From the many “Happy Independence Day” texts I received early yesterday morning, one stood out like a sore thumb with the question, “Is this our real Independence Day?” That question is something out of an Araling Panlipunan teacher’s playbook that is hopefully resolved after the class discussion and not left hanging.
Each year on June 12, there are always people who want to stir debate by insisting that our “real” independence should be reckoned from July 4, 1946, when the United States recognized (not granted) the independence of the Philippines. They argue that the declaration read from the central window of Emilio Aguinaldo’s Kawit home on June 12, 1898, was mere show, nothing but words; we simply changed colonial masters from Spain to the US. Remember, that at the end of the 1898 Spanish-American War, one of the provisions in the peace treaty was the acquisition of the Philippines from Spain for $20 million—a bargain by today’s exchange rate. Nobody wants to accept the declaration of Philippine Independence by Jose P. Laurel on Oct. 14, 1943, that short-lived republic, often derided as the “puppet government” during the Japanese occupation.
If we are to look back even further than Andres Bonifacio declaring Philippine independence on April 12, 1895, by writing graffiti deep on the walls of Pamitinan Cave in Montalban, we should remember that the Philippines was one of the last colonies to declare independence from Spain. In the years between 1808 and 1826, all of Latin America had become independent with the notable exception of Cuba and Puerto Rico, which, like the Philippines, were passed on to the US at the conclusion of the 1898 Spanish-American War. By 1825, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela had thrown off the Spanish yoke.
It is not well-known that after Mexico won its independence from Spain in 1821, its founding fathers drafted a secret memo concerning the foreign affairs of the newly born nation. These stirring words introduce the section with reference to the Philippines:
“Freedom is the destiny and heritage of all nations. It is obtained peacefully by the will of God or by force of arms. Imperialist Spain, by conquering many overseas countries and depriving their inhabitants of their freedom and human rights, is indeed guilty of a great crime against humanity, and deserves to be ostracized and abhorred by all freedom-loving peoples.
“Now that we, Mexicans, have fortunately obtained our independence by revolution against Spanish rule, it is our solemn duty to help the less fortunate countries that are still colonies of Spain and are suffering from Spanish oppression and cruelties … especially the Philippines, with whom our country has had the most intimate relations during the last two centuries and a half. We should send secret agents to these countries with a message to their inhabitants to rise in revolution against Spain and that we shall give them financial and military assistance to win their freedom.”
This once-secret document, dug up in the Archivo General de la Nacion in Mexico by eminent historian Gregorio Zaide and translated from the original Spanish by him, shows that the Mexican founding fathers were forward-thinking in terms of domestic and global trade. It states the importance of establishing a Navy Department to protect their seaborne commerce beyond the Philippines, to China, Japan, Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Thailand.
The document also provided for the “eventuality of the separation of the Philippines from Spain. We must take utmost efforts to revive the former Acapulco-Manila [Galleon] Trade, which had been one of the contributory factors to Mexico’s economic prosperity. As revived, this trade shall not be a government monopoly, as Spain made it. It shall be a free enterprise, in which all merchants are welcome to engage in. The restrictive measures that Spain previously imposed must all be abolished. The Marianas Islands, particularly Guam, have to be retained as a midway station, with proper facilities for anchorage and repairs of ships. These things would be needed by the trade galleons, as well by the warships of our Navy.”
The US annexation of the Philippines, while heralded as “benevolent assimilation,” was actually based on maintaining a foothold in Asia for trade with China. The Philippines was a necessary coaling station and safe haven for US vessels doing business in the region. The document concludes with these words:
“Finally, should the Philippines succeed in gaining her independence from Spain, we must felicitate her warmly and form an alliance of amity and commerce with her as a sister nation. Moreover, we must resume the intimate Mexico-Philippine relations, as they were during the halcyon days of the Acapulco-Manila [Galleon] Trade.”
These are words that can be used by the Philippine Ambassador to Mexico and the Mexican Ambassador to the Philippines. These words remind us of a common past long forgotten and the promise of a common future.
Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu