The case against Sabah
I am amused by the flag-waving and saber-rattling of some of our countrymen obsessed with that resource-rich land south of Sulu known as Sabah. While I do not pass judgment on the veracity of historical documents that may tip the scale of evidence of ownership and even sovereignty in our favor, I question the wisdom of a claim that has no chance of winning in the most supreme court of all: the sentiments and views of the inhabitants of Sabah.
Because they are Muslims, in a Muslim-dominated federation, with more hope for peaceful and more productive lives for themselves and their descendants by living in that land and freely swearing allegiance thereto, is there any chance that they will reject being a part of the orderly and prosperous Federation of Malaysia and choose instead to join a chaotic Christian Philippines that is beset with seemingly unmanageable internal problems? I would say the chance is closer to zero than 50 percent in any impartial referendum.
We are in for a big disappointment if we push through with our claim to Sabah at the International Court of Justice, where the principle of “effectivities” or effective control and occupation of a disputed territory, carries a lot of weight. In my view, Sabah is a lose-lose situation for the Philippines, and the sooner we realize and accept this fact, the better for us. Frankly, and to put it graphically, the Philippines needs Sabah as much as one needs a big, gaping hole in the head.
Even if we win in the principal United Nations judicial organ and the unthinkable happens (read: Malaysia gives up Sabah), what in heaven’s name do we do with Sabah? We can barely manage our own house. Just look at the daily gridlock on Edsa and our main streets; the snail’s pace relocation of squatters clinging like barnacles to the banks of our filthy, clogged rivers and esteros; extortionist policemen and government middlemen fleecing legitimate businessmen in Philippine ports and highways (which adversely affects our global “competitiveness”); an ineffective agrarian reform program that prevents our poor farmers from becoming more productive citizens (and joining the ranks of our nascent middle class); persistent power outages in the countryside that bring untold misery to the people and undermine business productivity; the continuing diaspora of our skilled workers and professionals that has helped keep our economy afloat, at the heavy price of family dismemberment; a navy that lacks ships, planes and manpower to police our internal waters (at the unacceptable cost of $1.5 billion annually lost to neighbors who brazenly plunder our rich fishing grounds); peace and order problems that continue to swell our already overflowing prisons; the uneven distribution of wealth (76 percent of which is controlled by less than 100 families); and, of course, that elusive peace among our warring Christian and Muslim brothers in Mindanao.
The list is very long and depressing so I will stop here. The point is: let’s get our act together and fix our most urgent problems at home rather than waste our precious will, time, and meager treasure on a futile exercise for territorial gain.
A country is much more than a chunk of real estate. People, not land, make (or break) a country. Some of the great or notable empires in history originated from small countries, like Spain, Portugal, England, and Japan—nations no bigger than the Philippines. Power and development are like an iceberg, with a small tip and a large, unseen base beneath the water: What we see with our naked eye (the tip) is only the physical infrastructure of power and development (roads, bridges, skyscrapers, dams, factories, planes, and military hardware). But far more important assets lie beneath the water: the intellectual infrastructure of leadership, education, social discipline, organization, and a technological-scientific base that make it all possible.
The “tip” can be razed without fatally destroying the base, like what happened to Germany and Japan in the last war. As we all noted with admiration and awe, those (small) countries rose from the ashes of defeat to become global economic powers in a relatively short period of time because their “base” of development was largely intact.
So let us not be seduced by the siren call of territorial riches, especially when doom (not gold) awaits us. Our neighbor, Singapore (expelled from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965 by the imperatives of “national interest”), is no larger than Metro Manila. The city-state has no natural resources, not even fresh water (which it imports from Malaysia). However, in all universal economic indicators such as GNP (gross and per capita) and PPP (purchasing power per capita), tiny Singapore is far ahead of the Philippines—and most of the world, for that matter. The World Bank ranks it among the top 10 most prosperous countries in the world, even way ahead of the United States in per capita income ($60,000 per annum vs America’s $48,000, according to a recent US Central Intelligence Agency’s Internet fact sheet). What Singapore lacks in territory and natural resources, it more than makes up for with its strong and focused leadership and substantial intellectual, socio-economic and institutional base.
But let us behave with a modicum of self-respect and dignity in dealing with the issues brought about by the decision of Sultan Jamalul Kiram III to dispatch a contingent of his armed followers in an ill-fated mission to Sabah. One of the most important duties of a state’s premier officials is often unstated: to conduct themselves with honor and comportment in their varied interactions with sovereign nations, corporations, and individuals and groups of all kinds. In the Sabah crisis, our top government officials failed the test of duty by bending backward to appease Malaysia, at the expense of erring but well-meaning Filipino Muslims. If we can send our Vice President regularly abroad on pathetic missions to plead for the lives of convicted Filipino drug mules, why can’t we be more sympathetic to countrymen who went to Sabah because they sincerely believe it to be their ancestral home?
Malaysia has bullied the Philippines, using as leverage its so-called “mediating” role as peace broker in the ongoing negotiations between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. In dealing with Malaysia, it will serve us well to be less emotional in tone and more erect in posture, as befits our stature as an independent, sovereign nation.
N.M. Reyes (Narciso M. Reyes Jr., [email protected]) was a journalist at the Manila Daily Bulletin and bureau chief of the Philippine News Agency in Beijing; first secretary/press and information, Philippine Mission to the United Nations; press attaché, Philippine Embassy in Jakarta; and special adviser to the ARMM regional director. He holds a master’s degree in international and strategic affairs from Georgetown University in Washington, DC, and is the author of the book “The God in Einstein & Zen.”
