The plight of the Badjao – the sea gypsies, the boat people from the Sulu archipelago, is probably the worst that has ever happened to a Lumad in recent times.
The Badjao are the counterpart of the nomadic Mamanwa in the forests of Surigao and Agusan provinces. They lived in boathouses that clustered and moored near an island of choice in any particular moment. A community of Badjao would consist of 15 to as many as 50 boathouses. They spent most of their times in the sea, fishing, gathering seashells or pearls in the wild. They would only set foot on dry land to sell their products, to buy panggi or pyoto – a grated unsweetened cassava cake, to fetch drinking water, to gather firewood, and to bury their dead. The Badjao practiced sustainable fishing, getting only what they needed for the day with hook and line, spear and traps. They never harvested for surplus to process in any way for the proverbial rainy days.
The Badjao were humble and peace-loving people. They avoided conflict of any kind. If provoked by land-dwelling people, they would just bow their head and move away from their tormentor. They would never fight back even if they were right. When threatened, they would simply pull their anchors and sail to another place. Their land-based Sama and Tausog neighbors gave them derogatory names, such as Samal Palau (outcast Samal) or lumaan (God-forsaken people). The Badjao preferred to call themselves Sama laos (Sama of the sea).
The Badjao used to settle along the shores of some islands in the Sulu archipelago; but many eventually retreated to the sea to escape the oppression of the islanders.
Conflict among neighbors in the Badjao community was accordingly resolved in an impromptu-like singing contest within the hearing distance of everybody. The conflicting parties would sing aloud their grievances, resentment and sentiments one after the other until everything in their heart had been aired out. After the singing marathon things would return to normal.
The Badjao practiced monogamy. It was one boat one wife one family. For them sex was a natural biological phenomenon. When a husband felt like doing it with his mate he would do it, all inside the boat, the children might be playing around, or even within the viewing distance of their neighbors. There was no need then to wait for the night to fall, for the kids to go to sleep, for the neighborhood to become still, because everybody knew anyway anytime they would do it as their boathouses were interconnected in a temporary mooring. The Badjao had no concept of privacy, or an idea of malice, given that almost everything in life was done in an open boat.
Such was the simple and unadulterated life of the Badjao. Some Muslim and Christian missionaries tried to change their way of life but were generally unsuccessful. Certainly, they had captured some few unfortunate souls and taught them the concepts of malice and sin. But the rest of the Badjao had remained free from the tyranny of organized beliefs.
Things changed tragically, however, when Martial Law was declared in the country. To counter the MNLF uprising, the Armed Forces of the Philippines stationed military units in almost every island in the Sulu Archipelago. Some rogue military men befriended the Badjao and taught them how to improve their daily fish catch through dynamite fishing. This altered the perspective and the sustainable life of the sea gypsies. They experienced a sudden boom in their fishing activity, so radical the change that they didn’t even know what to do entirely with their excessive harvest or their extra money. They still lived in their boathouses and they had not much need for anything. Of course, some of the men now stayed longer in dry land with their new found friends and learned to booze. It was not too long, however, when most of the fishing grounds of the gypsies were destroyed and soon became unproductive. Life started to become a daily ordeal to the once self-sufficient people.
Then some NGOs and government agencies came to the rescue. They taught the Badjao how to operate and maintain a seaweed farm. This intervention made a positive change in their sinking economic life. The men in the boat houses would again tarry in dry land after harvest time, eating, drinking and spending their dough in pubs and local entertainment houses. But the economic rise of the boat people ended dramatically when pirates robbed and divested them of their income every harvest time. The Badjao were scared to the bone and scampered to safety. There was no option but to move away from the Sulu seas.
So began the diaspora and exodus of the Badjao away from home. They hovered for sometime in Zamboanga City, and without employable skills they reduced themselves to begging just to survive. Zamboanga City very soon became too crowded for them, thus many ventured farther away into the different cities of Mindanao, then in Cebu and finally in MetroManila. In many occasions, the boat people were herded by authorities in MetroManila and forced back to Zamboanga City. But after saving for some fare money, they would make a comeback to the great metropolis, now improving and honing the art of begging.
Such is the tragic plight of the once free and meek people of the Sulu seas. They are now dispersed everywhere. In a generation or two, they would completely forget their origin, their history, culture and traditions. Except those who practice begging in seaports, many Badjao very soon may even forget how to swim, when not long time ago they were already swimming even before they started walking. The government wants them to go home, but I doubt if they can still go home, home to the place and time where and when they were free from the burdens and demands of our own civilization.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
The Plight of the Gypsies in Mindanao: The Mamanwa ( Part 1 )
The Lumads are the descendants of the free and proud people in
Consider the Mamanwa. The Mamanwa are dark-skinned with kinky hair but are much taller and with well-proportioned body than their Aeta counterparts in Antique and Zambales. Nomadic, they used to occupy and roam the forest ranges of the Surigao and Agusan provinces. They were literally dependent on the bounty of the nature, satisfying their basic needs from what they could harvest from the forests and capture from the rivers. They never permanently settled but stayed temporarily in an area in huts without walls for as long as the bounty of nature still met their needs. After a while, they would roam again in a cluster of 3 – 10 families to another place enjoying life that is free from the trappings of a more sophisticated community. They were honest and peace-loving people who resolved conflicts among themselves through the mediation and counsel of the eldest member of their community.
After the Second World War, however, the landscape of
When Martial Law was declared, the New People’s Army (NPA) for some time ruled the jungles of Surigao and Agusan. The Mamanwa, because of their familiarity with the terrains, were hired or forced to become guides by the military and the NPAs in pursuing each other and became primary victims in armed encounters and life-threatening suspicion from both sides of the warring parties. As a result the Mamanwa were ultimately forced out from their shrinking paradise. With no employable skills, they have been reduced to begging for food and clothing from the lowlanders who despise them. Anyway, some kind souls had taken pity of them and hired their men as farm hands or their women as house helpers. But their benefactors complained that they lacked initiative, motivation and concentration in what they were doing. In short, they were perceived as lazy and unreliable. They would accordingly escape work now and then pursuing and connecting with relatives in their wandering. The nomad in their blood refused a settled life. Disoriented, they keep on moving without definite purpose and direction except to survive out from the kindness and help of people they met along the way.
The passage, of R.A. 8371, otherwise known as the Indigenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997, restored to some 1900 Mamanwa their forest land through the issuance of a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) by the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) on 22 September 2006. The Mamanwa’s ancestral domain covers an area of 49, 870 hectares located in the municipalities of Claver, Gigaquit, Bacuag, Alegria, and Tubod, all in the
Unfortunately, for the Mamanwa, their return to their homeland has been compromised by the surge of some 20 or more mining firms or mine claimants within the domain, in addition to those already entrenched earlier in the area, particularly upon the passage and implementation of the controversial Philippine Mining Act of 1995 (R.A.7942). Under the IPRA law, the natives were entitled to a royalty of one percent of the gross income of each mining firm operating within their territory. This has not been done. One firm shrewdly managed to ink an agreement with the tribal chieftain to grant P500,000/annum to the tribe people and their host communities. Notwithstanding that this in violation of the IPRA Act, only P200, 000 so far has been released to the beneficiaries and their host communities. Meanwhile, the Mamanwa homeland is now crisscrossed by mining roads, bulldozed, opened, and dug again and here and there for the precious minerals, destroying biodiversity and the natural environment, and displacing some of the natives from their farm lands. Recently, the military have occupied areas in their ancestral domain to protect mining investors reportedly from the harassment of the NPA rebels. The Mamanwa, who have begun to settle in their recovered land, are forced once again to mass evacuate into the lowland for their safety.
An NGO (Filipino Tribe Mission) is reportedly assisting Mamanwa families live a settled community life somewhere in Taganito, Surigao del Norte. Mamanwa children are taught the rudiments of education and the adults, hygiene, sanitation, nutrition and improved farming methods and employable skills to enable them to join the labor force or generate self-employment. If the approach succeed this would save the Mamanwa from the indignity of living at the mercy of other people. And yet this benevolent intervention may yet ultimately lead to their ultimate assimilation into the mainstream of society and erase once and for all what little cultural heritage that is left in their soul.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
A Short Lesson in Political Science 4: Here They Come Conning Us Again
Is our Constitution so flawed and sick that it needs urgent surgical operations?
The rah-rah boys of President Arroyo in Congress believe so or are made to believe that it is, such that they want to overhaul it before the 2010 national elections. The motion to do it picks up tempo with the passage of H.R. Resolution1109.
One of the eyesores of the fundamental law of the land that the advocates of amendments or revision want to remove is its patriotic provisions that prohibit foreign ownership of our national patrimony, especially land. The restrictive provisions are perceived to discourage foreign investments that have resulted to our economic doldrums. The wagtails of Malacanang want to open our land and our national resources for exploitation to those who have the dough wherever they may come from. Doing this would lead, accordingly, to the economic prosperity of the country.
This thinking is politically naïve. First, many of our lands, many of our national resources are, for all intent and purposes, already in the hands of foreign nationals. You go to the famous tourist destinations in this country, such as Boracay and Panglao, and the locals will tell you that the prime lots there are already owned by the Swiss, Belgians, Germans, Americans, Koreans, Japanese, and many other more. The strategy is to marry locals or hire dummy partners and, presto, these aliens may now do business in our blighted shores. Foreign investors are not interested in owning lands, the nitwits in the Lower House should know, but in using them to serve their business interests. Land titles remain in the names of their Filipino mistresses, second or third wives, or gambling and drinking buddies but the profits derived from their economic activities remain intact in foreign hands. Train your sight to plantation farming, mining, fishing, and other resource extractive or ecologically destructive enterprises and you will know that the scenario, the plots of their stories are similar, if not exactly the same. Indeed, if there is one need to amend our Constitution it is to provide provisions to stop the aliens from hoodwinking us.
The other primary argument for Charter change is the perception that our structure of government does not usher sustainable national development. Our presidential form of government, with its bicameral legislative body, is not, accordingly, politically efficient and effective and economically responsive. The executive and the legislative department may compete and not cooperate and unite for holistic governance but would rather engage in a political war of attrition, especially if the occupants are of different political colors. The Senate and the House of Representatives often clash on many agenda, economic and otherwise, that would only derail important legislative interventions to improve the quality of life of our people. The members from the two houses compete, rather than cooperate, develop and protect their own turfs, rather than spread development, are obsessed with investigation of scandals of all kinds, from mundane sexual exploits of certain psychotics to corruption in high levels, accordingly in aid of legislation, but had not been heard of actually coming up with legislative remedies for all the mess they had poked their noses into. It is contended that to become more efficient and effective and to stop or curb corruption to the minimum the solution is to change the structure from presidential to parliamentary form of government.
The perceived solution is wishful thinking. Theoretically, a parliamentary form of government appears in general to be efficient and effective in governance. The executive and the legislative bodies blend and become one integrated working machine. The parliament elects the head of state, the prime minister, from among the members themselves, and also appoints heads of ministries (departments) from the same membership to implement legislations or programs of government. This avoids the proverbial delays in legislation and execution of government laws and programs which seems to characterize the presidential form of government. Great, but this is only true if the members of government are dominated by a single party. But if the parliament is multi-party in composition, then it is all hell for everyone. There would be stalemates and paralyses in the operations of government as interests and directions of governance differ and clash. There would be constant abolition of government (ministries, including that of the prime minister’s, or the entire parliament itself at times) for lost of confidence, operational paralysis, and for other reasons.
How is corruption reduced or eliminated in a parliamentary form of government? Corruption is not spawned or stopped by the structure of government but by the people who run it. In fact, a parliamentary form of government run by a single party with members of corrupt tendencies may yet become an apparatus of grand scale corruption as they can easily connive, agree and unite to pursue their selfish interest.
The government is only as honest and as good as the people who run it. If this is so why the rush to change the constitution through a constituent assembly (con-ass) before the 2010 national elections?
The only possible political answer, claimed by critics and even by some followers of the tenant in Malacanang, is to really install a parliamentary government to extend GMA’s stay in power till kingdom comes. Once a parliament is in place, Arroyo Almighty may run for a seat in Pampanga, win it by all means as in the hello-garci 2004 elections, and become prime minister through the tyranny of number of her pork-hungry lapdogs. Thus, it is happy time forever more for her and her ilk.
Will the Supreme Court allow the actual conduct of the con-ass without the participation of the Senate?
The ambiguous provision of Article XVII, Section I (1) of the constitution is the bone of contention here. It says “Any amendment to, or revision of, this constitution may be proposed by: the Congress upon a vote of three-fourths of all its members.” The ambiguity lies on a missing clause (one obvious lapse of the framers of the 1987 constitution that really needs amendment!), that is either “voting jointly” or “voting separately” which should have been added to the end of said provision.
Gloria’s bright boys assert an interpretation that it is voting jointly (thus HR 1109). The Senate, which will definitely be outnumbered if this view prevails, counters it is voting separately in the tradition of making separate action on major legislations, a procedure that is inherent in a bicameral congress. Otherwise, the latter will accordingly boycott the con-ass.
A petition to nullify HR 1109 was filed with the Supreme Court. But the High Court dismissed it as “premature and lacked justiciable issue.” The Court contends that the House of Representatives has not yet performed an act (such as the actual convening of Congress into a constituent assembly) or done something that would warrant its intervention.
The sordid drama continues while the people are getting sick and numbed by the political maneuvers, manipulations and deceits.
The rah-rah boys of President Arroyo in Congress believe so or are made to believe that it is, such that they want to overhaul it before the 2010 national elections. The motion to do it picks up tempo with the passage of H.R. Resolution1109.
One of the eyesores of the fundamental law of the land that the advocates of amendments or revision want to remove is its patriotic provisions that prohibit foreign ownership of our national patrimony, especially land. The restrictive provisions are perceived to discourage foreign investments that have resulted to our economic doldrums. The wagtails of Malacanang want to open our land and our national resources for exploitation to those who have the dough wherever they may come from. Doing this would lead, accordingly, to the economic prosperity of the country.
This thinking is politically naïve. First, many of our lands, many of our national resources are, for all intent and purposes, already in the hands of foreign nationals. You go to the famous tourist destinations in this country, such as Boracay and Panglao, and the locals will tell you that the prime lots there are already owned by the Swiss, Belgians, Germans, Americans, Koreans, Japanese, and many other more. The strategy is to marry locals or hire dummy partners and, presto, these aliens may now do business in our blighted shores. Foreign investors are not interested in owning lands, the nitwits in the Lower House should know, but in using them to serve their business interests. Land titles remain in the names of their Filipino mistresses, second or third wives, or gambling and drinking buddies but the profits derived from their economic activities remain intact in foreign hands. Train your sight to plantation farming, mining, fishing, and other resource extractive or ecologically destructive enterprises and you will know that the scenario, the plots of their stories are similar, if not exactly the same. Indeed, if there is one need to amend our Constitution it is to provide provisions to stop the aliens from hoodwinking us.
The other primary argument for Charter change is the perception that our structure of government does not usher sustainable national development. Our presidential form of government, with its bicameral legislative body, is not, accordingly, politically efficient and effective and economically responsive. The executive and the legislative department may compete and not cooperate and unite for holistic governance but would rather engage in a political war of attrition, especially if the occupants are of different political colors. The Senate and the House of Representatives often clash on many agenda, economic and otherwise, that would only derail important legislative interventions to improve the quality of life of our people. The members from the two houses compete, rather than cooperate, develop and protect their own turfs, rather than spread development, are obsessed with investigation of scandals of all kinds, from mundane sexual exploits of certain psychotics to corruption in high levels, accordingly in aid of legislation, but had not been heard of actually coming up with legislative remedies for all the mess they had poked their noses into. It is contended that to become more efficient and effective and to stop or curb corruption to the minimum the solution is to change the structure from presidential to parliamentary form of government.
The perceived solution is wishful thinking. Theoretically, a parliamentary form of government appears in general to be efficient and effective in governance. The executive and the legislative bodies blend and become one integrated working machine. The parliament elects the head of state, the prime minister, from among the members themselves, and also appoints heads of ministries (departments) from the same membership to implement legislations or programs of government. This avoids the proverbial delays in legislation and execution of government laws and programs which seems to characterize the presidential form of government. Great, but this is only true if the members of government are dominated by a single party. But if the parliament is multi-party in composition, then it is all hell for everyone. There would be stalemates and paralyses in the operations of government as interests and directions of governance differ and clash. There would be constant abolition of government (ministries, including that of the prime minister’s, or the entire parliament itself at times) for lost of confidence, operational paralysis, and for other reasons.
How is corruption reduced or eliminated in a parliamentary form of government? Corruption is not spawned or stopped by the structure of government but by the people who run it. In fact, a parliamentary form of government run by a single party with members of corrupt tendencies may yet become an apparatus of grand scale corruption as they can easily connive, agree and unite to pursue their selfish interest.
The government is only as honest and as good as the people who run it. If this is so why the rush to change the constitution through a constituent assembly (con-ass) before the 2010 national elections?
The only possible political answer, claimed by critics and even by some followers of the tenant in Malacanang, is to really install a parliamentary government to extend GMA’s stay in power till kingdom comes. Once a parliament is in place, Arroyo Almighty may run for a seat in Pampanga, win it by all means as in the hello-garci 2004 elections, and become prime minister through the tyranny of number of her pork-hungry lapdogs. Thus, it is happy time forever more for her and her ilk.
Will the Supreme Court allow the actual conduct of the con-ass without the participation of the Senate?
The ambiguous provision of Article XVII, Section I (1) of the constitution is the bone of contention here. It says “Any amendment to, or revision of, this constitution may be proposed by: the Congress upon a vote of three-fourths of all its members.” The ambiguity lies on a missing clause (one obvious lapse of the framers of the 1987 constitution that really needs amendment!), that is either “voting jointly” or “voting separately” which should have been added to the end of said provision.
Gloria’s bright boys assert an interpretation that it is voting jointly (thus HR 1109). The Senate, which will definitely be outnumbered if this view prevails, counters it is voting separately in the tradition of making separate action on major legislations, a procedure that is inherent in a bicameral congress. Otherwise, the latter will accordingly boycott the con-ass.
A petition to nullify HR 1109 was filed with the Supreme Court. But the High Court dismissed it as “premature and lacked justiciable issue.” The Court contends that the House of Representatives has not yet performed an act (such as the actual convening of Congress into a constituent assembly) or done something that would warrant its intervention.
The sordid drama continues while the people are getting sick and numbed by the political maneuvers, manipulations and deceits.
Securing Peace In Mindanao
The Mindanao Problem
The current volatile peace and order situation in Mindanao may have been triggered by the cancellation of the signing of the GRP-MILF Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD). The failed Agreement would have “restored” to the Muslims in Southern Mindanao their long-sought homeland, and they would have become the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (a largely autonomous state within the Republic). The Mindanao problem, however, is not a recent phenomenon but has its roots in the long history of Spanish colonization of the country.
Betrayal
The decision of President Arroyo to cancel the signing of the Agreement simply festered an old open wound. It was taken by some quarters in the MILF as another treachery; a betrayal to a cause that would have brought peace to Mindanao. But Arroyo was left with no option because many local government officials in Mindanao questioned the constitutionality of the Agreement before the Supreme Court. There was also this issue of non-consultation on a very crucial matter that affects governance in Mindanao, where a wide area would be carved out to give way to the Bangsamoro ancestral domain. The area proposed for segregation to become the Bangsamoro homeland covers a good number of Christian-dominated communities. The group opposed to the MOA, which increased upon its exposure, claimed that the agreement clearly violates the Constitution as it dismembers the territory of the Republic and allows the establishment of a separate state. The high court declared the MOA-AD unconstitutional before its scheduled signing on August 5, 2008 in Malaysia.
The killing, burning and looting rampage of MILF Commander Bravo in Lanao del Norte and that of Commander Kato in Cotabato areas in the middle of August 2008 is symptomatic of a mishandled settlement of the Mindanao conflict. The resumption of war has displaced hundreds of thousands of civilians and has spiraled the body count in the war zone. Indeed, there is a need for sober minds to rethink a way out from the present mess.
The “Muslim-Christian” Conflict
About a century earlier before the arrival of the Spaniards, Arab traders and missionaries were already in the country converting the natives to Islam not by force but by conversation and by its attractive way of life. Conversion and intermarriages of royal bloods resulted to the establishment of a number of Sultanates in Sulu and Mindanao. A sultanate is a Moro state where religious and political laws and practices are converged to form a way of life. When the Spaniards arrived in the country during the 16th century, they were very much surprised to find that their hated enemies in Europe – the “Moors,” actually the native adherents to Islam, were already effectively entrenched in the southern islands. The small states were progressive with organized armies and navies and were linked together at times by military alliances.
The enmity of the Spaniards towards the Muslims who invaded and occupied south of Spain in the 8th century was deep-seated. This was the reason why the Christian-Muslim War or, more specifically the Spanish-Muslim War, was exported to the Philippines to last for three centuries of costly running battles. The Spaniards could simply have avoided the local Muslims, pejoratively called latter as “Moros,” in the southern islands and concentrated their efforts in colonizing the fragmented barangays in the north. Instead, upon pacification and subsequent colonization of the natives in the Visayas and Luzon, they used the Christianized people in their intermittent raids, assaults and looting of Muslim villages. The Moros would also retaliate with equally ferocious and bloody pillage of Christianized communities in Northern Mindanao and the Visayas. This was the beginning of what is wrongly perceived as the “Muslim-Christian” conflict in Mindanao.
The Bangsamoro Struggle for Independence
In the later part of the 19th century, the Moros experienced more and more defeats in their battles with the well armed and more efficiently organized Spanish military. But until the end of Spanish colonization, they were never Christianized nor effectively conquered or ruled by the Spaniards.
The end of the Spanish-American War in the Philippines deprived the Filipinos of their well deserved independence from Spain. This led to the Filipino-American War that lasted for three years ending in the overwhelming defeat of the Filipinos.
Meanwhile, at the conclusion of the Spanish-American War, the Spaniards, in the Treaty of Paris, ceded to the Americans their “Philippine territory,” which included Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan, at the price of $20M. The Filipinos considered the cession anomalous as the Spaniards had no more rights over the Philippines as they had already defeated and overthrown them. The Moros, who did not consider themselves Filipinos at that time (and still some today), considered the cession of territory as illegal and null and void because it included the sale of their homeland – Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan, a territory that was never owned by the Spaniards.
How could one sell something that he does not own or possess? Argued the Moros. In their push to recover their homeland and recapture their independence the Moros assumed a more holistic identity as Bangsamoro (Moro nation) at the turn of the century. The Bangsamoro claims their ancestors were the original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands, including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago before and at the time of Spanish conquest or colonization. Indeed, although the Spaniards were not able to control Sulu and nearby islands, and parts of Mindanao and Palawan, they were smart enough to include them in the territory they ceded to the United States in the Treaty of Paris.
Separation from the Christian Filipinos
Once the Americans had secured their rule of the Philippines the Bangsamoro people started to distance themselves from the Christian Filipinos. In 1921, 57 prominent Moro leaders signed a petition addressed to the US government declaring and manifesting the desire of the people of Sulu that Sulu Archipelago be made permanent American territory.
The petition complained of the failure of the Philippine Legislature to work for the benefit of the Moros; to recognize their religion; to pass any laws recognizing their marriages, and other customs and traditions.
The petition closed with these words:
“We, the people of Sulu, guarantee that we ourselves will maintain law and order in the event our territory is made part of the American nation. We feel assured that the American Government at Washington will provide special laws for our people, protecting our religion and our customs, and under the protecting arm of America we will have just courts, wherein we will receive justice” (Gowing, Muslim Heritage and Horizons, 1979).
In 1926 the US Congress placed on record a “Declaration of Rights and Purposes” sent to it in 1924 by a group of Moro leaders. In Moroland there was widespread support to the sentiment expressed in that Declaration (Congressional Record, 1926:8836, cited by Gowing, 1979):
“...in the event that the US grants independence to the Philippine Islands without provision for our retention under the American flag, it is our firm intention and resolve to declare ourselves an independent constitutional sultanate to be known to the world as the Moro Nation..”
That year their lobby in the US Congress secured them the Bacon Bill of 1926. The Bill, which was never passed, proposed to exclude Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan from the Philippine territory to be granted independence and make them part of the US territory.
When the U.S granted the Philippines its independence, the Bangsamoro leaders vehemently objected the inclusion of their homeland to the Philippine territory. Again, they would rather be under the control and supervision of the U.S.A. than to be part of the newly independent country. This attitude and political stand were born from deep distrust and insecurity of being together and be ruled by the very people they had fought for centuries with their Spanish patron and mentor.
Indeed, on foresight, if they have remained under the U.S.A they could have regained their independence the moment the United Nations decided for the decolonization of territories under the control of colonial powers.
Another proposal initiated by the Bangsamoro people to regain their independence was to hold a referendum in Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan. The referendum would allow the people in these areas to decide on the issue “whether these territories would be incorporated under the government of Luzon and the Visayas, or become part of the territory of the United States, or become independent” 50 years from the grant of Philippine independence in 1946.
This proposal gained no grounds and finally died in 1996 (50 years after the grant of Philippine independence), subsequent to the signing of the Peace Agreement between the GRP and the MNLF under the Ramos administration which expanded the benefits of Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) through the creation of the Zone for Peace and Development (ZOPAD) in Mindanao.
The Bangsamoro continued to work for its independence from the Philippine Government. However, their leaders realized that to work with the government and abide with the political regulations of the country gave them no opportunities of attaining their ancestral heritage. Thus, the MNLF under Nur Misuari who “slept” with the government under the peace accord of 1996 was discredited and kept in the cold. The cudgel for liberation transferred to the hands of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), the Cotabato splintered group of the MNLF under the late Hashim Salamat. The goal of the MILF is no less than to build an Islamic state to rise in the Bangsamoro ancestral land.
Government Action or Reaction:
Appeasement, Negotiation, and War
Different government administrations employed different strategies in dealing with the Mindanao problem. The immediate post war regimes adopted a policy of appeasement. To restrain political leaders from committing disturbances, public development funds were disbursed to them that rarely reached or benefited at all their constituencies. This only worsened the plight of the Bangsamoro people. Pres. Marcos waged battles, made peace settlement here and there and likewise “bribed” influential Muslim leaders with positions in government and public work funds. President Joseph Estrada went beyond rhetoric and declared and engaged the MILF in an all-out war. Again the Bangsamoro rebels may have been defeated but not destroyed. They were able to recoup loses and were sooner back to their fighting form. When Arroyo came to power, she negotiated for ceasefire and began another peace talk with the rebels.
Mismanagement and External Influence on the Peace Process
The Arroyo peace initiative, which resulted to the ballyhooed breakthrough - the GRP-MILF Agreement Ancestral Domain and the consequent establishment of the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE), was actually undermined by mismanagement and the apparent intrusion of external interest into the accord.
The Arroyo dispensation put everybody in the dark as to the substance and extent of the agreement to the eleventh hour. The Congress, local government officials and the Supreme Court were not on board of the peace process. The backlash of protests and legal actions following the announcement of the scheduled signing of the MOA only showed how un-transparent the agreement was pursued.
On the other hand, the creation of a Bangsamoro state, which the MOA-AD by all intent and purposes was all about, was apparently influenced, shaped and supported by the US to protect its interest in Southeast Asia. This is evidenced by some preparatory moves - the heavy outpouring of US economic and capacity building assistance in Central Mindanao during the last decade, such as the massive road, airport and other infrastructure project in General Santos- Cotabato areas, and the many other confidence building projects under the USAID Growth and Equity in Mindanao (GEM) and Ecology Governance (EcoGov) in Muslim Mindanao, Basilan and the Sulu archipelago. It was also no coincidence that the amiable lady US Ambassador had been unnaturally visible in the war-torn areas while the MOA-AD was being forged.
Arroyo’s Flirtation with China
The flirtation of the Arroyo regime with the Chinese after the withdrawal of the Filipino contingent in Iraq, which irked Washington, apparently shaped developments in Mindanao. Arroyo had the Chinese smiling with the many favors given them, such as the joint exploration of the offshore resources in the Philippine waters near Kalayaan islands and Palawan, the controversial ZTE broadband and DepEd IT deals, the North Luzon Railway project and, lately, the mining concessions granted them. This maneuver to spread China’s sphere of influence worried the US to no end. This may have caused the rush schedule (sans public consultations) for the signing in Malaysia of the aborted GRP-MILF AD Agreement on August 5, 2008. It seemed to appear that Pres. Arroyo might have also been put in the dark by her lapdogs (negotiators) who warmly wagged their tails to their US master.
Apparently, the fingerprints of the US were all over the Agreement. A Bangsamoro state, whose people are historically friendly with the Americans, would allow the US to jointly exploit with the Bangsamoro the rich natural resources of the area, as well as likely to establish a military base within its territory, thereby recovering its geopolitical and military hegemony in the area that is now strongly challenged by China.
Back to the Negotiation Table
Of late, there is an apparent consensus to resume talks and attend to the various issues obtaining in the aborted ancestral domain agreement. Accordingly, the GRP wants to pursue peace negotiation with DDR as the guiding principle. The DDR refers to the peace process framework of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration. The MILF, however, views the framework as a strategy to return to the status quo, that is, to the period prior to the initialed MOA-AD. To operate within such framework is perceived as recapitulation, almost an abandonment of what has been reached in the aborted accord. Indeed, how the negotiation will proceed and end is a tricky question considering the many conflicting interests on and under the negotiation table.
Perspective
The Mindanao conflict is a complicated puzzle to solve. A win-win solution has eluded the peacemakers. What agreements reached in the past proved nothing but shaky compromises to suspend grand-scale bloodshed. Consider, for instance, the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and the Zone for Peace and Development in Mindanao (ZOPAD). Both were hailed as breakthroughs in peace negotiation. But even before the ink had dried on the peace document the combatants on both sides were already back in the warpath.
It requires most of the time blood to rewrite history, or to reverse the imperatives of history.
Mindanao, or a great part of it, might have been a Bangsamoro homeland. But it could as well be the homeland of the Lumads before some of them converted to Islam. The reality of the time, however, is that Mindanao is no longer the homeland of either the Lumads or the Bangsamoro but the homeland of the people who are now called Filipinos. To ignore this truth, to continuously harp on old favorable historical facts that have been covered by layers and layers of more recent and opposing facts, renders the search for justice and peace an exercise in futility.
Pragmatism should rule in the negotiation table. A win-win solution is a solution that addresses the aspirations of people within the framework of the current reality in Mindanao – that the island is now the homeland of a people who are there by virtue of their being a Filipino. While some special rights may be granted to some people who have different beliefs and traditions, this should not in anyway deprive others of their fundamental rights as citizens of the land.
The current volatile peace and order situation in Mindanao may have been triggered by the cancellation of the signing of the GRP-MILF Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD). The failed Agreement would have “restored” to the Muslims in Southern Mindanao their long-sought homeland, and they would have become the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (a largely autonomous state within the Republic). The Mindanao problem, however, is not a recent phenomenon but has its roots in the long history of Spanish colonization of the country.
Betrayal
The decision of President Arroyo to cancel the signing of the Agreement simply festered an old open wound. It was taken by some quarters in the MILF as another treachery; a betrayal to a cause that would have brought peace to Mindanao. But Arroyo was left with no option because many local government officials in Mindanao questioned the constitutionality of the Agreement before the Supreme Court. There was also this issue of non-consultation on a very crucial matter that affects governance in Mindanao, where a wide area would be carved out to give way to the Bangsamoro ancestral domain. The area proposed for segregation to become the Bangsamoro homeland covers a good number of Christian-dominated communities. The group opposed to the MOA, which increased upon its exposure, claimed that the agreement clearly violates the Constitution as it dismembers the territory of the Republic and allows the establishment of a separate state. The high court declared the MOA-AD unconstitutional before its scheduled signing on August 5, 2008 in Malaysia.
The killing, burning and looting rampage of MILF Commander Bravo in Lanao del Norte and that of Commander Kato in Cotabato areas in the middle of August 2008 is symptomatic of a mishandled settlement of the Mindanao conflict. The resumption of war has displaced hundreds of thousands of civilians and has spiraled the body count in the war zone. Indeed, there is a need for sober minds to rethink a way out from the present mess.
The “Muslim-Christian” Conflict
About a century earlier before the arrival of the Spaniards, Arab traders and missionaries were already in the country converting the natives to Islam not by force but by conversation and by its attractive way of life. Conversion and intermarriages of royal bloods resulted to the establishment of a number of Sultanates in Sulu and Mindanao. A sultanate is a Moro state where religious and political laws and practices are converged to form a way of life. When the Spaniards arrived in the country during the 16th century, they were very much surprised to find that their hated enemies in Europe – the “Moors,” actually the native adherents to Islam, were already effectively entrenched in the southern islands. The small states were progressive with organized armies and navies and were linked together at times by military alliances.
The enmity of the Spaniards towards the Muslims who invaded and occupied south of Spain in the 8th century was deep-seated. This was the reason why the Christian-Muslim War or, more specifically the Spanish-Muslim War, was exported to the Philippines to last for three centuries of costly running battles. The Spaniards could simply have avoided the local Muslims, pejoratively called latter as “Moros,” in the southern islands and concentrated their efforts in colonizing the fragmented barangays in the north. Instead, upon pacification and subsequent colonization of the natives in the Visayas and Luzon, they used the Christianized people in their intermittent raids, assaults and looting of Muslim villages. The Moros would also retaliate with equally ferocious and bloody pillage of Christianized communities in Northern Mindanao and the Visayas. This was the beginning of what is wrongly perceived as the “Muslim-Christian” conflict in Mindanao.
The Bangsamoro Struggle for Independence
In the later part of the 19th century, the Moros experienced more and more defeats in their battles with the well armed and more efficiently organized Spanish military. But until the end of Spanish colonization, they were never Christianized nor effectively conquered or ruled by the Spaniards.
The end of the Spanish-American War in the Philippines deprived the Filipinos of their well deserved independence from Spain. This led to the Filipino-American War that lasted for three years ending in the overwhelming defeat of the Filipinos.
Meanwhile, at the conclusion of the Spanish-American War, the Spaniards, in the Treaty of Paris, ceded to the Americans their “Philippine territory,” which included Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan, at the price of $20M. The Filipinos considered the cession anomalous as the Spaniards had no more rights over the Philippines as they had already defeated and overthrown them. The Moros, who did not consider themselves Filipinos at that time (and still some today), considered the cession of territory as illegal and null and void because it included the sale of their homeland – Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan, a territory that was never owned by the Spaniards.
How could one sell something that he does not own or possess? Argued the Moros. In their push to recover their homeland and recapture their independence the Moros assumed a more holistic identity as Bangsamoro (Moro nation) at the turn of the century. The Bangsamoro claims their ancestors were the original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands, including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago before and at the time of Spanish conquest or colonization. Indeed, although the Spaniards were not able to control Sulu and nearby islands, and parts of Mindanao and Palawan, they were smart enough to include them in the territory they ceded to the United States in the Treaty of Paris.
Separation from the Christian Filipinos
Once the Americans had secured their rule of the Philippines the Bangsamoro people started to distance themselves from the Christian Filipinos. In 1921, 57 prominent Moro leaders signed a petition addressed to the US government declaring and manifesting the desire of the people of Sulu that Sulu Archipelago be made permanent American territory.
The petition complained of the failure of the Philippine Legislature to work for the benefit of the Moros; to recognize their religion; to pass any laws recognizing their marriages, and other customs and traditions.
The petition closed with these words:
“We, the people of Sulu, guarantee that we ourselves will maintain law and order in the event our territory is made part of the American nation. We feel assured that the American Government at Washington will provide special laws for our people, protecting our religion and our customs, and under the protecting arm of America we will have just courts, wherein we will receive justice” (Gowing, Muslim Heritage and Horizons, 1979).
In 1926 the US Congress placed on record a “Declaration of Rights and Purposes” sent to it in 1924 by a group of Moro leaders. In Moroland there was widespread support to the sentiment expressed in that Declaration (Congressional Record, 1926:8836, cited by Gowing, 1979):
“...in the event that the US grants independence to the Philippine Islands without provision for our retention under the American flag, it is our firm intention and resolve to declare ourselves an independent constitutional sultanate to be known to the world as the Moro Nation..”
That year their lobby in the US Congress secured them the Bacon Bill of 1926. The Bill, which was never passed, proposed to exclude Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan from the Philippine territory to be granted independence and make them part of the US territory.
When the U.S granted the Philippines its independence, the Bangsamoro leaders vehemently objected the inclusion of their homeland to the Philippine territory. Again, they would rather be under the control and supervision of the U.S.A. than to be part of the newly independent country. This attitude and political stand were born from deep distrust and insecurity of being together and be ruled by the very people they had fought for centuries with their Spanish patron and mentor.
Indeed, on foresight, if they have remained under the U.S.A they could have regained their independence the moment the United Nations decided for the decolonization of territories under the control of colonial powers.
Another proposal initiated by the Bangsamoro people to regain their independence was to hold a referendum in Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan. The referendum would allow the people in these areas to decide on the issue “whether these territories would be incorporated under the government of Luzon and the Visayas, or become part of the territory of the United States, or become independent” 50 years from the grant of Philippine independence in 1946.
This proposal gained no grounds and finally died in 1996 (50 years after the grant of Philippine independence), subsequent to the signing of the Peace Agreement between the GRP and the MNLF under the Ramos administration which expanded the benefits of Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) through the creation of the Zone for Peace and Development (ZOPAD) in Mindanao.
The Bangsamoro continued to work for its independence from the Philippine Government. However, their leaders realized that to work with the government and abide with the political regulations of the country gave them no opportunities of attaining their ancestral heritage. Thus, the MNLF under Nur Misuari who “slept” with the government under the peace accord of 1996 was discredited and kept in the cold. The cudgel for liberation transferred to the hands of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), the Cotabato splintered group of the MNLF under the late Hashim Salamat. The goal of the MILF is no less than to build an Islamic state to rise in the Bangsamoro ancestral land.
Government Action or Reaction:
Appeasement, Negotiation, and War
Different government administrations employed different strategies in dealing with the Mindanao problem. The immediate post war regimes adopted a policy of appeasement. To restrain political leaders from committing disturbances, public development funds were disbursed to them that rarely reached or benefited at all their constituencies. This only worsened the plight of the Bangsamoro people. Pres. Marcos waged battles, made peace settlement here and there and likewise “bribed” influential Muslim leaders with positions in government and public work funds. President Joseph Estrada went beyond rhetoric and declared and engaged the MILF in an all-out war. Again the Bangsamoro rebels may have been defeated but not destroyed. They were able to recoup loses and were sooner back to their fighting form. When Arroyo came to power, she negotiated for ceasefire and began another peace talk with the rebels.
Mismanagement and External Influence on the Peace Process
The Arroyo peace initiative, which resulted to the ballyhooed breakthrough - the GRP-MILF Agreement Ancestral Domain and the consequent establishment of the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE), was actually undermined by mismanagement and the apparent intrusion of external interest into the accord.
The Arroyo dispensation put everybody in the dark as to the substance and extent of the agreement to the eleventh hour. The Congress, local government officials and the Supreme Court were not on board of the peace process. The backlash of protests and legal actions following the announcement of the scheduled signing of the MOA only showed how un-transparent the agreement was pursued.
On the other hand, the creation of a Bangsamoro state, which the MOA-AD by all intent and purposes was all about, was apparently influenced, shaped and supported by the US to protect its interest in Southeast Asia. This is evidenced by some preparatory moves - the heavy outpouring of US economic and capacity building assistance in Central Mindanao during the last decade, such as the massive road, airport and other infrastructure project in General Santos- Cotabato areas, and the many other confidence building projects under the USAID Growth and Equity in Mindanao (GEM) and Ecology Governance (EcoGov) in Muslim Mindanao, Basilan and the Sulu archipelago. It was also no coincidence that the amiable lady US Ambassador had been unnaturally visible in the war-torn areas while the MOA-AD was being forged.
Arroyo’s Flirtation with China
The flirtation of the Arroyo regime with the Chinese after the withdrawal of the Filipino contingent in Iraq, which irked Washington, apparently shaped developments in Mindanao. Arroyo had the Chinese smiling with the many favors given them, such as the joint exploration of the offshore resources in the Philippine waters near Kalayaan islands and Palawan, the controversial ZTE broadband and DepEd IT deals, the North Luzon Railway project and, lately, the mining concessions granted them. This maneuver to spread China’s sphere of influence worried the US to no end. This may have caused the rush schedule (sans public consultations) for the signing in Malaysia of the aborted GRP-MILF AD Agreement on August 5, 2008. It seemed to appear that Pres. Arroyo might have also been put in the dark by her lapdogs (negotiators) who warmly wagged their tails to their US master.
Apparently, the fingerprints of the US were all over the Agreement. A Bangsamoro state, whose people are historically friendly with the Americans, would allow the US to jointly exploit with the Bangsamoro the rich natural resources of the area, as well as likely to establish a military base within its territory, thereby recovering its geopolitical and military hegemony in the area that is now strongly challenged by China.
Back to the Negotiation Table
Of late, there is an apparent consensus to resume talks and attend to the various issues obtaining in the aborted ancestral domain agreement. Accordingly, the GRP wants to pursue peace negotiation with DDR as the guiding principle. The DDR refers to the peace process framework of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration. The MILF, however, views the framework as a strategy to return to the status quo, that is, to the period prior to the initialed MOA-AD. To operate within such framework is perceived as recapitulation, almost an abandonment of what has been reached in the aborted accord. Indeed, how the negotiation will proceed and end is a tricky question considering the many conflicting interests on and under the negotiation table.
Perspective
The Mindanao conflict is a complicated puzzle to solve. A win-win solution has eluded the peacemakers. What agreements reached in the past proved nothing but shaky compromises to suspend grand-scale bloodshed. Consider, for instance, the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and the Zone for Peace and Development in Mindanao (ZOPAD). Both were hailed as breakthroughs in peace negotiation. But even before the ink had dried on the peace document the combatants on both sides were already back in the warpath.
It requires most of the time blood to rewrite history, or to reverse the imperatives of history.
Mindanao, or a great part of it, might have been a Bangsamoro homeland. But it could as well be the homeland of the Lumads before some of them converted to Islam. The reality of the time, however, is that Mindanao is no longer the homeland of either the Lumads or the Bangsamoro but the homeland of the people who are now called Filipinos. To ignore this truth, to continuously harp on old favorable historical facts that have been covered by layers and layers of more recent and opposing facts, renders the search for justice and peace an exercise in futility.
Pragmatism should rule in the negotiation table. A win-win solution is a solution that addresses the aspirations of people within the framework of the current reality in Mindanao – that the island is now the homeland of a people who are there by virtue of their being a Filipino. While some special rights may be granted to some people who have different beliefs and traditions, this should not in anyway deprive others of their fundamental rights as citizens of the land.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)