Martial law

Why martial law? Because, like Everest, it is there. The “why martial law” question gets wrenched from our guts only because of the sad experience this country had from its first taste of it. But it could not be that bad, or else it would not be in the constitution in the first place. It is not martial law, therefore, that is bad but the possibility of improper implementation.

And this is where our thoughts may differ. To those who have faith in duly-constituted authority and in the officials who carry out that authority, the call of the day is to give “this” martial law the benefit of the doubt. To those who have closed their minds to “this” president and his government, nothing good ever proceeds from his hand or his mouth.

Still, why martial law? Because it has a ring to it that can terrify even the most hardened terrorist. As commander-in-chief, President Duterte can unleash the full force of the uniformed services against terrorists without having to declare martial law. But that is the normal thing to do. That is predictable. And some of the biggest and most important fights, in whatever arena, have been lost by being predictable, by being normal.

Take the case of Manny Pacquiao, the boxer. Boxing pundits do not like his fighting style because he does not follow the normal style. At the same time, these very same boxing pundits love his fighting style because it is unique, one of a kind. It is this unheard of and unseen boxing style, more than his devastating punch, that has made Pacquiao the greatly admired and greatly feared boxer that he is.

Martial law, therefore, adds an element to the usual military operation that every terrorist has come to expect after every attack. It shakes the very ground under which every battle is waged just by the mere mention of its name. One very telling effect martial law can have in the fight against terror is that it slams the door on many terrorists in search of shelter, sympathy, and succor.

Do I approve of martial law even if it is extended to include the Visayas, the possibility of which the president has threatened? I honestly think Duterte will not do that. I have seen so much of the president and heard of his speeches too much that until he does anything, you can never put a finger on what he is saying. So, as the late Abe Licayan used to say; “let us to see.”

My gut feeling, though, is he will not. In fact, I suspect that after the initial impact of his martial law declaration had started to sink in, and after he has seen that the Maute Group has largely been contained in just the Marawi area, he would be beginning to think seriously whether he did not knee-jerk his reaction from Russia, given his distance from the homeland.

There could be other reasons why, knowingly or unknowingly, he felt compelled to knee-jerk a martial law reaction. One is he had just been threatened with war by his Chinese counterpart and needed to recover a little of what part of his dignity might have been lost because of it. On the other hand, there are reasons as well why he will not go too far with his martial law gambit. He is still to meet his Japanese counterpart, the leader of a pacifist nation, whom he respects highly.