Transcript of
U.S. Ambassador Francis Ricciardone’s Press Discussion
Following POTUS State of the Union Address
U.S. Embassy, February 3, 2005
Manila

 

Q: President Bush in his speech this morning said that, “we honor freedom defenders,” (inaudible). Can you comment on this?”

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: The President has been absolutely clear on this from day one. We’re not going to set a date, and he pointed out why: a date will only give the bad people some hope that they can outlast us. He made it clear that we’re going to stand by the Iraqi people. The mission is to strengthen them so they can defend their new democracy. He saluted the courage that the Iraqi people have demonstrated, to the inspiration of the entire world, and he made clear that as soon as the Iraqis decide, and we all understand that they are in fact capable of protecting themselves, only then will we go, because we are not going to abandon them. … I myself get e-mails from my Iraqi friends feeling so good about what just happened on Sunday and saying “thank you, please stay with us until we’re ready.”

Q: Which brings us, Mr. Ambassador, to the question of are you hoping that the Philippines would go back?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: Not really. The Philippines has to decide for itself its future with Iraq, and its responsibilities as a member of the community of democracies, and what your national interests are. There are several thousand Filipino workers there now, making their contribution. Last August, after the terrible hostage affair, President Arroyo made clear that she was going to permit the Filipino workers to stay on and make their very important contribution. And she has done that, although the Government at the same time is discouraging more from going there. It’s a tough dilemma, and through your political process, you will decide what is right for you.

But I can tell you where we stand. President Bush has made clear where we stand: We’re not going to give up on the Iraqi people. No American will ever be cowed by intimidation of ax murderers and car bombers. We feel just as deeply when an American is taken victim by the hostage takers or the murderers there, but our response is not to cave in to them. Our response is to stand firm with the Iraqi people – men, women, children, elderly people – some who came out in wheelchairs to vote. Those people have a courage that we’re not going to abandon.

Filipinos will decide what you think is right, too.

Q: But the Government did say that it would re-think its position after the January 30 elections and after this speech of President Bush. Do you think it’s a perfect time for the Government to re-think?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: You’ve got a democracy. Your Government responds to what the people of the Philippines want. Your Government has relations with the new Government of Iraq that took office in late June. You helped to bring it about, by being the President of the Security Council for a resolution that recognized that Government. The Prime Minister of that Government had asked your Government during the hostage crisis to support them. You need to decide what kind of relationship you want with a free Iraq, how you want Iraqis to remember Filipinos in the future. Those are tough decisions. There are costs in supporting a people that is under siege and still dealing with terrorism. President Bush’s view - my view – is: we all need to stand together against terrorism, and brutality and hate and ignorance. We’re standing with you and with our other friends around the world who are facing these problems.

Q: The Philippines has a slow, rather stagnant relationship with North Korea, and Mr. Bush has said that…allies in Asia – (inaudible) What exactly, in view of the fact that the Philippines basically (inaudible) initiative and because it is also (inaudible) the meeting has not reconvened yet – what do you think or what do you expect the Philippines, specifically to you, what will it do to hasten Korea’s – maybe even coming back to the conference table?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: In general terms, I would respond that you shouldn’t undersell the weight of your own country in international affairs. We certainly don’t. We look on all countries as having value in standing firm in the international community, whether in defeating terrorism or nuclear proliferation – the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and bio. The Philippines, in fact, has always “punched above its weight,” as we say in Manny Paquiao’s world. It’s a country that has boasted Carlos P. Romulo, for example, helping to found the United Nations. It’s a country that even now, this year, is on the United Nations Security Council. People listen to the Philippines as the oldest democracy in Asia. I think the Philippines is appreciated in the world as not just a friend of the United States, but also its own country with its own identity as an Asian country.

The North Koreans – I can’t speak for the North Koreans. I don’t know how they look at the world. Clearly they have a very peculiar prism on the world. But I have to believe that if they see all the countries of the world – the big ones, the little ones, the Asians, the Africans, the Latin Americans, the North Americans all saying the same thing – “get off the nuclear track, get rid of your nuclear weapons – join us. Join the world in feeding your people, educating your people, beautifying your country.” That will have to matter, if you stay strong and help encourage them and the others. Surely, the six parties who are around North Korea have the most immediate stake, but we all have a stake in this. It’s not something we can stay neutral about.

I think maybe that’s President Bush’ message – we all have to be strong when it comes to fighting for liberty. It’s not someone else’s business to take care of the problems of the world. I would be very disappointed if Filipinos thought , “thank God the United States is making the world secure and safe – that means we don’t have to.” I don’t think there are many Filipinos who really think that way. Certainly, no responsible ones. So stick with us at the U.N. Help our alliance be strong. Make your country strong against terrorism. Make your country strong against people who would smuggle nuclear or chemical or biological weapons back and forth, against North Korean arms that might come in to support terrorists in Mindanao. There is lots that the Philippines can do.

Q: If my colleagues have no questions, I would like to raise another one. Okay. In (inaudible) exchange the other day and I’m just asking about your comments on the (inaudible). In a few days the peace panel will leave again for Malaysia and there’s a lot of pessimism going on, although the government itself is very optimistic – there’s a lot of anxiety that the government (inaudible) is an artificial deadline. I may have misinterpreted you, but you are saying that the MILF – are you saying that the negotiations are going to fail because the MILF as we see them now are continually metamorphosing into splinter groups? Is it okay for Malaysia to work on a timetable that the Philippines wants? Because a Malaysian diplomat has mentioned to me that maybe the Americans don’t understand that we Asians understand confidence-building measures more than you do. And perhaps we should give the MILF credit now while they are still quite amenable to a peace agreement. Could you comment on that?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: That’s quite an essay –

Q: I don’t know how to say it more briefly because I wanted to be sure that all the basic ....

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: Yes. You’re asking me whether I think things are going to fail, and the anxiety and pessimism and all of that.... . As you were speaking, I was thinking of the words of President Ramos that I hear all the time: “the need for caring, sharing and daring.” And I think that’s the secret to the success of this proposition of a peace process. It’s going to take boldness – the daring part – on both sides. Because both sides are going to have to do things that are in some ways politically unpalatable. This isn’t all, “let’s jump into a hot tub and make slogans of peace and pretend there are no problems. Let’s all paper things over and have a photo opportunity as we all sign a piece of paper and hope that the problems will go away.”

These are much more serious issues. There are historic injustices that need to be addressed. And it’s very hard to do that unless you have freedom, which you have in this country, thank God; and unless you have confidence in your leadership. On the side of the Government of the Philippines, it’s a democracy. You know who the leader is, you know when the President of this country speaks and her cabinet officers speak. They can commit this Government and this country. So on one side, we know what we’re dealing with – in one of the parties of the conflict. On the other side – who is the party to the conflict? Who is leading it? Can that person, group, party…commit to a certain path after they sign a nice piece of paper which we hope will happen? Can the party adhere to the commitments?

And not only the commitments. Can the party then make use of the concessions that it has received from the opposite party? One assumes that a peace process would result in at least far greater autonomy and protection of the rights of the Bangsamoro people. At a minimum, clearly that's what the other side is insisting on. Will there be someone there who can use those rights? and protect them, and educate the young people? and protect the communities, and keep terrorists out, and establish courts, and collect taxes fairly? and see that the taxes are applied toward bettering the lives of the people – building roads and all of that? Is there such a party? I don’t know.

If at the moment, there’s something that calls itself the MILF, and some days they are in Kuala Lumpur negotiating – some of them – and then other days they’re attacking market places with bombs, or protecting internationally wanted terrorists from the Jemaah Islamiya, and letting the JI have training camps, then how can you understand what you’re dealing with? It becomes very, very difficult. It’s difficult. But what we’re doing in Iraq is difficult. On the American side, you don’t hear a President confusing the word “difficult” with the word “impossible.” When something is difficult and you have a leader like President Bush or President Arroyo, I think it whets their appetite, and emboldens them to tackle what is difficult. And I hope the same is true on the MILF side.

Q: So you are seeing a game of musical chairs?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: No, I’m seeing a very tough, complicated grappling with ancient, very difficult political problems. And what is encouraging is that there’s political grappling with them now, which seems to be gaining momentum, and not just bombing grappling. The bombing isn’t solving it.

Q: So this is the so-called MILF or the rebels in general?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: There are all these criminal groups running around. There are people who take hostages, and there are people who plant bombs, who are not the MILF. At least, from what we understand, the MILF has a website. It has a platform. One has an idea of the program they stand for. And that’s a good start toward becoming the nucleus, perhaps of a government of some kind . A government on a local level; a government that will deal in some way with the ARMM. But it’s for them and the ARMM to figure out what to do with each other. Do they merge? Does one replace the other? Do they expand? None of that is pre-determined, but at least it’s a political process under way. None of that can be determined by military or terrorist means. I don’t think the Armed Forces of the Philippines can use military violence to solve the age-old problem in Mindanao. Nor do I believe that the terrorists down there can solve the problem by planting bombs around Mindanao, on ferries off of Manila or anywhere else.

Q: You wouldn’t touch of course on the issue of ancestral domain – because first of all this is in our constitution – considering that you are giving a lot of financial help to Mindanao in general and to these recalcitrant groups. What is your comment on the MILF’s view that ancestral domain can be interpreted to mean that they have to wrest power from the ARMM. They have to take over the ARMM also. All these groups have to one way or the other, have a chance at the ARMM that is now, or maybe changed, but at a legitimate government, they want to have this and so now it is MNLF dominated – but what they want is to take over?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: On ancestral domain, I’m no expert. There are some American and international scholars who have studied it, and are prepared to do more study. And the United States Institute of Peace has been talking about this issue with the MILF, and with scholars who have dealt with similar problems in other countries, to see if there are lessons that can be learned from how those other conflicts were resolved when the conflicts were in part, at least, based on ancient claims to land that had been overtaken sometimes by modern history. So there is some American expertise but I don’t possess it, I have to say. As to the rest of the questions you’re getting at, I have the view that the way to deal with these very complicated issues is for the MILF and the ARMM and the Government of the Philippines and all people who care about the future of the children down there to speak with each other.

Q: To make the long story short, are you willing to make a statement that would wake up the government- this administration, to label – to give correct labels and to identify who really has the logo that you are talking about? They should have the courage – in your words, the daring?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: Labels! We tend to shy away from labels. Labels are something superficial, that you slap on a jar of peanut butter or something. We think in terms of identity: what you want when you are negotiating with a business partner, or a potential business partner, is to know the identity of that person. You want more than the superficial label. You want to know the identity. So we hope the MILF will establish its identity, its logo, its brand. Who they are, what they stand for, and what they want. Just as the Government of the Philippines is more than just a flag. You know what the institutions of the Government are; the policies, and the laws of the government. You know how to hold them to account.

Q: In the case of the Communist party – Secretary Romulo just arrived from Europe to help the process get going again. The part of the United States Government – how’s the Government assisting the peace process? Is it now willing to consider dropping the CPP from the foreign terrorists organization list just to get the process going again?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: We support the Government of the Philippines. We hope the Government of the Philippines will succeed in finding solutions to both of the major streams of insurgency that it’s been dealing with for decades in this country. With respect to the Communist Party of the Philippines and its front organizations, the various parties, the NDF: I go back to the question we just had. This isn’t an issue of labels for us. It’s an issue of identity. And when an organization kills, and boasts about killing, and threatens to kill; and burns capital investments of small businessmen, large businessmen, livelihoods for people; when it murders mayors, small local officials, soldiers of your country who are delivering disaster relief: that is murder. That’s not a label – that’s an identity. If you kill people, you’re a murderer. If you kill people outside of the law, you’re a murderer. If it’s done in a political name, it’s terrorism.

What the United States says or doesn’t say, what Europeans say or don’t say, is not going to change the facts. If an organization keeps destroying people’s livelihoods, and murdering people outside the law, they’re murderers. When they do that to terrorize people and make them afraid, that’s terrorism. It has nothing to do with what we say. It’s not an arbitrary decision by my Government or the Europeans.... That said, the entire world has recognized them for what they are, for what they do. This isn’t name-calling. And when they stop murdering, stop bombing, stop destroying cell phone towers, transmission lines; stop threatening to blow up power plants – well, they’ll no longer be terrorists, will they? And you can expect the rest of the world to acknowledge that.

But so far, we hear them calling each other names and threatening to kill each other. It’s very painful, actually, and sad. I’m kind of a 60’s radical. I think revolutionary change is usually good. And in this country, as in my country, revolutionary change is necessary. When a country stops changing, when a person stops changing, it means, I guess, you’re dying.

Q: Going back to the speech of your President, while we discussed the issue of Iraq extensively earlier I was wondering if there was anything else in that speech that could be significant to Filipinos or would that be Iraq?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: I was of course listening through American ears – though I tried, being among you, to listen through Filipino ears.

Q: Immigration.

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: Immigration! That caught me. That’s the part I thought Filipinos are going to respond to. I found the President really putting his fingers on hard things that he’s got to do and wants the Congress to do, and it was all visionary and forward-looking. Not just about protecting the country, but also protecting social security. I’m below the cut-off line: he told everybody over age 55 not to worry – that things won’t change. I’m below that still, and so I’m very interested.

He also spoke about reforming immigration, and that has different competing constituencies in the United States, and it’s politically sensitive. But I understood from him that he’s going to rationalize it, make it easier for legitimate people to come in to the United States and work, do the jobs that are available there, that are not taking jobs from Americans. I found that very encouraging, both as an American, and then trying to think how a Filipino would respond to that. Didn’t you? You’re a Filipina, what did you think?

Q: There are a lot of Filipinos who are there and who would want to work there and take up the jobs that Americans won’t.

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: I hope what it will do is help make sure that those who are in our country working can somehow legalize their status. You heard the President say, “those who want to work hard for an honest living and support their families.” We need to help these people do so legally. I found that a positive thing.

Q: Going back to Iraq, can you update us – it’s more than 90 days now since an American hostage and a Filipino hostage have been there. Do you have any move on how to help them, the two hostages?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: I think it’s important to hold the line together and support each other and make very clear that neither of our countries will grant concessions. No hostage taker will ever benefit from taking an American. That’s our policy, and we hope that your policy is that no hostage taker will ever benefit from taking a Filipino. If you let them think that they will benefit from taking one of your countrymen, they will keep doing so. We’re going to stand together – we’ll deal with this patiently and we think prudently. We have people in Baghdad that are in touch with your diplomats. I know your Government cares very deeply about your hostage, just as we do about the American – as the Turkish Government cares about the Turkish hostages, the Saudis about the Saudis, the Egyptians about the Egyptians. The community of countries that are ruled by the rule of law and democracy need to stand together when it comes to confronting these ax murderers and car bombers.

Q: Will there be no military actions for the hostages?

AMBASSADOR RICCIARDONE: We don’t do reckless things. There is not a military solution to every problem. Sometimes there are. But they’re usually the last resort, we find. There are usually other ways you have to deal with anything – whether it's terrorism writ large, or a specific terrorist instance. We usually try to find other than military solutions, for the obvious reasons.

* * * * *