Lorena. Kerima. Alyssa.

When I first heard of Alyssa Alano, her life was over, violently taken in an AFP-NPA encounter in Negros. She reminded painfully of Lorena Barros na nakaklase ko sa Experimental Psych and an Anthro class sa U.P. in the late sixties when she was still in Twiggy mode, mini-skirt and black net stockings with ankle boots and all. When I heard she had turned activist, and then revolutionary, I was awed by the transformation. When she founded MAKIBAKA (Malayang Kilusan ng Bagong Kababaihan) of the iconic battlecry “Makibaka! Huwag matakot!” I envied her the certainty that “a woman’s place is in the struggle,” therefrom disdaining and dropping conventional notions of femininity in response to the nationalist call vs imperialism, feudalism, bureaucrat capitalism, and consumerism, all valid issues then and now.

I don’t remember when I heard that she died in battle four years into martial law — censorship forbade such news — only that it was much much later, when the list included the likes of Eman Lacaba and Ed Jopson and many many more young intellectuals. I do remember grieving for nation, for the  loss of the best and the brightest of our generation who bravely took up the armed struggle for revolutionary change. The very same grief when it was Kerima Tariman‘s turn in the time of Duterte, and Erickson Acosta‘s in the time of Marcos. And now Alyssa’s and eight others’ .

To my mind, Alyssa is a Kerima is a Lorena, no matter that her fellow progressives in Manila say she wasn’t armed. That she was in NPA turf, not for the first time, I hear, and of her own volition, speaks volumes. That I can’t find any data on her, like her birthday if only for her zodiac sign, or how long she’d been in Negros — surely someone keeps track — makes me think even more that she was indeed one brave and bright scholar turned insurgent.

She was ready to die for the cause, and now that she has, died for the cause, habang nakikipamuhay sa masa, I’m actually surprised that the Left is kind of disclaiming her — she was civilian, unarmed, doing research — instead of claiming her outright and with pride: proof that the Resistance is not dead and all that jazz.

In a virtual chat with political historian Patricio “Jojo” Abinales about Alyssa and the NPAs of Negros, I had mentioned that I knew Lorena back in the ’60s…

ABINALES: Today’s activists missed the chance to have their own Lorena Barros by depicting Alyssa as a seemingly innocent researcher instead of praising her commitment to the revolution.

Sayang, because I think they need their own heroine, their symbol of resistance. Each generation has its own revolution to make. This generation is fighting a revolution of the older generation, our generation, which may be outdated na. [April 27, 30]

Medyo outdated nga. It’s been 57 years, and protracted war pa rin ang strategy despite the obvious failure to organize and radicalize the broad masses into overthrowing the government? Armed struggle pa rin ang strategy gayong malinaw na naman na walang panalo?

In a January 2026 essay on “The Misguidance of Chantal Anicoche,” the Fil-Am activist whose “immersion” with the NPA was cut short without losing her life, Abinales remarks on the sorry state of the communist movement.

ABINALES:  The disappearance and dwindling of the guerrilla fronts [are] the outcome of several factors. First, the Armed Forces of the Philippines has vastly improved its fighting capacity, largely thanks to American assistance. Night-vision goggles had made it easier to locate NPA squads, and drones were cheaper to launch missiles into NPA camps.

The second reason was the pandemic. COVID was the NPA’s bane. Unable to enter the village they claim as their “mass bases,” the guerrillas had to remain in the jungle, only to have their body heat exposed to drone surveillance.  It was also said that it was a drone attack that ended the lives of former CPP chairman Benito Tiamzon and his wife, Wilma, in the mangrove swamps of Samar in August 2022. The military’s adept tracking of cell phone messages and calls purportedly revealed Jorge “Ka Oris” Madlos’s movements, leading to his death in an encounter in Impasugong, Bukidnon….

The irony is that it is in the parliamentary struggle that the CPP is doing well, its elected representatives doing well on the legislative floor and on television. But in Amado Guerrero’s world, parliamentary struggle will always be ancillary to the armed struggle, its primary role being like that of the universities – to politicize and organize. It cannot be the central area of struggle, lest one commits the sin of political deviationism. https://www.positivelyfilipino.com/

Yeah. Joma was fixated on the vision of an awakened proletariat, armed for revolution, encircling the cities from the countryside for the Communist Party. Shades of Mao, but so last century.

Time for political deviationism. Read Unmasking the Myths of the CCP and its leader Joma Sison (2025) ng mag-asawang Maya at Carlo Butalid, mga dating kadre na naging RJ (rejectionists) in the 1990s. Self-published. Edited by Abinales. Or read Rene Ciria Cruz‘s review: “a hard look” at this “cautionary account of the couple’s disenchantment with the party and its founder.” [19 January 2026] Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières https://www.facebook.com/ 

CIRIA CRUZ: “The CPP is inherently undemocratic. So how can it build a democratic Philippines?” The authors ask rhetorically.

…Some online testimonies of former NPA fighters, wearied of the grueling, existential demands of guerrilla life now question the effectiveness of the CPP’S strategy of protracted people’s war to seize power by surrounding the cities from the countryside. The strategy gives “priority to military matters,” write the Butalids — or, in leftist parlance, it puts the military, not politics, in command.

… Why does it have to be a military-based strategy at all times: “There are alternative paths; e.g., through the building up of strong and militant social movements that could eventually topple the government in a relatively non-violent uprising,” they note, without needing to directly cite the People Power overthrow of the Marcos dictatorship as proof.

A good time to point out na noong martial law, hindi lahat ng aktibistang anti-Marcos ay na-recruit ng Kabataang Makabayan para sa CPP-NPA. Marami ring moderates (as opposed to radicals) —  mostly students, hippies, activists, oppositionists of the sixties and seventies who believed in making love, not war. Rather than collaborate with the dictator, they went underground, not to join the armed revolution and die for Joma Sison, but to do grassroots work, some with church and charity orgs, some on their own. They became known as cause-oriented groups, non-governmental orgs, stepping in not just to deliver basic services where government was absent, but also to do consciousness-raising workshops, community organizing, networking, and sponsor (along with like-minded do-gooders) livelihood projects meant to empower people in commmunities to become the stewards of their own environment and the engines of their own development.

The peaceful revolution of 1986 which saw the ouster of the martial law government was a combined effort of these activists in “rainbow coalition” with leftists and Coryistas. At least this is what I gathered from the sidelines in1984 to 2001, as editor of the journals and papers of the late environmentalist and original NGO volunteer Maximo “Junie” Kalaw on NGOs and the movement for sustainable development.  https://stuartsantiago.com/code-ngo-fake-ngo/

Non-violence na ang mantra noon, and we didn’t do too badly. Nagkaleche-leche lang when many NGO/civil society leaders joined the Aquino government, which messed up their priorities, and when NGO funding from many international aid groups came with strings attached in aid of unsustainable development programs, raising again the question: development for whom?

Malinaw naman na Systemic Change can be achieved through nonviolent measures. And yet the Left refuses to lay down their guns. Is it a macho thing? Or for love of Joma? Time to take stock, seriously: you’re getting students killed if not stunting their intellectual-political development when they could be aboveground, contributing to the general discourse and struggle for social change.

Sabi nga ni Earl Parreño, independent journalist and author who has also read the Butalids: the question is why we continue to offer the youth a path that so often demands their lives, instead of one that allows them to live—and still fight for justice.

PARREÑO: The real failure is not the absence of options, but our refusal to confront them. These alternative paths to deep, structural change—grounded in democratic struggle, social movements, and accountable institutions—are too often pushed to the margins, while violence continues to dominate both imagination and policy.

This is what should be at the center of national discourse: not the shallow, personality-driven contest of who is worse or better—Marcos or Duterte—but a serious reckoning with how meaningful change can be pursued without sacrificing yet another generation. After the Toboso encounters: The discourse the nation needs

April 22 synchronicities

Sitting through most of the Justice Committee hearing wasn’t a waste of time, mabuti na lang. To my mind, probable cause was established vis a vis unexplained wealth in the impeachment case of VP Sara. “Smoking gun,” sabi ni Rep Chel Diokno. Salamat kay Sonny Trillanes. And kudos to committee chair Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro sa maingat ngunit matalim na pagtitimon. Impressive, Ma’am!

Meanwhile in The Hague, the ICC denied again the jurisdiction appeal of Duterte‘s counsel. The very next day, April 23, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber finally confirmed all charges against Duterte and committed him to trial before a Trial Chamber. Ka-abang-abang. At nakakapagpaisip. How did Digong receive kaya the news. Surely he didn’t see his life winding down on this very sad note. I suppose he thought he could get away with the killings and stealings, no one would ever dare take him to court. But he trusted Imee, made Marcos 1.0 a hero, then made Marcos 2.0 the president. What if he hadn’t.

Umeksena rin ang Supremes. Without necessarily giving due course to the petition, the Court ordered BBM and his executive secretary Ralph Recto to respond in 10 days to former House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez‘s plea that the president be made to submit to health exams, including a hair follicle test. Hindi ko gets. Ang naaalala ko ay nuong panahon ng boss ni Alvarez when we’d see then President Rodrigo Duterte stumbling around, talking weird, looking half-asleep, barely paying attention, like he was high or stoned on Fentanyl or other, remember? He’d disappear sporadically, too, sometimes for a week or two, and we wondered who was running the country, and we’d ask for his medical records, and always, Duterte refused. A petition to the Supreme Court by Atty. Dino de Leon in April 2020 was simply junked by the Supremes a month later, hindi na inabala si Digong with an order to respond within 10 days. Double standard much, Your Honors?  Read “Panelo: No need for medical bulletin on President” 

Samantala sa social media, nambulaga in video si former House Speaker Martin Romualdez, whom we haven’t heard from since he resigned as speaker in the wake of the flood-control corruption scandal. Obviously na-upset dahil hindi siya pinayagan ng Ombudsman na magpuntang Singapore for a medical procedure — baka daw kasi hindi na siya bumalik a la Zaldy Co. “Fuming mad” si Romualdez, sabi ni Tony Lopez ng BizAsia. Angry enough to fight back and name Co and Chiz Escudero as the real masterminds daw, in cooperation with the executive branch. Hmm. Who next? Chiz maybe? I hear he’s threatening to name names too. Laglagan na ba, ang saya.

But the best April 22 event was Naga Mayor Leni Robredo reiterating that she is not running for president in 2028. Hindi nga naman tayo nakikinig. Tigilan na natin siya. She’s done her part. She didn’t want to run either in 2022 pero na-pressure siya into saying yes dahil VP siya noon. Pero ngayon, sa Naga na ang eksena niya, and she’s doing good there, let’s be happy for Naga!  So who might she endorse? Clearly she would be choosing among these three: Risa Hontiveros, Kiko Pangilinan, and Bam Aquino. Here’s hoping she eventually zooms in on Risa as the best choice for nation.

KATRINA S.S. [More than Bam or Kiko] Hontiveros has been at the forefront of urgent and critical investigations in the Senate, from the illegal POGO hubs to the West Philippine Sea; has been fighting with all of us for the divorce and SOGIE bills; has been an important voice on national issues since 2016, and even more so since 2022.

Hontiveros is, in fact, a level-up to Leni. The kind that will not dial back on her pro-divorce stance (as Leni did) when faced with the Catholic Church. The kind that will not suddenly compromise on her stance for equal rights and protection for LGBTQIA+ in the face of conservative criticism. The kind that can and will and has proven able to speak about democratic rights and systemic change in a language that we all understand, and in ways that are doable and imaginable and possible. https://katrinasantiago.com/

Pax Silica Ph

The news broke on the 18th, that we had signed up for Pax Silica, a 4000-acre economic-security zone project of (with?) the U.S. along a Luzon economic corridor, ostensibly to reduce supply chain dependence on China for semiconductors and AI technology. My first reaction was wow! that’s a lot of land, on what terms kaya, do we share in the profits, may technology transfer ba, done deal na ba, at kung anoano pa. On second thought, I wondered if this is why PBBM seems so relaxed about this worsening economic crisis upon us, exacerbated by Trump’s war on Iran — because he knows na hindi tayo papabayaan ng Amerika, kailangan niya tayo for Pax Silica in this Pacific outpost? The Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas has already declared it a “massive sellout” of the country’s land, minerals, and sovereignty. Been waiting for the pundits to weigh in. Here’s a first from Philippine Star’s Cito Beltran who wonders if it’s just a PR story, a puff piece, meant only to distract.

‘TO SEE IS TO BELIEVE’
by Cito Beltran
April 20 2026

All the rumors about the United States building economic zones, ship building facilities and now a 4,000-acre “Economic Security Zone” has started to get tongues wagging, with netizens sharing and reposting news articles about the subject.

Early this year, a Subic resident mentioned that there were “plans” by the US government to put up a ship building facility inside SBMA. But some locals suspect that it was a ploy to put up a military base instead.

And after just a few months, mainstream media and online news sources reported that the United States and the Philippines have gone beyond talking but are already in the early stages of putting together a proposed agreement.

Some of the details mentioned are that the land area involves 4,000 acres or 1,619 hectares, will be rent free, covered by diplomatic immunity, will operate under US Common law, covered by a two-year lease renewable for 99 years.

The area will be purposely built as an “Economic Security Zone” to be administered by the United States and available for US companies engaged in manufacturing defense and key industries who may hire US or local personnel as needed.

Another focus of these reports is that US investors are expected to level up the minerals extraction practices currently done in the region, particularly in the Philippines.

Instead of shipping raw materials, the US companies would process raw nickel, copper, chromite and cobalt and rare minerals, pass on the said materials to manufacturers inside the economic zone or export them to the mainland for use in defense and AI technology manufacturing.

At this point, it is important to be reminded that from the looks of it, the whole thing is still an idea or at the “conceptual stage” as mentioned in an online article of the Wall Street Journal.

There seems to be no mention of an exact location for the proposed US Economic Security Zone, which may be intentional in order to draw out local governments who are willing to embrace the proposed zone and to avoid political backlash if an area is pre-selected or mentioned.

As word gets out and the idea solidifies in people’s imagination, it would certainly create a competitive climate among local governments (provinces/towns) to become the site of a labor rich project, even if they collect no taxes.

Laborers need transportation, food, etc. Those needs play right into the businesses of local politicians and their families who often control local transport, stores and groceries and even fast-food chain outlets.

As you go through the alleged plan or provisions for the “US Economic Security Zone,” it is filled with highly controversial provisions, which from the looks of it may be “click bait” by design.

Since when do we start “giving away land” as in allowing foreign governments to occupy 4,000 acres of land rent free? Officials on both sides know that that would trigger an outcry from nationalists, leftists and politicians looking for two minutes of fame.

The idea of asking or giving diplomatic immunity for a 4,000-acre “Economic Security Zone” and agreeing that US common law applies within that zone is equivalent to giving the US sovereignty over Philippine land and a direct violation of the Constitution.

If US common law prevails within the Economic Security Zone, does it follow that it operates like a US military base or will Filipino workers, visitors or government officials be required to secure a US visa or a special purpose visa?

If officials or personnel of the zone commit a crime outside the zone, similar to the sex-related crimes committed by servicemen, etc., is there a provision that the suspects or accused will be surrendered to Philippine authorities “posthaste”?

Or will locals have to submit to the judicial process of a court within the zone or worse, travel to the nearest US territory like Guam or Hawaii? Does having US common law in effect mean the zone will have its own police and court of law?

In terms of mutually beneficial agreements, what is the benefit of putting up the zone to the Philippines? The US companies buy raw materials and pay cheap for them, yes, there will be employment but for how many, what type of jobs? Will they also get US salary rates?

This entire idea, concept or even “story” simply makes no sense, if not unbelievable. It is like leaving rotten fish in the open to attract all the flies. In journalism, it could be a political trial balloon to find out what the public or media reaction will be.

If the numerous articles now circulating in mass media does not “raise Cain,” it may signal to the governments and officials concerned to go right ahead.

In the world of politics and PR, it could be a win/win distraction story meant to distract the public from their difficulties and hardship that could push government into crisis.

On the other hand, the story could be a “puff piece” designed to create a positive impression or raise investor confidence by highlighting the willingness of the US government to create, operate and manage an export processing zone.

As a final point, this story is yet again an example of the government’s failure to communicate with its citizens. Why do we have to learn about the plan from a foreign media outlet and posts of the US embassy instead of the PCOO?

In the end: “To see is to believe.”

Oil policies, failed thinking

Watching aghast the latest from Trump theater that has the US Navy preparing to blockade the Strait of Hormuz this Monday to prevent ships “entering or departing” Iran, and unsurprised by Iran’s promise of a “forceful response”. Who is writing this insane script unfolding kayâ? The one thing we can be certain of is that things are gonna get very much worse before they get better. Especially here at home where moves to repeal, or at least amend, the Oil Industry Deregulation Act of 1998, the better to serve public rather than private-profit interests, seem to be at a standstill. “Where’s the problem?” tanong ni Sonny Africa, sabay sagot: “It’s in the skewed priorities. Even amid a massive social crisis, the govt is still most concerned about fiscal targets, credit ratings, investment sentiment. And protecting corporate profits and billionaire wealth.” 

On the other hand, in the same vein, investment banker Stephen CuUnjieng had earlier sounded off on how a balanced and enlightened industrial policy is so very hard to do naman talaga and government just has to try harder: “It requires flexible and responsive policy and execution from the government, plus the private sector not always getting what it wants or having to do certain things to get what they want in exchange for national security and development. We failed at it before 1986, and it is hard to get right. So, what did we do? Instead of working harder to get it right, we gave up. “It is too hard, takes too long, so never mind” could be our national motto. [Oil policies and failed thinking https://www.manilatimes]

Not that anyone was listening? CuUnjieng’s April 10 column calls out the Pontius Pilates in government who wash their hands of oil policies, “chickening out and leaving it to the magical private sector” to deal with. Kasi, nasa “the best government is the least government” pa rin sila, which is so Washington Consensus, na matagal nang na-discredit. CuUnjieng rightly harps on the challenge to government to level up, learn from our mistakes and from the example of other oil-dependent countries that are so much better-prepared to address the needs of their people, especially the poor and middle classes, because of hard work, coordinated response, and critical thinking.

Hamlet’s soliloquy and economic Pontius Pilates
By Stephen CuUnjieng
April 10, 2026

“To be, or not to be, that is the question:/Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer/The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,/Or to take arms against a sea of troubles/And by opposing end them.” Hamlet

Substitute “to be, or not to be” with “to think or not to think,” and I think we may capture the problem with more than a smattering of our economists, policymakers, and commentators on any pressing issue. Instead of taking arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them, they rely on the old, tried and proven failures like that of an over-40-year-old “Washington Consensus” that Washington has abandoned as “a promise that had not been kept” (Jake Sullivan, National Security Adviser on April 27, 2023), and bromides like, leave it to the private sector, and the best government is the least government (yet complaining where is government when they want something). Add their abandonment of industrial policy for laissez-faire, as it failed in our iteration and is too hard.

That is the equivalent of being an economic Pontius Pilate washing one’s hands of policymaking and execution and taking the lazy and unimaginative way by chickening out and leaving it to the magical private sector, even though it is public policy of the highest order and necessity that we are dealing with.

They lament we are at crisis on cost and availability of oil, fertilizers and more. Their solution is — no surprise — no regulation, as the government is too lousy and our politicians too populist and most naive, run to our taipans to save us? As if governance, rather than profit, is their reason for being. I am happy many taipans do CSR and are responsible players, but they are not policymakers or government! Nor their mission to engage in public policy. It is like asking a cardiologist to be an oncologist. Now what? Nothing except incoherent babble and not worked out thoughts, like defaulting to leave it to the private sector as always on any issue. It is clear that the times transcend the ability of what the private sector is equipped to deal with. We face daunting regional and global issues that even sovereigns are incapable of handling individually and are scrambling to work on collectively. Yet here we want to ask the private sector and taipans to take care of it! It is not easy public policy that is needed, but these are times and issues that demand it.

Yet that is not all, horrible as it is. They all trot out another cliché that a crisis is a shame to waste or some platitude to that effect. OK, what is their prescription of dealing with it? Some vague tired reform dating to the 1980s like open the economy to foreign investment without limits and remove restrictions on land ownership? Ano? How does that provide energy and food security? Didn’t that lead to shutting down of refineries and further imports of food staples? We have even less industry now, but lots of warehouses, cold storage, and logistics companies to feed the families of OFWs who hopefully don’t lose their jobs. The biggest job openings domestically will be delivery personnel in their “hugas kamay” vision for the Philippines. Brilliant.

If we are incapable of original and critical thinking, can our economic Pontius Pilates at least learn from what our immediate neighbors successfully did? And without being the teacher’s pet, to a multilateral panacea of removing any safeguards for local industry, and just open everything to unrestricted foreign investment. I need to remind readers of something I have previously written.

When these teacher’s pets and hugas kamay economic Pontius Pilates say look at say the US, Europe, Hong Kong and Singapore — they say they have no statutory limits on foreign investment and show how naïve and uninformed they are. First, there are limits, like transportation is limited to 40 percent foreign ownership in the US, and within EU to members in Europe. In all of them, regulators are allowed to disallow foreign investment if against national interest. Please look up CFIUS and their record. Even in the all-foreign- investment-allowed Hong Kong, regulators decide on your fitness, for example, to own a bank or open an investment bank or asset manager. When Cable and Wireless sold HK Telecom (their PLDT) in 2000, who could buy was vetted, and it was sold to PCCW (owned by Richard Li, son of Li Ka Shing). In 2006, when a group led by Macquarie wanted to buy it, they were told you are not going to get approval, as we are not convinced of your commitment to Hong Kong, given that you are relatively new to investing in Asia. That is reality versus accepting propaganda and marketing like the limited thinking teacher’s pets are.

On industrial policy, all countries got it partly wrong (even Japan and Korea), but stuck with it and improved as they knew manufacturing had to be developed and nurtured for sustained and broad economic growth and prosperity. You think Japan became successful at cars, appliances and electronics because they left it to the private sector and foreign investment? It was government policy set and implemented by the powerful MITI (Ministry of International Trade and Industry) and its successors. What they did was protect them as they grew, but made them grow to be globally competitive and abandon those which did not measure up, given a timeline to improve quality. You think China just let market forces and foreign investment make it the dominant player it is in processing rare earth minerals, renewable energy, batteries and electric vehicles? If you believe that, let me sell you some VHS tapes and Nokia phones. Or even the EU when they decided to challenge Boeing with Airbus?

To those who worry about capitulation to China on the Spratly Islands, well, what these economic Pontius Pilates are doing with their naivete and lazy reliance on failed over 40-year-old solutions that even its originators have abandoned is to me, the economic equivalent of surrender. Grow up and think critically with love of country and patriotism rather than be Pontius Pilates engaging in economic psittacism*. What a kakistocracy* among many of our supposed thinking class.

The author is an independent director of the state-run Maharlika Investment Corp.

  • Psittacism is the mechanical, repetitive, and meaningless use of speech or writing. Derived from the Latin psittacus (parrot), this term describes repeating phrases or jargon without thought or comprehension. It is often used in a pejorative sense, particularly in philosophy and literature, to criticize empty rhetoric or thoughtless repetition.
  • Kakistocracy is a system of government led by the least qualified, most incompetent, or most unscrupulous citizens. Derived from the Greek words kákistos (worst) and krátos (rule), it represents government by the worst people. It is often used in political commentary to describe corrupt or inept leadership.