Interview with Prof. Jose Maria Sison

Interview with Prof. Jose Maria Sison:
On His Current Status, People's War, and Peace Negotiations
Part I
by Roselle Valerio
June 27, 2008
http://mrzine. monthlyreview. org/sison010708a .html

Thank you for agreeing to this interview. I intend to ask you
questions about your legal and political situation, the people's war
in the Philippines and the peace negotiations between the National
Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) and the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines (GRP).

Persecution of Prof. Jose Maria Sison

Q1: In what capacity do you answer my questions?

JMS: As a Filipino and as a member of humankind. As a student and
teacher of political science. As the chief political consultant of
the NDFP in peace negotiations with the GRP.

Q2: What about as the founding chairman of the Communist Party of
the Philippines (CPP) or as the current chairman of the Central
Committee of the CPP?

JMS: As founding chairperson of the CPP. That is a historical
fact. I may be able to cite pertinent events in CPP history to shed
light on current circumstances. The circumstances are clear that I
cannot speak as the current chairman of the CPP Central Committee.
My curriculum vitae is publicly available in the website of the
International Network of Philippine Studies.

Q3: You were a target of the charge of subversion as the alleged
CPP chairman in September 1988. A month after, this charge pushed
you to seek political asylum in the Netherlands. Subsequently, the
Philippine military authorities poured out more charges against you
to oppose your asylum application. What became of those charges?

JMS: The subversion charge and other allegations against me were
supplied by the Philippine government to the Dutch government upon
the direction of the US government. Indeed, they were used to
counter my application for asylum and residence even as the Raad van
State, the highest Dutch administrative, court ruled in 1992 and
1995 that I am a political refugee in accordance with the Refugee
Convention. In an online bulletin the US State Department
acknowledged that it used the Philippine government to intervene in
my asylum case. And the Dutch government also openly declared that
it was denying me asylum supposedly to maintain the credibility of
its relations with allied governments.

All the false charges against me were politically- motivated and were
used for psychological warfare in the mass media. The charge of
subversion was the only one that was filed before a court in the
Philippines. It was dismissed by the court in 1992 after the repeal
of the oppressive Anti-Subversion Law. In principle, the CPP was
supposed to have become legal in the Philippines. The charge of
multiple murders in connection with the 1971 Plaza Miranda grenade
attacks on the opposition party was finally dismissed by the
prosecutors of Manila in 1994. In April 1998 the Philippine
secretary of justice certified that there was no pending criminal
case against me.

But the Dutch government had used the false charges to block my
legal admission to the Netherlands as a refugee. It had given
credence to all the false charges supplied by the Philippine
government since the late 1980s. It also made its own false claim
that I had contacts with so-called terrorist groups. It used the
lie to buttress its argument that it denied me asylum supposedly in
order to maintain the "credibility" of the Dutch state to its US and
other allies. It never started any criminal investigation of its
own false charge against me in the 1990s. The Dutch intelligence
fabricated the charge against me and never acknowledged my meetings
with Philippine government officials, bishops, academics,
parliamentarians, labor leaders, and all other kinds of respectable
people from various countries.

Q4: It seemed like the Philippine authorities did not bother you any
more with false charges from 1998 until sometime under the Arroyo
regime. If I remember correctly, then President Ramos and Speaker
de Venecia were urging you to visit the Philippines. Did the
Philippine authorities ever stop exerting pressures or making
threats against you? Please elaborate on the charges filed against
you before prosecutors and courts during the time of Arroyo.

JMS: The Philippine authorities never stopped throwing false charges
against me in the mass media, from the time of Aquino up to that of
Arroyo. Indeed, no formal charge was made against me before any
court from late 1992 until 2006. But in 1999 Philippine authorities
made a decision to have me assassinated in the Netherlands. I
became aware of this in October 2000 after two failed attempts had
already been made against me.

Since the second half of 2001, the Arroyo regime escalated false
charges of rebellion and common crimes against me in military press
releases and in complaints to prosecutors. In November 2001, Arroyo
herself requested the US government to put me on its so-called
terrorist list. Subsequently, the US government put me on this list
on 12 August 2002. Other governments followed suit upon signals
from the US government and the open lobbying of the Philippine
government.

Each time that the NPA undertakes tactical offensives, I become the
target of false charges in the press. The military and police
investigators also include my name in formal complaints submitted to
prosecutors. These have been done most systematically against me
under Oplan Bantay Laya, especially since 2005 under the auspices
of the Inter-Agency Legal Action Group (IALAG) directed by the
national security adviser on behalf of Arroyo and her cabinet
cluster on internal security.

The IALAG is the agency denounced by UN special rapporteur for
trumping up charges to stigmatize opposition leaders as "enemies of
the state" and to cause their detention. The IALAG is also used for
covering up such human rights violations as extrajudicial killings
and disappearances.

Q5: What else have the Philippine authorities under the Arroyo
regime done against you?

No less than the national security adviser called for my
assassination in a full cabinet meeting. The Philippine authorities
headed by foreign secretary Alberto Romulo agreed with the Dutch
authorities headed by Dutch justice minister Piet Hein Donner on 26
January 2005 to trump up criminal charges of murder by which I could
be charged, arrested, and detained and by which the legal protection
I have from Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights
could be circumvented.

The two government sides agreed to accuse me for the 2003 and 2004
killings of two military assets, Romulo Kintanar and Arturo Tabara.
Thus, the Dutch police started in 2006 to collect testimonies from
false witnesses provided by the Philippine authorities. At the same
time, in violation of my right against double jeopardy, the
Philippine government included these killings as specifications in
the formal charge of rebellion filed against me and 50 other
opposition personalities before the Makati court in late February
2006.

In July 2007 the Philippine Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of
the charge, nullified the supposed evidence and berated the
prosecution for engaging in politically- motivated charges and
prostituting its office. The Philippine authorities did not inform
the Dutch authorities about the content of the February 2006 charge
of rebellion and the July 2007 Supreme Court decision. They made
fools out of the Dutch authorities who proceeded to arrest and
detain me on 28 August 2007,

Q6: How did you manage to get out of detention? What are the
factors involved?

JMS: The first factor involved is the truth that I had nothing to do
with the killing of Kintanar and Tabara and that the Dutch
prosecution could not provide any direct evidence against me. The
second factor is that my lawyers are highly competent and the courts
that we have gone through can easily see the lack of prima facie
evidence against me. The third factor is the widespread militant
support that I have received from the people in the Philippines and
in various countries. People in more than 20 countries demonstrated
against Dutch embassies and consulates to demand my release and
denounce the injustice done against me.

Prof. Jose Maria Sison carrying his personal belongings in a plastic
sack upon his release from The Hague penitentiary on 13 September
2007 in the Netherlands
The District Court of The Hague decided on 13 September 2007 to
release me for lack of evidence. In response to the appeal of the
prosecution, the Court of Appeal decided on 3 October 2007 to uphold
the earlier court decision on the lack of prima facie evidence and
went further by pointing to the political context in which the
charge is obviously politically motivated, the witnesses against me
are unreliable, and it is doubtful whether I can exercise my right
to cross-examine witnesses. The examining judge who had allowed my
arrest and the raids on 28 August 2007 terminated the preliminary
investigation on 21 November 2007.

Q7: People cannot understand why after all the court decisions in
your favor, the District Court of The Hague decided on 5 June 2008
to allow the prosecution to continue investigating you and possibly
to indict you at some later date. Were the previous court decisions
worthless? What is really the status of your case?

JMS: In its 5 June 2008 decision the District Court of The Hague
upheld the previous court decisions and declared on its own that so
far (as of 20 May2008) there is no incriminating evidence against
me. But it wrongly claimed that I had given up my demand to end the
investigation and close the case against me by demanding that I be
declared out of prosecution and an investigation be thoroughly
conducted against those involved in assassination attempts against
me in 2000 and 2001 and thereafter. In fact, my counsel Michiel
Pestman pointed out to the court that the prosecution had previously
wanted to extend the investigation only up to mid-June 2008.

The court also wrongly gave credence to the claims of the
prosecution that out of 6.3 million items seized in the 28 August
2007 raids it still had to examine 1.3 million items and that the
previous examining judge had allowed it to examine more witnesses.
In fact, the examining judge closed the investigation because of the
court decisions and the failure of the prosecution to come up with
incriminating evidence. Normally, the case against me would have
been dropped entirely. But certain political factors are at work.

Under the Dutch legal system, the prosecution is allowed to ask for
an extension of investigation together with the police and even
without the examining judge. It is given the benefit of a doubt
that it might still be able to turn up incriminating evidence, after
which it can go to court to ask for another examining judge and I am
also supposed to get the chance to cross-examine the witnesses
against me before both the defense and prosecution go to court for
trial.

The prosecution announced in court that its decision could be
expected before December 1, 2008. It also hinted that it is
considering to shift the charge of murder under Dutch criminal law
to a charge of war crimes under the Geneva Convention and crimes
against humanity under the International Crimes Act because
supposedly it is easier to prove command responsibility than direct
personal responsibility in a murder charge.

Q8: You mention political considerations in the continuance of the
investigation against you by the prosecution. What are these?

In the first place, the charge of inducing the murder of military
assets in the Philippines is without factual and legal basis but is
politically motivated and is the result of a political deal between
Philippine and Dutch authorities. It would also be a political
decision for the Dutch authorities to shift from a charge of
inducing murder to one of war crimes or crimes against humanity.
They will have to recognize the political authority of the
revolutionary forces as basis for demanding command responsibility.
This is contrary to the constant position of the Philippine
authorities that the revolutionary forces are merely their domestic
police problem.

But I think that the clearest and strongest consideration of the
Dutch authorities in making the false criminal charge of inducing
murder is to have the pretext to arrest me and raid the offices of
the NDF Information Bureau and the NDFP Negotiating Panel and the
homes of the panel members, consultants, and staffers. Some of the
papers and digital files seized from the raids have been used as
basis for statements in the Dutch court decisions to the effect that
I and other NDFP personnel in the Netherlands play a "prominent
role" in the CPP and the NPA. Such materials are in the possession
of those raided because they are needed in the peace negotiations of
the NDFP with the Philippine government.

These court decisions are favorable to me in so far as these
established the lack of prima facie evidence and effected my release
from detention relative to the murder charge. But they are now
being used by the Council of the European Union to provide a false
judicial basis for the serialized perpetuation of my name in the so-
called terrorist list of the European Union. I am certain that the
US, Dutch, and Philippine governments are in cahoots in trumping up
the false charge of terrorism and using it in the US-instigated
global war of terror and state terrorism. These three governments
had also worked together before to oppose my application for asylum.

Q9 Are you going to appeal the June 5 decision of the District
Court of The Hague? Why did you demand that the investigation
against you be ended and redirected against those involved in the
assassination attempts against you? What are you doing regarding
this?

JMS: My lawyer and I are studying the possibility of appealing the
June 5 decision of the District Court of The Hague. We are also
observing how the prosecution is proceeding.

We demanded that the prosecution make a thorough investigation and
undertake a prosecution of those involved in the assassination
attempts against me. The Dutch prosecution and police themselves
have made significant findings in 2007 and 2008 about these
assassination attempts. These are in the BORSSOM file and include
the testimonies of Jose Ramos, Gloria Jopson-Kintanar, and Ruel
Murakami and some documentary evidence.

But the prosecution made a decision not to prosecute those involved
in the assassination attempts, supposedly because they have
voluntarily withdrawn from these. It claims that there is no more
crime to prosecute despite the criminal attempts on my person and
life on Dutch territory. Thus I filed before the Dutch Court of
Appeal on 12 June 2008 a complaint against the prosecution for
failing to prosecute a criminal act.

Q10 Why are the Dutch authorities so relentless in using false
charges to oppress you, deny you asylum and residence, stigmatize
you as a terrorist, ban you from work, deprive you of the essential
means of human existence and arrest and detain you?

JMS: The long-running reason is to discredit, isolate, and run me
down or to discourage me from exercising my freedom of thought and
expression against US and Dutch imperialism and their puppets in the
Philippines. The more recent reasons are connected with the US-
instigated global war of terror and the GRP-NDFP peace
negotiations. Regarding these, the Philippine authorities and their
imperialist masters have interrelated objectives.

Under the pretext of looking for evidence against me on the charge
of inciting murder, the raids were conducted on the NDFP office and
homes of the NDFP panel members, consultants, and staffers as a
larger fishing expedition in connection with the false charge of
terrorism involved in my case against the Council of the European
Union before the European Court in Luxembourg.

The US, Dutch, European, and Philippine authorities are also
collaborating to pressure the NDFP to capitulate to the GRP. They
have made many declarations that the CPP, the NPA, and myself would
be removed from the so-called terrorist list as soon as the NDFP
capitulated to the GRP.

............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........

Interview with Prof. Jose Maria Sison:
On His Current Status, People's War, and Peace Negotiations
Part II
by Roselle Valerio
http://mrzine. monthlyreview. org/sison010708b .html

People's War in the Philippines

Q1: The Arroyo regime has vowed to destroy or reduce the CPP, the
NPA, and the NDFP to an inconsequential level before she steps down
in 2010. Is this possible?

JMS: The Arroyo regime is daydreaming about the impossible. History
shows that the Marcos regime could not destroy the revolutionary
forces with 14 years of fascist dictatorship when these were still
far smaller and far weaker than now. Instead, they grew bigger and
stronger. The objective conditions now have become far more
favorable for the Filipino people and the revolutionary forces to
wage armed revolution. The crisis of the world capitalist system
and that of the semi-colonial and semi-feudal ruling system have
become far worse than before.

The subjective forces of the revolution, such as the CPP, the NPA
and the NDFP, have overcome the grave errors of subjectivism
and "Left" and Right opportunism through the Second Great
Rectification Movement since 1992. They have thus been able to take
advantage of the ever worsening crisis of the ruling system in order
to gain strength and advance in response to the Filipino people's
demand for revolutionary change against oppression and exploitation.

Q2: Will you describe briefly the crisis of the world capitalist
system and the domestic ruling system? Hasn't the policy of "free
market" globalization brought about development and prosperity?
Isn't it ideological nonsense for the revolutionary forces to
continue the fight? Are not the revolutionary forces afraid of
the "strong republic" line of Arroyo and the US-promoted war on
terror?

JMS: It is Arroyo who is engaged in ideological nonsense by
believing in the dogma of the "free market" against the reality of
foreign monopoly capitalism, the comprador big bourgeoisie, the
landlord class, and corrupt politicians like her escalating the
exploitation and oppression of the broad masses of the people. It
is a matter of reality and urgent necessity for the people to wage
the new democratic revolution for national liberation and democracy
against the semi-colonial and semi-feudal system.

Neoliberal "free market" globalization has accelerated the
concentration and centralization of capital in the hands of the
monopoly bourgeoisie and has rapidly pressed down the incomes of the
working people and more than 90 per cent of the countries. It has
actually constricted the global market. For a while, this market
contraction was concealed by the expansion of money supply and
credit to finance consumption, cover trade and budgetary deficits,
and promote corporate speculation. Now, the US and other
imperialist countries are in a severe economic and financial crisis,
the worst since the Great Depression.

"Free market" globalization has prevented the Philippines from
engaging in self-reliant comprehensive and well balanced socio-
economic development. The Philippines has not undertaken national
industrialization and land reform and has abandoned self-reliant
food production. It has been victimized by policies of
denationalization, liberalization of imperialist- controlled
investment and trade, privatization of public assets and
deregulation against the workers, women, children, and the
environment.

It has used huge amounts of foreign and local covering to cover
trade and budgetary deficits. Now, there is a global credit crunch,
a big drop in global demand for the raw material and semi-
manufactured exports of the Philippines, and the soaring prices of
fuel, food, and other imported necessities. The broad masses of the
people are undergoing terrible suffering. They are protesting in
increasing numbers and are clearly desirous of revolutionary change.

Q3: Will you describe briefly the status of the revolutionary
forces? How near or far are the revolutionary forces from taking
the central seat of power in Manila? Are not the people getting
tired that after 40 years of people's war they have not yet seized
power on a nationwide scale? How do the revolutionary forces
measure success?

JMS: I think that the CPP, the NPA, the NDFP, and other
revolutionary forces are strong enough to be considered the most
serious political challenge to the entire ruling system. Although
the revolutionary forces are not yet about to seize power in Manila
and take over the presidential palace, they have made outstanding
achievements in forty years of armed revolution and can use these as
the basis for making larger achievements. The achievements of the
revolutionary forces are due to the participation and support of the
people. The people cannot grow tired of their own achievements and
accept the reign of greed and terror that victimizes them.

On the basis of my readings, let me cite the achievements of the
revolutionary forces. The CPP has members in so many tens of
thousands and exists in all regions and provinces of the country.
It leads millions of people in the urban and rural areas. The NPA
has thousands of rifles and operates in 120 to 130 guerrilla
fronts, covering thousands of barangays in 15 regions, 70 provinces,
and 800 municipalities. It enjoys the support of millions of people
and it can move freely in at least 90 per cent of Philippine
territory. Through the local revolutionary organs of political
power, the people's democratic government has supplanted the
authority of the reactionary government in extensive areas.

The NDFP encompasses 17 revolutionary forces within its fold. These
include the CPP, the NPA, alliances like those of the Christians for
National Liberation (CNL), the Moro Resistance and Liberation
Organization (MRLO), Mindanao hill tribes (LUMAD), and the
Cordillera People's Democratic Front (CPDF) and the mass formations
of the workers (KASAMA and RCTU), peasants (PKM), women (MAKIBAKA),
youth (KM), teachers (KAGUMA), health workers (MASAPA), lawyers
(LUMABAN), writers and artists (ARMAS), scientists and technologists
(LAB), and government employees (KAWANI). The NDFP has effectively
expanded the influence of the revolutionary forces in the
Philippines and abroad.

Q4: You have explained well that the people and the revolutionary
forces have achieved a lot over a protracted period of time. But do
you see any indications that the CPP is seeking to accelerate the
growth and advance of the revolution? Won't there be a great leap
forward soon? If there are indications, will you point these out?

JMS: There can be no clearer indications than the statements of the
CPP published in its website and the news reports of intensified NPA
offensives. The CPP has been calling on the people and the NPA to
intensify the people's war and bring it to a new and higher level by
seizing the initiative and launching tactical offensives at a faster
rate and on a wider scale.

What is foreseeable is that the people and the revolutionary forces
will continue to frustrate and defeat Oplan Bantay Laya, bring about
the maturation of the middle phase of the strategic defensive, and
pave the way for the advanced phase of this stage in the people's
war. The middle phase of the strategic defensive is supposed to
involve the development of platoons as strike forces of the
guerrilla fronts and companies as the offensive units of the
regional and eventually provincial commands of the NPA.

Making a great leap forward depends on the revolutionary
determination and capabilities of the revolutionary forces of the
people and the rapid worsening of the crisis of the ruling system.
There is no doubt that the people are sick and tired of the rotten
ruling system and are desirous of revolutionary change. The stage
of the strategic defensive in the people's war has taken such a long
time but the succeeding stages of the strategic stalemate and
strategic offensive can be comparatively much shorter.

Q5: What is the CPP trying to do in order to enhance its leadership
and accelerate the advance of the Philippine revolution? What is
the CPP doing to make sure that significant advances are made?

JMS: Relying on my background, I presume that the CPP has to
undertake ideological, political, and organizational work in order
to strengthen itself, realize the revolutionary leadership of the
working class, and accelerate the advance of the Philippine
revolution. The Philippine revolution would be indestructible and
would continue to advance so long as the CPP engages in Marxist-
Leninist-Maoist ideological building, pursues the general political
line of people's democratic revolution through people's war, and
follows the principle of democratic centralism in organizational
building among the toiling masses of workers and peasants mainly and
among people in the middle social strata secondarily.

The CPP is publicly known to have an organizational and educational
plan to increase its membership into hundreds of thousands, who have
the Marxist-Leninist- Maoist stand, viewpoint, and method in thinking
and acting, who are in the revolutionary mass movement and who are
prompt in recruiting to the CPP the most advanced mass activists.
The CPP is strengthening itself at all levels. It seeks to be
deeply rooted among the masses at the lowest level. It is
strengthening itself at the village, section, and district levels to
further develop the mass base for people's war. It aims to
strengthen itself at the provincial and regional levels in order to
maximize its ability to lead and coordinate the use of NPA units
from the guerrilla fronts for more frequent tactical offensives on
the scale of a province or a region.

Q6: What is the NPA trying to do to advance the revolutionary armed
struggle? Are there new developments in this regard?

JMS: The NPA is a fighting, propaganda, productive, and cultural
force. It has long been the main organization of the CPP not only
for defeating the armed counterrevolution in military terms but also
for arousing, organizing, and mobilizing the people in various
aspects, politico-military, socio-economic, and cultural. Under the
leadership of the CPP, the NPA has encouraged the formation of mass
organizations and organs of political power and the carrying out of
the land reform campaign and other campaigns socially beneficial to
the people.

The NPA integrates revolutionary armed struggle, land reform, and
mass base building in carrying out people's war. According to CPP
publications, the guerrilla fronts will be increased from the level
of more than 120 to 173 in order to have a guerrilla front in every
congressional district in the rural provinces. There will be more
frequent tactical offensives involving platoons, oversized platoons,
and companies. There will also be well-calculated head blows
against the chieftains and centers of the armed counterrrevolution.
Both CPP and NPA statements have been making these announcements.

Q7: Is there any new development in the politico-military strategy
and tactics of the NPA? Anything new in terms formation and
deployment, targeting, tactics, and technique?

JMS: It is a matter of public knowledge that the CPP and the NPA
continue to pursue the strategic line of protracted people's war,
encircling the cities from the countryside over a protracted period
of time until the people's army has gained enough strength to seize
the cities and take power on a nationwide scale. In the meantime,
the NPA is waging an intensive and extensive guerrilla warfare on
the basis of an ever widening and deepening mass base. It is
conscious of a course in which guerrilla warfare is the main form of
warfare in the strategic defensive, giving rise to regular mobile
warfare in the strategic stalemate, and further developing into a
more widespread regular mobile warfare of larger forces, with
elements of regular warfare and mass uprisings, in the strategic
offensive.

In the present phase of the strategic defensive, the NPA is
increasingly using platoons, oversized platoons, and company-sized
tactical offensives to annihilate or disarm enemy units through
ambuscades and raids. At the same time, small NPA units are being
used for various offensive purposes, including sniping, punitive
actions, arrest operations, seizing arms, and sabotage. Carried out
often and on a wide scale, these can weaken, demoralize, and force
the reactionary armed forces to commit serious mistakes.

According to CPP publications, the NPA gives the highest priority to
the tactics of wiping out its armed opponents and capturing their
weapons as well as impeding their operations by attacking their
depots and lines of fuel, communications, and food supply. The NPA
also gives high priority to the dismantling of the operations of
mining, plantation, logging for export, and other enterprises which
grab the land from the people, plunder the natural resources, and
ruin the environment. The NPA targets those entities most notorious
for human rights violations, corruption, narco-trafficking, and
other serious anti-social crimes.

Despite military superiority for its strategic offensive, Oplan
Bantay Laya has failed to destroy the NPA because this is a
people's army that uses the major tactics of concentration to attack
an enemy unit it can defeat, shifting to evade a superior enemy
force, and dispersal to do mass work or to deprive the enemy of any
visible target. The forces of the NPA can use the tactics of
concentration, shifting, and dispersal because they enjoy the
people' participation and support in the armed revolution. They
develop their tactics and technique because they learn lessons from
the onslaughts of the enemy forces and seize weapons and other kinds
of equipment from them.

Q8: Is there any effort to advance the agrarian revolution from the
long-running minimum land reform? What is the response of the
revolutionary movement to the scoffing statement that it is not at
all interested in making the tiller the owner of the land he tills?

JMS: According to CPP publications, the NPA is still carrying out of
land reform: the minimum program of reducing land rent and interest
rates and raising farm wages, prices at farm gates, and production
in agriculture and sideline occupations. But the NPA is ever ready
to carry out wherever possible the maximum program of enabling the
tillers to take over the land at no financial cost to them. It has
long been experienced in confiscating land from the despotic
landlords and causing the restitution of land grabbed from the
peasants and indigenous people. But this time it is determined more
than ever to dismantle or disable large estates owned by
corporations and landlord families and pave the way for the landless
tillers to take over the land.

The reformists have carped that the reactionary government's
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program is truly meant to deliver land
ownership to the tillers, unlike the minimum land reform program of
the revolutionary movement. But the CARP has spent more money on
the upkeep of the bureaucracy of the Department of Agrarian Reform
than on the tokenistic amount of overpriced land sold by the
landlords for supposed redistribution. The CARP allows the big
landowners and agri-coprorations all tricks to prevent genuine land
reform. These include the overpricing of the land, re-
classification of the land, the stock distribution option, pure and
simple land grabbing and so on.

Q9: Is there anything new concerning building the mass base?

JMS: According to CPP publications, the CPP looks forward to the
emergence of stable base areas as a result of the merging and
development of the guerrilla fronts as bulwarks of the revolution in
politico-military, socio-economic, and cultural terms. The stable
base areas can emerge as the product of the integrated advances of
the revolutionary armed struggle, agrarian revolution, and mass base
building.

With regard to mass base-building, the CPP and the NPA are striving
to consolidate and expand the revolutionary mass organizations,
strengthen the organs of political power, and form the committees
for carrying out campaigns of mass organizing, public education,
land reform, defense, health, arbitration, and cultural uplifting.
The system of justice is being improved. The people's militia and
self-defense units are trained to do local security work, support
the NPA, and stand as the reserve force. The people's militia can
run into tens of thousands of members. The self-defense units
based in the mass organizations can easily run into hundreds of
thousands.

Q10: What role does the united front or the NDFP play in advancing
the revolution? Why is it that up to now the broad united front has
not yet ousted the Arroyo regime? What is the relationship of the
united front for armed struggle and the united front for legal
struggle?

JMS: The policy and tactics of the united front play an important
and decisive role in the development of the people's democratic
revolution. They serve to amplify the strength of the revolutionary
movement, win over allies, and mobilize many more millions of people
in order to isolate and destroy the enemy of the people at every
given time. The National Democratic Front of the Philippines is the
most consolidated united front organization of the patriotic and
progressive forces that are committed to armed revolution for
national liberation and democracy.

You better ask those involved in the broad legal united front to
oust the Arroyo regime. I believe that there are favorable
conditions for this broad legal united front to achieve its
objective. It is up to the main forces to find out what needs to be
done in order to bring out hundreds of thousands and then millions
of people to the streets on a nationwide scale and persuade the
military and bureaucracy to withdraw support from Arroyo.

The success of the broad legal united front to oust the Arroyo
regime will not topple the ruling system but will involve some gain
of strength among the legal progressive forces and will serve to
encourage the people's war. But if the broad legal united front
fails to oust the Arroyo regime, the broad masses of the Filipino
people will find it more necessary than ever to place their hopes on
the armed revolution and to regard the CPP, the NPA, and the NDFP as
their most reliable and most effective instruments for overthrowing
the entire reactionary ruling system.

............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..

Interview with Prof. Jose Maria Sison:
On His Current Status, People's War, and Peace Negotiations
Part III
by Roselle Valerio
http://mrzine. monthlyreview. org/sison010708c .html

GRP-NDFP Peace Negotiations

Q1: What is the position of the NDFP on the question of resuming the
formal talks in the peace negotiations with the GRP? What is the
key step towards overcoming all the impediments?

JMS: The NDFP is always ready to resume the formal talks in the
peacenegotiations with the GRP in accordance with the Hague Joint
Declaration and subsequent agreements, especially the Joint
Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG), the Joint
Agreement on the Formation, Sequence, and Operationalization of the
Reciprocal Working Committees (Joint Agreement on RWCs), the
Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and
International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL), and the Oslo Joint
Statements I and II.

The NDFP and GRP must address the roots of the armed conflict
through negotiations and agreements on economic, social, political,
and constitutional reforms in accordance with the agenda and methods
set by the Hague Joint Declaration and the Joint Agreement on RWCs.
The two negotiating parties and their principals succeeded in
forging the CARHRIHL. If they muster the needed political will,
they can make the comprehensive agreements on social and economic
reforms (SER), on political and constitutional reforms (PCR) and on
the end of hostilities and disposition of forces (EHDF).

Q2: Why does the NDFP consider as impediment the demand of the GRP
for a permanent or indefinite ceasefire? The NDFP calls this an
impermissible precondition. But is not the NDFP making its own
preconditions.

JMS: The GRP demand for a permanent or indefinite ceasefire as
precondition to the resumption of formal talks is an impediment
because it violates the Hague Joint Declaration which stipulates
that there shall be no precondition whatsoever which negates the
inherent character and purpose of the peace negotiations.
Supplanting the peace negotiations on substantive issues with
ceasefire negotiations simply to pacify the revolutionary forces is
a blatant violation of the Hague Joint Declaration. The GRP is
seeking a ceasefire agreement that kills the negotiations on the
substantive agenda of economic, social, and political reforms. The
issue of ending the armed hostilities is the fourth and last item of
the agenda.

Unlike the GRP, the NDFP is not setting any precondition. It is
simply telling the GRP to comply with the agreements that it has
signed with the NDFP. What is the point in negotiating with the GRP
if it can refuse to comply with agreements already made and even
violate these so flagrantly. What the GRP cannot win in the
battlefield, it seeks to win across the table by pushing a permanent
or indefinite ceasefire that amounts to the pacification and
capitulation of the revolutionary forces and the people and
therefore the end of the peace negotiations without any substantive
agreement on basic reforms.

Q3: It has long been bruited about that the NDFP has set as
precondition to the resumption of formal talks the removal of the
names of the CPP, the NPA, and yourself from the US list of so-
called terrorists. How true is this? What exactly is possible and
acceptable to the NDFP by way of overcoming the "terror" list as an
impediment to peace negotiations? How are Oslo Joint Statements I
and II related to the question of "terrorist" listing?

JMS: Since the last week of November 2001 the NDFP has known for a
fact from then Speaker Jose de Venecia that it was the Arroyo regime
that had requested the US to list the CPP, the NPA, and myself as so-
called terrorists. It should be necessary and appropriate for the
GRP to request the US to delist the CPP, the NPA, and myself for the
sake of promoting the peace negotiations. But shamelessly the
Arroyo regime has declared that it is the sovereign right of the US
to impose its political and legal categories and presumptions on
Philippine events that are strictly within the jurisdiction of the
sovereign Filipino people.

Knowing the extent of puppetry of the Arroyo regime to the US, the
NDFP has frankly told the GRP several times that the NDFP cannot
expect a puppet regime to tell its imperialist master to delist the
CPP, the NPA, and myself. Instead, the NDFP has proposed that the
GRP and the NDFP sign together a declaration upholding national
sovereignty and territorial integrity against foreign interference
in the internal affairs of the Philippines. The Hague Joint
Declaration declares national sovereignty as one of the mutually
acceptable principles guiding the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations.

The Oslo Joint Statements I and II calls on the GRP to be proactive
in seeking the delisting of the CPP, the NPA, and myself. But the
GRP has consistently said that it is the sovereign right of the US
to interfere in Philippine affairs and that the way out of
the "terrorist" list of the US and other foreign governments is for
the CPP, the NPA, and the NDFP to capitulate and submit themselves
to a sham peace accord that is obviously drafted by the US Central
Intelligence Agency and its Philippine assets like executive
secretary General Eduardo Ermita and national security adviser
Norberto Gonzales.

Q4. Do you consider the US and the Arroyo regime as the biggest
impediments to the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations? How do you propose
to overcome US military intervention and the US-instigated war on
terror, the human rights violations under Oplan Bantay Laya, and
the false charges in the "legal offensive" under the Inter-Agency
Legal Assistance Group (IALAG), including the charge of rebellion,
multiple murders in Leyte, and the current charge against you of
inducing the murder of Kintanar and Tabara?

JMS: Indeed, the biggest impediments are the US and the Arroyo
regime itself. At the highest level, these have agreed on
unleashing US military intervention in line with the US global war
of terror. This has taken the form of Oplan Bantay Laya I and II
and has resulted in gross and systematic human rights violations of
the worst proportions since the Marcos fascist dictatorship.
Progressive legal activists have not been spared from extrajudicial
killings, disappearances, torture, and false charges to stigmatize
and imprison them.

The state terrorism that is going on in the Philippines is a matter
of policy taken at the highest level on the GRP side upon the
instigation of the U.S. Arroyo cannot be expected to change policy
and course. She still daydreams that she can destroy the armed
revolution or inflict a strategic defeat on it before she steps down
or is ousted. She is in fact compelling and challenging the
revolutionary forces and people to intensify the armed revolution.
Her appointment of General Esperon as presidential advisor on the
peace process is widely regarded as a provocation for the
furtherance of the civil war in the Philippines.

The advocates of just peace and human rights in the Philippines and
abroad have done well in exposing the gross and systematic human
rights violations of the Arroyo regime. The UN special rapporteur
Philip Alston has pointed out that the extrajudicial killing sand
disappearances are connected with the design of the "counter-
insurgency" scheme and has called for the abolition of IALAG. It
would be good if the GRP-NDFP Joint Monitoring Committee can
function fully in accordance with CARHRIHL and the JMC Operating
Guidelines.

It is fine that the Supreme Court has ordered the dismissal of the
rebellion charge against me and 50 other opposition leaders. But
IALAG continues to oppress opposition leaders, including myself,
with trumped-up murder charges in Leyte and elsewhere. The
tentacles of the IALAG have also reached the Netherlands. I
continue to face the false charges of inducing the murder of
military assets like Kintanar and Tabara.

Q5. What led to the suspension of the JASIG by the GRP? Was the GRP
justified in suspending it? How do you overcome the suspension of
JASIG and the use of the list of holders of documents of
identification (DOI) as wanted list, the murders, disappearances,
and imprisonment of NDFP consultants?

JMS: At one point in the second half of 2004, the NDFP postponed the
formal talks in order to give the GRP the chance to comply with the
Oslo Statements I and II, regarding the "terrorist" listing. The
GRP reacted by "suspending" the JASIG. The provisions of the JASIG
do not allow "suspension. " They allow only either continuing
validity or termination after a 30-day notice in advance. The
NDFP's position is that JASIG remains valid and binding in effect in
the absence of any notice of termination.

The real and malicious intent of the Arroyo regime in the illegal
suspension of the JASIG became indubitably clear when it converted
the list of holders of NDFP documents of identification into a
manhunt list (with a great deal of guessing the real identities
behind the alternative names). At any rate, the manhunt list
resulted in the murder, disappearance, torture, arbitrary
imprisonment, and grave threats to NDFP consultants and staffers.

To resume the formal talks, the GRP needs to declare unconditionally
the continuing validity and effectivity of the JASIG. The
negotiators, consultants, and staffers must be assured of safety and
immunity guarantees. The GRP must give an accurate account of those
NDFP consultants and staffers who have been victimized by the
illegal suspension of the JASIG. Justice must be rendered for the
benefit of the victims. Those who have violated their human rights
must be held to account under the JASIG, CARHRIHL, and pertinent
laws.

Q6. In what way does the Anti-Terrorism Law impede the GRP-NDFP
peace negotiations? What will happen to the peace negotiations if
the Supreme Court recognizes its validity and allows its
operationalization?

JMS: Should it be considered valid by the Supreme Court and
operationalized by the GRP executive, the Anti-Terrorism Law (alias
Human Security Act of 2007) would certainly kill the GRP-NDFP peace
negotiations once and for all. The floodgates to human rights
violations would open to an extent and in a manner as to outstrip
the Marcos fascist dictatorship. The Anti-Terrorism Law is a
license for unbridled fascism.

Even without the Anti-Terrorism Law, gross and systematic human
rights violations have been perpetrated. They would certainly
become more rampant if the Anti-Terrorism Law were allowed. In the
course of their constant struggle for power, the rival reactionary
groups themselves would not be safe from the overbroad and vague
definition of terrorism and from its draconian punitive measures.

It is fine that constitutional questions have been raised before the
Supreme Court by a broad range of highly responsible associations
and institutions. Many people expect the Supreme Court to
invalidate the Anti-Terrorism Law as entirely unconstitutional.
Like the Anti-Subversion Law of the past, the Anti-Terrorism Law
would not discourage but would inflame the armed revolution against
oppression and exploitation.

Q7. According to some reports, the Arroyo regime used for
electioneering purposes in 2004 the money recovered from the Swiss
bank account of Marcos. How can the victims of human rights
violations under the martial rule of Marcos be indemnified after the
reported misappropriation and squandering of the money by the Arroyo
regime? In what way is the failure to indemnify the victims an
impediment to the resumption of formal talks? How can this be
overcome?

JMS: There are indeed reliable reports that the Arroyo regime
misappropriated and squandered the money intended to indemnify the
victims of human rights violations under the Marcos fascist
dictatorship. At the same time, the GRP Negotiating Panel informed
the NDFP Negotiating Panel in 2004 that such money was still
available if a law would be enacted to amend the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law. But every year the Arroyo-controlled Congress
fails to pass that amendatory law.

The GRP has to indemnify the aforesaid victims, who were winners in
the human rights litigation against Marcos in the US. The
indemnification is in accordance with CARHRIHL. Continuing failure
to indemnify the victims exposes the bad faith of the GRP in co-
signing agreements with the NDFP. It shows that the GRP has utter
disregard for human rights and for rendering any measure of justice
to the victims of human right violations. As soon as possible, the
GRP should negotiate and agree with the representatives of the
victims.

Q8. What can be done to overcome the prolonged failure of the Arroyo
regime to fulfill its promise to release political prisoners in 2001
and 2004?

JMS: This is a matter of the GRP keeping its word in order to build
good will and confidence. In comparison to the Ramos regime, the
Arroyo regime has promised so little to show a measure of goodwill
to the political prisoners but has failed to deliver. Some of those
political prisoners who were supposed to be released in 2001 and
2004 are still in prison. Others have won their freedom through
difficult legal struggle.

Instead of undertaking goodwill and confidence-building measures,
the Arroyo regime has gone into an orgy of human rights violations
under Oplan Bantay Laya I and II. After taking over the peace
negotiations on the side of the GRP, fascists like Generals Reyes
and Ermita and long-time CIA asset like Norberto Gonzales have
merely used the illusion of peace negotiations as one of the minor
tactics in their vain attempts to deceive the people and destroy
the armed revolution through sheer military force.

Q9. How do you evaluate the localized peace talks and offers of
amnesty and rehabilitation as well as the payment for weapons
surrendered?

JMS: Real peace negotiations between two conflicting forces like the
GRP and NDFP can be carried out only through negotiating panels
created and directed by their respective principals who ultimately
sign and approve the comprehensive agreements on economic, social,
and political reforms. The Arroyo regime has maliciously used so-
called localized peace talks and offers of amnesty and
rehabilitation and payments for arms surrendered in a futile attempt
to supplant the negotiations at the proper level, deceive the
people, and split the ranks of the revolutionaries.

The GRP has long failed in these tactics. In so-called localized
peace talks, the GRP talks with a handful of renegades and its own
underlings and therefore with its own shadow for psywar purposes.
The offers of amnesty are not believed because those who make the
mistake of taking the bait are soon murdered by death squads of the
regime. To pocket the money for themselves, corrupt military
officers and bureaucrats collude in drawing up the lists of ghost
beneficiaries of amnesty, rehabilitation, and rewards for the
surrender of arms.

Q10. What are the chances for resuming the peace negotiations while
Arroyo is still in power?

JMS: It is doubtful whether the formal talks can be resumed while
Arroyo is still in power. That is because the Arroyo regime is not
making any move to meet the demands of the NDFP for doing away with
the impediments that the GRP has put up. The impediments can be
overcome if analyzed one by one and if what is just and reasonable
is aimed at within the framework of the Hague Joint Declaration and
the succeeding agreements.

The NDFP is willing to go further into exploratory talks towards
overcoming the impediments and resuming the formal talks. If these
exploratory talks do not lead to formal talks during the Arroyo
regime, they can probably lead to formal talks during the next
regime. In this regard, good sense and energy will not be wasted.
At the same time, reality beyond the negotiating table does not
stand still. The crisis of the ruling system is ever worsening.
And the revolutionary forces of the people are growing in strength
and advancing.

Roselle Valerio is editor of Liberation International.