Palace blasts CPP-NPA’s 50 years as a ‘failed rebellion’
Manila, Philippines — The five decades-long insurgency of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army (CPP-NPA) is a “failed rebellion,” Malacañang declared, as the nation’s Maoist movement celebrates its 50th anniversary on Wednesday.
“The 50 years of Joma Sison’s rebellion speaks for itself. It’s a failed rebellion,” Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said in a statement.
“It only resulted in loss of lives of Filipinos specially the numerous young students who were killed in battles, skirmishes, battles and in sickness in the hills, who could have served their country well in pacific and productive means, as well as destruction of properties,” Panelo added.
He cited that “the NPA’s (surrenderers) are coming in droves responding to the call of the government to return to the fold of the law, while Sison remains ensconced in his ivory tower of comfort and luxury while his comrades die for a lost cause.”
Sison, founding chair of the CPP, has been in exile at the Netherlands after peace talks with government failed in 1987.
Panelo has accused Sison of living a comfortable life abroad while his comrades continue their armed struggle in the Philippines.
“No wonder the forces on the ground no longer follow him, hence, his regular rants against PRRD (President Rodrigo Roa Duterte) to give himself the appearance of relevance. It’s time for him to wave the white flag before his physique gives up on him. There is honour in returning back to a democratic society and embracing the constitutional order,” he said.
As the CPP celebrates its 50th year of existence, former ranking member and founder of the organization blasted the group and exposed its “deceit and lies.” They also claimed that the CPP’s armed wing NPA had “no chance of winning” its armed struggle against the government.
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.