‘Catastrophic success’

In his book on America’s history of regime change, “Overthrow,” Stephen Kinzer wrote a chapter he called“Catastrophic Success.”                                                                            

 President Bush does not probably understand the irony of that title. He was practicing a speech on the invasion of Iraq in the Treaty Room.  He told those around him why he decided to invade – “The purpose of the invasion is to “disarm Iraq, free its people and defend the world from grave danger.” That sounds noble enough if it were true. But political writers described it as “the speech that ripped the United States away from a long tradition of cooperative diplomacy turning it into an arrogant power that assumed the right to determine which foreign governments could live and which one must die.”

It is the most relevant to us in these times. There was an antecedent to that arrogance about Iraq. It happened in the Philippines.

Kinzer used the painting to draw the image of what he meant. He wrote that we should instead turn our attention to the  painting on the wall of the room where Bush was practicing his speech. In the “Treaty Room” is an imposing painting that immediately arrests the attention of those who enter the room. The painting is about “The Signing  of the Protocol of Peace Between the United States and Spain on August 12 1898 by the French artist Theobald Chartran. We should give a second look at the painting. That painting illustrates how “regime change” by arms or cunning became a habit with America.

“The Protocol of Peace” is a misnomer.  It is not about equal states agreeing with each other to achieve peace. As Kinzer writes, it should really be called a “Protocol of Surrender” because it is about how the US forced Spain to surrender after its military defeat in Cuba.

It was the beginning of “catastrophic success” for America on what its role should be as a superpower. Having taken over the Philippines successfully in the 19th century was a precursor of other regime changes that would take place for a century.

More important it was a declaration that the United States was now able and willing to depose foreign governments, writes Kinzer. It is the attitude and the policy that would make the Philippines an American colony. The invasion of Iraq and the US taking over the Philippines come from the same roots – it assumed it now had the power to dictate the fate of weaker countries.

 It is doubly hard for the Philippines because it did win the revolution against Spain which gave it the right to their own country. They fought for their own freedom and independence but that victory was snatched from them by deception. (That is a long story still debated but it is time that we take a deeper look into how we became a colony of America. We must not cry when we sing Bayan Ko. We must be angry and fight for it).

To Kinzer, Bush and McKinley were motivated by the same reasons – patriotism and religious fervor when American corporations were looking abroad for new markets and sources of raw materials.

Not all Americans agreed with these attitudes and policies. But in the political struggle of what should be adopted, the imperialist side won. Political candidates won elections simply by promising that it would use military strength with “extreme care.”

The candidates hid their imperialist intentions by saying it would not be seeking advantage for itself but for humanity’s sake. It is important that we recall this past or we will be led astray by those who want to continue the history and policy symbolized by the portrait of McKinley on the wall and Bush making his speech trying to justify its invasion of Iraq. They may succeed but it is an empty success and we now know in hindsight what that it is an evil lie.

That is the animating principle of the attempt to overthrow President Digong. It is not about “human rights” that is being protected but once again a show of force and cunning of how a powerful country treats weak countries. Bush and McKinley used words that would deceive those who know nothing of the governments they overthrow and why it would not make the world more free and peaceful.” McKinley, the man in painting in “the Treaty Room knew next to nothing about the Philippines. Bush, on the other hand recklessly justified the invasion of Iraq by saying  “I rely on my instincts.”

I am writing this column because the parallels between Bush’s invasion of Iraq and McKinley’s invasion of the Philippines as Kinzer rightly said are startling.

More disturbing is the reason why we will never be able to change our Constitution. I used to think that it is our politicians’ fault. But someone else was waving the baton and that was the United States which sees itself as the savior of the world.  Indeed it is one of their oldest traditions and it is hidden behind false humanity and religion. It is not surprising that when Quezon returned from the US to discuss the Constitution for an independent Philippines, McKinley was immoveable. American government  said “presidential or no independence.”

 The US wanted Presidential unitary just like what the US had. What else could it be and it stayed with us until the disastrous presidency of Benigno Aquino III. Yet, some Filipinos want more of the same by overthrowing Duterte and making sure that we are not free from the clutches of its imperialism.

 The results of invasions for regime change should be foremost in our minds at this time when President Digong has dared to break away from American imperialism. He is undertaking the revenge for all Filipinos when they stole our revolution in the 19th century.

He may not think of it that way but he has unconsciously embraced the collective mind of Filipinos. Time did not did not erase what happened then. It is still inside our souls.

The American and Spanish government reckoned the Treaty of Paris as an instrument of peace, but to Filipinos it was a deception which led to our subservience to America. Filipinos were not even consulted or considered in its making. The provisions of the treaty were not for the benefit of the Filipinos but for the imperialists.  With the signing and ratification of the Treaty of Paris, the bitter relations between the Americans and the Filipinos became more bitter and it eventually led to the Filipino-American war.