There is attached Mr. Bell’s analysis of the probable trends in the
Philippine Government following Magsaysay’s election victory.1
Mr. Bell’s comments include the following:
[Attachment]
Memorandum by the Officer in Charge of
Philippine Affairs (Bell) to
the Deputy Director of the Office of Philippines and Southeast
Asian Affairs (Day)
secret
[Washington,] November 16,
1953.
Subject:
The victory of Ramon Magsaysay and the Nacionalista party in the
Philippine elections is not expected to lead to any major shift in
Philippine domestic or foreign policy. Magsaysay was supported by a
wide range of persons representing disparate points of view. He
obtained the nomination under terms of an agreement signed
[Page 559]
by Senators Laurel, Recto
and Tanada with the aid and more or less open support of the young
businessmen and businessmen’s veterans’ organizations, particularly
the Junior Chamber of Commerce.…
Apart from his wide personal following the major leaders supporting
him fall into three categories:
- 1.
-
The older leaders of the Nacionalista Party,
principally Senators Recto, Laurel and Rodriguez, who
have had many years’ experience in the Philippine
political arena and who also enjoy widespread personal
influence. Recto is the most brilliant lawyer in the
Philippines, the greatest master of the English language
in public life in the Philippines, and a man of
integrity. The fact that he and Laurel served as
Secretary of Foreign Affairs and President respectively
during the Japanese occupation is of no political
significance in the Philippines today. Political
developments since the War have demonstrated that the
Filipino people are convinced that Laurel and Recto
acted in their best interests during the occupation.
Laurel is an aesthete, almost something of a mystic,
probably an alcoholic, and astute politician and almost
devoid of any knowledge of or interest in economics.
Although Laurel has captured the imagination and
affection of many Philippine peasants and workers, it is
unlikely that he would advocate any radical reform
measures. Recto is wealthy; Laurel less so. In general,
they represent the views of the conservative land-owning
class, although Laurel might assume a somewhat more
progressive attitude than Recto. These two men will
almost certainly dominate the Philippine Senate for the
next four years. Senate President Rodriguez, respected
as “an elder statesman”, is in fact less influential
than either Recto or Laurel. Some younger politicians
regard him as senile.
Because of the control of the Philippine Senate by
representatives of this element it is likely that they
will exert a very considerable influence in the new
administration.
- 2.
-
The relatively younger, more militant, Catholic
Progressive element, in part under the leadership of
Senator Lorenzo Tanada, played an important role in the
election of Mr. Magsaysay but generally lack any real
political strength through a political party. Tanada’s
Citizens party has many attributes in common with
European Progressive Catholic political parties.
Generally viewed as a “knight in shining armor”, Tanada
is young, aggressive, absolutely honest but somewhat
immature politically. He holds progressive social views
which are probably less leftist than they were a few
years ago. Philippine correspondents covering the Senate
invariably list Tanada as one of the best men in the
Senate.
The Catholic Church played a much greater role in this
election than they ever had in the past. A few days
before the election Quirino, in a letter to the Papal
Nuncio objected to the Church’s interference in the
political campaign. Most of the leaders of the Catholic
action, close associates of Tanada, ostensibly worked
for honest elections; in fact, they also worked for the
election of Magsaysay. According to one report of
unknown reliability the Bishop of Jaro, in Iloilo, in
effect endorsed Magsaysay publicly.
- 3.
- Magsaysay was strongly supported by the principal
organization of young business men and veterans,
particularly the leaders of the Junior Chamber of Commerce,
the Lion’s Club and the Philippine Veterans Legion. While
some of these leaders may have personal political ambitions,
the majority probably supported Magsaysay because of their
desire to eliminate corruption and inefficiency from the
Philippine Government. They in general represent the type of
leadership which is to be found among organizations of young
progressive businessmen in the United States.
These three groups will all compete in attempting to influence
Magsaysay’s policies. On the basis of what we know about Magsaysay,
it is likely that his personal attitudes are closer to the Catholic
progressives and the young business men than to the older political
leaders. Certainly, his attitude toward the need for reform of the
land tenure system, resettlement and the issuance of land titles
would receive more support from the younger element. It is
debatable, however, whether he will be able to obtain the necessary
cooperation from the Philippine Congress to carry out any drastic
reforms. The older entrenched party leaders will have firm control
of the Philippine Senate and very likely great influence in the
House. The followers of General Romulo in the Democratic party,
particularly the four Senators, formerly Liberals, who joined him,
are all seasoned politicians and more sympathetic to the
conservative social views of the Nacionalista leaders than they are
to the other group cited above.
On the basis of these considerations, it seems likely that there may
shortly develop a struggle within the Magsaysay camp to mold his
political and social thinking which is as yet relatively
undeveloped. There will inevitably be a series of compromises but it
seems likely that, if Magsaysay’s personal prestige and courage are
as great as we have been led to believe, he may be able to effect a
shift away from the traditional pattern of domination of the
Philippine Government by the absentee landlords and those who
represent them. Reports on Magsaysay’s personality do not indicate
that he is adept at the art of compromise. On the contrary, he has a
tendency to be impetuous. It is possible that if these disparate
elements find their differences irreconcilable the party will split.
In this event, Magsaysay would find it difficult to fulfill many of
his campaign pledges.
It is probable that the general moral level of government will
improve although a few of the most notorious scoundrels in the
Philippines, including Senator Cuenco and Governor Lacson, both
former Liberals, supported Magsaysay and Cuenco was elected to the
Senate as a Nacionalista. Lacson was defeated for the House of
[Page 561]
Representatives and will
probably go to jail as he was recently convicted of rape and is
being tried for murder.
It is almost impossible to prognosticate Magsaysay’s economic
policies. There is no question that he has a burning desire to
improve the standard of living of the mass of the people. However,
as mentioned above, he will have considerable opposition from the
older leaders in his own party.
Magsaysay’s economic advisers represent a number of varying
viewpoints. Salvador Araneta and Senator Rodriguez are both
protectionists. Leo Virata and some of the Junior Chamber of
Commerce leaders might be expected to advocate a more liberal
foreign economic policy. Domestically the powerful Senate leaders
will oppose any radical departure from conservative economic
policies designed to protect the economic welfare of a relatively
small group which has traditionally dominated the Philippine
Government. Those supporting a liberal point of view will probably
have less political influence than the group favoring conservative
policies. Magsaysay’s foreign policy will depend largely on the
degree to which he is influenced by Senator Recto who has in the
past favored a “neutralist” policy similar to that of Indonesia or
India. It does not appear that even Recto will recommend any drastic
change from the traditional Filipino support of the Free World but
day-to-day relations on matters of less significance might become
more difficult. Many observers in the Philippines consider Recto the
most anti-American of any leading politician. He was imprisoned by
American troops immediately after the war and obviously harbors some
animosity toward us as does Laurel. However, it is not likely that
he will advocate policies which will seriously change the present
attitude of the Philippine Government toward international affairs.
General Romulo’s influence on Philippine foreign policy will be
limited because he has almost no real political power within the
Philippines. His political stature has increased in the last few
months but falls far short of being equal to that of either Recto or
Laurel.
