(The Philippine Star) Updated June 23, 2012
12:00 AM
Every June 12, I try to write about General
Emilio Aguinaldo. His role in the making of our nation has not been given its
rightful place. Among the few who have kept hammering on the issue is Muslim
scholar Datu Jamal Ashley Yahya Abbas. He is now a facebook friend and
inevitably we exchanged notes on the wrong done to the hero. I reminded him yet
again that it was through his writings that I changed my opinion on General
Aguinaldo.
*
* *
The last time I spoke about this project on
Aguinaldo was at a lunch with Aguinaldo descendant, Cesar Virata. Another
admirer of Aguinaldo, Antonio Abaya was also present but he has had a massive
stroke and would no longer be in any position to help. Abbas agreed that
revisiting the story of Emilio Aguinaldo is central to the history of the
Philippines.
Correcting that mistake may be the key to
understanding the complex relations we have with the United States of America
today. Looking at some scattered notes, the elections in 1935 in which
Aguinaldo was defeated was probably the first foreign intervention on how we
should be led. What was the reason for that intervention? Perhaps, his
descendants should take the initiative.
It is puzzling that nothing has been done
in this direction.
“Rehabilitating Aguinaldo is a tall order.
Quezon and the Americans had totally destroyed him in the minds of the masses.
But somebody has to start it. You and the Aguinaldos could very well spearhead
the project. I would be glad to be of help, in any capacity,” Abbas said. Tall
order it may be but its urgency grows with each year that we celebrate Philippine
Independence Day on June 12.
*
* *
Abbas’ writings tell us that the Europeans
especially French journalists were more sympathetic to the Philippine cause at
the time. He refers to the articles written by French journalists who were
actually in Manila to cover the war and the Philippine declaration of
independence.
Being reporters on the scene, as far as
they were concerned the hero of the Philippine wars of independence against the
Americans was General Emilio Aguinaldo. During the 100th anniversary of the
proclamation of Independence celebration, the on the scene reports by the
European journalists should have been put at the center stage to be emphasized
and its implications brought out.
Abbas, who knows French, wrote on those
reports. “Yet Aguinaldo, who became a cause celebre in Europe during his time
for daring to fight the American power, had such a bad press in his own
country. He died in old age almost in disgrace . . . Rizal wrote only two
novels and Bonifacio’s Manila revolt lasted for only about a week or so. It was
Aguinaldo’s army who subdued the Spaniards while the Americans looked on. It
was Aguinaldo who proclaimed the Philippine Republic, whose centennial was
celebrated with pomp and ceremony. And it was Aguinaldo who led the fight
against two-thirds of one of the world’s strongest army at that time,” Abbas
wrote. He puts the blame on the Filipino elite (the ilustrados) for
reconstructing Philippine history.
“The Americans and their new wards (Quezon
et al.) needed to demonize Aguinaldo and the Katipunan. Although the Americans
declared the Philippine-American war as “officially” finished in 1902, some
Katipuneros continued the fight led by such men as Mariano Sakay and Miguel
Malvar. Gen. Artemio Ricarte chose exile in Japan over an ignominious surrender
to America.”
*
* *
There are a number of Filipino historians
and writers fluent in French who are qualified to take up this cause. We should
delve deeper. Luckily we have the accounts of French journalists as a starting
point.
The French journalist Gaston Rouvier described
Aguinaldo as “even to his enemies, (he is) the greatest man of the Malay race.”
Rouvier wrote: “As soon as the naval
victory of Dewey in Cavite was achieved… (Aguinaldo) left for the
Philippines…The MacCulloch transported them.
“On May 19, hardly disembarked, Aguinaldo
rekindled the embers of revolt across the Luzon provinces, thanks to his
untiring work and a kind of magnetic influence which he exercised on his
followers. He roused a rebel leader in every district. For the capture of all
Spanish garrisons and outposts, he devised a campaign plan. He was Bonaparte,
if his admirers were to be believed.
“Bonaparte, indeed, by the strange
fascination that he elicited from his people. He obtained extraordinary
results. In two days, his messengers covered 150 kilometres. In 36 hours, his
soldiers travelled 70 to 80 kilometres. Thus, he was able to take the Spanish
garrisons by surprise; he was able to take hold of arms and treasures. From May
1898 to January 1899, he led the struggle against Spain without let-up. He
captured 15,000 Spanish soldiers and forced 2,000 to 3,000 others to leave
Camarines, Tayabas, Batangas and Laguna for Mindoro, Panay and Cebu. At present
he still detains 6,000 Spanish soldier-prisoners in the northern provinces.”
*
* *
Such a tribute to Aguinaldo comes as a
surprise to me and other Filipinos equally nurtured with a different version.
“Filipinos living today have been brought up to think of Aguinaldo as an
elitist leader who sold out the masses, who killed the father of the
Revolution, Andres Bonifacio, and the greatest Filipino general, Antonio Luna.
(CNP: The revolutionary funds that were entrusted to him disappeared. He
allegedly left it with his girlfriend, Ysidra Cojuangco). Somebody, preferably
a historian, should explain the discrepancy.”
*
* *
Tall order or not it has to be done. Abbas
cites Serafin Quiason, once chair and executive director of the National
Historical Institute, who wrote the preface to the volume The War In The
Philippines: As Reported by Two French Journalists in 1899.
“Its story disappeared from the Filipino
consciousness for two generations, thanks to the history books authored first
by American teachers and then by Filipinos steeped in the colonial atmosphere
of the educational system.”
“For a nation trying to find its identity,
nothing is worse than seeing its greatest sons de-bunked . . . During my
elementary school years, I remember asking my elders why Aguinaldo was not as
great as Rizal or even Bonifacio. One answer that I often got was because
Aguinaldo did not die fighting. In my freshman year in college, the history
teacher asked the students to think of a question for a debate. Many students
responded with the proposition to resolve who was the better hero, Rizal or
Bonifacio. When I interjected and proposed Aguinaldo’s name, the class fell
silent,” adds Abbas.
No comments:
Post a Comment