The KMP (peasant movement of the philippines) movement generation, activity, and continuity in philippine society 4 5

It is comprised of NGOs like PEACE144, KAISAHAN145, KAMMPIL146, PPI147, PRRM, CARET, ELF, CFPI; of former national democratic peasant groups, which are identified with CPP -initiated or

CHAPTER IV Philippine Peasant Movements and Organizations

This chapter deals with peasant movements and organizations in the 1980s and 1990s Its organization revolves around two basic arguments First, movement emergence, activity, and continuity owes much to the persistence of significant agrarian structures that are reflected in the goals and issues carried out by said movements and organizations Second, the emergence and development of the KMP (Peasant Movement of the Philippines) demonstrates concrete political, organizational, and ideological continuities while manifesting the comparable conditions of movement emergence and collec tive action generation discussed in the preceding chapter

The first section describes the range of peasant actors in Philippine society I analyze the politics of these organizations and the environment that facilitated their emergence and proliferation Against this backdrop, I introduce the subject of study

by presenting a brief history of the KMP and examining its politics Lastly, the conclusion punctuates the chapter by linking the historical section (Chapter III) with

the present-day peasant politics and movement and underscore movement continuities

A Present-day Peasant Movements and Organizations

The 1980s and 1990s witnessed a remarkable emergence of peasant organizations and movements A variety of factors and their convergence could be pinpointed to have directly or indirectly made this phenomenon possible In what follows I analyze briefly the societal conditions between the 1980s and 1989s to carve the environment in which movement emergence transpired and then discuss the various peasant formations

1 Facilitative Conditions

The structure of political opportunities significantly influences movement emergence, activity, and continuity In the last two decades several changes unfolded

in Philippine political environment First, the Marcos government lifted martial law

in January 1981 The formal lifting of military rule directly and indirectly encouraged social and political activists to go out into the open and express their dissent against the Marcos dictatorship and aspirations for social change

Second, the three-day EDSA uprising (24-26 February 1986) put an end to the Marcos rule and the event created the so-called euphoria for political openness.131Formal democracy was restored through Aquino’s ascendancy as president via extra-constitutional means In 1987 and 1988, congressional and local elections were held

respectively Interestingly, the communist left through the Partido ng Bayan (PnB,

People’s Party) fielded eight candidates in the national elections but lost This

phenomenon reflected the widely held notion of the existence of a democratic space and the openness of the new government Nonetheless, several progressives were

131

EDSA stands for Epifanio De Los Santos Avenue

able to enter government through appointments and elections but they were

eventually “eased” out.132

Third, the promulgation of the 1987 Freedom Constitution and the enactment

of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (R.A 6657) on 10 June 1988 further uplifted the hopes of the agrarian population and pro-land reform advocates for a significant and lasting social change The pro-people stance of the Aquino government enticed peasant organizations from different political poles The years

1986 to 1987 were characterized by an arduous lobbying of peasant organizations and alliances to pressure the Aquino government in implementing a genuine agrarian reform The laborious effort, of which KMP was a major participant, spawned a broad-based peasant coalition, the Congress for Peoples’ Agrarian Reform (CPAR) Several years after, the Local Government Code of 1991 was implemented and further encouraged the participation of NGOs and POs in local government units

Fourth, it was between the mid-1980s and early 1990s when NGOs gained prominence and dominated Philippine civil society Not a limited number of these organizations engaged in agrarian reform and rural development advocacy and implementing development projects for the rural sector In short, the last two decades witnessed an expansion of civil society.133

Another factor that led to the proliferation not only of open peasant movements and organizations but also NGOs points to the evolving character of the CPP -NPA The tactical blunder, as the CPP admitted in one of its documents, of calling for a boycott in the 1986 snap presidential elections rekindled a 1979 debate

within the party of the same nature, that is, to participate or boycott the congressional elections The party implemented the non-participation policy As for 1986, some of the key people involved in this debate, like the late Mr Filemon “Popoy” Lagman, again disagreed vehemently with the policy.134 And in early 1993, the Manila -Rizal regional committee bolted from the CPP and rejected not only the leadership of Jose Maria Sison but also the whole party As such, they referred to themselves as ‘RJs’ or the rejectionist faction.135

As a result, top leading cadres and members of the party have disaligned themselves from or quit the revolutionary movement Today we can see them working with NGOs, engaged in their own businesses, others have been appointed in top government positions and joined think tanks, some have taken the path of being partisan scholars, while others have just kept silent and went on with their ordinary

lives This fall-out likewise contributed to the expansion of civil society, particularly

of NGOs

The expansion of political opportunities, however, does not guarantee a channeling of political participation toward institutional bounds Contrary to the belief of the majority of peasant-based organizations and movements, the KMP for instance and other formations for that matter continue to engage the Philippine state through extra-institutional means Theirs is experiential and ideological “Political opportunities are” hence “relative and acquire meaning only in relation to a movement’s social base and collective strategy” (Boudreau, 2001: 48)

re-2 Of Movements and Organizations136137

The expansiveness of non-governmental organizations and movements in Philippine society is reflected by three typologies that aim to grasp their character and scope First, David for instance presents a four-part categorization of Philippine NGOs

“The first category is comprised of academics, religious leaders, and other

professionals and they are termed as non-governmental individuals (NGIs) The

second one pertains to membership-based organizations that include professional,

academic, and civic organizations (PACOs) and grassroots people’s organizations

(POs) POs can be further subdivided into government run and initiated POs

(GRIPOs) and genuine, autonomous people’s or ganizations (GUAPOs) The

GUAPOs have organized themselves beyond the community and/or workplace

through sectoral and geographic alliances The third pertains to ideological forces

namely national democrats, democratic socialists, social democrats, and liberal

democrats Finally, there are those institutions or agencies that support grassroots

organizations or the NGOs These NGOs are further classified as development,

justice, and advocacy NGOs (DJANGOs), traditional NGOs (TANGOs), funding

agency NGOs (FUNDANGOs), and mutant NGOs (MUNGOs) that are further

subdivided into GRINGOs, business-organized NGOs (BONGOs), and fly

-by-night entrepreneur organizations or COME N’GOs” (David 1998, pp 26-48)

On the other hand, Ferrer also uses a four-part differentia tion of civil society groups:

“They can be distinguished as to the nature of organization, that is, its function or

role may be service-oriented, for advocacy, research or training, may be

ideological or political, organic (community) or indigenous or traditional (clan,

tribe); or be based on nature of composition (e.g sectors, classes, ethnic groups,

gender); as to organizational level, that is, organizational membership may be as

individuals or groups; and scope of operation and/or membership may be at the

most basic territorial unit (e.g., neighborhood) or national and international; as to

organizational origin, that is, it may be initiated by government, interest groups,

or particular institutions (business, church, academe) or by individuals; and as to

perspectives / ideology, that is, their operational frameworks may be defined by

some ideology, philosophy, religion, or culture” (Ferrer 1997: 2, emphasis on the

original)

On a more specific plane, Franco categorizes the peasant struggle into three political poles

“The outright opposition (far left) is represented by KMP (Maoist -inspired,

CPP-influenced) that perceives CARP as inherently limited and implementation is

impossible Thus, wittingly or unwittingly, sides with the anti-reform land-owning

elite and real estate developers in calling for the scrapping of CARP altogether

Nonetheless, it acknowledges the continued importance of anti -reform resistance

The second pole, uncritical collaboration (center -right) is exampled by AR Now!

137

I am gratefully indebted to Ms Marge Ibañez of CODE-NGO who introduced me to Mr Rolly B Ascuncion of PAKISAMA who in turn unselfishly shared his work on profiling peasant movements, organizations, and coalitions The contents of this section were largely derived from the document

“Situationer on the Peasant Movement in the Philippines: 1992 to 1998”, PHILINK, January 1999

(which is of a pro-Ramos social democratic orientation) relies on formal-legal

means to move lands and lays exclusive emphasis on the state for implementation

It also perceives CARP as inherently limited and little has been achieved It is

nonetheless, pro-CARP and anti-Morales And the third pole, critical engagement

(left -of-center radical reform pole), is represented by PARRDS138 It does not only

rely on formal-legal means to move lands but more importantly on organized

social pressure from above and below to drive land reform This actor advances a

pragmatically neutralist pro-CARP stance and views that implementation is

possible but also acknowledges the continued importance of anti-reform

resistance” (Franco, 1999, pp 1-4; 1997, pp 2 -4)

The three typologies, with emphasis on the third, are by no means insignificant in understanding the nature of peasant formations in Philippine society Their application, however, should be qualified so as to put into effect a contextualized analysis Instead of trying to establish or formulate a general pattern

or mode of analysis it would better to treat these organizations on an empirical level and in a relational manner with government and agrarian reform and rural development adversaries

The CPAR for instance could not neatly be boxed along the categorizations presented It was rather a collective spontaneous reaction of agrarian reform advocates to grab the opportunity of initiating a meaningful agrarian reform program The CPAR, formed on 21-23 May 1987, is thus far the biggest, broadest, and longest coalition of peasant and peasant-based organizations, movements, and advocates It was comprised 93 organizations led by 12 national peasant and fisherfolk organizations – AMA, AMIHAN, BMMLL, KABAPA, KMP, KAMMPIL, FFF, LMP, LMMP, NFSW, PAKISAMA, and PAMALAKAYA (PPI 1998, p 72).139Upon the implementation of CARP, CPAR criticized the program as basically not comprehensive and ridden with many loopholes On this note, the coalition called for

of Sugar Workers, PAKISAMA for National Federation of Peasant Organizations, and PAMALAKAYA for National Federation of Fisherfolk

a multi-sectoral conference that was participated by 600 sectoral representatives In this conference (25-26 June 1988), the People’s Agrarian Reform Code (PARCODE) was formulated and approved to challenge CARP.140

The CPAR, for six years, became a center of activities for agrarian reform advocacy Through lobbying, dialogues, mobilization, and electoral participation, the coalition advocated for various issues that concern not only the rural sector but the general population as well These issues ranged from land conversion, fishery issues and aquatic reforms, palay and rice prices, coconut levy, rights of peasant women, food security, environmental destruction, natural calamities, skills training, militarization, peace, the ousting of U.S military bases, to the issue of foreign debt.141 In June 1993, however, CPAR imploded due to politico-ideological and other differences between member organizations (PPI, 1998: 74)

Critical Collaboration with the Philippine state and its institutions has been a defining characteristic of most peasant actors.142 Like the FFF and the PRRM, an overwhelming majority of peasant societies in the last three decades has resorted to institutional means in struggling for agrarian concerns, nonetheless in varying degrees Their politics is rather primarily directed toward influencing the state and other dominant social forces through formal-legal means and participation in the implementation of government programs and policies and in the delivery of services

These organizations (for example PARRDS), however, claim that they also or equally rely on

“organized resistance from below” in pushing for reforms See Borras, 1997

implementation of NGO-PO -GO programs, hold planning workshops with DAR, work hand in hand with certain government agencies and officials in formulating and implementing agrarian-related policies Examples of these are the AADC, dKMP, KAMMPIL, KASAMA-FPO, and the PAKISAMA, and COIR (PHILINK, 1999) In some cases, others have developed long-term working relationships with government, e.g., the FFF, SANDUGUAN, PKSMMN, SCFO, and the AMA (ibid.)

Embarking from Franco’s typology, a concrete example of the critical engagement grouping is PARRDS or the Partnership for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development Services that was established in 1993 It is comprised of NGOs like PEACE144, KAISAHAN145, KAMMPIL146, PPI147, PRRM, CARET, ELF, CFPI; of former national democratic peasant groups, which are identified with CPP -initiated or –controlled organizations like the dKMP148, PEACE, PPI, and Siglaya149; of popular democrats like the PRRM and the MPD (Movement for Popular Democracy); and of and independent socialist formations like the BISIG150 and CARET

On the other hand, AR Now! (The People’s Campaign for Agrarian Reform Network, established in 1997) is constituted by formations like the AADC,

144 The Philippine Ecumenical Action for Community Empowerment Foundation is also of ND origins and a research and advocacy format ion It is currently involved in the struggle against the land grabbing and conversion case in San Jose del Monte, Bulacan

145 KAISAHAN (UNITY) together with SALIGAN (Alternative Legal Assistance Center), BMFI (Balay Mindanao Foundation Inc., and SENTRA (Center for Genuine Agrarian Reform) are para-legal support groups for peasants KAISAHAN, SALIGAN, and BMFI provide support to a broad array of peasant groups including dKMP, PAKISAMA, and KASAMA-FPO

146 Established in 1991, KAMMPIL (Association of Small CocoFarmers in the Philippines) was a founding member of the COIR (Coconut Industry Reform Movement)

149

A faction that bolted from the CPP -NPA in 1993

150

Bukluran sa Ikauunlad ng Soyalistang Isip at Gawa or Unity for the Advancement of Socialist

Thought and Action

PAKISAMA, KAMMMPI, and the KASAMA -FPO151 and member NGOs (ANGOC, BMFI, CARRD152, ICSI, PASCRES, PARFUND, PDAP153, PhilDHRAA154, SALIGAN, and WAND) The political attitude of these two groupings toward government and state projects is likewise carried by other organizations and networks such as the AMA155, MORE-AR156, SANDUGUAN157, PKSMMN158, and the SCFO159 (PHILINK, 1999: 50)

The PAKISAMA was spawned by a series of grassroots consultations in 1986 after the EDSA uprising It is affiliated with other several coalitions and formations like the NPC, Green Forum Philippines, PHILINK, PKSMNN, COIR, and the

151 The KASAMA-FPO or the Federation of People’s Organizations is a multi-sectoral formation whose main membership is comprised by farmers and farmw orkers also includes small vendors, jeepney drivers, and small fisherfolks

152 The Campaign for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development or CARRD together with ICSI (Institute of Church and Social Issues) and PASCRES (People’s Alternative Study Center for Research and Education in Social Development) are research and advocacy centers

153

Established in 1986 and basically remains a partnership of six Philippine NGO networks and a number of Canadian NGOs It has focused on estate/site development (post-land trans fer in 10 pilot areas through its PPSE (Promoting Participation in Sustainable Enterprises) program and sustainable agriculture

154

The PhilDHRAA together with ANGOC (Asian NGO Coalition), PDAP (Philippine Development Assistance Program), Tambuyog, CERD, and SIKAT (involved in community-based coastal resource management), and ATI (Appropriate Technology International), PhilNET -RDI (Philippine Network – Rural Development Institutions), and COIR are peasant support organizations for the development or adaptation of appropriate technologies and sustainable agriculture and fisheries

155

AMA (Alliance of Workers in Agriculture) was established in 1976 and was formerly known as MASAKA (Association of Free Farmers) that is identified with the underground armed movement of

PKP (Baltazar 1998, cited in PHILINK 1999) Its network organizations are SAMAMA (Association

of Small Fisherfolks), KMM (Small Farmers’ Association), UMA (Agricultural Workers’ Union), KMB (Farmers’ Association in the Hinterlands), KMT (Association of Sugarcane Farmers), BMA (Salt Workers’ Association), UMN (Coconut Workers’ Union), MALAYA (a women’s organization), and KaBaPa (Society of New Filipina)

156 The Movement to Oppose and Resist Exemptions to Agrarian Reform is an issue-based coalition formed in 1995 and is comprised by the FFF, dKMP, KASAMA-FPO, and PAKISAMA

157 SANDUGUAN (“Unity in Blood”), a federation formed in 1987, is primarily concerned with organizing and strengthening cooperative rural banks

158

The PKSMMN (National Coalition of Organizations of Coconut Farmers and Farmworkers) is a broad coalition formed with the support of Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) officials Among others, its network organizations include AMA, AMMANI, ARBA, ASTKK, APKN, BUKLOD, COFFRA, DLPI, D -JPAT, FAITH, FFF F:RF, KAMMPIL, KASAMA-FPO, KAMMMPI, KAMALAYAN, KOMMMPAK, LMP, MARANAO, NAMAHAMIN, NFSCFO, PAKISAMA, PASALEY, SIPAG, SCFO-Q, TASK, and UGMA, most of which were established during and after the martial law period (PKSMMN Brochure, nd.)

159

The SCFO or Sm all Coconut Farmers Organization was organized by the PCA in the late 1980s

PNPC.160 PAKISAMA has a total of 42 affiliate peasant organizations federated at the provincial and municipal levels and are located in 32 provinces throughout the country It is also in the process of building two sectoral organizations namely LAKAMBINI for peasant women groups and MAMAMYAN for fisherfolks (PAKISAMA Brochure, nd.)

Formed in November 1995, the AADC or the Agri-Aqua Development Coalition is said to have a sphere of influence in 22 municipalities in the five provinces of Regions 9, 10, 11, and 12 Its other network organizations are the Mindanao Environment Forum (MEF), Mindanao Coalition of Development NGO Networks (MINCODE), the National Peace Conference (NPC), KAMMMPI or the Federation of Small Fisherfolks in the Philippines that was established in 1997 and a board member of the AADC in Mindanao,

Another basic characteristic of the majority of these members is their overriding focus on specific agrarian issues such as cooperatives, coco levy, fisheries code, liberalization of agricultural trade, agricultural prices, rice cartels, food security, productivity and technology161, leasehold implementation, agrarian reform fund, etc On the other hand, they fail to or do not link these important problems to the more general issue of landlessness and agrarian reform and the political-economic orientation and system of Philippine society Consequently, there is an imminent

danger of overlooking land reform and the impa rtial implementation of agrarian

reform Moreover, others would tend to focus only tactical issues that can muster maximum media projection

On the other hand, a range of these organizations also employ parliamentary means but in a limited sense They likewise participate in mass campaigns and demonstrations, rallies, and vigils To a limited extent also they engage in grassroots organizing and mobilization These organizations are the CO-TRAIN (Community Organizing, Research, and Advocacy Institute, established in 1993) and PHILCOS (Philippine Community Organizers’ Society, established in 1994), which is supported by the former Moreover, most of these organizations are well endowed and can afford air-conditioned offices and buildings, state-of-the art computers, and salaried staff, and possess funding for their daily operations Interestingly, challenger peasant societies or KMP in particular does not have resources such as these

extra-The collaborational politics of these peasant formations can further be dissected theoretically and pragmatically There are those who work with government because they believe that it is best way to advance the interests of their members and constituents and society in general On the other hand, there are those who

collaborate with government because they are staunch defenders of the status quo and

abhor extra -legal and non-legal practices Third, there are those who work with government to counter radically oppositional peasant organizations and compete for mass support Fourth, there are those who have become disillusioned with the national democratic movement and opted to explore the rules of the game set by the state and change government from within Fifth, there are those who cooperate with government for the simple reason of survival Sixth, there are those who profit from government projects and deals and are either constrained to do so or are willing collaborators These, nonetheless, overlap with another

Interestingly, a critical segment within the abovementioned Philippine peasant formations stands apart in terms of organization, goals, and strategy Infamously dubbed as militant and uncompromising, I now proceed to introduce the subject of the study, that is, the KMP

B The KMP: A Political Historical Description

The KMP is but just a small voice if located within the expansive range of social and political formations that aim to advance agrarian reform and rural development in the Philippines Its radical oppositional political practices, however, bring into consideration various theories and perspectives on social movement emergence, activity, and continuity In what follows, I take into account the emergence of KMP and the factors tat contributed to its establishment and then present the nature of its politics in terms of orientation, organizational structure and dynamics, agenda, and program and strategies of action

1 Historical Brief

The social political turmoil and activism in the 1980s midwifed one of the largest and most militant peasant movements in the Philippines Social movement theories and perspectives in general alternately point to structural conditions, grievances, organization, the structure of political opportunities, resources, and identity as interrelated factors to movement emergence Aside from peasant grievances emanating from structural conditions and the agrarian crisis, which I have discussed elaborately in the preceding chapters, the emergence of KMP could also be attributed to the convergence of the following factors – mixed political opportunities, existence of formal protest organizations, and the participation of middle forces

a Naissance of KMP

Central Luzon is one of the many regions in the country that possesses a tradition of peasant political activity – the 1745 agrarian revolts, the Palaris uprising

in 1762, the Katipunan Revolution of 1896, the Sta Iglesia movement in 1903, the emergence of peasant organizations in the first two decades of the 1900s, the establishment of the PKP in 1930 and HUKBALAHAP/HMB and the PKM in the 1940s, the MASAKA in 1964, the CPP-NPA in the late 1960s, and the AMA in the 1970s The tradition continued remarkably in the 1980s and the agrarian concerns were not different basically from past grievances

In 1981 another wave of peasant reorganization brewed in Central Luzon

‘Old and new’ peasant activists and leaders, and revolutionary cadres conducted a conference-type meeting on 14 November to discuss the peasant situation and the need for organization.162 A committee was formed and this regional body served as the preparatory step in the formation of a region-wide alliance, the Alliance of Central Luzon Farmers (ACLF) It outlined a set of issue-based demands ranging from irrigation, flood control, usury, low level of production to access to credit (Interview with AMGL Leaders; PPI, 1998: 69)

The peasants, through the ACLF, launched a petition addressed to the FPA that was later forwarded to the MoA (Ministry of Agriculture) The petition making was facilitated by host of organizations and institutions like the Bulacan Social Action Center (BUSAC), Luzon Secretariat for Social Action (LUSSA), and the Office for Continuing Education of the University of the Philippines Institute for Social Work and Community Development (OCE-UP-ISWCD) (Tadem, 1985: 64-65) And on 9 December, a 3,000-strong delegation of Central Luzon peasants and

162

It could not be ascertained as to what organizations these cadres came from but it would be safe to assum e that the organizations involved both open and secret and old and new peasant formations and people’s organizations

supporters staged a demonstration in front of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture to protest the high cost of fertilizers and pesticides (ibid.; Interview with current AMGL Leaders, 10 December 2000; PPI, 1998: 69) The failure of the petition to produce concrete results caused frustration among peasant organizations and made them realize the importance of organization (Tadem, 1985: 65)

Interestingly, there was an attempt to form a more comprehensive program vis-à-vis the issue -based program of the ACLF that would eventually lead to the establishment of a regionwide organization (Interview with AMGL Leaders) The organizing efforts were, however, almost paralyzed when 5 organizers were killed by military troops during a raid in their meeting place in Pulilan, Bulacan on 21 June

1982 Official reports identified them (4 men and 1 woman) as members of the NPA who were killed in an encounter For two years, the event silenced the ACLF and its political activities (Tadem, 1985: 65-66)

The year 1983 was also characterized by major political events and peasant activities In May, twenty-five peasant organizations joined forces and formed the National Consultative Assembly of Peasant Organizations (NCAPO) On the 20t h of July, protesting sugar workers numbering around 10,000 in Escalante, Negros Occidental were brutally dispersed by the CHDF taking the lives of 27 protesters.163The assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino Jr on 21 August exacerbated the political crisis under the Marcos dictatorship Peasant conditions and struggles on the other hand received significant attention from the alternative press In Mindanao, the peasantry launched a large-scale mobilization to condemn land grabbing and eventually led to the formation of the Mindanao Alliance Against Land Monopoly, a

163

CHDF stands for Civilian Home Defense Force, a notorious para-military group established under Marcos to aid the military and police in their counter-insurgency campaign

regional multi-sectoral alliance advocating for a genuine agrarian reform (PPI, 1998: 69-70)

By mid-1984 the fertilizer issue was rekindled when its priced soare d by 120 per cent From this concern gravitated other agrarian issues such as “the writing off

of all Masagana 99 debts, the institution of a new small farmer credit scheme, stabilization of palay prices, the lowering of the price of gasoline, and the implementation of a genuine land reform and nationalist industrialization program” (Tadem, 1985: 67)

The resurgence of the fertilizer issue served as the impetus to the abated attempt to organize The whole reorganization effort finally culminated in the esta blishment of the AMGL (Central Luzon Peasant Alliance) that held its first congress on 14 October 1984 Subsequently, its provincial chapters likewise launched their formal assemblies and founding – the AMC (Capampangan Peasants’ Association) on 24 October, the AMB (Bulacan Peasant Alliance) on 18 November, and the ALMABA (Bataan Peasant Alliance) on 29 December In the same year, the

ad hoc of MAKAMAZA (Zambales Farmers’ Independent Unity) and AMT (Tarlac Peasant Alliance) were also formed while the AMGL-NE (Nueva Ecija chapter) was formally launched in 1985.164

The year 1985 proves to be a critical juncture in the history of peasant movements in the Philippines On 4 February, an 800,000-strong peasant mobilization from Central Luzon traveled to the Ministry of Agrarian Reform (MAR)

demanding for price subsidies on fertilizers Dubbed as the first Lakbayan/Sakbayan

(People’s Journey/Caravan) in the history of the peasant movement, the Caravan

164

Interviews with Mr Loreng Tiongson and Mr Rod Tuazon, General secretary and President, of AMGL (10 December 2000) These provincial chapters, particularly the AMC and AMB preceded the formation of AMGL

became an annual undertaking.165 The activity culminated in a 3-day kampong bayan

(people’s camp-out) in front of the MAR to demand an increase in the price of palay but was violently dispersed by the police.166

The peasant caravan and the people’s camp-out culminated in the establishment of the KMP The NCAPO and other orga nizations from Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao convened a national congress of farmers’ organizations on 24-27 July 1985 at the Claret School in Quezon City Jimmy Tadeo of Bulacan was elected as National Chairman and Rafael Mariano of Nueva Ecija as Secretar y-General To punctuate the activity, the newly formed KMP led a 3,000-strong demonstration in Plaza Miranda and declared its “Statement of Principles” (PPI, 1998: 70, Tadem, 1985: 70; Interviews with AMGL Leaders)

From the point of view of identity forma tion, the first five years of the 1980s could be perceived where class identity among the Philippine peasantry reached another climax From a Marxist perspective, the long-standing “class-in-itself” consciousness of a significant segment of the peasant population could be perceived

to have undergone a transformation However, a “class-for-itself” consciousness among the peasants could only be possible if there were concrete collective venues through which actions and grievances could be channeled, that is, organizations (McNall, 1991)

b Importance of Organizations

The importance of formal or established organizations was manifest in the establishment of the KMP At the grassroots base, the founding members were

165

Lakbayan stands for Lakad ng Bayan or People’s Journey while SAKBAYAN stands for Pagsakay

ng Bayan or People’s Caravan The purpose of this means of mass mobilization is to demonstrate the long procession of a people coming mainly from the grassroots sector to protest against the (policies of) government The activity is a multi-sectoral in character with the grassroots sectors comprising the majority of the participants

166

PPI 1998, p 70; Tadem, 1985: 68-70; Personal recollections where the author was able to shake the hands of Jimmy Tadeo, then president of the AMGL

comprised of 38 people’s organizations located all over the archipelago.167 Of the 38 organizations, only 1 was still in its preparatory or ad hoc stage and the rest were established and open mass organizations To date, these organizations exist under new names and formations, the changes of which could be attributed to political and security reasons.168 (Interviews with KMP Leader Rafael Mariano, December 14, 21, and 22, 2000)

The following organizations were represented in the founding congress:169

Luzon – Northeastern Luzon Farmers Movement (Cagayan Valley), Central

Luzon Peasant Alliance (AMGL), Bulacan Peasant Movement (AMB),

Capampangan Peasant Movement (AMC), AMGL Nueva Ecija, Assembly of

Peasant Organizations Against Poverty (KASAMAK), Bataan Peasant Alliance

(ALMA-BA), Aurora Farmers’ Association (AK MA), Silang Farmers’ Alliance

(ALMAS, 1983), Quezon Farmers’ Association (QFA), Banahaw Peasant

Movement (KMB), Union of Peasant Organizations of Real, Infanta, and Nakar

(KASAMA-RIN), Bicol Coconut Planters Association, Inc (BCPAI), Camarines

Sur, Albay, Sorsogon Farmers Association, Camarines Norte, and Masbate

Visaayas – Association of Farmers in Panay Island (KAMI-PA, 1984), Small

Farmers Association of Negros (SFAN, 1985), Unity for the Welfare of Small

Farmers in Negros Oriental (KAUGMAON), Bohol F armers Association

(HUMABOL, 1984), Alliance of Samar Farmers Association (ALSA -MASA,

1984), and the Farmers Unity of Sta Fe, Leyte (NAKAMAS)

Mindanao – United Farmers of Zamboanga del Norte (MAZANAG), United

Farmers Alliance of Zamboanga del Sure (ALMANAZ), United Farmers

(MAGNA) of Misamis Occidental, Misamis Oriental United Farmers

(KAMONA-MAG-UUMA), Farmers Association of Lanao (HOMLAN), Agusan

del Norte Farmers Union (UMAN), Farmers Association of Agusan del Sur

(KAMAS), United Farmers of Surigao del Norte (NAMASUN), Surigao del Sur

Farmers Association (KAMASS), Nagpakabana Davao Farmers Association

(HUMANDA), Davao Farmers Association (DAFA, 1980), South Cotabato

Farmers Association (SOCOFA), Sultan Kudarat Farmers Association

(SUKUFA), and the Ad H oc Bukidnon.

On the other hand, the said organizations and the national KMP were supported by peasant institutions like the Philippine Assistance for Rural Development (PARUD), Philippine Ecumenical Action on Community Enlightenment (PEACE), Forum for Rural Concerns (FRC), Farmers’ Assistance

Board (FAB), Luzon Secretariat of Social Action (LUSSA, CBCP), and the Philippine Peasant Institute (PPI)

Advocacy of peasant issues and critical researches of emerging and existing agrarian conditions were the main contribution of these institutions They also participated in mass demonstrations and provide technical help in launching related activities They likewise engage directly in organizing and mobilizing constituent peasants But most importantly, they provid ed a discursive venue for alternative solution to agrarian problems and state-initiated agrarian reform and rural development

It should also be noted that by participating in larger movement networks, wherein the Philippine left is could be perceived as a major social movement industry (McCarthy and Zald, 1973; see also Boudreau, 2001), the KMP was able to broaden its network and deepen its politics.170 The CPAR undertaking gave the nascent movement a first hand experience in dealing with other peasant formations with different political standpoints Another endeavor was the movement’s participation in

1987 Congressional elections through the umbrella organization of the Partido ng Bayan (People’s Party, PnB) Its president, Mr Jaime Tadeo, ran for a senatorial position The legal left, for the first time since 1946, engaged in the electoral struggle under the Alliance for New Politics or ANP (Timberman, 1991: 207) On the other hand, KMP’s early and continued involvement with the New Patriotic Alliance (BAYAN) strengthened its ties with like-minded national democratic organizations

c Participation of Middle Forces

The term “middle forces”, a Maoist nomenclature, basically pertains to the forces located at the middle of a political spectrum, that is, between the left and right

170

In Chapter VI (A.4.), I discuss in detail the network of organizations that KMP engages with in launching oppositional politics at the national level

It particularly pertains to people coming from the middle and upper classes, e.g., students and small businessmen, who possess democratic aspirations and beliefs and/

or do not have any party affiliation Their participation in revolutions or social movement activities is c ritical in that they could decide a sudden swing in the balance

of power (Laswell, 1950: 15; Snow, 1957: 22; Bowie, 1962: 150; Floyd, 1964: 408; Timberman, 1991: 134)

The turbulent years between 1983 and 1986 witnessed a peculiar

configuration of political forces As Timberman (1991: 134 cf Diliman Review,

1986: 7) notes, in 1983, a “very highly organized left and a very highly organized right in the dictatorship and a highly unorganized, fragmented middle forces” could

be observed in the Philippines In 1985, however, a “more organized middle group” could be seen that was visible in 1983

From this insight, the active participation of the middle forces in Philippine politics is manifest It was also in this context tha t KMP engaged particular

personalities from this sector as a political and practical tactical move (sse also

Tadem, 1985: 75) In a situation where a desperate government was doing all means

to preserve its power and the status quo and block social change, a radically oppositional movement like the KMP needed a buffer or a neutralizer vis -à-vis the intensified militarization (Interviews with KMP President Rafael Mariano, December

14, 21 and 22, 2000)

Specifically, these elected officials were Ben Granada as National Vice Chairman of KMP, a politician from Mindanao who once ran for the Davao governorship; Sister Clemente Flora as the National Treasurer, a Catholic nun; and Jose Feliciano as a National Council member, former Secretary of Agriculture of the

Macapagal administration (Interviews with KMP President; Tadem, 1985: 75) Other figures involved were Memong Patayan and Andong Hilario

Tadem (ibid.) was quite critical of a perceived “KMP’s dependence on middle class elements and the need to strike deeper roots in the countryside” In a similar perspective, it would really be odd for a grassroots class-based movement to have national leaders belonging to the middle class and/or middle forces The movement, however, “started to replace the middle forces wit h grassroots leaders anchored on a conscious effort to mold both men and women peasant leaders For instance, Imelda Lopez was elected as the National Vice Chairman and assumed the position since the

2nd Congress (1987) It could also be observed that there is a significant participation

of women in provincial and regional chapters” (Interviews with KMP President)

d Mixed Political Opportunities

The relevance of the emergence of KMP during a cataclysmic period in Philippine politics in social movement theory is instructive in that movement generation and activity could solely be confined within the domain of a perceived existence of a favorable structure of political opportunities A government could always give concessions to expand political space for the purpose of misleading, neutralizing, or pacifying social dissent or a brewing revolution

In the preceding section, I discussed the favorable political opportunities that contributed to the emergence and proliferation of peasant or rural organizations There were, however, major undercurrents to these perceived positive changes in the political environment First, when martial law was lifted salvaging became rampant and the frequent victims were activists.171 Second, the essence of the much-vaunted

171

Salvaging is the popular or colloquial term of summarily liquidating or killing suspected subversives or criminals without due process of law This was allegedly perpetrated by the “secret police” or “death squads” of the Marcos regime

EDSA “revolution” should be grasped based on its immediate and long-term impact

on Philippine society As Rivera puts it, “In EDSA, one can speak of a political revolution but certainly not a social revolution An authoritarian regime gave way to

a democratic regime but the rules of engagement and governance of this formally

democratic order continue to favour the few in a society suffering from gross

economic and social inequalities” (Rivera 1996, p 20, emphasis added)

Third, the people especially the peasantry started to look for concrete policies that would implement social, economic and political reforms in the first six months

of Aquino’s presidency On 22 January 1987, different peasant organizations rallied

in front of Malacañang to remind the Aquino government of its promise of agrarian reform.172 However, they were violently dispersed leaving 13 peasants dead and the massacre became the rallying point of succeeding peasant mobilizations

Fourth, in the middle of 1987 the government finally revealed its political

character vis-à-vis the progressive forces and the revolutionary movement The low

intensity conflict (LIC/Gradual Constriction)173, with again the “assistance” of the

CIA, was launched to crush the progressive, nationalist, and leftist forces, specifically the CPP and NPA With an endorsement from the Catholic Church, vigilante groups

were formed throughout the archipelago.174 Moreover, the late 1980s witnessed the

“assassination of opposition leaders – labor leaders, anti-bases activists, and human rights lawyers”, student leaders, priests, and peasant activists.175 These events

172 During her political campaign, Aquino espoused the infamous slogan of libreng pamamahagi ng

lupa (free land distribution)

175

Schirmer and Shalom 1987, p 420, cited from Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Vigilantes in

the Philippines: A Threat to Democratic Rule, New York: 1988, pp x-xvii

transpired under the “Freedom Constitution” that contains the longest bill of rights in

Philippine history

The abovementioned conditions are important factors that significantly contributed to the organizational slump of the KMP between 1987 and 1990 There were, however, other factors to be considered and they point to the internal dynamics

of the movement Mr Rafael Mariano exclaimed that these were economism and reformism, the perception of a peasant insurrection, and organizational schism Together with Mr Daning Ramos (Vice-President), they explained these as follows:

“The first factor was economism It refers to the act of being content with or

prioritizing the material benefits that peasants could gain from collective actions

Reformism is the tendency or practice of confining the peasant struggle within the

legal provisions of the CARP and achieving piecemeal solutions to the problem of

peasants Second was the perception of a peasant insurrection There was a ‘small’

but influential group within the movement who aimed to engage the peasants

toward an insurrectionary path This was manifest in the style of their work

characterized by sweeping and fast track organizing Third was the attempt to

incorporate the KMP From an organization whose policies and principles are

determined by member grassroots chapters, the movement would be directed by of

board members and it would lose its mass character (Interviews with Rafael

Mariano and Daning Ramos, December 14, 2000)

The aforesaid external and internal conditions posit two critical insights on the relevance of political opportunities to movement growth and activity First, political opportunities are almost always characterized by positive and negative dimensions The KMP, hence, thrived through what could be called as mixed opportunities It emerged under both favorable and unfavorable circumstances and developed under the same conditions Second, the advantages that a political opportunity offers greatly rely on internal social movement dynamics On one hand, favorable conditions may not be capitalized if certain aspects of an organization of a national character do not permit so, e.g., cohesion On the other hand, unfavorable conditions may be translated into favorable opportunities based on the strong commitment of an organization to its principles and constituents

2 The Politics of KMP176

The oppositional character of KMP could be grasped by analyzing its political orientation, orga nizational structure and dynamics, agenda, and strategies and program of action By examining these aspects, I highlight the movement’s peculiar characteristics vis-à-vis the majority of peasant movement and organizations in Philippine society

a Political orientation

Established on 24 July 1985, the political pedigree of KMP has so far been influenced by five historical junctures in the history of peasant movements in the Philippines: the Katipunan Revolution of 1896; the establishment of the KPMP in the 1920s (the first class-based peasant organization), the PKP in 1930, and the HUKBALAHAP/HMB and PKM days in the 1940s and 1950s; the founding of the CPP and NPA in the late 1960s; the establishment of the AMGL (Central Luzon Peasant Alliance) and its provincial chapters in the early 1980s; and the splits in the 1990s within the CPP and NPA that reverberated throughout the peasant movement, NGO, and PO communities This peasant movement is said to have an effective leadership over a total of 800,000 rural people comprising roughly 9% of the Philippines agricultural labor force with 55 provincial and 6 regional chapters nationwide.177

This political historical heritage explains why KMP in its almost 15 years of active participation in the peasant struggle has acquired several “labels” from the different sectors of society These labels, whatever their political underpinnings are, could be best contextualized by understanding this challenger society as a national

176

This general introduction of the politics KMP was derived from the movement’s brochure (no date) and from interviews with Rafael Mariano (General Secretary), Danilo Ramos (Chairman), and Lu Roque-Bailosis (International Relations Officer), December 2000

177

As of the 4th National Congress in 1993 (KMP Brochure, nd.)

democratic (ND) organization As an ND organization, it believes that “imperialism, bureaucrat-capitalism, and feudalism are the triumvirate reasons for Philippine underdevelopment and subservience to foreign interests, especially the U.S Under such political orientation, KMP envisions national freedom and democracy as the starting stage178 that will rid Philippine society of these social maladies179”

Another principle that distinguishes the KMP from other member peasant formations is the application of class analysis in society.180 NDs believe that Philippine society is in a state of prolonged semi-feudalism and semi-colonialism while the others perceive such diagnosis as anachronistic.181 A third contentious issue that separates KMP from the rest is its political standpoint on revolutionary armed struggle It openly respects armed struggle as the primary and most effective means

of achieving agrarian reform and societal transformation.182 This means is also perceived as the “embodiment of a high commitment and strong principle in advancing the peasant struggle and societal transformation as a whole”.183

Following the lead of Ellingson (1995: 100-144), KMP integrates its peasant discourse within the larger discourse of national liberation The belief system of the movement owes much to the political movements that espous e socialism and communism Its leaders at the local and national level emphasize the need for a broader consciousness and ideology with the aim of providing a class perspective to

It should be noted that this distinction also applies to nat-dems (national democrats) vis-a-vis the

soc-dems (social democrats), pop-dems (popular democrats), and the RJs (rejectionists)

Moreover, not all CPP-NPA-NDF members are socialists and communists per se

183

Interview with Danilo Ramos (KMP President)

peasant struggles.184 It would then be logical to assume that through this ideology that movement members and leaders alike undergo “cognitive liberation” (McAdam, 1982: 48-51) and acquire an “insurgent consciousness” (Smith, 1991: 62)

b Organizational structure and dynamics

The National Congress is the highest policy-making body of KMP It elects from the various local chapters the members of the National Council and officers of the National Executive Committee which function as the leadership bodies of the federation The KMP national office is staffed by a secretariat working in various departments implementing the organization’s goals, programs and services – mass struggles, public information, education and training, economic welfare, organizing, international affairs, projects and special programs, and administration and finance

On the other hand, chapters at the regional, provincial, municipal, district, and barrio levels have respective administrative bodies and particular programs working along the general policies and programs of action of KMP.185

The KMP’s organizational dynamics, however, is far more complicated than its structure It is claimed that in its first five years of existence KMP as an organization functioned without a body “Until around 1990, the KMP existed only

as a nominal national structure; i.e., there was a set of structures at the head of which were officeholders, but its membership was not active in the organization itself” (Weekley 2001, p 200) The emergence of the KMP, however, could not have been possible if it were not for the active participation of established open peasant organizations in 1985 and the intervention of supporting middle forces To reconcile this contradiction, it should be noted that between 1986 and 1990 the Philippine

184

Interviews with Gemo Bautista, Nardo Sevilla, and Philip de Guzman (UMALPAS-KA Leaders), Gigi Mendoza, Albert Custodio, and Lino Santos (SAMBAT and KASAMA-TK Leaders), and Rafael Mariano and Danilo Ramos (KMP National Leaders)

185

KM P 1993 Constitution

government declared a total war against the progressive and nationalist forces and the CPP -NPA This explains probably the inactivity of the founding members of the KMP in the period under consideration

The 1990s, nonetheless, proved to be the molding years of the KMP as an oppositional movement It is in this period, where it underwent organizational evolution and developed as a politically empowered actor Peasant organizations of different political orientation and origins became active partners and chapters of KMP in open extra-parliamentary and parliamentary struggles An exemplary case points to the experience of the self -organization of UMALPAS-KA186 in Hacienda

Looc, Nasugbu, Batangas (see Chapter VII) To date, the national movement has 62

provincial chapters and 13 regional and sub-regional formations while 9 more member organizations are in the process of organization and reorganization

Another interesting political historical angle is KMP’s perceived or presumed links with the CPP-NPA In the mid-1980s and early 1990s, a typical way of distinguishing leftist groups gravitates on the practice of determining the amount of influence the CPP has over them Timberman (1991: 311), however, critically raises the point that “this was not an entirely accurate indicator, because CPP influence extended in varying degrees to groups not belonging to the NDF For example, it was difficult to determine exactly how much influence the CPP had over Bayan, the KMU, and the KMP”

Moreover, a student of Philippine oppositional politics should recognize that the boundaries between unarmed and armed struggle are often blurred in the countryside The existence of such condition goes way back to the MASAKA and PKM days and the origins of the coupling of armed and unarmed political actions

186

UMALPAS-KA stands for People’s Association Against Land Destruction

could ultimately be traced to the Katipunan days and the peasant and mass uprisings

in the Spanish and American colonial period More so, not only the CPP187 was able initiate peasant actions after its establishment and but so was the PKP as well188

c Agenda189

KMP advocates and struggles for a revolutionary agrarian reform program that will abolish all forms of feudal and semi-feudal exploitation and implement a free and equitable distribution of land and resources to the tillers It espouses a rural development program complementing agrarian reform that encour ages agricultural cooperation among farmers and enhances local production and productivity Agricultural productivity, however, is perceived to go hand in hand with sustainable agriculture and environmental protection It likewise seeks to promote the rights and welfare of peasant women and eradicate all forms of discrimination against women, and the recognition and respect for the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples

On a broader scale, the KMP stands for economic nationalism and freedom from foreign domination and control, particularly by the U.S and Japan, and a nationalist industrialization program that counters imperialist globalization It works for the establishment of a free, democratic, and independent nation that respects the people’s political and civil rights and pursues an independent foreign policy based on mutual interests It strives for the realization of a comprehensive and progressive social policy that ensures the provision of basic social and public services for the

187

In Southern Luzon, for instance, residents of Barangay Kamagong speak of how some of them were able to thwart the despotic rule of a landlord/encargado named Plat on in the 1970s They did this through armed confrontation and the CPP did not have any hand on this It was only in the late 1980s

where CPP -NPA cadres and organizers learned of this history (Personal interviews in 1988 with then

people In the cultural realm, it seeks to promote a nationalist, pro-people, and scientific culture

Moreover, the disastrous impacts of liberalization and globalization on rural societies and the general population form the very basis of KMP’s active participation in national and global oppositional politics This contentious process simultaneously engenders various types of opposition at the same scale and provides

a broader and larger venue for collective political actions, especially peasant politics

d Strate gies and Program of Action190

KMP carries out painstaking organizing and education work among the peasants as an important requisite in building a strong and mass-based organization

To fulfill its vision and mission, the movement employs various forms of struggle ranging from simple legal protests and lobby work to massive defiant actions such as nationwide strikes and land occupation Alliance with other sectors of society especially with workers, students, and progressive sections of the middle class has been instrumental in generating popular opposition to government’s anti-people policies and programs

The movement respects the option of armed revolution being waged by an increasing number of peasants who believe that this is the only means to redress grievances and achieve genuine people empowerment KMP likewise struggles for tactical and temporary reforms that could bring economic relief for the people through programs and projects and contribute to actual socio -economic upliftment of the peasants Livelihood, health, disaster relief, cooperative-building, and technology-development projects are some of the projects being undertaken

190

Ibid

Nonetheless, KMP primarily employs extra-parliamentary means of advancing the peasant cause, combines it with other forms of struggle, and utilizes different arenas of contestation

C Conclusion: Peasants’ Continuing Past

Philippine peasant politics and the agrarian landscape are intricately woven The structure of landlessness and the persistence of aggravating conditions (e g., usury, inequitable sharing, lack of support services) represent an almost automatic conductor of agrarian dissent For the past 400 years, these structures have prevailed despite efforts to put into effect a program for agrarian reform and rural develo pment

Another facilitating context surrounding movement generation points to the existence of mixed political opportunities That while the Philippine political system displays a relative degree of openness to non-governmental participation or democratic expansion, it continues to undermine the participation of grassroots sectors particularly the agrarian population

The emergence of peasant movements and organizations in the 20th century Philippines could particularly be attributed to the existence of established organizations, participation of middle forces, and the existence of mixed political opportunities Generally, ideology (grand or specific) still plays a key role in their organizational and mobilization work Before the late 19t h century, spontaneity was the nucleus of consciousness and grievance was the motor force of spontaneous protests and organization relied more on informal networks

Facilitative contexts, however, could be perceived as relative vis-à-vis the agency of peasants and supportive individuals and formations It is then imperative to look into movement dynamics in order to concretize how conditions conducive

toward movement generation, activity, and continuity become useful to the study of social movements

From the Spanish, American, and Japanese colonial periods, agrarian dissent has remarkably been expressed through spontaneous and organized uprisings In the 1920s, however, peasant organizations started to proliferate and ideology became a key factor of protest The 1930s was also characterized by pronounced peasant struggles, especially in Central Luzon, while the 1940s witnessed a different level of resistance against foreign aggressors, with the PKP (old Communist Party of the Philippines) establishing its own army and survived until the 1950s Nonetheless, the agrarian component was always manifesting In the late 1960s the demise of the PKP gave birth to the CPP, which similarly established a people’s army from the remains

of the HUK/HMB Through a pronounced Maoist line, the peasants are considered a major force in the national democratic revolution being launched by the CPP-NPA-NDF

To date, peasant formations continue to proliferate and their concerns range from specific to general agrarian and social issues Actions of present-day movements compared with the peasant uprisings and protests from the 16th to the 19thcentury could be perceived as more organized and complex on three grounds First, local peasant struggles or actions that usually takes place at the community, town, district, provincial, or regional levels are consciously provided a national and even an international perspectives by partner or network organizations Second, the forms of protest have become modular (e.g., advocacy, education and training, street demonstrations, camp-outs) though particular forms of actions are still taken depending on the situation, e.g., land occupation in the early 1990s, human barricades, and confrontations Third, while actions of peasant formations are

generally autonomous, meaning independent from state initiatives, the practice of lobbying and advocacy within government agencies by concerned organizations lends a bifurcated character to peasant actions The situation becomes murkier if a former peasant advocate or activist has assumed public office

The aforesaid comparison, however, necessitates an elaborate analysis of the political practices of present -day movements at different levels It is on this ground that the next chapter proceeds on with the investigation of the movement dynamics of one of the largest and militant peasant formations in Philippine society

Chapter V Oppositional Politics at the Local Level

KMP challenges the state and other dominant social forces through oppositional politics This process of contesting dominant powers, however, does not transpire in a social vacuum The KMP, hence, consciously carries out and launches its oppositional peasant politics the local, national, and international levels On the other hand, political contestation is initiated and sustained through specific means and processes – political organization, advocacy and education, and mobilization Moreover, the political actions of KMP are orchestrated respectively through the extra-parliamentary or non-legal and formal-legal arenas

The nucleus, however, of all political opposition launched by KMP on the national and international scales is represented by the movement’s struggle at the local level Struggles at the local level are the “microfoundations that transform individual age nts into a collective actor that can engage in social activism” (Buechler, 2000: 149) This level is likewise the site where KMP and its member organizations

directly encounter and contest the exercise of power by the state and dominant social

forces

In the succeeding discussions, I focus on KMP’s oppositional politics at the local level.191 The struggle of UMALPAS-KA (Ugnayan ng Mamamayan Laban sa

Pangwawasak ng Kalupaan – People’s Association Against Land Destruction), a

hacienda -wide organization, epitomizes the struggle of KMP at the local level in contesting land conversion and challenging government and real estate developers.192

191

Contents of this chapter were published in late 2002 in ASIAN REVIEW’s “Popular Movements”,

pp 37-62 (Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand) The article was entitled “Breaking Free through Oppositional Peasant Politics in the Philippines”

192

‘UMALPAS-KA’ is directly translatable into English as ‘BREAK FREE’

The chapter basically revolves around three arguments First, external factors like structural conditions, state policies, mixe d opportunities, and the existence of larger movements are critical toward movement generation This facilitative context, however, may not lead to the emergence of new movements if peasants themselves were not ready to respond The situation leads to the second argument – that agency

as well plays an equally important role in the generation of new movements

Third and more specifically, it was through organization, ideology, education and training, networking with larger movements that powerless peasants in Hacienda Looc are able to maintain the control of their lands A synthesis of the three arguments suggests that protest in the process becomes an important continuation in the peasants’ lives and activities

In the first section, I present briefly an overview of peasant conditions and struggles in Southern Luzon to put into context the struggle of UMALPAS-KA The succeeding five sections discuss in details how processes and structures external and internal to movements contribute to movement generation, activity, and continuity The chapter concludes by recalling the aforesaid arguments and highlighting perspectives on peasant politics and social movements

A Peasant Politics and Struggles in Southern Luzon

The Southern Luzon agrarian landscape has undergone significant changes in the 1990s.193 One of the significant developments was the establishment of the CALABARZON growth area that covers at least 1.6 million hectares of land.194Attuned with the development dictum of export-oriented industrialization, the

Aquino government established export -processing zones in selected areas throughout the country

What remained unaltered is the structure of agrarian relations in the region First, large landholdings dominate the type of land ownership The KASAMA-TK claims that landholdings in Southern Luzon are concentrated in the hands of fifty-three (53) landlords/corporations who control at least 276,410 hectares.195 Second, usury continues to burden peasants in the rice, coconut, rice, and sugar sector The absence of government financial support, i.e., access to credit, makes the agrarian population vulnerable to onerous loans provided by moneylenders In Batangas, for instance, “5-6” loans that imposes 20 per cent interest rate on a compounded monthly basis is the us ual resource to get cash In the case of rice farmers, they borrow one sack of seedlings and pay two sacks in return And unless the loan is paid the additional sack accumulates.196

Third, peasants are burdened by the inverse relationship between the cost of production and the price of their produce For example, the average rent for hand tractor is PhP 700 (S$ 2.50) daily and the water buffalo for PhP300 (S$12) Other expenses to be accounted for are cost of seeds and labor On the other hand, the local price for one sack of palay is only PhP 250 or S$10 while the price of copra (the raw material to produce coconut oil) ranges from PhP 4 or S$ 0.16(local) to PhP 10 or S$ 0.25 (market).197

The aforesaid conditions are just some of the issues being confronted by peasants in Southern Luzon and reflect the basic agrarian concerns of many peasant formations and movements in the Philippines Peasant political activity in the region

195

See discussions in Chapter II, A, 1

196

Interviews with Nasugbu peasants Shilay Enrile and Elay Enrile (54 and 34 years old respectively)

in Nasugbu, Batangas, July 25-27, 2000

197

Ibid

could be interpreted to have been influenced by external political organizations like the HUK/HMB in the 1950s, the CPP-NPA in the 1970s and onward, and a host of NGOs from the mid-1980s up to the 1990s Southern Luzon peasant movements have likewise imbibed their mode of operations of combining aboveground and underground or open and secret organizations and struggles

In the early 1980s, peasant formations sprung up in the open to participate in the multi-sectoral struggle against the Marcos dictatorship More particularly, it was during this period that issue of coconut monopoly became a major concern In 1981, the ACMA (Anti-Coconut Monopoly Alliance), a coalition among tenants, small farmers, and even big landed families adversely affected by the coconut levy imposed

by Marcos, was formed to campaign for the removal of said monopoly (PPI, 1998: 69).198

In 1982, Southern Luzon peasants launched a mass campaign to protest against the monopoly in the coconut industry A few years later, the KASAMA -TK, a regional peasant organization, was formed It basically calls for the implementation

of a re volutionary agrarian reform program Subsequently, a province-wide organization in Batangas was established as one of its chapters, the SAMBAT (Batangas Peasant Movement) These peasant formations, however, were not a party

to the establishment of the KMP in 1985 Instead, groups like the Quezon Farmers’ Association (QFA), Banahaw Peasant Movement (KMB), and the Union of Peasant Organizations of Real, Infanta, and Nakar (KASAMA-RIN) were the ones who attended the founding congress and became founding members

198

The coco levy fund was set up in 1973 by virtue of Marcos’s P.D 276 It stipulated that effective

20 August 1973 a levy of 15 pesos per 100 kilograms of copra (coconut product) shall be imposed on every first sale The levy was called the Coconut Consumer Stabilization Fund (CCSF) Within 9 years (1973-1982), however, the levy ballooned to 100 pesos per 100 kilograms of copra By 1986, it was audited that the CCSF already contained PhP 9.695 billion and by 1998 it has already accumulated PhP 100 billion in funds and assets (Coconut Industry Reform Movement, 1998, http://www.codewan.com.ph/anihan/campaigns/scam.htm)