Conditional threat
The Romanov lesson isn’t about revenge. It’s about what happens when institutions fail and only force is left.
Text size
The Romanov lesson isn’t about revenge. It’s about what happens when institutions fail and only force is left.
Vice President Sara Z. Duterte is standing trial for what the prosecutors claim is the grave and impeachable offense of making a threat — that she allegedly hired a gunman to kill President Bongbong Marcos, his wife Liza, and former Speaker Martin Romualdez if she were assassinated.
The threat, that was publicly aired by VP Sara, was made after she got hold of information about an “Operation Romanov.” Unless one reads Russian history about an event that happened in 1918, he or she won’t know what the plot is all about.
In the instant case, the VP’s “conditional threat” was not a promise to attack. It was a strategy; it was a statement: “If you do A, then B will automatically follow.” The possibility of the threat coming true was based on that condition.
We just saw a textbook case. President Trump recently stated publicly that if he were to be assassinated, the US response against Iran would be severe. That’s a doctrinal conditional threat in that the means is defined, the horrific consequence is implied. It is clear that the objective is to deter any plot to kill the President of the United States.
What is the relevance of the covert “Operation Romanov” and why did this trigger the counter conditional threat which is now an object of litigation being one of the impeachment charges leveled against the Vice President?
It is obvious that VP Sara has knowledge of Russian history which includes the chapters that led to the end of the reign of the Romanov dynasty. The Bolshevik forces of the vicious Russian Communist Party led by Vladimir Lenin executed Tsar Nicholas II, his wife Alexandra and their five children.
Let’s look at the relevance of Operation Romanov in the current political imbroglio in the Philippines.
Operation Romanov in today’s context actually refers to an alleged assassination plot against Vice President Sara Duterte and her family. The counter-measure, “a conditional threat,” will only be activated if the assassination happens.
In last Tuesday’s trial, the prosecution with assistance from Senator-judge Ping Lacson attempted to frame VP Sara as the Bolsheviks while President Marcos and family were the Romanovs, meaning the victims. They forgot the fact that in the current scenario, Marcos is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines while the VP has to rely on whatever is left of her security.
In the impeachment trial, the prosecutors presented a video wherein VP Sara used conditional language. She stated that if anything happened to her and her family, the instructions she left behind would be carried out. She did not however detail what those instructions were.
Take note of the mechanism:
The condition: “if they kill me and my family.” The goal: Deterrence. To make it effective as a deterrent strategy she understandably had to raise the cost of any action against her.
This is not unique to the Philippines or to one politician. It is leverage. The Romanovs, the Cold War, Trump-Iran and now Philippine politics — all using the same tool.
It works because the ambiguity of the threat creates caution. An adversary has to calculate: “Is it worth it if we do as planned for we do not know what will come next out of nowhere?”
For the Philippines, the lesson is: conditional threats may deter, but institutions must be clear.
Our AFP, PNP and legal system have sole authority on security and justice. No private instructions supersede that. But then again given the present environment of toxic politics where loyalty is purchased with “maletas” of cash, a conditional threat is a strategy of last resort.
The Romanov lesson isn’t about revenge. It’s about what happens when institutions fail and only force is left. A healthy republic shouldn’t have to get there. Unfortunately, moreover, we have a situation where, in the all-consuming desire to stop Inday Sara Z. Duterte from becoming president, the political forces of varied ideological persuasions connived to derail her run in the 2028 presidential derby.
The obscene syndicate has used every means to discredit Sara employing black propagandists, commercial political analysts in all media platforms. Today, she faces trial in an impeachment court as a penultimate recourse to stop her from running. But obtaining a two-thirds convict vote from ALL senators is like reaching for the moon.
Today, you have a brand of Duterte leadership much sought-after by a nation that is neck-deep in the quagmire of unprecedented corruption. The nation is on the brink and when the patience snaps, conditional
