Whatever happened to “Thank you?”

I commute via jeepney almost everyday. And every time I am struck by the lack of a simple courtesy that was commonplace during my youth when The Beatles ruled the airwaves.

A passenger hands his fare to the driver, and someone takes the fare and places it in the driver’s hand. Basic politeness dictates that one should thank the person who handed the fare to the driver.

A simple “Thank you” or “Salamat” would do.

But you hardly ever hear these words. I make it a point to say “Salamat” every time someone does me this favor. Of course, I miss out on occasion, but I do make an effort to thank that helpful person.

I somehow expect other passengers to say “Salamat” when I do them this favor. But this hardly ever happens. I can’t even recall the last time it did happen!

I tried a simple experiment only recently. I counted the number of times someone said either “Salamat” or “Thank you” to someone who handed his fare to the driver.

In 21 jeepney rides, I counted 108 instances when someone handed another passenger’s fare to the driver. Only three people bothered to say “Salamat” or “Thank you.”

Just three people and they looked like they were in their 30s. And not one teenager.

This result reminded me of the angels’ search for 50 good men at Sodom and Gomorrah. It also told me that courtesy should be taught at school, from elementary to college.

It’s in the little things like saying “Thank you” that reveal the moral and intellectual quality of a people.

Courtesy is contagious. It’s catching. If more of us bothered to say “Salamat” or “Thank you” for a favor, or smiled instead, we’d find a lot more to like in our fellowman. We’d learn the meaning of being kind and considerate.

The first place to start practicing these simple, forgotten courtesies would be at home. I’d be right if I said that very few Filipino parents even bother thanking their children for doing them a service.

That’s because most Pinoy parents remain authoritarian. It’s still a boss-employee relationship in nearly all families.

But it wouldn’t hurt to thank your children once in a while. If saying thank you is against your parental management style, a smile will do. Or a nod of approval. That will tell your kids it’s all right to be kind.

Our grim country needs all the kindness and smiles we can give it. So, have the courage to say “Thank You” or “Salamat” when an officemate does you a favor; when a guard opens a door for you or when your brother runs an errand for you.

Little courtesies will go a long way in making this country a better place. Let’s spread them around.

Sweat is good

It might be a cultural thing having to do with the Filipino's deep-seated desire to look his best no matter what. Or it might have something to do with aberrations in the Filipino psyche, like our glorification of reality shows where contestants dip for prizes in disgusting pigswill.

But sweating has always gotten a bad rap in this country. It's as if sweating were, well, a gruesome bodily function. Like hurling (vomiting).

That's why we have Filipinos who become panicky when sweat shows through their clothes. Or who chide others who sweat a lot, claiming that sweat is "pangit" (ugly) and should be wiped off post haste.

But sweat is good. Sweat is cool. And so is sweating. If you didn't sweat, you'd be dead within an hour from heat stroke.

If you didn't sweat, your skin would fry--literally--as its temperature shoots past 100 degrees Fahrenheit (38 degrees Celsius). Then your heart rate goes haywire. What happens next depends on the presence of mind of the persons you're with. If they know first aid for heat stroke, you've got a chance. If not . . .

You can prevent this worst-case scenario by doing the smart thing: sweat. And you can only sweat sufficiently if you drink lots of water--water and not soft drinks, coffee, tea or fruit juices.

On a typically cool day, the average person loses one-liter of water per hour as sweat . We're always sweating (even in air conditioned rooms) but are so busy we don't notice it. Sweating or perspiring is the body's way of releasing excess metabolic heat.

During summer, which is particularly fierce this year, that water loss jumps to two or three liters per hour! That's mind-boggling and potentially life threatening.

You're looking for trouble if you stay out under the sun for hours without first drinking a lot of water and regularly replenishing water lost as sweat. The danger from heat stroke increases in a very humid country like ours since humidity (or the amount of water vapor in the air) keeps sweat from evaporating. And that hinders the sweat glands from producing enough sweat to cool you down so your body temp doesn't hit the danger zone of 106 degrees Fahrenheit.

Losing two to three liters of water per hour is a lot and most of us don't realize we can lose that much so quickly under a blazing summer sun. The dangerous thing is that by the time we feel thirsty, we're already dehydrated.

Dehydration happens without warning. You start licking your dry lips. Your skin feels on fire. You feel dizzy. Confusion sets in.

If you still have some presence of mind, you'd quickly find shade and slowly drink water. Keep drinking until you feel your senses returning. Your body temp has got to drop to 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit or lower for you to enter the safe zone.

You should feel safer when you begin sweating profusely. Try not to wipe off the sweat at once but let it evaporate. Sweat is good. It might also save our life.

But it would be best if you knew first aid for heat stroke. Remember that the only solution for heat stroke is to cool the victim down.

You can do this by getting him to drink water if he's conscious; soaking his entire body in cool water; sponging cool water onto his body and applying ice packs to his head, neck, armpits and groin. If not treated, heat stroke can kill in less than an hour.

On the other hand, I don't advocate not wiping off excessive sweat. I also don't encourage you to cool down inside an air-conditioned room if you're sweating (that will get you sick).

But, as a wise sage once cautioned, do everything in moderation. If it's hot and you're outdoors, let your body sweat so it cools you down. If you don't sweat, drink water. If you're bathed in sweat, better dry out outdoors. And do drink lots of water.

So sweat, be cool and be safe.

The second war against Iraq

SHOULD it come to a fight, the second Persian Gulf War will prove if the United States has reached a sophistication capable of achieving the perfection of military strategy: Attaining victory with a minimum of fighting.

Washington's strident saber-rattling; the pre-positioning of its armed forces in the theater of conflict, its stepped up aerial attacks on Iraq's anti-air defenses and a not too stealthy campaign to remove Saddam by "other means" (such as a bullet in his brain) appear to me as more indicative of its intent to win victory with the least fighting than as imminent preparations for a lightning war.

The United States seems bent on frightening Saddam into submission by threatening his life and promising the overwhelming destruction of his armed forces, which is the foundation of his power. Saddam's surrender without the need of combat would achieve the United States' military aim of overthrowing him and dealing a serious blow against international terrorism.

That would be the best result possible for a world alarmed by the economic disaster that might result from a prolonged war against Iraq. It might also be the world's best in win-win solutions.

Should Washington's campaign to unseat Saddam without resorting to war fail, however, the Allies should be able to destroy the Iraqi army in about a week, according to Western analysts. Former US president Bill Clinton has said that he'd be surprised if the Iraqi army lasted more than three days.

No pushover
But war plans rarely go according to plan in war and the Iraqi armed forces might not be the pushover it appears on paper. And, of course, there is the threat of Iraq's still invisible WMD (weapons of mass destruction) that determined UN weapons inspectors have been unable to uncover despite a month of intense effort.

Although suggesting that wars are fought to minimize fighting appears astounding (or totally absurd), this view does hew to military logic and does have historical precedents. The perfection of strategy, as the noted British military thinker Sir Basil Liddell Hart pointed out in his famous body of work about warfare, "would...be to produce a decision without any serious fighting."

The aim of (the) strategy, he said, "...must be to bring about this battle under the most advantageous circumstances. And the more advantageous the circumstances, the less, proportionately, will be the fighting.

"The perfection of strategy would be, therefore, to produce a decision without serious fighting. History...provides examples where strategy, helped by favorable conditions, has virtually produced such a result."

Decisive example
A decisive example of the perfection of strategy was the German Army's blitzkrieg against France and the Low Countries from May to June 1940. The Wehrmacht's six-week campaign led to the conquest of western Europe at extremely low cost: 60,000 casualties against an Allied loss of more than one million men.

I cited this example with no intention of drawing parallels between Nazi Germany's campaign to dominate Europe and Washington's current effort to unseat a maniacal dictator. What I sought to emphasize was that clever strategy can achieve decisive battlefield victories no matter who its originator.

Liddell Hart was an apostle of this perfection of strategy, which he termed the "strategy of the indirect approach." It is a strategy that uses political, psychological and physical means to attain victory with a minimum of fighting.

In looking at the options available to Washington, it is apparent that the most favorable outcome for the Allies would be Saddam's removal before any war takes place. The second most favorable outcome would be the rapid defeat of the Iraqi armed forces, if possible, through the strategy of the indirect approach.

A cursory look at the map, however, shows the immense problems faced by Allied planners. The only invasion route into Iraq available now is by Kuwait, which lies southeast of Iraq.

Grim prospect
The Iraq-Kuwait border is just over a hundred miles in length, making any Allied attack on Iraq a frontal one. Without Saudi Arabia agreeing to the use of its territory to launch flank attacks on Iraq, the Allies are faced with the grim prospect of assaulting prepared Iraqi defensive positions along the most obvious invasion routes. Should Iraq decide to make a determined stand on its border, the battle to ram into Iraq might prove too bloody despite Allied superiority in armor and advanced weaponry.

Once clear of the border, however, the Allies will have free rein into Iraq. An early stand by the Iraqi army at the border will only lead to its early destruction.

Iraq, on the other hand, appears to favor a strategy of trading space for time, much like the Russians did against the Germans in World War 2. It might give up territory to conserve its military strength and try to inflict as many casualties on the Allies as possible. Winning against the Allies is out of the question.

Iraq will seek to prolong its battlefield resistance to further weaken the United States and world economy and to inflame the morale of Muslim radicals around the globe. That Iraqi media has made much of defending Baghdad and other strategic centers indicate this might be the most profitable strategy for Saddam.

The Allies lost some 1,000 men and women in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, popularly known as Operation Desert Storm. Doubtless that Saddam is eager to increase the Allies' bill for conquering Iraq a second time.

Of course, my armchair generalship might be 360 degrees off the mark, but the reality of terrain as it now stands seems to favor a head-on assault by the Allies. The spring of 2003 has been bandied about as the most favorable time for any attack but that now seems unreasonable since UN weapons inspectors will remain in Iraq until early 2003.

With the loss of the favorable campaign season, the Allies are left with the difficult choice of either isolating Iraq until late 2003 or early 2004 or fighting in the intense summer heat next year. The UN attacked Iraq on Jan. 16, 1991 and forced an Iraqi surrender 100 days later.

The indirect approach, however, remains possible. In what form and where it must take place is up to Allied planners. It would be comforting to hope that Washington's top leadership will take into account that the true aim of the strategist "is not so much to seek battle as to seek a strategic situation so advantageous that if it does not of itself produce a decision, its continuation by a battle is sure to achieve this. In other words, dislocation is the aim of strategy; its sequel may be either the enemy's dissolution or his easier disruption in battle."

But then, a few bullets in Baghdad might end this war before it begins.

Print Publicity 101

Print publicity is the cheapest form of advertising open to any company.

It’s free—if you know how. But first, you’ve got to learn how the print media operates. You’ve also got to remember that the working press is a corps of intelligent and decent professionals battling against time every day of every year.

The men and women who work in daily newspapers labor under the intense pressure of immutable deadlines. Editorial offices are a madhouse in the late afternoon. That’s deadline time for stories.

Phones ring non-stop. Everyone seems hunched over his or her keyboard madly typing away. A perspiring few stare blankly into space awaiting divine inspiration.

Your company’s press release arrives into this bedlam. If it’s on paper and is addressed to a specific editor, your release goes to that editor’s inbox pile. And it stays there until the editor gets to it.

You also have to fall in line if you email the release. Editors are deluged with emailed press releases. Now what?

Where your press release goes from here depends on how you “prepared” your release for publication. By “prepared” I mean going through a process that gives your release a better than even chance of getting published. Here’s that process in a nutshell.

1. Make your release easy to read so the editor won’t have to waste his time re-writing it. Writing a press release is never easy. If you didn’t take journalism, or if you had news writing but never took it seriously, you’re in deep shit this early. Better find someone who knows how to write news.

But if you do know how to write, you’re best served by using the five “Ws” (Who, What, When, Where, Why) and the “inverted pyramid” format (the most important news in the first three to five paragraphs; the rest of the story is background).

Keep the language simple but pack the story with information and quotes from a company boss, if possible. But make sure the most important info goes into the first three to five paragraphs.

That will make it easier for the editor to edit your story (without taking out the “meat” of your story) in case he runs out of layout space. Also, do create an appropriate title for your story.

Paragraph and make your paragraphs short. As a guide, make each paragraph consist of three short sentences. That’s the equivalent of about one printed inch in a newspaper.

Editors who can’t understand your press release, or who know they’ll have to spend a lot of their limited time re-writing it, will normally set the release aside.

A few matters of form: prefer Times Roman 12 points with 1.5 inch spacing when typing hard copy on MSWord. Also include your name and contact info (telephone, email) to establish your credibility. Proofread your story for mistakes.

Remove “honorifics” such as Mr., Mrs. and Ms but retain professional titles (Dr., Atty.). Refer to your company in the third person (not “our company” or “my company”).

2. Address your press release to a specific editor. You must never send out a press release addressed “The Editor.”

A broadsheet has a lot of editors. Sending it to that nebulous entity, “The Editor,” is the best way for your release to get lost in the newsroom forever.

Before you even write the release, however, call up the editorial department of the newspaper or newspapers you intend to send the release to. Identify yourself and your company and say you’re writing such and such a press release and whom should I send it to?

Jot down the editor’s name and his position. Ask if you should send the release by email or hard copy. Many broadsheets prefer email (it eliminates re-typing) while a few prefer hard copy.

Address the release to that specific editor in the subject line of your email along with the title of your press release and your company name. In the hard copy, legibly write down the editor’s name on the upper right hand part of the first page.

3. Do follow up your press release. This is probably the single most important factor in getting your release published if you’re unknown to the editor. “Huwag kang mahiya.”

Call the next afternoon, identify yourself and politely ask the editor if he got your press release. If he says he did, ask politely if he’ll use it. If he says he didn’t get the release, ask if you could re-send it and how you should send it. Follow up but don’t be “makulit” by phoning the editor everyday.

4. Re-issue the press release to the same editor if the release hasn’t been published after a week. Re-write the press release to make it read better. The editor might have forgotten receiving your first release and might not have seen the re-issue.

5. Increase the odds of your press release being published. You can issue it simultaneously to the seven English broadsheets, the top business paper and the two top English tabloids. That's 10 newspapers and odds are your release will see print in at least one or two of them.

How to make your employees your customers

I find it odd that Filipino companies or Philippine-based companies hardly every bother to sell themselves to their employees. But do company employees need to be sold on the company they work for, you might ask?

The straight answer is, Yes. Because employees are employees for only eight hours a day, six-and-a-half if your exclude the one hour lunch break and two 15 minute meriendas.

Beyond that, employees are individuals who work for themselves. And all of a company’s managers and staff are also customers who’ll buy a competitor’s products or patronize his services if they’re convinced these are better than their own.

Company loyalty means just that—employees are loyal to their company. That loyalty doesn’t automatically extend to a company’s products or services. Brand loyalty has to be earned, even from a company’s employees.

And even if a company’s products or services can’t be used by its employees (call center services, for example), a company still has to work hard at promoting itself to them. That’s a good way of keeping hard-to-find employees, especially in leading edge industries such as call centers and business process outsourcing (BPO).

How does a company promote itself to its employees? The answer is to give employees a steady stream of information in a personalized package unique to the company.

Ideally, this information should build company and brand loyalty; foster productivity; create support for the company’s goals; make clear the company’s stand on vital issues and contribute to the bottom line.

That package is the company newsletter. Nowadays it’s also the company Intranet. The company website? Not quite since websites are impersonal salesmen that sell to the world.

Company newsletters used to be a big thing in the decades before the PC (the 1970s and 1980s). Now, they’re going the way of the Philippine Eagle and the precious few that survive are finding it hard to soldier on in the face of anorexic budgets and lack of skilled staff (editors and writers).

The latter, I guess, is the key reason for the dying out of the company newsletter. There simply aren’t that many good English editors and writers in today’s labor pool.

Ask the broadsheets. One of my editor friends, who also teaches journalism, complains that writing two paragraphs of passable English is a daunting challenge for many reporter candidates. And some of these people graduated with degrees in journalism or English!

If mass media is finding it next to impossible hiring good English writers, imagine what it’s like for corporations. Companies won’t hire an employee specifically to be a newsletter editor or writer. I haven’t come across a single instance of this yet.

A company usually assigns the newsletter to its human resources unit, which is usually understaffed and overworked. HR then appoints the newsletter’s staff after frantically searching its database for employees with even an iota of English writing experience.

When this fails, as it most often does, HR either does the job itself or cancels the newsletter. It might also hire an experienced editorial consultant like me to assist in providing content and layout for the newsletter.

Producing a printed or online newsletter is always tough. Ensuring its continued existence is even tougher considering its investment.

But you’d have to weigh the cost of this investment by the value of what you stand to gain. Newsletters impart information, a commodity that has value only when read.

Information, if intelligently used, is the basic building block of all sales. You buy because you’re convinced—sold—on the information presented to you. Advertising only jazzes up this information.

A newsletter or any other information carrier “sells” information to a market—a company’s employees—who are already half sold on the value of their product or service. The extra information provided by a company newsletter could push employees into becoming paying customers.

And there are also the other intangible advantages to the information provided by a newsletter. Advantages like improved productivity; stronger teamwork; a closer alignment with company goals.

A surprising bit of information is a recent report by U.S. retailers that TV is no longer the most influential advertising medium. Surprisingly, word of mouth and news inserts have replaced TV as more effective advertising media. Email and the Internet are also generating a lot of advertising buzz.

Word of mouth. Email. The Internet. Companies have these in abundance.

News inserts? That’s what newsletters are for.

First work about Philippine Korean War battles published

What battles other than the famous Battle of Yuldong were fought by the Philippines in the Korean War? And what was the first and last Filipino battle in this war?

The battles—and victories—won by the Philippines in the Korean War (1950-53) are highlights of the magazine, “Significant Filipino Battles of the Korean War,” edited by Art Villasanta, Korean War historian, and issued during the recent celebration of the 9th Korean War Veterans of the Philippines Memorial Day.

The magazine recounts five of the epic battles fought by the Philippine Expeditionary Force to Korea (PEFTOK) against the communist Chinese and North Koreans. It is the first published work about Filipino battles in the Korean War.

“The Philippines had a record of battlefield victory in the Korean War, but this isn’t that well known,” said Villasanta. “This modest work tells the story of some of the epic victories won by our country in the Korean War.”

Among these little know victories is the “Battle of Miudong/Syngue” fought in Nov. 1950, the first battle—and the first combat victory—won by the Philippines on foreign soil in its history. The battle was won by the 10th BCT commanded by Col. Mariano Azurin.

The work also sheds light on the last battle fought by the Philippines in the Korean War. This was another victorious defense of Christmas Hill by the 14th BCT under Col. Nicanor Jimenez. This last battle was won just two day before fighting in the Korean War ended on July 27, 1953.

The magazine tells the story of the longest PEFTOK battle: a bloody four-day fight for Hills Arsenal and Eerie in June 1952. This battle, also called the “Rizal Day Battle for Combat Outpost No. 8,” was a victory for the 19th BCT under Col. Ramon Aguirre.

On June 21, the morning after the vicious night battle that saw the final defeat of the last communist Chinese assault, a group of exhausted Filipino soldiers climbed Arsenal Hill and planted the Filipino flag on the summit. This act of victorious defiance showed the Chinese they had indeed lost the battle, and that Combat Outpost No. 8 remained firmly in Filipino hands.

Some 7,500 officers and men of the Philippine Army served in Korea. Organized into five battalion combat teams (BCTs), PEFTOK lost over 100 men killed and a further 400 wounded in action defending South Korea against communist invasion. The Philippines was among 16 member countries of the United Nations led by the United States that sent combat troops to the war.


The magazine was published as a souvenir program by the PEFTOK Veterans Association, Inc. (PVAI).

Sacrifice and brotherhood: The epic saga of the Philippines in the Korean War

By Art Villasanta
Korean War Historian


The Philippines fought in the Korean War (1950-53) despite having to contend with a growing communist-led rebellion and an economy mending from the immense destruction wrought by World War 2.

The Philippine Army had nine of its 10 Battalion Combat Teams (BCTs) and its only artillery battalion fighting the communist-led Hukbalahap or Huks when the 10th BCT was selected as the first Korea-bound combat unit on Aug. 23, 1950.

The BCTs were highly mobile, compact and self-supporting battalion-sized fighting units (1,000-1,500 men) designed to fight independently in their areas of operation. Distinguished by their heavy firepower, many BCTs consisted of infantry companies, an armor company equipped with either M4 Sherman or M5 Stuart tanks and a field artillery battery of six 105mm howitzers.

The BCTs were purposely organized as anti-guerilla units and were the key military reason for the defeat of the Huks by 1955. Together with other military units such as the Philippine Constabulary, the government fielded barely 25,000 men against the Huks in 1950.

In 1947, the Huks launched a rebellion aimed at overthrowing the Philippine government and replacing it with a totalitarian Marxist-Leninist state. The Huks had an armed strength of some 11,000 men by 1949, and many of their men were combat veterans of the guerilla war against the Japanese.

The Hukbalahap, an acronym for the “Hukbo ng Bayan Laban sa Hapon,” was one of the most potent of all Filipino guerilla units in World War 2

The discipline of its guerillas; the mobility and hitting power of its “squadrons” (units of 100 or more men) and the widespread support from civilians in Central Luzon allowed the Huks to inflict significant losses on the Japanese.

During the American campaign against the Japanese from 1944 to 1945, the Huks assisted the U.S. Army in re-taking towns and provinces in Central Luzon from the Japanese. In Tarlac, they raised both the Philippine and American flags after liberating the provincial capital.

The Huks, however, took a decidedly Marxist-Leninist bent upon widespread (and probably misguided) government suppression of the movement after the war.

The Huks had superior knowledge of the terrain in North and Central Luzon, the main theaters of the guerilla war. They could also count on the support of a mass base of peasants and farmers alienated from the government by chronic landlord abuses, grinding poverty, bureaucratic neglect and military atrocities, particularly those committed by the Military Police and Civilian Guards.

By 1952, the high watermark of their rebellion, the Huks had an active and armed strength of some 170,000 men and women and a mass base of over two million people.

The Huks, however, were finally made impotent by 1955 through a combination of heavy battlefield losses (especially among its leadership), effective civic action campaigns launched by Pres. Ramon Magsaysay and a dwindling mass base.

It was the first time anywhere in the world that a communist insurgency had been defeated.

“A great sacrifice”
Pres. Elpidio Quirino in 1950 said the Philippines was sending its men to fight in Korea in fulfillment of the country’s obligation as a co-signer of the United Nations Charter.

There was another, deeper reason for committing the Philippines’ limited military power to a foreign war, however. Korea was less than 1,500 miles away and a communist conquest of Korea would have been a severe blow to the Philippines’ campaign against the ascendant Huks.

“Poor as we are, this country is making a great sacrifice in sending you there (Korea), but every peso invested in you is a sound investment for the perpetuation of our liberty and freedom,” said Quirino to Filipinos who attended the massive farewell rally for the 10th BCT on Sept. 2, 1950 at the Rizal Memorial Coliseum in Manila.

And the Philippines was poor. The national government was almost bankrupt in 1950, relying heavily on U.S. financial aid and war reparations from Japan to stay afloat and to rebuild an economy shattered by World War 2.

Damage to industries was estimated at some P600 million while a further P800 million in assets were destroyed. The government was also plagued by massive bureaucratic corruption that siphoned off badly needed foreign aid worth more than P1 billion in 1950.

Despite these terrible realities and in an act of heroic brotherhood, the Philippines committed its meager armed strength to defend South Korea. It also made a commitment to send combat troops to Nationalist China to deter an impending Communist Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

One of the first to fight
On Sept. 19, 1950, barely three months after North Korea’s invasion of South Korea on June 25, the 10th Battalion Combat Team (Motorized) landed at the port city of Pusan in southeastern Korea.

The 10th BCT was the first of five Philippine battalions that served under the United Nations Command (UNC) in Korea. With its 1,400 officers and men, the 10th BCT was the third foreign combat contingent and the first Asian unit to enter the Korean War.

Our country was one of 16 UN member sates that sent combat troops to battle communist aggression. These nations, led by the United States, added their strengths to those of the armed forces of the Republic of Korea to preserve South Korea’s freedom against Communist North Korea and Communist China. Five more UN member states provided medical and humanitarian aid during the war.

General of the Army Douglas MacArthur, the man who led the Allies in defeating Japan, was commander-in-chief of the UNC. MacArthur was also the man who built and at one time led the pre-war Philippine Army. He also led the U.S. armed forces in liberating the Philippines from the Japanese in 1944-45.

Five BCTs with a total strength of some 7,500 officers and men served in Korea from 1950 to 1955 as the Philippine Expeditionary Force to Korea or PEFTOK. Taken together, these battalions constituted the Regimental Combat Team promised by the Philippine government in Aug. 1950 to the United Nations war effort.

PEFTOK consisted of these units:

• 10th Battalion Combat Team (Motorized)
• 20th Battalion Combat Team (Leaders)
• 19th Battalion Combat Team (Bloodhound)
• 14th Battalion Combat Team (Avengers)
• 2nd Battalion Combat Team (Bulldogs)

The 10th, 20th, 19th and 14th BCTs saw combat in the Korean War. The 2nd BCT, on the other hand, helped protect and rebuild South Korea following the signing of the Armistice that ended fighting in the Korean War at Panmunjom on July 27, 1953.

The 10th, 20th, 19th and 14th BCTs acquitted themselves well in combat. Not one PEFTOK BCT was defeated or made incapable of combat as a result of enemy action despite many hard fought battles. PEFTOK fought successfully against its main enemy— the “Chinese People’s Volunteer Army”—in scores of actions for hills, cities and towns in North and South Korea.

Among the epic Filipino battles in the Korean War were the historic but obscure Battle of Miudong/Syngue (Nov. 1950), the first battle and combat victory in a foreign land won by the Philippines. This victory was gained in North Korea by the 10th BCT.

The epic Battle of Yuldong (April 1951) is the most famous of all Filipino battles and has come to represent the other battles fought by the Philippines in the war. It is commemorated every year on April 23 to recall the incredible and successful defensive battle fought by the 900 men of the 10th BCT against an entire Chinese army of 40,000 men.

The longest battle fought by the Philippines was the four-day Battle for Hills Arsenal and Eerie in June 1952. Also known as the Rizal Day Battle for Combat Outpost No. 8, the victory was won by the 19th BCT.

At the end of this gory battle that saw bitter hand-to-hand combat, a group of Filipino soldiers scaled Arsenal Hill and planted the Filipino flag on its summit. This act of heroic defiance on the morning of June 21 showed the beaten Chinese they had lost this great battle, and that the Philippines remained in control of Combat Outpost No. 8.

The last Filipino battle in the Korean War was won by the 14th BCT two days before the Armistice. This was another successful defense of Christmas Hill by the 14th BCT against the communist Chinese.

It is worth remembering that practically all the Philippines’ battles in the Korean War were fought at night. The communists chose to fight most of their battles under the stars, mainly because of their superiority in night fighting and their inferiority in airpower and artillery that made conventional daylight battles suicidal.

Of the battles listed above, only the Battle of Miudong/Syngue was fought in daylight, and this was in early morning.

The price the Philippines paid to defend South Korea included over 100 Filipino dead; 300 wounded and some 50 taken prisoner in three years of war. Sixteen Filipinos are still listed as missing in action 55 years after the Armistice.

The Philippines was unique among UN combatants in that it was the only one with an active communist insurgency and the only one whose soldiers had immediate combat experience. Many of the men, especially the officers who served in Korea, had also fought against the Japanese. This combat experience was invaluable in keeping casualties low and in PEFTOK accomplishing the combat missions assigned to it.

All PEFTOK battalions were attached to larger Allied units, mainly American, during their tours of duty in Korea. Relations with these “mother units” were neighborly, especially with the Americans.

PEFTOK and the Philippine Army were trained in American tactical doctrine. Its equipment was almost all of American origin (rifles, machine guns, helmets, artillery, tanks, grenades). A number of Filipino officers trained in American military schools such as West Point, and in specialist schools such as those for armor at Fort Knox in Kentucky.

That PEFTOK officers spoke and read English well averted miscommunication problems that proved fatal in the front line to some UNC contingents for whom English was not a second language.


(Editor’s note: Art Villasanta wrote a website honoring the Philippines’ role in the Korean War in 2000. The website is at www.geocities.com/peftok. He was also Editor-in-Chief of two mini-histories of the Korean War published in 2006 and 2008. He can be reached at peftok@yahoo.com. A veteran editor and researcher, Villasanta writes business reports, conducts research projects and provides information services.)