Peace Talks in Mindanao

While the rest of the world was sleeping, the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) last Tuesday, August 5th, 2008, were poised to sign a set of agreements on how to achieve peace in Mindanao from a series of peace talks brokered by the US and Malaysian governments. The particulars of the agreements have not been publicly revealed, although newspaper reports indicate that the MILF, understandably in a hurry to seal the deal, would get legitimate control over a huge chunk of Mindanao, a conflict-ridden area south of the Philippines, to be governed by its own Bangsamoro Juridical Entity, with its own sharia laws, and security force.

Pressured by local officials in the area who are worried that their constituencies will be affected by the new political arrangements, the Philippine Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order the day before the signing ceremony in Kuala Lumpur, thereby preventing the signing to take place on grounds that the agreements violate the constitutional provisions of sovereignty and territorial integrity.

In effect, the Philippine Supreme Court prevented a potential selling out of Mindanao to a secessionist Islamic organization whose main reason to exist is to secede from the Philippines, establish its own independent state, separate from the jurisdiction of the Philippine government. That they almost got away with it should be cause for serious concern on the part of the Filipino people. They have every right to question the intentions of those who brokered these agreements, including the Philippine government and the Philippine military. The US government for its part should question how its military and financial aid towards the resolution of this conflict might have been put to misuse.

From the very beginning of the crafting of the Mindanao policy here in DC, I had questioned the wisdom behind the principles that informed the policy and rejected the idea of engaging an insurgency group to a peace talk. In an article I wrote earlier, I laid out my arguments, questioning the Philippine government’s belief that self-determination and cultural separatism would solve the Muslim conflict in Philippine politics. The issue of “ancestral domain” became the centerpiece principle of the peace talks, viewing it as key to settling Muslim grievances. In their draft proposal, the MILFs argue that all lands, including natural resources, occupied by Filipino Muslims since time immemorial by cultural bond, customary law, and historic rights be declared as rightfully belonging to the Bangsamoros.

There seems to be a strong consensus among scholars of Philippine Muslim politics that the only practical and just solution to the ethnic problem in Mindanao is to grant them exclusive right to these lands based on the principles of self-determination and cultural separatism. Muslim leaders argue that since their people are of a distinctive minority, differing from the majority in religion, ways of life, and language, they are entitled to autonomy if not independence.

On the surface, self-determination looks like a reasonable and just policy. However, as I pointed out in my article, in many countries torn by ethnic conflict, self-determination based on ethnicity, race, and religion seems only to exacerbate the problem. The reason is because these factors, in fact, sharpen group differences; they fuel ethnic wars.

This kind of thinking lumps people into groups and categories rather than as individuals, free to exercise their rights apart from their group and map out the directions of their lives. It creates divided allegiances and promotes group entitlements, but often at the expense of the common good.

What should the Arroyo government do instead? First, it should stop pursuing the “peace talk route” for the reasons mentioned above. Since the conditions for the proper exercise of the right political principles have yet to be created, the government should take the economic route instead. Arroyo should open up the region to free-market activities, with provisions for competition and individual responsibility, open investments and foreign trade, hence, more jobs for individual well-being and prosperity. Instead of engaging insurgent groups in peace talks, the Philippine government should be conducting economic summits, taking up measures on how to convert the entire Mindanao area into an economic/free trade zone, awarding investment privileges and labor opportunities to the locals of the region.

For the attainment of genuine peace in Mindanao, right principles must inform the process of conflict-resolution.