By Antonio C. Abaya
Written on Aug. 20, 2008
But it has to be assumed that some in the MILF would object to any renegotiation. These are the hardliners who believe that the MOA is a done deal and is already binding on the GRP, even if it has to be approved in a plebiscite, has to be backed by an enabling law from Congress, and has to wait for charter change to accommodate a federal state – which the MILF are demanding – within a larger federal union.
The MILF panel contends that these legal and constitutional details are of no concern to them because, as rebels, they are not bound by the Philippine Constitution, which they specifically insisted should not be mentioned at all in the MOA, to which the GRP panel sheepishly agreed.
Assuming there are still moderates among the MILF leadership who will agree to renegotiate, some basic ground rules should be agreed upon from the start.
One. The venue for future "peace talks" should be in Indonesia, not in Malaysia. Malaysia is not an honest broker in these negotiations. The Malaysians do not and will never forget that President Ferdinand Marcos tried in the 1970s to organize an invasion force that was meant to invade Sabah (or North Borneo) and claim it as part of Philippine territory on behalf of the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu, who had merely leased it to the British North Borneo Co., but which in turn ceded it to the Federation of Malaysia.
A Bangsamoro federal state controlled by the MILF, if it were to become a reality, would most likely declare independence from the Philippine Republic – the MILF has always been separatist – and even federate itself with Malaysia, since Malaysia has always been a much better managed country than the Philippines.
It can be argued that the separatist struggle that has percolated among the Moros in the region since the 1970s was stoked by Malaysia, with the help of British intelligence, as their payback to us for Marcos' failed grab for Sabah..
Indonesia, at least, has no reason to harbor ill will against the Philippines. Furthermore it has had its own share of separatist movements and would be sympathetic to Philippine efforts to discourage the dismemberment of the Republic.
Two. The GRP should negotiate only with groups that seek only greater autonomy. Groups that declare themselves separatist are really beyond negotiations because their minds are already made up and there is no point in talking to them. The GRP should talk to present separatists only if and when they are ready to scale down their demands to greater autonomy, rather than outright separatism.
The GRP should also insist that all negotiations should be held within the ambit of the Philippine Constitution. If groups wish to negotiate without acknowledging the over-arching jurisdiction of the Constitution – as the GRP panel foolishly caved in to the MILF - then forget it.
For once, I agree with former president Joseph Estrada: "We have only one flag, one armed forces and one nation. It is treason if you give away part of the country to the MILF."
For his part, Nur Misuari, chair of the rival Moro National Liberation Front or MNLF, says that "the MOA-AD is infringing, not only on the Philippine Constitution, but also on the GRP-MNLF final peace agreement," referring to the accord signed in 1996.
Misuari also said that until now he could not understand why the government negotiated with the MILF when it had already struck a deal with the MNLF, describing his group as "the official representative of the Bangsamoro People in the powerful Organization of Islamic Conference." (Philippine Daily Inquirer, Aug. 20, 2008)
This is an aspect of the problem that has been overlooked. Why is the GRP negotiating with two separate (and rival) groups over the same territory. Isn't that a guarantee of future problems as the two rivals squabble and fight over concessions given to one but not to the other, or over concessions given to both at the same time? It is like a property developer leasing out or selling one and the same condo to two separate tenant-buyers. I think it is called estafa or swindle.
The speed with which the GRP made concessions to the MILF, after years of stalled negotiations, and the secrecy with which these concessions were hidden from Congress, from the local government officials and from the general public, strengthen suspicions that these were lutong makaw concoctions in the Panciteria Gloria..
Add to this the uncanny coincidence of "presidential peace adviser" Hermogenes Esperon's admission that the MOA needed a charter change to federalism, and Sen. Nene Pimentel's Senate Resolution no. 10 to make that shift to federalism before the end of President Arroyo's term removes all doubts that this MOA was/is really meant to keep President Arroyo in power beyond 2010.
Keep in mind that simultaneous with Sen Pimentel's push for federalism is Gov. Joey Salceda's push for parliamentarism. One does not have to be a nuclear physicist to conclude that once Pimentel's constituent assembly is convened – where the Lakas/Kampi have an overwhelming majority over other parties – there will be a motion to table discussion of parliamentary also, even if Sen. Pimentel assures us that only federalism will be discussed. Come on, Nene, you are only the designated carpenter of this Trojan Horse. You do not decide who will hide inside it.
When asked by media why his resolution specifically seeks to make the ChaCha to federalism before the end of President Arroyo's term, Sen. Pimentel replied that he is afraid that if the shift to federalism were discussed after 2010, he would no longer be in the Senate – his term ends in 2010 - to push for it (and presumably to claim credit for it).
I suppose even carpenters experience bouts of megalomania. .But why should the fate of the Republic hang by the thread of one woman's inordinate lust for power, and a man's drive to build a monument to himself for an idea whose soundness has no basis at all in empirical evidence.
(To sell the idea that federalism will be good for the Philippines, the federalists cite the USA, Germany and Malaysia. This is false advertising. The USA has been federal since independence in 1776. Germany has been federal since unification in1871. Malaysia has been federal since independence in 1957. These countries did not shift from unitary to federal, which is what Pimentel wants us to do.
(Since this debate over federalism started, I have asked Sen. Pimentel what country or countries he knows that shifted from unitary to federal and thereby improved their economies, since it is his contention that federalism "will spur economic growth."
(Sen. Trojan Horse Pimentel does not deign to reply to me. But his people did. The only countries they can cite that shifted from unitary to federal, and presumably improved their economies, are: Ethiopia which did so in 1993 (now having its umpteenth famine in 15 years), and Nepal which did so in 2007 (now controlled by Maoists). All those who think that Ethiopia and Nepal are inspiring role models for the Philippines, please check your genius IQ with the Pimentel Pollyanna Psycho-Clinic.
I say, renegotiate the MOA under terms and conditions more appropriate to a sovereign country with a modicum of self-respect. And postpone all discussions about ChaCha to after June 2010 – which is less than 24 months away - and only through an elected constitutional convention.
Doing it through a constituent assembly, as Sen. Pimentel insists, guarantees that the trapos and political dynasts who now control Congress will wind up controlling Congress after 2010. By all standards, that would be a fate worse than death. *****
Reactions to tonyabaya@gmail.com. Other articles in acabaya.blogspot.com. Tony on YouTube in www.tapatt.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment