Interview with Filipino peasant leader

Scan page 12

warfare as a viable course for them at this time at least. The formation and consolidation of their revolutionary movement will begin with independent mobilizations in their own workplaces and communities around their own demands.

While maintaining a defensive posture and refusing to surrender its arms, the CPP has nonetheless agreed to negotiations regarding its inclusion in the AquinoLaurel-Enrile government as a key item to be discussed in cease-fire talks. This again reveals the CPP's mistaken confidence in the liberal wing of the capitalist class.

Only muted criticism has thus far been directed by the CPP toward the "progressive" Aquino wing of the government. The CPP's focus is to denounce those who are blocking the president's moves to "dismantle fascist rule."

The CPP did not criticize Aquino's call for an appointed, rather than elected, body to draft a new constitution-thus allowing the Marcos forces to demagogically raise the slogan of "democratic elections."

Every reform that the Aquino government undertakes under pressure of the mass movement-such as the freeing of political prisoners, restoring the writ of habeas corpus, and removing some Marcos-appointed officials —should be welcomed.

But this hardly warrants any political confidence in the ability of the liberal wing of the government to solve the ongoing problems of the Philippine people. And where the government already enjoys wide support, building an alternative political pole becomes all the more critical.

Today's tasks

Though the dictator is gone, the key structures and institutions of oppressive rule still remain. The continuing struggle for political democracy can be advanced not only by supporting the abolition of martial law institutions and the removal of Marcos appointees from the government, but also by calling for elections to local offices and to a constituent assembly.

Aquino says that elections would be too expensive. This is an excuse to hide the central government's shaky hold on the provinces, barely touched by the "February revolution" and where the mass organizations retain broad influence.

The call for land reform retains its urgency and can be coupled with demands by agricultural workers —particularly in the depressed sugar industry-for jobs and decent wages, and workers' control to safeguard these gains.

Given the weight of the multinational corporations in the plantation economy and agribusiness, and the domination of the peasant economy by the imperialistcontrolled world market, such demands are directly linked to the struggle for national liberation.

The main symbols of the Philippine government's Maria Rosario Felico is a leader of the Central Luzon Farmers Union in the Philippines. Last year, she participated in the formation of the national union of small farmers and agricultural workers, the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP).

The following are excerpts of an interview with Felico that first appeared in Internationalen, the newpaper of the Swedish section of the Fourth International. The interview was translated and edited by International Viewpoint.

Maria Rosario Felizco: For the majority of the people, democratizing the Philippines means recognizing their just demand for land.

But Cory has been very quiet about this question. Before the election, she talked most about the peasants getting better credits. Credits aren't much use when you don't have land to cultivate.

The poor peasants and agricultural workers have so far not seen any sign of change since Marcos' fall. It is the military that is most responsible for this. The power of the military is still very great in the rural areas.

The landless peasants, who make up two-thirds of all the people on the land, cannot but be sceptical about the new government when they see how influential the big landowners are in it. They don't believe that they will get any land, and rightly so, because the landowners have always blocked every attempt at land reform in the Philippines.

But the land question is the problem that overshadows everything in the countryside. Those who have no land live as laborers or tenants. Either they pay up to 60 percent of the harvest to those who own the land they work, or they rent land and pay 25 percent of the their incomes to the landowners, but then they have to pay all the expenses themselves.

In both cases this is exploitation because the landowner gets an income without working which is larger than the portion that the families who work the land can keep.

All the other problems in agriculture have to do with the fact that many people have no land. Since the poor farmers have nothing left after they have paid their rent and production costs, they are driven into the moneylender's net. Since few farmers own capital, the moneylenders can take from 20 percent to 400 percent on loans.

By law, of course, it is forbidden to take more than 12-percent interest. But all too often, the local government representatives, moneylenders, and landowners are the same people. Even for state loans, you can pay up to 45 percent.

What makes the situation worse is that more and more land is being taken from the poorest farmers, most swallowed by the plantations of multinational companies.

According to the law, no foreign firm is supposed to own more than 1000 hectares of land. But Dole owns 30,000 hectares. Del Monte owns 24,000 hectares, and so on.

They the small farmers off land hoto/Teanne-Marle Hallacy Peasant woman: Aquino army killed her husband.

cultivation because there is no longer any "fallow land" to take.

Those left without land have no choice but to go look for work on the plantations.

The minimum wage is 39 pesos, two dollars a day, and it is estimated that the minimum for supporting a family is 110 pesos. So, even two incomes are not enough to sustain a family, and the children usually work-especially on the sugar plantations.

A child can be paid as little as eight pesos a day. So the plantation owners prefer child workers.

Internationalen: The KMP calls for distributing the land free of charge.

Felizco: The poor have already paid for their land many times over by their rents or their starvation wages.

Agriculture can only develop if the farmers own the land and control production. And it is only by working together that the small farmers can improve production and market their products without being cheated.

Internationalen: But no land reform is in sight.

Felizco: Last year, something called the "balanced agricultural development strategy" was launched. It was backed by the World Bank. The proposal was that the Philippines should rely on its agricultural resources for development. In the rulers' version, this meant that foreign investment should be increased in agriculture —with the result that more land would be taken fron the poor peasants and become plantations.

We protested strongly against this idea. Now Ongpin is proposing a development strategy that in principle is the same. Nothing has changed. We were dumbfounded. But really, we should not have been so surprised. Ongpin himself is a big businessperson. The same, more or less, goes for Cory Aquino, whose family owns 6,000 hectares in sugar plantations.

We know that a strongly organized movement is the only power we have when we deal with the authorities. And if there is going to be any real change, it is going to have to come from us ourselves.

It is going to take time to win. Millions of poor people have yet to be organized. But we are on the right road and we have already come quite a way.

SOCIALIST ACTION AUGUST 1986

Scan page 13

requesting such measures to establish