Communist Insurgency in the Philippines (catch all)

[pinoyme]

charter 6:


You do not get the logic of my point.

When the Huks registered, the assumption was that they were a legal organization. They gave out their names, addresses, and names of immeidate relatives.

In other words, they were giving out to their potential killers all the vital information needed for the job.

The fact that the Huks started going out to Arayat and that they were re-organizing was in reaction to the intensified clashes. They were doing so for self-defense.

As for Quirino, he became President in April 1948. At that time the Philippine treasury was empty. Salaries for government employees and worse the military were not paid on time.

War brutalized the Philippines and the Filipinos. Guns were everywhere. It was also easy to make a quick buck. Much of it by outright stealing and graft.

It is to Quirino's credit that he got the government to function somehow. He also negotiated for US aid. The import controls he put up, a necessary stopgap then, had the unintended consequence of spurring the import substitition policy--which gave short run economic benefits up until the start of the term of President Diosdado Macapagal's father.

Again, the Huks were but one of the numerous problems a post-war and newly-independent Philippines faced. There were several others.

As for the Huk commander who killed Aurora Quezon, he was a renegade leader. The province of Quezon was a marginal base for the Huks. Its strength was basically Pampanga and parts of Bulacan in Central Luzon and parts of Laguna.

It seems you are unfamiliar with Philippine culture and that is why you assume the Huks were as highly disciplined and organized as the Viet Minh.

No, Filipinos are not that way. And that is why Filipinos will never tolerate a Communist-led regime. Too much discipline which goes against the Filipino penchant for inspired improvisation and a more creative approach to problems.

If you are citing US military texts, they are then sadly outdated. Which is dangerous. Because if you will be citing lessons learned from these texts to craft strategies for another COIN campaign elsewhere, you shall be coming to grief.

Again, the top leaders of the Communist underground were out in the open. The incoherent reaction of the Huks to the 1946 to 1950 clashes shows there was no overriding strategic goal.

That goal happened when the decision to launch a revolution in 1950 finally took place. "See you in Malacanang," then became the greeting Huks gave to each other.

And the series of attacks against government units finally began.


Addendum:

Wait, you're saying that the hired guards of the landowners and the PC fighting led to the war? Where do the Huks fit into that equation? I just don't think that's true.

This is a copyediting issue, not an issue of fact.I committed an error most Filipino English writers are prone to.

What I meant was that Huks were clashing with either the PC, civilian guards, or municipal policemen. The last were under the control of mayors.

[charter6]

You do not get the logic of my point.

When the Huks registered, the assumption was that they were a legal organization. They gave out their names, addresses, and names of immeidate relatives.

In other words, they were giving out to their potential killers all the vital information needed for the job.

I think you're conflating "Huks" with CPP or the Communist political leadership more generally. I think if you took your average Huk trigger-man in the barrios, they were not openly participating in the political process even if some of their leaders were. What I've been trying to say is that even if there were elements in the Communist leadership pursuing the political track as late as 1950, organized and directed violence against the Philippine state had begun far earlier, 1948 at the latest and I would argue as early as 1946.

The fact that the Huks started going out to Arayat and that they were re-organizing was in reaction to the intensified clashes. They were doing so for self-defense.

So they had to defend themselves despite the fact that they weren't at war? I think you're being internally inconsistent. Either these were isolated incidents of constabulary vs. Huk violence, in which case the leadership cadres who you say were participating in the political process would have nothign to fear; or there was a war going on, in which case moves to fortified positions from where they would be safe from government reprisal would be logical for the leadership cadres.

As for Quirino, he became President in April 1948. At that time the Philippine treasury was empty. Salaries for government employees and worse the military were not paid on time.

War brutalized the Philippines and the Filipinos. Guns were everywhere. It was also easy to make a quick buck. Much of it by outright stealing and graft.

It is to Quirino's credit that he got the government to function somehow. He also negotiated for US aid. The import controls he put up, a necessary stopgap then, had the unintended consequence of spurring the import substitition policy--which gave short run economic benefits up until the start of the term of President Diosdado Macapagal's father.

Again, the Huks were but one of the numerous problems a post-war and newly-independent Philippines faced. There were several others.

I agree completely. I think there were many faults with the Quirino administration, and with Quirino himself, but nobody can argue that he faced an unenviable situation on taking office.

As for the Huk commander who killed Aurora Quezon, he was a renegade leader. The province of Quezon was a marginal base for the Huks. Its strength was basically Pampanga and parts of Bulacan in Central Luzon and parts of Laguna.

I'm pretty sure Quezon's convoy was ambushed in Neuva Ecija, one of the strongholds of Huk power from the earliest days of peasant organization in the 1930's through until the end of the Huk Rebellion.

Viernes wasn't a renegade. There's a significant amount of information on him. Nicknamed "Stalin", he had been a respected Huk squadron commander through World War II. His first split with the leadership came after Taruc disavowed the attack in response to popular disapproval of the attack.

It seems you are unfamiliar with Philippine culture and that is why you assume the Huks were as highly disciplined and organized as the Viet Minh.

No, Filipinos are not that way. And that is why Filipinos will never tolerate a Communist-led regime. Too much discipline which goes against the Filipino penchant for inspired improvisation and a more creative approach to problems.

I don't deny that I don't have your familiarity with Filipino culture. I don't think I've compared the Huks to the Viet Minh though, I don't know where you're getting that.

That doesn't mean that the four years of concerted Huk efforts to roll back governmental influence throughout Central Luzon weren't centrally organized or endorsed by the Huk leadership.

If you are citing US military texts, they are then sadly outdated. Which is dangerous. Because if you will be citing lessons learned from these texts to craft strategies for another COIN campaign elsewhere, you shall be coming to grief.

I'm a college student, I have no affiliation with the US military. My interest in the Huk Rebellion is recent. A large part of my thesis is based on a comparison of the Huk Rebellion with the Malayan Emergency in terms of how experience from both were applied to Vietnam pre-1964. Based on what I've seen here, I don't think you'd disagree with the thrust of my paper.

As for the sources I've used on the Philippines: I've done a significant amount of archival work here stateside, but I'm also leaning heavily on sources like a couple RAND Corporation econometric studies of the conflict, SSI papers, some Huk-sympathizer works like Benedict Kerkvliet's The Huk Rebellion and contemporary publications.

Again, the top leaders of the Communist underground were out in the open. The incoherent reaction of the Huks to the 1946 to 1950 clashes shows there was no overriding strategic goal.

That goal happened when the decision to launch a revolution in 1950 finally took place. "See you in Malacanang," then became the greeting Huks gave to each other.

And the series of attacks against government units finally began.

Some of the CCP leadership was out in the open. What became the Manila cadre was out in the open. The military command was operating out of Arayat as early as '46.

I think your terming the pattern of violence from '46 to '50 incoherent is off base. The Huks steadily rolled back government influence in congruent, strategically important blocs of Central Luzon through this period. A Huk squadron captured Nueva Ecija in the summer of '46 after fairly intense firefights with government regulars. Through 1947 you've got a patterns of raids and ambushes in Bulacan, Tarlac, and Pampanga. These weren't isolated instances of localized violence, these are full Huk squadrons engaging in operations aimed at denying entire provinces to the Philippine army and constabulary.

This is a copyediting issue, not an issue of fact.I committed an error most Filipino English writers are prone to.

What I meant was that Huks were clashing with either the PC, civilian guards, or municipal policemen. The last were under the control of mayors.

Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding.

[pinoyme]

think you're conflating "Huks" with CPP or the Communist political leadership more generally. I think if you took your average Huk trigger-man in the barrios, they were not openly participating in the political process even if some of their leaders were. What I've been trying to say is that even if there were elements in the Communist leadership pursuing the political track as late as 1950, organized and directed violence against the Philippine state had begun far earlier, 1948 at the latest and I would argue as early as 1946.


Hi Charter 6:

Going to the mountains in self defense and to flee oppression appears to be an act embedded in the subconscious of Filipinos. It all started during the early years of Spanish colonization.

Mt Arayat has special significance for this. In Pampanga province, it is also a mystical mountain. It has also been the haunt of syncretic Philippine religions that blend pre-Hispanic animism with folk Catholicism.

Going up Mt. Arayat was therefore a natural reflex for the Huks.

The Huk membership in Central Luzon consisted primarily of members of the peasant associations that had been forming there since the beginning of the 20th century. In the 1930s, they constituted the core of the Socialist Party of the Philippines.

It was the Socialist Party of the Philippines that merged with the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas in the 1930s, as part of the Popular Front strategy then enacted by the Third Internationale.

Nonetheless, all this was Greek to the peasant members who constituted the backbone of the Socialist Party of the Philippines.

Membership in the Hukbalahap taught several peasants military skills. Up until War 2's eve, civilian guards of landowners were used to pushing around the peasants.

The landlords fled their haciendas during World War 2, and a good number collaborated with the Japanese. After the war, they tried to collect back rents.

Old habits die hard. They used their armed guards. This is how separate clashes without direction from the PKP leadership started.

Peasant leaders, who were Huk commanders and socialists at heart, repeatedly tried to broker peace agreements. To which the national government was predisposed to.

Hence, the registration of the Huks.

Trying to defend one's self with guns when the other side also has guns does not automatically constitute an act of war or rebellion. The Philippine Criminal Code--which freshmen in any college of law in my country illustrate this clearly in its definition of the crime.

Dona Aurora was on her way to Baler when ambushed and killed by the Huks.
This was her hometown and this was in Quezon province, which in the past was called Tayabas province.

There is no town named Baler in Nueva Ejica, which is a few kilometers north of Pampanga. It had Huks, but was a peripheral area. I wish Philippine newspapers of that time were now archived in the National Library of the Philippines.

Unfortunately, they are not. Because if they were, I would have asked you to check them out.

Having a glittering war record is no guarantee that one remains faithful to the Huk cause all the time. Many guerrilla leaders became warlords in the years immediately following World War 2's end in the Philippines.

If you think Kerkvliet is a Huk sympathizer, fine with me. BUT the late Jesus Lava , former PKP Politburo Charman, wrote a critique of his work. Unfortunately, it is in Filipino.

He was a Marxist intellectual BTW, and earned his medical degree from the University of the Philippines, the most prestigious in my country.

Nothing wrong with the SSI papers. But using other sources, including Philippine-written ones, would give you a better perspective.

And among these would be Jose Ma. Sison's Rectify Errors and Rebuild the Party as well as his Philippine Society and Revolution.

I suggest you also read William Pomeroy's, The Forest. Neither of us may agree with his politics. But it is a well-written account.

Cheers and I now end my debate with you.

[charter6]

Sorry to hear that you don't want to continue, I've enjoyed and found interesting our back-and-forth here.

Couple notes in closing:

I'm confident on my sourcing on the site of the Aurora Quezon assassination. You're right that Quezon's motorcade was on its way to Baler, but they were in Nueva Ecija when ambushed. Every source I've consulted cites an ambush in Nueva Ecija. Check for example the New York Times article on the assassination, dated April 29, 1949. "Mrs. Aurora Aragon Quezon, widow of the first President of the Philippines; two members of her family and ten other persons were killed in ambush yesterday in Hukbalahap-ridden Nueva Ecija province...."

Viernes was not a renegade in the sense you're suggesting. There's a reasonable argument as to whether Taruc and the HQ knew what he was planning, but I haven't seen any source question that Viernes and his squadron were recognized a recognized Huk unit generally acting under orders.

I don't deny that clashes with landlords and their guards were common after world war II; I'm just arguing (as I think most sources on the subject do) that there was also a concerted effort by the Huk leadership to engage government forces through the 1946-1950 period, with perhaps two or three breaks, and to undermine governmental legitimacy throughout Central Luzon.

Kerkvliet has a much more Communist-friendly depiction of pre-World War II peasant organization in Central Luzon, and is generally more generous to the Huk cause than most other works I've seen. I've read Pomeroy. I've seen Sison's work, but haven't spent too much time with him. Thanks for the tip on those.

[S-2]

Gentlemen,

You may enjoy this from the CMH-

The Hukbalahap Insurrection

[charter6]

have a copy sitting on my desk right now in fact. I don't suppose anyone here knows anything about the author, Lawrence M Greenberg?

...didn't notice General Stofft had written the foreward. He used to be commandant at USAWC, right?

[Tom Odom]

didn't notice General Stofft had written the foreward. He used to be commandant at USAWC, right?

I first met him when he was C/S of the college at Leavenworth and had been the first director of CSI where I worked. He went to CMH as a BG and then to the War College. He hosted the murder board for Certain Victory when I was part of the Mailhouse Gang working with Bob Scales. Finished as Director of the ARSTAFF.

Best

Tom