the resistance to the illegal US-led occupation continues to gather strength and unity.

March 20 marked one-year after the invasion of Iraq. Saddam Hussein has been captured and is now a prisoner of the United States government. And yet, no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Today, the illegal occupation of Iraq has led to an uprising of the Iraqi people mobilized, organized and armed, united around a single unmistakable demand: an end to US-led occupation.

The US government has called the uprising a handiwork of a small group of “thugs, goons” and mainly “foreign fighters” and has even tried to link it to Osama bin Laden’s al Qaida network. But news reports, even from journalists who were “embedded” with the occupation army and supported the invasion, describe an armed uprising backed by millions of Iraqis: workers, students, shopkeepers, women, children and especially, the youth. Journalists describe children as young as ten and thirteen, as well as women, who have taken up arms against the occupation.

Several cities in Iraq are now no-go zones for occupation troops and are under the control of a people armed. News reports are streaming through of the occupation forces losing control of Fallujah, Najaf, Kufa, Kerbala: names of cities previously unknown to many of us, but are now known around the world as battlegrounds of the continuing resistance

The US-led coalition is determined to crush the uprising at any cost. This is crucial to the US imperialist agenda: a) because they have huge economic interests at stake as they attempt to control one of the largest source of oil in the world, Iraq, in a region, the Middle East, strategically crucial to US and other imperialist interests; b) to deepen and expand US political and military control over the Middle East; and c) to gain market access and control over Iraq’s economy as part of its neoliberal globalization project..

The US army, the most powerful military force on earth, is responding with brutal force against the Iraqi people resisting occupation with whatever means they possess. In a chilling declaration of their intent to crush the people’s uprising, the Bush administration has named its military operation in Iraq “Operation Resolute Sword”.

Fallujah is a symbol of the people’s resistance. In one week the US-led occupation forces killed over 600 Iraqis, including hundreds of women and children, as they tried to retake control of the city. Some 60,000 refugees, one-third of the cities population, have fled the city to Baghdad. There are eyewitness reports of US B52 bombers being used to attack people as they fled.

The US government announced a much publicized eight-hour “cease fire” to negotiate with the resistance. But even during this declared break in the fighting, US snipers were taking shots at people’s heads, killing several, including many women.

News reports also state that the resistance has united the two main Muslim communities in Iraq. The erstwhile divided Shia and the Sunnis, have united and are now fighting together as one.. In Fallujah, a Sunni city, thousands of Shia across the country are donating blood in a dramatic show of solidarity, for their Sunni brothers and sisters fighting in Fallujah.

RP troops, out of Iraq now!

Amidst all this, there are Filipino forces, sent by the government of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, serving on the side of the US occupiers against a people fighting to liberate their country, from those former colonial powers that Filipinos fought against in their quest for genuine national liberation

Our government claims that the Filipino forces are non-combat troops and that they are in Iraq for “humanitarian” reasons. There is no middle ground in occupation and uprising. In Iraq you are either with the occupation or against it. It is also clear to everyone that the GMA government sent the Filipino forces in Iraq in line with its all-out support to George Bush’s “War on terror”. In Iraq, our troops are viewed as mercenaries, fighting a war for money and profit.

The action of the GMA government is not only shamefully illegal, it is also dangerous! It is because of this regime’s support for the US “war on terror” (which has also been described as the Bush administration’s “War of Terror”), which is a code for colonial-style occupation to advance imperialist interests, that the Philippines is under threat of retaliatory Madrid-style terrorist bombings. The Madrid bombings have, in fact, led to the electoral collapse of the Spanish ruling party and the newly elected Zapatero government’s decision to pullout Spanish troops from Iraq.

The Bush administration has threatened economic sanctions against the Philippines if Philippine troops are pulled out of Iraq. This is tantamount to blackmail and a gross violation of national sovereignty. A genuinely sovereign nation must have the right to decide its own foreign policy without being dictated to by any foreign power.

We call on the Arroyo administration to immediately withdraw support to the US-led "war on terror" and to pull out the Philippine troops from Iraq now. We also demand from the GMA government that it ensures the safety of Filipino workers whose lives are in danger in Iraq and secure safe passage for those who want to leave the country.
.
We call on everyone to join us in solidarity actions to show our support for the Iraqi people and their resistance against the occupation so that they can achieve genuine national sovereignty and freedom.

April 23, 2004

Signatories: as of April 26

Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission of the Association of Major Religious Superiors in the Philippines (JPICC-AMRSP) * Focus on the Global South (Philippines) * Young Moro Professionals Network * Gathering for Peace * Peace Camp * Institute for Popular Democracy (IPD) * Bukluran ng Maggagawang Pilipino (BMP) * AKBAYAN * ALTERNATIBA * Anti-Globalization Movement (AGM) * GOMBURZA * Kilusan para sa Pambansang Demokrasya(KPD) * Samahang Demokratiko ng Kabataaan (SDK) * Youth for Nationalism and Democracy (YND) * SANLAKAS Youth*Resource Center for People's Development(RCPD) * Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) * SANLAKAS * Gazton Z. Ortigas Peace Institute * Manggagawa para sa Kalayaan ng Bayan (MAKABAYAN) * Partido ng Manggagawa (PM) * Center for Agrarian Reform Empowerment and Transformation (CARET) * Pambansang Katipunan ng Makabayang Magbubukid (PKMM) * League of Urban Poor for Action (LUPA) * Pagkakaisa ng Kababaihan (KAISA KA) * Nuclear Free Philippines Coalition (NFPC) * Teatrong Bayan * Progresibong Alyansa ng Mangigngisda (PANGISDA) * Confederation for Freedom and Democracy (CONFREEDEM) * Women's Education, Development and Productivity, Research & Advocacy Organization * People’s Task Force for Bases Clean Up Phils .* PADAYON * SARILAYA * Liga Manggagawa * Pambansang Katipunan ng Magbubukid sa Pilipinas (PKMP)