Ukraine and the Philippines: The eerie similarities

These days, Ukraine -- and its dual-struggle for independence and democracy -- seems to be the talk of the town. Thailand and Venezuela have been experiencing similar domestic political upheavals in recent months, and given our geographical proximity to the former and cultural affinity to the latter, it might, at the first glance, seem quite perplexing that many Filipinos are instead so enamored by a political crisis on the far edges of post-Soviet territories. 

 

Beyond the fact that the Ukrainian opposition has triumphantly toppled an autocratic leader, Viktor Yanukovych, there seems to be something so captivating with the ongoing revolution in Kiev: Upon a closer inspection, Ukraine and the Philippines actually share many similarities. Both countries have had their own share of political struggles in recent decades.

 

While the 1986 People Power EDSA revolution represented the culmination of our democratic aspirations, the 2004 Orange Revolution marked a seismic event in Ukraine’s modern history. Both revolutions were largely non-violent, triggered by autocratic regimes’ flagrant manipulation of electoral institutions, sending shockwaves across their respective regions. 

 

Just like how the EDSA revolution inspired similar movements across East Asia and beyond, leading to regime changes in places such as South Korea and Taiwan, Ukraine’s Orange revolution, in turn, rekindled hopes of a new wave of democratic transition across the post-Soviet space.

 

Yet, both upheavals were bound for rude disappointments, smashing into pieces dreams of genuine political transformation. Both countries have also been caught between great powers, continuing to fight a centuries-old battle for national self-determination.

 

Incomplete Revolutions

 

In both countries, the past democratic upheavals managed to open up the space for greater freedom of expression. But as soon as people returned to their homes, and the economy became the main focus of public discourse, the old order reasserted itself.
 

In retrospect, one could argue that the revolutions were largely a reshuffle among the ruling factions, and there was no systematic decoupling from the old order. No wonder, the old social ills of massive inequality, widespread poverty, and rural-urban divide continued to plague both societies. In the end, ordinary people were not able to enjoy a significant improvement in their daily lives. Same oligarchies, but now in different clothing and speaking a new language of politics, continued to dominate the state as well as the critical sectors of the economy.

 

Far from displaying repentance and suffering punishment, the relatives of the old regime managed to stage a political comeback. 

 

In the case of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych was able to reverse his 2004 defeat by successfully contesting the presidential office within half a decade. Soon, Yanukovych consolidated his position by curtailing the powers of the parliament, and the gains of 2004 were under assault. All of this was achieved within existing quasi-democratic institutions. Similarly in the Philippines, we can see how a relatively constant set of oligarchs has been contesting political power, utilizing electoral victory for propping up long-established political dynasties. The EDSA revolution didn’t introduce a significant change in the make-up of the 20th century ruling class.

 

The supposedly new political order transformed into a new cycle of uneasy co-existence between competing elite factions. Rampant corruption, managerial ineptitude and grand standing constituted normal politics, until the political system reached a new crisis point.

 

Squeezed between Superpowers

 

In the Philippines, the middle classes (EDSA II) and masses (EDSA III) have staged their own versions of people power protests to resuscitate the spirit of the 1986 revolution, while Ukraine had its second shot at revolutionary change by deposing Yanukovych in 2014. But the main challenge for Ukraine -- as well as the Philippines -- is to build a new generation of leaders, who are not heavily invested in the status quo and are capable of introducing structural reforms to the overall political system.

 

The more dramatic aspect of Ukraine’s plight, however, is its struggle to balance its relations with a giant neighbor (Russia) and the Western powers. Quite similarly, the Philippines is also caught in an increasingly overt strategic competition between a giant neighbor (China) and the U.S. in the Pacific Theatre. And both Ukraine and the Philippines are deeply concerned with preserving their territorial integrity.

 

Russia -- committed to preserving its Eurasian spheres of influence and citing its historical claims to the post-Soviet space -- is accused of (de facto) annexation of the southeastern Ukrainian region of Crimea, while China is citing its “historical” claims to adjacent waters as a basis to exercise sovereignty over maritime features well within the Philippines’ 200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone.

 

Neglecting their armed forces for decades, which have been plagued by corruption and underinvestment, both Kiev and Manila have had little choice but to rely on the good will and wherewithal of Western powers to stand up to their giant neighbors. Everyone is closely watching how far the West is willing to go to protect Ukraine, because this might give us a clue on how Washington will react in an event of a conflict in the West Philippine Sea.

 

Filipinos and Ukrainian share a similar struggle for democracy and independence. And this may explain why Ukraine is such a popular topic among the chattering classes in the Philippines. The ultimate lesson, however, is that a true revolution isn't only about a change in figureheads, but instead the transformation in the mindset of the nation, paving the way for a holistic reform of the old order and the committed defense of our national interests.  

 

 

Richard Javad Heydarian teaches International Political Economy at Ateneo De Manila University (ADMU) and is a columnist for Huffington Post and Asia Times. He is the author of "How Capitalism Failed the Arab World: The Economic Roots and Precarious Future of the Middle East Uprisings" (Zed, London). He can be reached at jrheydarian@gmail.com