Analysis

Talking Peace, Waging War

Government forces are on the offensive, both on the Moro secessionist front and on the Marxist guerrillas. Government has been holding on-and-off peace talks with the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) since 1986, with the latter always under pressure to “surrender or else.” President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s recent “Formal Peace Accord” seems to be no different.

By Bobby Tuazon 
Bulatlat.com

The way the Macapagal-Arroyo administration is deploying divisions of troops in the countryside makes one wonder whether it is serious in holding peace talks with either the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) or the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) at all. The continuing militarization of the countryside particularly in suspected New People’s Army (NPA) turfs has also given rise to a series of human rights violations committed not only against suspected guerrilla sympathizers but also legal activists.

Human rights groups, notably the alliance Karapatan, have said that both military and police forces have been emboldened to launch bloodier crackdowns against the armed Left one after the other, ever since President Macapagal-Arroyo branded what defense officials call the country’s No. 1 “security threat” as “terrorist.”

In every region where the NPA is known to operate, several battalions of government soldiers are deployed waging relentless suppression campaigns against the guerrillas and their mass base. The current counter-insurgency campaign is the latest to be waged by government since the Marcos years or some 30 years ago, with generals vowing in each phase to break the backbone of the NPA. Failing in this, the Aquino presidency tried to lure the armed Left to the peace process by negotiating for a truce in 1986-1987. The massacre of scores of peasant protesters in Mendiola early 1987 – and reports that military rightists were out to assassinate members of the NDFP peace panel - prompted the latter to withdraw from the talks.

Succeeding administrations also tried to dangle the peace process, initiating talks with the NDFP while, at the same time, escalating armed offensives against the NPA. In the Ramos presidency, several peace agreements were forged between the two peace panels including the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights – International Humanitarian Law (CARHR-IHL). Until today, however, the agreements appear to be in paper only with government often accused of insincerity and of committing violations.

Utrecht talks

When it met the NDFP panel last Feb. 19 in Ultrecht for exploratory talks, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) side came up with a surprise package: a “Final Peace Accord” (FPA) that was drafted by Malacañang on Jan. 17. It took no time for the NDFP panel, led by Luis Jalandoni, to call the FTA an instrument to force – yet again – the NDFP to capitulate.

The FPA, while trying to address some specific items of the NDFP’s peace agenda, such as human rights, the right to self-determination, an independent national economy, as well as political and constitutional reform, requires the NDFP particularly its armed revolutionary member-organization, the NPA, to surrender.

Part IV of the FPA, “End of Hostilities and Disposition of Forces,” shrouds capitulation as a “voluntary of act surrender, with the (NPA’s) honor and dignity intact.” Upon signing of the FPA followed by a cessation of hostilities, members of the NPA, as well as those of the NDFP and the Communist Party, will be granted “absolute and unconditional amnesty” and their firearms surrendered, it further provides.

The GRP panel, headed by Silvestre Bello, explained that the terms cited in Part IV will be in effect six months after the FPA is signed.

“Outright capitulation”

Conversely, Jalandoni called the “peace accord” a proposal that says nothing about resolving the roots of the armed conflict which, in previous agreements with the GRP, must be addressed to ensure a “just and lasting peace.” It is all about “outright capitulation” by the NDFP, he said.

In the Utrecht meeting, Bello told the NDFP panel that the GRP desires to speed up the peace process by doing away with the four-point agenda that had been earlier agreed upon, namely,  a comprehensive agreement on respect for human rights and international humanitarian law, economic and social agreement, political and constitutional reform, and end of hostilities.

In short, the “new process” proposed by the Bello panel would do away with signing an agreement for each agenda so as to move on to the next items until a “final peace accord” that wraps up everything is reached.

When it was presented, the FPA became also a pressure point to the NDFP even as it also appeared to be linked to the “terrorist” tag on the Left. While the Utrecht talks were ongoing, Foreign Secretary Blas Ople told NDFP chief political consultant Jose Maria Sison to accept the GRP proposal now otherwise the “terrorist” tag on him and the armed Left would stand in the U.S. state department’s and the European Union council’s list of “foreign terrorist organizations” (FTOs).

“Once there is a peace agreement,” Ople said, “I will request the EU, the United States and other countries to delist (the rebels) as terrorists. If they sign, they will no longer be terrorists.”

“Total and absolute amnesty”

Surrender terms were at the back of Ople’s mind: “Our entire focus now is for Sison to sign a final peace agreement…If he signs the peace agreement, then he will be covered by the blanket authority…a total and absolute amnesty.”

Present in the Utrecht talks, aside from Bello and a staff, was Silvestre Afable, former press secretary. Afable, Malacañang inside sources say, is with the “hardliners” in the Cabinet cluster that is in charge of the peace talks, along with Ople, Defense Secretary Angelo Reyes and National Security Adviser Roilo Golez. Apprently, Bello is identified with the “moderates” which include other GRP panel members.

Much like in previous administrations, the “hardliners” continue to have the upper hand in government’s “peace process.” In the often-interrupted talks with the NDFP, it is Reyes who reportedly calls the shots now. In the first GRP-NDFP talks in Oslo, Norway two months after Macapagal-Arroyo took power in January 2001, Reyes was reportedly instrumental in government’s decision to suspend the talks following the assassination of Marcos intelligence officer, Rodolfo Aguinaldo.

Under whose authority the GRP panel is holding talks with the NDFP – whether under the defense department headed by Reyes or the civilian, which is supposed to be symbolized by the presidency – now remains a question. This and other questions have prompted many peace advocates to entertain doubts about the prospects of government’s peace initiatives even if Malacañang officials have publicly stated that formal talks may yet resume in Oslo soon.

As far as the NDFP is concerned, they’s rather negotiate with the next president. Bulatlat.com

Back to top

We want to know what you think of this article.