I clearly remember the events that took place in the Philippines in February 1986. On February 27, 1986, Ferdinand Marcos, the one-time popular politician who was elected to no less than three terms as the president of the Philippines, fled the country in an Air Force plane and went into exile in Hawaii. The story [...]

Sunday Times 2

Drawing parallels from the Philippines

View(s):

I clearly remember the events that took place in the Philippines in February 1986.

On February 27, 1986, Ferdinand Marcos, the one-time popular politician who was elected to no less than three terms as the president of the Philippines, fled the country in an Air Force plane and went into exile in Hawaii.

The story behind the rise and fall (and subsequent resurrection) of Marcos bears striking parallels to events in our own country.

Marcos served in the army and then qualified as a lawyer after World War II ended. He achieved political success by claiming to be “the most decorated war hero in the Philippines”. In later years, however, careful study of military documents proved that many of his claims of wartime heroism were false – but his propaganda worked, and he was elected to the Philippine congress in 1949. He gradually worked his way up the political ladder, progressing from congressman to senator to minister, and ultimately he was elected president of his country in 1965.

Marcos pursued an aggressive programme of infrastructure development and presided over an economy that initially grew steadily. He funded most of his programmes through foreign debt. His twenty years of rule were characterised by cronyism and vanity projects fuelled by massive loans. They left the country reeling from inflation, widespread poverty and a crushing debt crisis.

Mismanagement, plunder of public funds, and the blatant corruption of the president and his cronies resulted in economic instability – and debts that the Philippine government is still paying off 35 years after he fled.

What forced Marcos to flee the country was a series of popular peaceful demonstrations in February that year. Referred to as the “Yellow Revolution” or the “EDSA Struggle” (because it took place along the Epiphania Di Los Santos Avenue in Manila), this nonviolent protest led to Marcos fleeing in ignominy, ending 20 years of dictatorship and misrule.

During his time in politics, Marcos and his family amassed massive wealth — plundering millions that allowed them to purchase prime properties in the US. When they fled to Hawaii, the US Customs records on their arrival showed that they brought with them no less than $300,000 in gold.

Marcos and his family, although not US citizens, were granted political asylum in the US. They lived well in exile — and Marcos finally died in Hawaii at the age of 72.

I was musing about the story of Ferdinand Marcos and his family because it is a classic example of what happens to politicians who get themselves elected to positions of power – and then, lacking a proper moral compass, utilise their time in office to steal their country’s wealth for themselves.

Ferdinand Marcos and his wife Imelda stole billions of pesos from the Filipinos, amassing a personal fortune estimated to have been worth US$5 billion to US$10 billion by the time they were deposed in 1986. Unfortunately, the government of that country has never been able to get back all the vast sums of money that the corrupt Marcos family stole from the people. Commissions for construction paid into foreign banks, aid money siphoned off without being accounted for, expensive gifts extracted from well-wishers in return for political favours – all this ill-gotten wealth left the country. Some of it was used to fund a lavish lifestyle for the family when they lived in exile.

But after Marcos died, his widow Imelda and children were inexplicably allowed to return to the Philippines. Today, far from paying for the sins of their father, the Marcoses are well and truly back in business.

Like in Sri Lanka, politics in the Philippines is based on a feudal-type system of patronage. Voters select their representatives, not on their qualifications, experience, and capability but rather on whether the politician once elected will get them a job or a promotion or a contract — or even assist to get their child into a prestigious school.

Voters — whether in the Philippines or in our own country – have short memories. Following her return from exile after her husband died, Marcos’ widow Imelda was elected a member of parliament from 2010 to 2019. Her daughter, Imee Marcos, was also elected to parliament. She subsequently became the governor of their province and is now a senator.

And the most amazing fact of all is that Ferdinand and Imelda’s son Bongbong Marcos was this year – just 35 years after his father was forced to flee the country with his ill-gotten wealth –elected by the voters as the president of the country.

One need not speculate how the current president of the Philippines found the money to fund his election campaign. Both Imee Marcos and Bongbong Marcos have been identified in the Panama Papers as the beneficiaries of various offshore Marcos holdings.

I am getting old now and I am sure that I won’t be around a couple of decades from now.

But mark my words, just like Bongbong Marcos, one of the scions of the Rajapaksa family will no doubt return in due course to reclaim the presidency that he feels belongs by right to his family.

And I am certain that he will have no difficulty in finding the money to fund his election campaign and buy him his votes.

 

Share This Post

WhatsappDeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspaceRSS

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.