Image source: CNN

The 2022 elections signified a definitive defeat for the opposition. They have already struggled to regain political ground years prior, mainly because of aggressive attacks, disinformation, and silencing of critics, especially by former president Rodrigo Duterte. Similar tactics marred the campaign, but the promise of unity ultimately won. Cracks have emerged, creating a rare political opening. Can the opposition capitalize on the fractured unity to rebuild its political support?

Understanding the Marcos-Duterte Split

Presenting a united front secured majority votes for Bongbong Marcos and Sara Duterte. However, this so-called unity had run its course. 

Only days after the elections, Marcos announced that Duterte would head the Department of Education (DepEd) – an unexpected appointment since Duterte expressed her desire to lead the Department of National Defense (DND). Both camps denied a growing rift between them then, but the divide became deeper. 

A year later, the House demoted Pampanga Rep. Gloria Arroyo from her position as House Senior Deputy Speaker to Deputy Speaker. Allegedly, Arroyo was planning to oust House Speaker Martin Romualdez, cousin of the president. Duterte, who was a member of the Lakas-Christian Muslim Democrats (Lakas-CMD), Romualdez’s party, resigned following the news of Arroyo’s demotion.

Adding insult to injury, the House denied the P650 million confidential funds for the Office of the Vice President. Succeeding news showed the escalating rift as things became more personal. 

Admin fractures = democracy in peril?

Political factionalism is not inherently undemocratic. However, its manifestations such as power struggles and the use of state resources for political leverage further erode democratic norms. Since the split is largely driven by personal and political rivalries instead of ideological differences, the notion of democracy as a healthy competition with checks and balances is undermined. This reinforces the perception of democracy in the Philippines as controlled by political elites.

Furthermore, as both Marcos and Duterte camps utilize corruption allegations and governance failures, democratic discourse is also at risk. These discourses may be reduced as intra-elite conflicts which ultimately sideline the broader calls for accountability, transparency, and reform carried by the opposition. 

Creating space for the opposition: passive beneficiary or active force

Since unity has already served its purpose and is no longer convenient, the support base also became fragmented. Local political allies realign themselves to ensure continuity of power and influence. The breakdown of “unity” has weakened the stability of the regime. 

Among the cracks is a space for the opposition’s resurgence. Disillusioned supporters may seek alternatives. Previously, the opposition struggled to present itself as an alternative. Now, they have the chance to frame themselves as a force of stability and reform, in contrast to what the current admin coalition has to offer at present. Frustration among softer voters may be their chance to gain more support. 

This does not, however, come without risks. Although the split creates a rare opportunity to challenge and compete with the administration, there is also the danger of becoming a mere passive beneficiary rather than an active force. 

Relying on admin infighting to weaken the two factions without employing its own tactics to continue gaining support is a gamble. Marcos and Duterte camps have begun attacking each other using the same criticisms that the opposition has used against them. Hence, the public may see an independent opposition as unnecessary and side with one of the administration factions. Using the very same arguments that the opposition has long pushed versus them may drown out the true opposition’s messaging and take it as their own.

There have already been instances wherein Sara Duterte has been hailed as the ‘new opposition leader’ after she resigned from her DepEd and NTF-ELCAC posts. 

The opposition benefits from the rift. Their comments on issues become viral since either camp may agree with their statements. People who are tired of news on Marcos and Duterte may focus on opposition candidates such as Risa Hontiveros in the Senate. However, these short-term gains should be in tandem with long-term strategies. 

In a period of political volatility, the opposition holds the coin to flip things in their favor. They can either benefit or become sidelined further. Strategically positioning itself as a genuine alternative the opposition has a chance to rebuild and become a stronger political force.

The dangers of an irrelevant opposition

Failure to seize this opportunity has dire consequences for Philippine democracy. It leaves democratic institutions vulnerable to further erosion. There will be an almost non-existent formidable force that yields enough political power and influence to challenge authoritarian tendencies. This will also allow the dominant factions such as the Marcos and Duterte camps to dominate the political discourse without mechanisms for checks and balances.

In a worst-case scenario, if the opposition fails to gain ground during such a turbulent time, they risk irrelevance. This irrelevance poses the possibility of the country becoming a de facto one-party state wherein political competition will be reduced to disputes among the factions that belong to the ruling elite. 

The Path Forward: Becoming the True Alternative

The Marcos-Duterte split is not simply a moment of political fracture. It is also a test of the opposition’s ability to rise beyond what it is already known for. 

To present itself as a true alternative, the opposition should not focus on just criticizing the feud. Criticism must come with their own vision for governance, economic reform, and grassroots empowerment. Furthermore, without the overwhelming dominance of a unified administration, the opposition can focus on grassroots organizing beyond electoral campaigns. Disillusioned political actors, especially at the local level, who are breaking away from the Marcos-Duterte factions may be open to alliances to further the cause of the opposition. 

Their role in democratic resilience is very crucial as they must not only compete through electoral means but also actively rebuild democratic institutions that were weakened by years of erosion. Now is the time to push for legislative reforms that promote democracy such as strengthening media freedom and ensuring electoral integrity. 

There is also a chance to consolidate real political machinery beyond elite-driven movements, building on the volunteer-driven movements that have long existed and those that emerged during the 2022 campaigns. 

Lastly, crafting a compelling yet simple narrative is paramount to building support. The battle of rhetorics is the core of the Marcos-Duterte split, with both camps smearing each other through their messaging. Hence, the opposition must create a message that resonates with people, shifting from moralistic appeals to concrete governance proposals. 

The Marcos-Duterte split offers the opposition a chance to redefine itself – not as a reactionary force, but as a viable alternative for governance. For years, it has struggled to gain political advantage, and its devastating defeats in the 2019 and 2022 elections have brought a stark realization: we will keep losing if we don’t act now. 

The opposition must realize that to be passive and reactionary is insufficient. There may never be another chance like the one they have now. 

This moment of political instability must be taken advantage of through decisive actions, otherwise, the opposition risks irrelevance. The opposition must act – not only to challenge the administration but also to rebuild and strengthen democracy. They must now prove that Philippine democracy is not just a rivalry between political dynasties. Rather, it is a government that is truly for and by the people.