The Case of the Philippines

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support today for as little as $1 per month!

There is the case of the Philippines. I have tried hard, and yet I cannot for the life of me comprehend how we got into that mess. Perhaps we could not have avoided it — perhaps it was inevitable that we should come to be fighting the natives of those islands — but I cannot understand it, and have never been able to get at the bottom of the origin of our antagonism to the natives.
Mark Twain, 1900

When Twain wrote these words, the United States was engaged in a brutal struggle with nationalist Filipino rebels. The Philippine Insurrection, as it is commonly called, lasted from 1899 to 1902 and cost countless lives on both sides.

Now, a century later, U.S. troops have returned to this Asian island nation as part of a global effort to eradicate terrorism.

Some 700 American soldiers began landing in the southern Philippines in the middle of January. They are supposed to help that country’s army fight Muslim insurgents from the Abu Sayyaf organization, which is allegedly tied to Osama bin Laden’s al- Qaeda terror network. Abu Sayyaf has been locked in a vicious civil war with Filipino authorities since the early 1990s.

Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has been criticized for allowing foreign troops to take up arms in her homeland. Back in the United States, there is fear that President George W. Bush might be spreading himself too thin in the “war on terrorism.”

Overlooked in the media coverage of this expedition is the United States’ long history of military intervention in the Philippines. In 1942, the Americans bravely defended the island against an invading army from Japan. At the turn of the last century, however, the U.S. was involved in a far less heroic campaign here.

Following its victory in the Spanish–American War of 1898–1899, the U.S. took possession of Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines, which had been colonies of Spain.

At first, this development was cheered by Filipinos, who were chafing under Spanish rule. The Philippine people thought the United States was going to grant them independence. After it became clear that the U.S. wanted to colonize the Philippines for itself, nationalist forces launched a guerrilla campaign.

The end result was a brutal jungle war marked by atrocities and heavy casualties. By the time it ended, roughly 4,000 U.S. troops and anywhere from 40,000–200,000 Filipinos were dead.

While it has largely been forgotten, the Philippine Insurrection foreshadowed American involvement in another Asian country.

In Vietnam, the Americans initially saw themselves as liberators, protecting a small Third World country against the communist menace. As the war dragged on, U.S. troops lost this sense of mission and engaged in civilian massacres.

Likewise, the Philippine war was originally viewed as a great way to spread American values of capitalism and democracy to a “primitive” nation. Once the battle deaths started mounting, however, that idealism was tossed aside, as American forces began killing Filipino rebels and non-combatants alike.

Just as Vietnam sparked huge divisions among the American public, the Philippine Insurrection triggered intense debate between pro-imperialists; (who wanted the United States to become a colonial power) and anti-imperialists (who thought the U.S. should maintain an isolationist worldview).

Famous imperialists included President Teddy Roosevelt, while the anti- side counted industrialist Andrew Carnegie and writer Mark Twain in its ranks. The latter was particularly scathing in his criticism of American actions in the Philippines.“We have got into a mess, a quagmire from which each fresh step renders the difficulty of extrication immensely greater,” Twain stated in 1900. “I wish I could see what we were getting out of it, and all it means to us as a nation.”

Words to consider, as the U.S. finds itself fighting once more in the Philippines.

Further Reading

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable. has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.