Let’s agree on one thing. Indulging our fully justified sense of outrage, and calling on the government to stop the peace talks with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front because of last Tuesday’s barbaric ambush in Basilan, is the easier option. The harder (indeed, for some, almost impossible) choice is to keep one’s head.
Leave aside the posturing of the usual congressmen who have always been against the very notion of a peace agreement with Moro separatists; we are better off considering the opinion of the likes of Dean Bocobo of Philippine Commentary, who is undoubtedly an intelligent man. What does his screed against the measured position taken by the Inquirer, in the matter of the savage beheadings of our Marines in Basilan, tell us, but that even intelligent men can get it wrong?
The Inquirer editorial’s appeal for “an iron fist and an open mind” seems to me to strike the necessary balance between the need to bring the decapitators to swift justice —- preferably in the form of a massive military counterattack —- and the greater need to resolve the Moro separatist issue. Resolution, considering our history, the state of our military, and the nature of the separatist movement, may best be achieved through a peace agreement. Dean may not agree, but surely he can grant those who think differently from him the same reasonableness and patriotism he seems to assume for himself?
Tall order, that. Dean writes:
The editorial uses all the right buzz words, but it is dripping with insincerity, disingenuity and manages to blame the authorities for the tragedy. The motivation of the editorial is to embarrass the govt and excuse the terrorists.
Just because Dean cannot wrap his mind around it, doesn’t mean that the idea of a balanced response is unsound. In fact, by slyly equating “fair conclusion” with excuses for the terrorists, Dean is being intellectually dishonest. Is a fair peace agreement necessarily a surrender of the government’s sovereign prerogatives or a capitulation before the forces of terrorism? Dean protests too much.
The editorial, it seems to me, calls for retaliating with full force against those who beheaded our Marines. But it does not adopt the knee-jerk reaction of some, that the peace talks be scuttled, immediately, because of last Tuesday’s barbarity.
For once, an Inquirer editorial position agrees completely with the official Malacanang policy. A short statement from the Palace, employing a memorable turn of phrase, formulated it succinctly.
“We will run after those who killed our Marines, but we will not run away from the peace talks,” Arroyo said in a statement forwarded by Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye.
“Our desire to see the killers punished is matched only by our determination to forge peace,” she added.
That seems reasonable, and patriotic, enough.
October 5th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
teejay,
I agree with you 100%….the country I am staying right now…theres no doubt…filipinoes are much better than the people in this country….
The sad thing is…dahil puro magagaling ang mga pilipino…yun ang dahilan kung bakit hindi nagkakaintindihan..yun ang dahilan kung bakit sa isang partido, ang isang member na di maeelect para tumakbo sa isang position sa halalan…yung member na yun at magtatayo ng sariling partido..and so on and so forth…yan ang resulta kung bakt ang dami nating partido hehehehe bukod sa partido national marami pang partido sa local hahahaha
isa pang ejemplo ng di pagkakaisa at ayaw magkaisa…dito sa blog na to…kung basahin mo lahat ng blogs dito..wala talang pag-asang makikita na tayo dito na mga bloggers eh magkakaisa tungkol sa pamolitika ng pilipinas…
merong taga erap/fpj at sympre anti GMA
merong maka GMA at anti erap/fpj
etc etc etc
ang dalawang grupo na yan…i think never talagang magkakaisa at magkakaintindihan..
meron pa pala…yung mga maka Marcos…at nagsasabing mas safe pa ang buhay noonng martial law kesa ngayon hahaha
kanya kanyang galeng…kanya kanyang depensa sa pagiging magaling
October 5th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Suma Total: Unless the government of the Philippines and it’s people renounce violence and aggression there will be no peace in that country. It’s such a shame, my country of birth is a paradise compared to my adopted one now. I always say, if this kind of government system is the one applied to the Philippines, it should have been great. This country produces the first police force in the world but yet they refused to armed themselves with guns on the street. Can you imagined why? Because it’s true that if you armed your police force on the bit, the opposition will armed themselves better and more to compete with the police and so it goes. Anyway, I already concluded that the human rights of a poor Filipino had never ever existed at least in my life time. Human rights are only available in the P.I.to those who can afford. What can we do to change this, education?
July 24th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
Whoho! Slow down, Dean Jorge Bocobo! This is exactly what these guys want to happen, the government to get angry and withdraw from the peace talks…and turn the table against the government…the government is the problem.
I still think that we have to continue the peace talks but around new set of conditions. First, you do not want another kidnapping of the negotiators to happen, second, you do not want more beheadings.
Do we have all the facts on these incidents? Are we fed with information that confuse us and lead us to a direction that would lead us to stay away from the negotiation? If this is so, why? Who would have stakes in such a decision? Whose interests are being pushed here?
I would still keep an open mind. I would still continue to negotiate because this is what loving our brothers in this part of the Philippines means. Or are we negotiating with the wrong groups? Are we sending the right messages? …or they are sensing, hollow, insincere words and promises, lies and more lies from this government?
Just asking.
July 22nd, 2007 at 4:44 pm
There’s a better way than going to war with the MILF and the ASG. Let us warn them that if they did not surrender, we will ask our Senators to conduct an investigation (in search of legislation of course) about the Basilan inciddent and orders the Sargeant-at-Arms to arrest them if they did not appear in the Senate. The Senate can also cite them in contempt if they refused to attend the Senate hearing.
July 22nd, 2007 at 4:45 am
Both John and the Dean are speaking logic, even at temperatures on the boiling points. Here’s a point to consider with regards this peace talk: The peace talk between the government and the rebels have been going on for more than half a decade already. Still, inspite of that, war and atrocities goes on. The government is not making any headway to what it wants to accomplish vis a vis the Muslim rebellion in the south. On the contrary the situation there is continuously regressing all throughout the whole episode, always to the disadvantage of the Philippines as one souvereign nation and one government entity. In view of this very conspicuous factor, it could be said that, given two alternative options, one being peace talk, the other no peace talk, and we have tried the first without any success, isn’t it logical that we should try the second? With due apology to John, eh, John?