Manipulation overdrive

Manipulation overdrive | Daily Tribune

The disinformation drive from the well-funded propaganda machinery drives a wedge among Filipinos to the point of even floating the possibility of civil war.

In an elaborately disguised criticism of China which came out in a coopted publication in Hong Kong, a report cited the cognitive warfare strategy and the recent exchange of barbs between former President Rodrigo Duterte and President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.

At that time, in one of his public addresses, Duterte who is known for his acerbic rhetorics threatened secession which he later on dismissed as his way of using figures of speech.

Duterte has a knack for getting the attention of people through his strong emotions expressed through his addresses.

With the friction between the two most prominent political figures in the country, the propaganda mill is trying to rekindle it.

Online exchanges are believed being stoked by the fake news operators using local “social media influencers” and newspaper opinion writers about a deepening division when there is none.

“Rumors of a civil war in the Philippines may be linked to China’s attempts to manipulate public opinion amid the South China Sea conflict, reflecting Beijing’s broader disinformation tactics and strategic goals,” according to the report.

The hidden intention is to raise the notion of a “civil war” that has not even been suggested in the Philippine political arena where altercations are a necessary ingredient.

The propaganda mill is taking a leaf out of another nation’s instigation of a secession conflict in Mindanao to cause a distraction over another territorial question.

The Mindanao friction effectively shelved discussions about the historical claim that just recently was ruled by an arbitral court as valid but was later dismissed by a court where the ruling was issued, thus raising questions on the interactions that happened in the background.

The 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration award that invalidated the nine-dash line claim of China over practically the entire South China Sea was difficult to challenge for Beijing.

It dwells on its assertion that the claim remains historically indisputable and has been employing questionable pieces of evidence to back it up while the arbitral ruling was based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas which was a covenant in which China is a signatory.

The suggestion, through the report, is that PBBM has a weakening hold on power as a result of an imminent split of the strong alliance with the Dutertes.

The fact, however, is that the report was playing on the global perception in the country for intentions that may reveal itself subsequently.

Realpolitik in the country would show that Vice President Sara Duterte and PBBM remain allies and have shown confidence in each other.

PBBM has shown a deft politician who adhered to the philosophy of addition rather than subtraction.

Creating a rift between the top officials of the land would not be a walk in the park but those who seek to weaken the resolve of the country in the ongoing maritime conflict would certainly put their best effort towards it.

Social media has lately been filled with the same topic about “secession” and “Mindanao Independence” which carry strangely identical themes suggesting that these are part of an organized operation.

Online personalities including newspaper commentators have also been drumming up a heating political division and even the possibility of an “armed secession movement” without giving any proof about its claim.

The complex situation continues to evolve and the usual name-calling has given to a sophisticated campaign that at first appears on the country’s side but reading between the lines, seeks destabilization.

The subtle campaign primarily seeks to chip away at the strong public support that made PBBM among the few majority presidents of the country and distract the nation from the encroachment of its territory.