How Far Would You Go for Peace?

I have in my mind the fate of what was thought as a very significant agreement that – at least from the perspective of its proponents — should have brought, or at least paved the rightful way for, lasting peace in Mindanao (South of the Philippines).  Moro or Muslim rebellion in the Philippines has a very deep historical root.  And all the governments in the Philippines — beginning from the Spaniards, the Americans, and the Philippine Republic governments — have practically tried to deal with it.  Understandably, thus, when the Memorandum of Agreement on the issue of Ancestral Domain was purportedly signed by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP), hopes were high that at long last the light is already seen signalling the end of the tunnel.

However, to date, the MoA is already history after it was struck down by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on the ground of constitutionality.  Worse, it even became an article of complaint against the sitting President of the Philippines in the latest and fourth impeachment proceeding that was lodged against her. 

Lest I may be construed as pro the Philippine President, let me clarify myself.  I deem it not unfortunate that it became one of the basis for impeachment against President Gloria Arroyo.  I deem it unfortunate because the peace issue in Mindanao was used quite clearly as nothing but maneuver for political expediency.  Precisely, what makes the matter worse is that the concern for peace seems to be not a part of agenda of the present Philippine government.

I raise the question, thus: how far would we really go for peace?

I stumbled across a report coming from a peace and reconciliation training session in Goroka last week about the commission of infanticide by Papua New Guinea women for the purpose of ending tribal war.  The report was bannered by an Australian newspaper, The National.  Accordingly, two PNG women made the revelation about “their unbearable crime” in the Gimi area of Okapa, in the Eastern Highlands.  It was during the tribal conflict that began in 1986, and which lasted for more or less twenty years.  The women were struggling to feed their children after their men went off to fight.  Thus, the women in those communities decided to stop producing sons who would continue the long-running tribal fighting.  For by reducing the tribe’s male stock, their men — they hoped — would have to withdraw from fighting.  The women were quoted as saying, “Therefore, all the womenfolk agreed to have all male babies born killed because they have had enough of men engaging in tribal conflicts and bringing misery to them.”  While the number of male babies who were killed during the tribal conflict were not established, it is said that several mothers lost their sons.  Said the women in the peace and reconciliation training session: “…(We) were forced into it as it was the only means available to (us) as women to bring an end to tribal fights.”

The question in the preceding begs to be reiterated: how far would we go for peace?

Should we focus on the intent of the PNG women (and intentionally close our eyes on their questionable means), it is understatement to declare that we must have them as our mentors.

My friend who teaches in the University of the Philippines wrote her views on the failed MoA.  IClearly, one of her succinct point was: in history, we know that for peace, boundaries were even moved as maps were redrawn. 

All for and in the name of peace…