Legacy of conflict

Ending the armed conflict in the Philippines may be a pipe dream to cynics, but it is always worth a try, especially for those who genuinely desire peace and reconciliation. The latter desire is what impels the cautious optimism that has greeted President Aquino’s ambitious Payapa at Masaganang Pamayanan (Pamana) program. The budget department has been ordered to release P1.8 billion to fund various projects aimed at reducing poverty in conflict-afflicted areas in the country. Budget Secretary Florencio Abad said the release would cover various programs such as the Support for Peace and Development Communities with the Moro National Liberation Front; support for the Reintegration Program for Former Community Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army rebels; and livelihood assistance, community infrastructure and production support under the peace agreement with the Cordillera People’s Liberation Army.

As opening salvo for the program, P31 million will be spent in livelihood projects in communities occupied by the communist breakaway group, Rebolusyonaryong Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipinas-Revolutionary Proletarian Army-Alex Boncayao Brigade (RPMP-RPA-ABB). Leftist and pro-CPP-NPA sectors may decry the program as tantamount to divide-and-rule, but the first criticism of the move comes from a member of Congress, Zambales Rep. Mitos Magsaysay, who said the livelihood assistance for former communist hit men (the ABB is popularly called the Sparrow, or the urban hit squad of the CPP-NPA) may cause demoralization among policemen and soldiers.

To be sure, Pamana is not a matter of either-or. It doesn’t mean that since government is providing social assistance to former rebels, it is neglecting the police and military who fought the enemies of the state. The police and the military have social security and other benefits, their ample reward for their work in civil and external defense. In a manner of speaking, they already had their reward. This is not to say that the state should reward former enemies of the state for their subversion or treason; it is a matter of record that many of the conflicts are social rebellions. They broke out as a result of broad social iniquity; therefore, there’s need for programs of social amelioration.

Perhaps the stronger criticism would be whether government has the management savvy to see to it that it does not overlap with programs already underway. For example, Pamana appears to skirt the amnesty program provided by law.

Another concern would be the firearms held by the rebel groups. Teresita Deles, the presidential adviser on the peace process, said that while the RPMP-RPA-ABB members will be required to register their firearms, they will not be required to surrender them.

The concern about firearms is real since the traffic in firearms—there are reportedly one million undocumented firearms in the country, according to the police—helps fuel lawlessness and to some extent, social conflicts. It is noteworthy, for example, that the killing of an Italian missionary priest in Mindanao, similar to the Fr. Tulio Favali killing in the early 1980s during the waning days of the Marcos dictatorship, should happen under President Aquino, who’s a gun user and has in fact encouraged state prosecutors to carry firearms for their protection. There’s really a need for gun control to stop the spiral of violence in the country.

In addition, social amelioration should go hand in hand with military solutions to check the hardcore military elements of the insurgencies. The AFP and the PNP should be made to account for the big budgets that they have enjoyed across several decades in the fight against communist insurgency and Muslim secessionism. Both conflicts have lasted for almost two generations without the military and the police showing anything remotely connected to ending them satisfactorily. In contrast, what these state instrumentalities are showing hapless taxpayers picking the tab for the costly wars is the looming possibility of partition (the so-called Muslim Mindanao substate) and more prospects for violence (the bloody route of soldiers in Basilan by the MILF and CPP-NPA threats of widening the war).

Considering continued MILF violence in Mindanao, violence abetted perhaps by military miscalculation (or was it intentional?), Filipino taxpayers are footing both hard and soft approaches at ending conflicts without the state providing accountability. The P5 million clandestinely given by the President to the MILF in Tokyo best exemplifies the shadow-play and lack of transparency that have perpetuated the insurgencies. Caught in the crossfire are the people, the ultimate victims of our never-ending conflicts.