The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) today is no longer the same institution that toppled — or attempted to topple — presidents in the past. And that may be a good thing for our democracy.

Rumors of destabilization and whispers of a coup always find a way to resurface whenever a Philippine presidency faces turbulence. Today, those rumors carry the name of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., whose administration is grappling with corruption allegations and a crisis of credibility. Yet the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) has been emphatic: it wants no part in any plot to remove the president.

This is not the first time such talk has emerged. What is new is how swiftly and firmly the AFP has shut it down. Military spokesperson Col. Xerxes Trinidad called the claims “baseless,” insisting the institution remains loyal to the Constitution — not to any faction seeking power. The message is unmistakable: the age of coup adventurism, at least for now, has passed.

For a country that endured multiple coup attempts after the 1986 People Power Revolution, that shift matters. It suggests not merely obedience but a recalibration of the military’s role in national life: from political kingmaker to professional defender of the state.

Learning from a troubled history

The late 1980s saw a series of military uprisings against the fledgling administration of Corazon Aquino. Those crises nearly broke the restored democracy. From then on, the Philippine military had to confront a difficult question: Was it a guardian of the nation or a shadow government ready to intervene when it disliked civilian leadership?

For years, the answer was not always clear.

Today’s generals, however, seem to have learned a costly lesson. AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Romeo Brawner Jr. revealed that retired officers attempted to convince active commanders to support an intervention. They refused. The plot went nowhere.

That refusal signals a cultural shift. Intervention is no longer viewed as a patriotic duty but a threat to institutional legitimacy and public trust — commodities the military cannot afford to squander.

Why the AFP is choosing restraint

The AFP’s reluctance to be dragged into a power struggle is driven by at least four realities:

1. The reputational cost is now too high.

The Philippines is under intense global scrutiny. A coup — even a failed one — would isolate the country diplomatically and economically.

2. The chain of command is more disciplined.

The AFP has invested heavily in professionalization, training, and clearer separation of military and partisan roles.

3. Civil society and media are stronger.

Plotting against the government has become harder to hide — and harder to justify.

4. The military understands instability no longer guarantees better governance.

Coups do not solve corruption, poverty, or crisis. History is proof.

A needed, if imperfect, democratic maturity

This does not mean the AFP is free of factions or political sympathies. It does not mean democratic institutions are strong. It simply means that the military appears unwilling to play executioner when civilian governance falters.

That should not make us complacent. A democracy survives not because the soldiers stay in their barracks, but because citizens hold their leaders accountable — through elections, through legislative investigations, and through peaceful mass action when necessary.

If Marcos Jr. is to be removed, it must be through constitutional and democratic means, not through a return to barracks politics.

What this moment demands of us

The AFP seems to recognize that the real battles the nation faces are not against presidents, but against:

• corruption that robs Filipinos of dignity,

• disinformation that poisons public reason,

• and insecurity — economic, social, and moral — that weakens our democracy.

Coup rumors distract from those battles. They offer shortcuts when what the country needs are institutions that work, leaders who serve, and citizens who do not surrender sovereignty out of frustration.

Final Word

The question is no longer whether the military will save the country from its leaders. It is whether we, the governed, will save our democracy from ourselves — by demanding performance, rejecting impunity, and believing that the Constitution is not a suggestion, but a covenant.

The AFP has taken a step back.

Now it is the people’s turn to step forward.

About The Author

Antonio Manaytay

Antonio Manaytay is a journalist, editor, and pastor reporting for Rappler and leading the Daily Sun Chronicle. A 2024 Klima Fellow, he covers climate, governance, and grassroots resilience in the Zamboanga Peninsula.

See author's posts