The public posturing of government officials conveys an impression that it is rather simple to launch a war in Basilan and Sulu and to be able to sustain it. This is definitely not the case for families in the distant communities of Basilan and Sulu who will be caught in the crossfire and bear the consequences of disruption for an indefinite period in their already miserable lives. This is not to be the case for many members of civil society and government agencies who have struggled over many years to pick up the pieces of death and destruction brought about by the preceding wars and having to face its dire consequences once more. This, I am sure, is also not the case for soldiers and their families who have been likewise victimized by the spiral of violence. And this, I strongly believe, is not the case for many Filipinos who abhor violence and destruction by ways of violence.

War can only bring us all into the abyss of chaos and hatred. Studies have shown that the pursuit of peace and security in conflict areas in the world cannot be accomplished with the mere physical annihilation of the enemy. In the case of the Philippines, human security, contrary to how the Human Security Act of 2007 defines it, is not merely about finishing off the Abu Sayyaf or other terrorist groups the government claims exist in the country. There is more to it than meets the eye, so to speak.

Any undertaking for managing local conflicts must be made keeping in mind the fact that communities in conflict or post-conflict situations have the ultimate solutions for conflict transformation and peace building. In Sulu, people have, many times, expressed its recommended agenda for peace. Among these are the 1993 National Unification Commission’s Peace Consultation, the Tabang Mindanaw’s Study on Developing a Culture of Peace for Sulu, and more recently, the OPAPP-funded Grassroots’ Peace Consultations piloted in six out of 18 municipalities in Sulu. How the peoples’ agenda can be harmonized under a more integrated human security framework that is collectively owned and what mechanisms can be set up or enhanced to support remain to be a lingering process.

My own exposure working with various communities in Basilan, Sulu and Tawi tawi in the past years including with displaced peoples in Sulu have made me realize more strongly that the real strength and human potential for conflict transformation and peace building lies in the people caught in the actual situations of war and dire poverty. They have the truthful determination and untapped potential to work for positive changes if the opportunities are made available for them, or simply, not withheld from them. Such determination can only come from the utmost yearning for peace with Islam as its bedrock, and the preservation of the Muslim peoples’ cultural integrity and pride.

The second point of realization is that, most often than not, the primary factor that aggravate the conflict is governance, with local leaders themselves who have abandoned their areas of responsibility, traditional values and cultural pride. Sadly, countless leaders and their supporters have traded their birthright in exchange of the Internal Revenue Allotment or IRA. This, of course, is true not in the ARMM only. Some public views on governance from a survey conducted in 18 municipalities of Sulu reveal that:

• politicians are liars
• government of thieves
• many are corrupt

Needless to say, there are many external actors including foreign and local military, national government leaders and non-governmental agencies, and foreign agents who are adamant on their own formula for peace in Sulu for whatever selfish or unselfish motives they may have. Everyone may think they have a better formula on how to resolve other peoples’ plight, insisting on an alien development framework without having to consult the people themselves, hear what they have to say, and learn from the hard lessons of the past.

THE FAILURES OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS PAST

By many indications, a significant proportion of past and current technical or developmental assistance has been and continues to be ineffective, that is, failing to build long-term capacity and reduce poverty. In the case of Sulu, the question needs to be asked once again: Despite all these studies, efforts, government programs, donor funding, millions of pesos & dollars spent, why does peace remain so elusive in Sulu? Why does Sulu remain in poverty and conflict?

One can render many explanations to this ranging from poor governance to socio-economic-cultural factors but all these point to the fact that the situation in Sulu is extremely complex. Given such complexity, any peace program must be multi-faceted. The Human Security Act and the government’s own road map to peace do not seem to have much appreciation for this complexity. Government has glued itself on the failed “clear-hold-consolidate-develop” paradigm rather than courageously venturing on the reverse mode.

It is very important that the engagement with communities in conflict situations takes place in their context. Most often, we unavoidably bring in our own mindsets, speak in our language, in our own style of discourse, and these basically create a barrier. The work demands that we are able to make the effort to adjust to their milieu. It is in their knowledge and experience where solutions can be found. Perhaps what was amiss in the past many years was the fact that policy makers, government leaders and development agents come and go with a pre-set of interventions they think are best for communities at a specific given moment. We pride ourselves as “coaches”, yet we have a limited understanding of communities in conflict zones apart from what we have read or engaged in discourse.

COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

One of the important factors, from the viewpoint of community development work, is community empowerment. Community empowerment complements governance. In the Sulu archipelago, just to cite some examples, one cannot miss out on many infrastructure projects like municipal / barangay halls, health centers and day-care centres, which are left empty (except for goats seeking shelter from the rain), water projects that are abandoned and do not function, and so on. Yet many of these projects, which may not have been monitored at all, were most likely to have been reported as completed and operational. Proponents, donors and contractors may be satisfied but who accounts to the people? Who is responsible for ensuring quality standards and making sure the projects would benefit the communities as they were intended to? More often than not, programs and projects become mere money-making ventures and what becomes of them is no longer a cause for concern. There is no serious effort to address sustainability and community ownership. How then can this take root? Wherefrom must we pick up the pieces when the spirit that would give life to these programs and projects has long been exterminated?

THE PURSUIT OF THE INTANGIBLES

Development projects always have TWO phases:  Technical and Social. Often, too much emphasis is placed on technical solutions rather than on what are often social and political problems. Many times, the social aspect far outweighs the technical problems, more truly so in conflict areas where the confidence and dignity of people have been shattered over many years of war and conflict. The faith in oneself must be born anew and nourished delicately in order to bring back the spirit that will move these programs to function. This is going to be long-term.

BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS – BUILDING HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS

NGOs or any social development agent for that matter, who do not actually stay with the communities to allow the building of a trust relationship - the You and I as against the It and I, will never get to a real understanding about situations of people in conflict. This was a basic challenge thrown at us by a local leader before we decided to pilot our water resistivity survey in an Islamic municipality in Sulu. The anguish of a jittery mother whose baby fell off her arms and died as a result of a bomb that struck a nearby house during a military operation in Patikul, Sulu, last year, will remain a distant pain to an outsider.  This is only one tragic example of numerous cases of civilians caught in the conflict that will never be unheard of and resolved. Some of these civilian victims are often easily tagged as Abu Sayyaf members or supporters. End of story. Who would be able to contest these claims of the military and government officials? The fact is information from Sulu has always been one way – a monopoly of the military and national government.

If one were to engage in authentic transformation processes, development change agents must enter into solid partnerships with communities that can serve as a channel for community empowerment. Partnership is only made possible on the basis of confidence. It begins with a cultural exchange that opens up to building trust and friendship. Cultural exchanges and awareness promote greater understanding between outsiders and local communities. Understanding leads to friendship and the first step towards building trust.  It necessitates a face-to-face, person-to-person encounter, through good times and hard times, and over a long period of time. Then, one realizes, that indeed there are no barriers to religion and culture.  The values of love, peace, and generosity of spirit are universal. It is to be found among the Tausugs of Sulu, the Yakans of Basilan and the Sama of Tawi tawi and other peoples in the Sulu Archipelago.

The obvious limitation for many INGOs and NGOs, which may have the honest intention to help the people in these islands, is the security constraint. This is understandable. Hence, many end up managing programs by remote control and are compelled to make decisions that are most often detrimental to the lives of people other than their own, hiring consultants or sub contractors who write proposals and visit sites for a very limited period of time, if at all, then end up with conclusions or recommendations for projects that are most likely destined to fail. It becomes a typical case of “phantom aid creating phantom capacity that dissipates as soon as the external ‘expert’ returns home and the funding dries up”. (ActionAid International’s Real Aid Report, May 2005)

It is likewise frustrating to witness how national government officials go for some hours of “consultation” or field project visits. As it was in Sulu and may be true for other areas in the ARMM, it is often during these disruptive VIP visits that people get to see their own local leaders who stay and leave at the same time the national officials and/or foreign guests come and go. Even some NGOs, both in development and humanitarian work, may be guilty of doing this. They pass by for a day or so, carry out assessments, and bring back with them action steps that were intended to do well but end up doing more harm due to poor guidance and shallow understanding of the socio-cultural context and the nuances of the conflict on the ground, and most particularly, a weak anchor on principles of engagement in conflict areas.

For those that choose to and are able to work in these conflict areas, these individuals are challenged to undergo a real change of attitude of humility in order to, themselves, get transformed. It also requires a leap of faith to trust friends and partners to provide the physical security to keep one from harm. Last year, when I heard word getting around that the Abu Sayyaf was allegedly eyeing my team and me as we were carrying out our water and sanitation program in various locations in mainland Sulu, I deliberately passed on the issue to the people. The security problem was as much their problem as it was ours. Together, we enhanced our internal security protocols without having to arm ourselves (it was not an option for the team anyway). They looked out for our safety and took serious responsibility for our well-being. Above all, with God’s grace, this also was made possible because we have established the bond of friendship tested through many difficult times. Each one felt that our joys and pains are to be shared.

THE QUEST FOR PEACE: THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE ABU SAYYAF

There was no doubt that our quest for water was a quest for peace. It was clear to the team from the very beginning that our work cannot just simply be about water and sanitation. After all the problem is not just about water as it is not just about the Abu Sayyaf.  We were not in Sulu to construct a mere physical facility. We were there to begin to heal - to open up opportunities for a dejected people to bring back their self respect and collective pride for the good work they are carrying out for their community, in stark contrast to what they have been so used to see and subjected to – substandard and abandoned projects carried out for selfish intentions. We began our approach without stressing on monetary figures but rather on the willingness and desire to undertake something out of free will without having to think about financial compensation or reward.

Albeit in the midst of these complexities, organizational limitations and misplaced demands and expectations, we were able to endure and carry out some modest positive progress in our water and sanitation program for the people. The social pool indeed took time to spin but it was worth the long wait. People have to be made to understand simply through all their physical senses that programs and projects can have high impact and yet be very cost effective and replicable. There were simple, yet enduring, celebrations that sealed the bond. The virtues of patience and perseverance have become treasured outcomes for each individual in the team, likewise for the rest of the communities.

A MUTUAL TRANSFORMATIVE PROCESS OF ENGAGEMENT

There is so much more to learn from communities in the conflict zones that have been through a lot of difficulties than any one can profess to teach. If at all, a peace and development worker’s humble role is to try and work with the communities, most of which are not sufficiently able to articulate their priorities, in eliciting untapped capacities engaging in a very delicate process of value transformation. Indeed, the transformation process is a personal and collective journey that is mutually beneficial. It is important that the program development and implementation processes itself must imbue the elements of value transformation. It is essentially a handholding process that opens the mind, touches the heart and moves the person to act not merely for oneself but for the good of others. Hence, each player must be very conscious of promoting ethical principles. With the dignity of the human person always consistently in mind, we need to uphold downward accountability aiming at optimal results and adopting creative ways to achieve these.

One’s vision for peace must be infused with sustained commitment and endless optimism. It is not an easy task.

FORMATION OF PEACE VIGILANTES

The Tabang Mindanaw Sulu Peace Study underscores one of the core principles for developing a culture of peace:  that any gain achieved along the road to peace must be jealously guarded, as these can disappear overnight – as they did many times in the recent past in Sulu – February 2005 and November 2005, and its upsurge in 2006, and with Oplan Ultimatum launched by the AFP against the Abu Sayyaf and the Jemaah Islamiyah, and the ongoing Oplan Ultimatum 2.  We are apprehensive that it is happening in Basilan again. Many locals are worried that the tasking of Army Chief Lt. General Romeo Tolentino to lead the operations against the Abu Sayyaf augurs a grimmer scenario of war and destruction for the Sulu Archipelago.

Peace building is 24/7 vigilance and is more often very frustrating than rewarding. Given difficult hurdles that communities are already confronted with, the little victories are a big cause to celebrate collectively. Such public rituals will continue to inspire the forces of peace to persevere. Guarding and preserving the peace is certainly much more difficult than probably catching the Abu Sayyaf (assuming honest to goodness military intelligence works).

An observation from my limited direct exposure among Tausug communities tells me that the Tausug warriors are armed with a natural gut instinct that has been cultivated over time having to deal with various conquering forces for the past 616 years Sulu has existed.  Perhaps winning the peace is much like fighting a war; it comes from the deepest innate force within the human person. The authentic breed of Tausugs imbues the age-old wisdom and set of principles that explain their sheer bravery and courage. This is the same spirit that will compel them to become warriors for peace. It is from these communities of conflict and post conflict that a new breed of leaders can be tapped. Many promising ones remain untapped and should be given appropriate exposure and opportunities to hone their natural skills for leadership and set examples of community service of which Islam speaks.

CHANGE OF DEVELOPMENT PARADIGM

Fundamentally, assistance often fails because it is externally driven and founded on an out-dated development framework. In the pursuit of human security to win the peace, one must take note that conflict areas are caught in volatile situations. Hence, there is a demand to be flexible, to step back and be able to make turns in different directions at the right time. The traditional mode of sequential programming targeting specific outputs for a specific period is outdated.  This has been the weakness of many foreign funded projects.  Every subsequent step takes off from deep reflection and collective planning, and some consensus building. Each model of engagement is going to be different and context specific but the common denominator begins with local knowledge and choice.  We must offer a range of policy options to communities to enable them to assess the implications of the various choices open to them. We must find creative ways that will not restrict but rather promote the ability of the poor and marginalized to make their own policy choices.

Even as long term institutional building is crucial, there is a need to balance in what seems to be a lengthy gestation period of the potential impact of training programs vis a vis the demands in conflict situations. In winning the peace, time is of the essence so that creative interventions must work out a balance to prevent new conflicts that feed on current ones. Most often than not, as we often witness, response has been too little, too late.  Timely and well thought out action that could keep a community from sliding back into conflict, which is renewed and much worse, is often missed out. The distinct opportunity for peace building comes at its ripest moment. One cannot afford to miss this chance. But one would be able to seize the opportunity as it presents itself, if one were to be on the ground, exercising utmost vigilance and courage.

For the moment, local institutions, which are faced with many constraints including political compromises, will hardly be able to quickly respond to a crisis or anticipate such, more so in distant communities where it has yet no constituency base.  Your normal working bureaucracies (a false assumption) are out of sync to the urgent needs of a conflict or post-conflict situation.

A positive development that is worth monitoring in Sulu is the Tan Administration that seems to have a serious desire and more determination to get governance to work. The second positive factor is the presence of a Joint Task Force Comet Major General Ruben Rafael, which is struggling to institute reforms among the various contending AFP units operating in Sulu and convert the soldiers into true “protectors of the people”.  The internal organizational squabble among military commands is intense in Sulu, which in fact manifests itself in poorly coordinated and failed ground operations. Both face very tremendous challenges and need to be supported.
 
HUMAN SECURITY ACT 2007: A MOVEMENT BACKWARD TO AN ABYSS

Human security as espoused by the United Nations in contrast to how the Philippine Government defines it cannot wait. Tragically, the Arroyo Administration has geared itself up on a reverse mode. Its sole strategy to win the peace is by going to war. How can death and destruction possibly bring about peace? For many Filipinos on the verge of daily survival, this is horribly disturbing. For many Basilanos and Suluanos who have not yet recuperated from the psychosocial trauma of war, this is very dangerous.

Winning the peace means providing basic services. People need food and shelter, clean water, basic education for a minimum life of dignity. In Sulu, many communities displaced for many years, do not even ask for a bed for the night, they just want to be able to go home to their ancestral roots to sleep soundly under the moon and the stars. To this day, many communities in Patikul and Indanan, Sulu, which have been displaced for at least five years, have not been able to return to their farmlands and home communities, which have become a “no man’s land” due to intermittent but sometimes relentless military operations. To this day, only three out of ten families have access to clean water. More than 90% of water sources TM has randomly tested in Sulu are e-coli contaminated. Life expectancy for one born in Sulu is 52.8 years.

Winning the peace means provision for alternative livelihoods. Without a source of income, the odds of renewed instability are enormously enhanced. People require immediate short-term personal security to be able to plant and harvest a crop, fish for the next meal, and attend to their cattle.

Winning the peace needs new institutions and empowered communities. It depends on good governance that is fair and transparent and relies on the rule of law. It requires a good police force, an honest to goodness justice system, and dedicated civil servants. It demands the active participation of all stakeholders in setting their own agenda for development and peace, and working for its realization.

Winning the peace means social justice and respect for human rights. Civilian authorities and CSOs must assert the respect for human rights, particularly of communities caught in conflict. Where communities have now become the battle zones almost always render civilians as victims of the crossfire, and most often as suspected accomplice. Innocent civilians in these battle zones end up as mere casualties of war or “collateral damage”.  The ICRC People on War Report explains that, “At the end of the 20th century, civilians have moved to centre stage in the theatre of war, which in the past was fought mainly on battlefields. The fundamental shift in the character of war is illustrated by a stark statistic: in World War I, nine soldiers were killed for every civilian life lost. In today’s wars, it is estimated that 10 civilians die for every soldier or fighter killed in battle”. At this instance, hostilities will worsen and cause the conflict to spread. Ultimately, the underlying causes of conflict must be addressed. And the primary cause remains to be social injustice and the disrespect for human rights.

SOME CASES OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AGAINST INNOCENT CIVILIANS

1. Fourteen-year-old Abdulhakim Abbibul was on his way home with his friend, 20 year old Sarib Jumdail on the evening of 19 February 2007 in Sitio Kasambuhan, Tagbak, Indanan. They came home from the errand of buying rice and, after a brief stopover to watch a favorite telenovela, “Jumong” at a neighbor’s house. Unknowingly, Scout Rangers, who have been operating in the area, allegedly had a mis-encounter that ended up with the bullet-ridden dead body of Abdulhakim and a severely wounded Sarib. Sarib was able to run despite the multiple gunshot wounds from M14 and M16 rifles and was able to inform their relatives about the incident. It took a while for the family of Abdulhakim to locate his body just before it was to be buried in the town’s cemetery anonymously.  This incident caused over a hundred families to hastily evacuate in the middle of the night to a nearby public school in Kasambuhan. To this day, the case has not been resolved. No one has taken responsibility for the death of an innocent child and the wounding of a young man who was even fearful to go to the provincial hospital for necessary treatment.

2. On April 26, 2007, Jul Ahmad Amdanan, 15 years of age, was walking in the Upper Mangalis area, Barangay Buansa, Indanan. He was looking for coconuts to harvest, as this is one of the livelihood activities that he and his father are involved in, harvesting coconuts for different landowners. At around 11 a.m. as he was looking up at the coconut trees, he heard someone call out to him in Tagalog, ordering him to stop and approach. When he looked in the direction of the voice, he saw several soldiers. His immediate reaction was to run because, as he explained to one of his relatives, he believed he would be beheaded by the soldiers. As he ran, the soldiers shot at him. He was hit at the back of his right ear and his left buttocks. He continued running until he fell unconscious. Some residents recognized the boy and informed his parents. Jul Ahmad’s father was in a state of shock for several days following this incident.

Because of the bullet embedded in his right thigh, Jul Ahmad is now unable to gather coconuts as he did in the past to help earn a living for his family. The Amdanan family consists of the parents and nine children, with ages ranging from 4 years to 29 years. Actually, the Amdanans had 12 children but three died, and they are now left with 9. Of the 9 children, only one is working, the eldest, 29 years of age, at a coffee shop in downtown Jolo. Of the 8 other children only 2 are in school. Jul Ahmad himself only reached grade 4 and then had to drop out because of poverty and the need to help his father, being the second oldest boy.

Despite the tragedy that struck this very poor family, the Amdanans can only be grateful for the medical attention extended to them by the military, which had facilitated his 28-day confinement at the SouthCom hospital. No case report as to which military unit responsible for shooting and causing debilitating injury and trauma to Jul Ahmad, has been recorded and filed. This poor and humble family can only say ‘thank you’ for the medical assistance extended by people within the same organization that caused the boy’s suffering in the first place. This is typical in Sulu, where aggrieved parties are not even aware of their basic human rights and/or just plain scared to raise them.

3. OTHER CASES:  On two different occasions, in Patikul, in August 2006, two parents visited us to lament the tragedy that struck their children. These young men, Abbas Mara, 30, evacuee from Darayan and Amil Asri Sirajan, 30, evacuee from Bakung went to their farms in the hinterland on separate occasions to harvest fruits to save for the Ramadhan. Upon seeing soldiers, it is instinctual for people, particularly boys and children, to run. Even if they were unarmed, these men were shot dead. Again, it was reported to be another case of an Abu Sayyaf member or supporter. Case closed.

I had personally raised the matter to the then newly arrived JTFC General Ruben Rafael at his office. He had advised me to inform the civilians not to run away when they see soldiers. I had courteously rebutted the General to say that he needed to instruct the soldiers not to point their arms and shoot civilians particularly those that are unarmed. I remember back then, during the Estrada all-out-war in Central Mindanao, when Tabang Mindanaw did a random survey among IDPs in Lanao del Sur, Cotabato, Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat as to why the people refused to return to their home communities despite the government’s call to return home, the number one response was the fear brought about by the presence of armed government soldiers. The mere sight of the men in uniform is cause of terror.

At the right time, I would like to share my own personal case of harassment and gross misbehavior by the marines in Kulay-Kulay, Panamao last June 3. More than two months since the case was filed with the Marine Force South office in Zamboanga with the assistance of Major General Rafael, nothing moved. For someone who is already aware of her human rights and is able to document and follow through, concerned authorities just brazenly take such cases for granted and cover the tracks of their erring comrades. What more for ordinary Suluanos? No case of human rights violations as far as I know have been documented and much less resolved. The Commission on Human Rights, despite many calls in Sulu to establish its presence there, is unable to set up its own office for “lack of budget”. The aggrieved parties are left to endure the injustice or take the law in their hands.

HIGH LEVEL OF MISTRUST

There continues to be a high level of mistrust of the military among many people in
Sulu.

Mr. Victor M. Taylor, in a study on ‘Developing a Culture of Peace in Sulu’ cites, “Over the last 442 years, not a single generation of Suluanos has experienced uninterrupted peace in Sulu during their lifetime. During this period of almost 450 years of continuous siege, the face of the enemy was not only that of the white Spaniard or American, but for the most part that of the Christian Filipino soldier. In like manner, built into the mindset of the Christian Filipino is the view of Muslims as enemies. How often have we heard that the ‘The best Moro is a dead Moro’ or the contemporary ‘Muslims as terrorists, juramentados’?

Furthermore “the actuations of the military in Sulu such as the disregard for basic public courtesy, the practice of appropriating private possessions particularly if homes have been abandoned, have reinforced this mistrust”. The absence of trust in the military on the part of the civilian populace then leads to:

• Lack of cooperation with the military
• Suspicion regarding objectives & motivations of military activities, which leads them to believe that deception & disinformation are the standard tactics of the military
• Outright hostility & counter-reaction

This type of reaction on the part of the civilian populace in turn:

• Confirms the military’s suspicions about the hostility of the populace
• Heightens the state of alertness on the part of the military
• Leads to intensified operations
• Increases the risk of human rights violations, i.e., “collateral damage”

It is a vicious cycle of vengeance, destruction and death.

FREEDOM FROM HUMILIATION

Of all the key elements in the human security framework, peace and social justice are the most critical. The freedom from humiliation is the heart and soul that demarcates the life and death of a people. A proud Islamic community like Panglima Estino is constantly up in cudgels for peace – fiercely guarding its Dar-ul Salam (Abode of Peace). The local leaders, who are the sons and daughters of brave warriors that fought the war at Sibalo Hill during martial law, are as valiant as their parents once were. Any uncoordinated move by military authorities that ignores local civilian authorities in the conduct of its pursuit operations against rebel groups or bandits could backfire and potentially bring to life the ghosts of the past. At one time in an exclusive dialogue with OPAPP and Joint Task Force Comet, the local leaders cited their quandary: “Ang hinahanap ng Army, asset ng Marines at ang hinahanap ng Marines, asset ng Army. Ang mga namamatay ay puro assets na inilalabas na ASG member.” The people are confused.

HEALING AND RECONCILIATION

Reconciliation is an inevitable step on the road to healing. No developmental program can do well unless there is some confidence that ghosts of the past can be revisited without some agony. Too many times I have listened to stories, shared by Tausugs, of horrendous human rights atrocities done against them and their ancestors by government soldiers. Whether the event took place during martial law or in the recent past, it brings the same sensation of deep anger and pain as if it just took place the previous day. Perhaps one should try to look deeper into the need to understand the reasons behind the gross physical mutilation done against government soldiers as was reported in Basilan or as it has happened in Sulu many times.

HOPE NEVER WITHERS IN TIMES OF UNPEACE AND DISASTERS

In any disaster situation, a humanitarian worker always keeps hope aflame in her heart. Indeed, the best of the human spirit triumphs in the most difficult circumstances when resilience is fostered often in the frontlines. I have been blessed to witness this strength many times both in conflict situations and in natural disasters.

The vital, unprecedented path to peace and development in Sulu and Basilan is not without hope. What I see and have witnessed is that communities have a strong desire for peace more than any other. It is from this desire that solutions for peace can emanate. Winning the peace is providing people the opportunity to decide on their fate and work their way towards a life of dignity, a dignity that has been robbed from them by the nature of conflict. They must be involved in every step of the development engagement that they decide to be a priority. Any gain that impacts on the community will be its exclusive collective pride. Any failure will be its collective source of learning and growth. Unfortunately, PGMA’s call to war in the guise of peace is robbing the people of Sulu and Basilan once again of this opportunity.

The long, arduous path to peace is essentially a healing path – to regain trust and pride in one’s own self, and in one’s fellow human being. A healing path that makes the human spirit truly alive from the goodness and joy it espouses. A healing path that is able to reach out to others in a respectful and affirmative manner.

THE CHALLENGES WE ALL NEED TO FACE IN PEACE BUILDING AND CONFLICT TRANSFORMATION

Civil society has a very important role in harnessing and promoting a policy environment conducive for transforming communities in conflict. The critical engagement, over and above downward accountability, is in the mobilization of a strong lobby force for national policies on peace and governance that respect the peoples’ clamor and right to peace.  CSOs must lobby national and local governments to re-establish the rule of law in conflict and post conflict areas, and uphold its “responsibility to protect”, and to renew institutions for peace, social justice and human rights.

It is tragic that our own government is turning out to be our biggest problem. It brings us to war, not peace.  The Human Security Act of 2007 is its legacy of a big mistake. As natural disasters are about to strike our country once again this last semester of the year, often a disaster expected to be worse than the previous one, does our country need another human disaster of its own making? 

WARS ARE ALWAYS WORSE THAN NATURAL DISASTERS

War has very deep psychosocial implications in the individual and collective psyche. It leaves indelible scars. It is not just the basic physical needs that are lost and found wanting by the displaced peoples. It is essentially the restoration of human dignity.

“Nature may cause harm unintentionally, while humans are capable of causing harm intentionally. While in the case of natural disasters, individuals may begin to doubt that the world has any sense, victims of man-made disasters tend to view the world and themselves in a more negative light.” (Janoff-Bulman 1992) As we have witnessed too many times in our country, “Natural disasters may kill, but they do not threaten people’s self-respect. Human failure and violence do.” (Welsaeth 1994)

“In armed conflicts, there is a deliberate, conscious attempt by armed parties to subdue or inflict harm on individual members of opposition groups, to dominate or shatter the social structure of the ‘enemy’, and/or to capture damage or destroy their material resources.” (Meyers 1991)

These are the standard psychological and social tools of repression that every humanitarian and development worker must be aware of.

MILITARY HUMANITARIANISM

Just prior to the launching of Oplan Ultimatum 2, the military in Sulu was very proud to announce the conclusion of Oplan Ultimatum 1 and the launching of Oplan Kaunlaran “to win the hearts and minds of the people”.  As it unravels at the moment, the reverse is true. The military humanitarianism that comes in the guise of medical missions, or civic action programs may be too good to be true. In the context of conflict, humanitarianism by a party to conflict is still suspect for intelligence data gathering, upholding a clear military objective. I have witnessed and heard stories about medcap missions done by both US and local military forces in Sulu distributing wrong medicines and, worse, triggering dependence on a populace that have yet to experience an authentic and empowering community based health program. Publicity is very favorable but inside stories will never be heard of and remain undocumented among people who are basically unaware of their basic human rights or are otherwise too scared to speak up. If one truly cared about the health of the people, why not assist in instituting sustainable programs to make rural health clinics operate instead of the deluge of medical missions repeatedly in the same areas? But then this is not the objective of military humanitarianism. Military medcaps take place not for this reason. This is the role of health government personnel and the local governments to undertake.

Humanitarian work essentially is about advancing people’s welfare & upholding their right to human dignity. This should be the end & not the means to some other objective.

DILEMMA FOR HUMANITARIANS

It must be reiterated that humanitarians operate merely on the basis of need and not to uphold any military, political or religious standpoint. Humanitarianism must preserve its neutrality and independence at all times possible. The evolving trend in war situations locally and globally has made humanitarian work extremely difficult and puts humanitarians at greater risks. Many times, we find ourselves walking on a path laden with broken glass, becoming suspects to both parties to conflict.

THE DELUGE OF AID

More than just administering aid, which can take the form of infrastructures, the assistance must be about harnessing people’s potential to manage these efficiently in order to uplift their dignity. Everyone must take care not to foster a ‘dependency culture’. There is a need to be sensitive about respecting the resilience of people, acquired over time, by the force of a repeated circumstance. Interventions must not lead to the degradation of local capacity. In order to search for the answers, one must rely heavily on their local counterparts for local knowledge and understanding in a manner that will instill pride and respect to people where it is due.

The underlying framework of Human Security is the protection of the vital core of all human lives in a way that enhances human freedom and human fulfillment. It has reference to freedom from FEAR, freedom from WANT and freedom from HUMILIATION. Human security enhances and ensures internal state security.

A war in Basilan and Sulu will only lock away these fundamental human freedoms; it would be a deep and ugly plunge into the abyss.

Milet B. Mendoza was the Executive Coordinator of Tabang Mindanaw for the past nine years since April 1998. She has served under the Office of the President’s various peace agencies (Peace Commission, National Unification Commission and OPAPP) for 10 years since 1989. She now remains as a non-government individual serving as a humanitarian volunteer, and peace and development worker in the Sulu Archipelago. She is also a founding member of the Asian Disaster Reduction and Response Network (ADRRN).