Twins at birth

Recently Cuba celebrated the 50th anniversary of its revolution that led to a Communist state. Many Filipinos were not aware of what both countries had in common. It did not even merit to be mentioned in local media. As far as we are concerned Cuba is terra incognita.

We do not know anything about it except as the communist country of Fidel Castro. I will be surprised if even a handful would recognize Cuba, as a twin country at birth because of our common colonial history, first under the Spanish and then under America.

Cuba and the Philippines were like twins who were separated and later lived under different systems. We may have different concerns today but we can learn from what we had in common in the past especially on these special occasions. Out of the many points to ponder about Cuba, the most important is its refusal to kowtow to American power. It is my opinion that it is the wellspring from which it evolved its identity.

They had a leader — Fidel Castro — who resisted American intervention or attempts at regime change that has lasted up to this day. Not so the Philippines which took a different path, succumbing to the trepidations of American power after being defeated in its wars of independence. This column does not seek to compare the twin countries at birth or determine which had fared better. We cannot undo that past. What we can do is remember our common history in that distant past that we may better understand ourselves.

*      *      *

The Cuban leadership does not look forward to different or better relations with the US under Barack Obama. In his speech on the 50th anniversary of revolution, on the same spot Fidel declared victory half a century ago, Cuban president Raúl Castro said “It will be another 50 years of revolutionary struggle. It is time to reflect on the future, on the next 50 years when we shall continue to struggle incessantly.”

He paid tribute to his brother, Fidel, who has been ailing and has not been seen in public for two years.

“One way or another, with more or less aggressiveness, every US administration has tried to impose a regime change in Cuba,” he said.

He added the victory of the Cuban revolution was important “for it has been attained despite the unhealthy and vindictive hatred of the powerful neighbour.” He cited the Bay of Pigs invasion by US-trained exiles, the US embargo, the Cuban missile crisis and assassination attempts against his brother.

There is speculation that relations between the two countries may change under President-elect Obama. The American president-elect has promised to reopen negotiations with Cuba and lift severe restrictions on family travel and remittances to the island. These remain to be seen. The Cuban revolution shall have outlasted 10 American presidents (including George Bush) all of whom maintained tough sanctions to overthrow Cuban leadership.

*      *      *

In a letter to the editor of a London newspaper on January 19, 1899, Alfred Russel Wallace wrote on America, Cuba, and the Philippines and gives valuable insights from which we can learn.

“It is generally admitted that a people who fight strenuously for liberty against powerful oppressors deserve to obtain it; and that such a people should be presumed, till the contrary is proved, to be fit to possess it. Both the Cubans and the Filipinos have done this, and both with a large measure of success, which could never have been attained without courage, patriotism, and a considerable capacity for organization and combined action.”

He adds “in the case of the Philippines it is even more regrettable than that of Cuba.”

“The war there was only for the purpose of crippling the Spanish power and thus leading to an early peace.” Wallace, an Englishman, wrote “the inferiority of the race (ie Filipinos) makes the success of the natives against their Spanish rulers even more remarkable than in the case of the Cubans where a large proportion of whom are of pure Spanish blood.”

“In the Philippines the two higher native peoples, the Tagals and Bisayans, with numerous Chinese and Spanish half-breeds, constitute almost the whole civilised population, are fairly educated, and by their successful resistance to the established rule and military organisation of Spain have gained the right to freedom and self-government in their native land.”

His letter is an eye-opener for those who want to understand the roots of American colonialism in the Philippines.

“The Americans claim “the rights of sovereignty obtained by treaty,” and have apparently determined to occupy and administer the whole group of islands, with a population of over 6,000,000, against the will and consent of the people. They claim all the revenues of the country and all the public means of transport, and they have decided, according to the latest advices, to take all this by military force if the natives do not at once submit. Yet they say that they come “not as invaders and conquerors, but as friends,” in order “to protect the natives in their homes, their employments, and their personal and civil rights,” and for the purpose of giving them “a liberal form of government through representative men of their own race.”

He expresses surprise that Filipinos, who have been justly struggling for freedom, are still spoken of as “insurgents” or “rebels,” and “expected, apparently, to submit quietly to an altogether new and unknown foreign rule, which, whatever may be the benevolent intentions of the President, can hardly fail to become a more or less oppressive despotism.”

He admits his country, England cannot be proud of its own conduct. “Our conduct towards the Boers and Zulus in South Africa, the Burmese, and many of the hill tribes on our Indian frontier, and the Chinese in our wars growing out of the opium trade, has been certainly not better than what the Americans have done or are likely to do in Cuba and the Philippines.”

He wrote the letter to express disappointment that “our American kinsfolk are apparently following our bad example, it is because, in the matter of the rights of every people to govern themselves, we had looked up to them as being about to show us the better way, by respecting the aspirations towards freedom, even of less advanced races, and by acting in accordance with their own noble traditions and Republican principles.” Well said and certainly relevant in the coming days when we analyze US-Philippines relations and how these can be improved.