Mindanao History and Culture of Peace Information Caravan for the Youth (MH-COP-ICY)
(A Pre-Mindanao Week of Peace Project)
Ernesto C. Casiple, Jr. (Project-in-Charge)
please visit also http://www.kapayapaankapatidcouncil.blogspot.com/ for details.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Peace and political settlement
(Here is an excerpt of the article I have read. It is about understanding the dynamics of peace and politics in Mindanao with the emphasis on recent GRP-MILF Conflict. Visit Ramon Casiple in http://moncasiple.wordpress.com/personal-musings. He is the executive director of the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform (IPER).)
These are both political rebellions requiring political solutions. However, the government has been treating them historically as armed situations requiring military solutions, influenced, no doubt, by the US counter-insurgency strategies. The record speaks for itself: the government may defeat a particular group, may neutralize its leadership, or may scatter its followers. However–like a many-headed hydra or a resurrecting phoenix–the rebellions continue.
The democratic approach to these conflicts is logically a political accommodation of rebel groups, their grievances, and their agenda. A democratic system works by having all components of the political body compete for and win the support of the majority of the people in fair and free political processes, including elections. Once there is an exclusion of a particular group, then the seeds of conflict are sown.
A democratic approach to political settlement addresses the essential nature of the rebellion, which is political. However, only a democratic regime can implement it successfully. The Nepal political experiment bears watching.
There exist the internal conflicts in the Philippines–between the Government (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), on the one hand, and between the GRP and the Communist Party of the Philippines/New People’s Army/National Democratic Front (CPP/NPA/NDF), on the other hand. The protagonists against the government are the current embodiment of decades-old Moro and class rebellions in the country.
These are both political rebellions requiring political solutions. However, the government has been treating them historically as armed situations requiring military solutions, influenced, no doubt, by the US counter-insurgency strategies. The record speaks for itself: the government may defeat a particular group, may neutralize its leadership, or may scatter its followers. However–like a many-headed hydra or a resurrecting phoenix–the rebellions continue.
The democratic approach to these conflicts is logically a political accommodation of rebel groups, their grievances, and their agenda. A democratic system works by having all components of the political body compete for and win the support of the majority of the people in fair and free political processes, including elections. Once there is an exclusion of a particular group, then the seeds of conflict are sown.
A democratic approach to political settlement addresses the essential nature of the rebellion, which is political. However, only a democratic regime can implement it successfully. The Nepal political experiment bears watching.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Children Part One: Plebeians Initiative
Alay Kalinaw para sa mga Bata/ December 14, 2007, Fatima, General Santos City
Thank you to Kapayapaan Kapatid Council (with the support of the German Technical Cooperation)
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
The Public Administration of Peace and Development:The Sarangani Experience
The Public Administration of Peace and Development:
The Sarangani Experience[1]
By: Ernesto C. Casiple Jr.[2]
(A paper presented to the Class 43rd of Masters in National Defense of the National Defense College, Camp Aguinaldo in Quezon City. Presentation was held at the Environmental Conservtaion and Protection Center (ECPC), Capitol Compound, Alabel Sarangani Province, Philippines on April 18, 2007.)
The unique multicultural view of Mindanao and the challenging frontiers it has experienced showed by the occasional setbacks in development is a breakthrough to redefine livability in terms of the needs of the community. This is brought about by conflicts surrounding the island. Peace and development is viewed as eclectic in terms of definition and applicability. Like public administration per se, peace and development has become inseparable terms to look at growth of a community.
Incorporating peace and development with public administration has even become more complicated and more challenging. But it has never become a burden rather an opportunity to explore the needs of the community and being able to deliver appropriate projects and programs we will call “tool for peace.”
This paper would like to explore on the attempt of the Provincial Government of Sarangani to institutionalize peace and development in its public administration. Institutionalization here would mean formal creation of an office that would both oversee and promote peace and development initiatives of the Province and by external accessing support to fund its resources.
Initial Initiatives
& the Malabod Experience
The signing of the Final Peace Agreement (FPA) in 1996 paved way to attainment of peace in Mindanao. The FPA has gained support from the United Nations. It gave birth to the first phase of the GoP-UN Multi-Donor Programme in Mindanao. SPCPD[3] was created to oversee the second phase of the Programme until the initial months of the phase three (3). This have identified 11[4] Peace and Development Communities in the Province. It must be stressed that Phase 2 focused on MNLF members and their families while the Phase 3 included the Christians and the Lumads as beneficiaries.
During the Phase 3, the PDCs became the central institution of the programme to where the Local Peace and Development Program of the Province was founded.
On the other hand, the Local Peace and Development Program of the Province has a unique beginning. In an article published by the Kalinaw Sarangani[5] on December 2007, it was mentioned that “intermittent crimes such as cattle rustling and robbery became famous in the identified hotspots of the Province. One of the areas of concern on banditry was the Barangay Malabod in Malungon.” The situation in Malabod has worsened that the case has to be coordinated by religious groups and local leaders. Thirteen lawless elements surrendered in December 2000 through the collaborative efforts of local government units. This led to the creation of the then Provincial Task Force for Peace and Development (PTFPD). The LGU Executives believed that the Malabod experience has to be sustained and that the PTFPD was tasked to document the negotiations as well as address the various issues and concerns of the local government units.
Moreover, the peace and development initiatives in the Province was even recognized during the initial partnership between the UN-MDP3 with other stakeholders such as military, police and other cooperating agencies and national government agencies.
On June 2003, Sarangani launched the Provincial Peace Summit (first in the Province and in the Region). The Summit “provided the blueprint for the crafting of the Provincial Peace and Development Strategic Plan.” Still on the same year, “the provincial government replicated the UNMDP3 experience in the Barangays of Ticulab, Mindupok, Upo and Kalaong in Maitum, as its pilot expansion areas for peace and development communities.” The Provincial Peace and Order Council (PPOC) saw the need to oversee the efforts of the Province. Thus, the Peace and Development Committee was created as sub-committee.
Later, Executive Order No. 29, Series of 2004 expanded the membership of the Provincial Task Force for Peace and Development to “include other key national agencies and NGOs.” This paved way to the signing of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Province and the ACT for Peace Programme (the successor pahse of the GoP-UNMDP 3) in 2006. The Province acted as the service provider while the ACT for Peace funds it with the aim to build the gains of the past three phases of the UNDP.
KSU Overview
In 2004, the Provincial Government of Sarangani adopted the Comprehensive Peace and Development Plan[6]. Subsequently, peace and development initiatives are underway through the Special Concerns Division under the Office of the Governor. Branded as a duplicate and replication of functions of other government units, the Province saw the need to mainstream peace and development into one compact unit that will formalize the institutionalization of the culture of peace[7]. Like in other places, the question is always on the difference of a peace and development office to the function of other offices.
Having realized that there is a unique way to resolve conflict, maintain peace and create peace, thus, brings peace and development, Executive Order # 16, Series of 2007 created the Kalinaw Sarangani as the Peace and Development Program of Sarangani Province. The Kalinaw Sarangani[8] handled the Kalinaw Sarangani Unit (referring to the office) under the Office of the Governor.
What made Kalinaw Sarangani unique? While we concede to the fact that the tangible projects delivered to the community may be the same with other offices, the way the projects are realized make it more acceptable and accessible to and by the community. “Kalinaw Sarangani aims to promote and preserve a peaceful and livable Sarangani where the people enjoy basic services and are actively involved in planning development and exercising governance.”
While other offices focus on addressing the issues of poverty and unemployment, the Kaliaw Sarangani incorporated marginalization, lack of access and cultural insensitivity as problems resulting to poverty and conflicts.
Kalinaw Sarangani works with Peace and Development Communities (PDCs). PDCs are Barangays in Sarangani Province that are identified as post-conflict areas and conflict-vulnerable areas. Kalinaw Sarangani also attempts to reach interior Barangays in the Province (e.g. Kinam, New Aklan, Datal Anggas, etc.) The Program would like to capacitate and uplift the living conditions of 50 Barangays in 2010. This is through incorporation of the Culture of Peace (CoP). Of the goals, objectives, and principles of program the makes emphasis on:
pursuing the tenets of peace and development by being catalyst, facilitator, and advocate of peace and development initiatives;
transforming the local communities that have been disturbed by strife and conflict into peace and loving communities meeting basic needs and providing access to basic social services;
facilitating assistance to different force multipliers/ extenders to include tanods, CVOs, rebel returnees, MILF, MNLF and community members affected by conflict; and
adhering to the principle of parallel governance and co-existence of ethno-linguistic group under the paradigm of community living and mutual respect.
The Program operates on three (3) project components namely PEACE, MaP, and Special Project with ACT for Peace. The three (3) project components are necessarily complementing each other. Although, 18 of the 50 PDCs covered in the Program are identified in the Special Project with A4P while the remaining PDCs are called regular PDCs that are PLGU funded.
PEACE Project
The PEACE Project is an acronym of Peace Education through Alliance-building and Community Empowerment. Among others, the projects aims to “increase involvement of key partners (MNLF, MILF, NPA, former bandits, religious groups, CSOs, CVOs, line agencies and others) in peace building, development planning, decision-making and governance.”
MaP Project
The MaP Project stands for Madaris for Peace Project. In has been an enduring objective of the Province preserve its Muslim Heritage through educating the youth in the establishment of Madaris.
A4P Project
The Special Project with the ACT for Peace Programme is a partnership agreement between the Province and the GoP-UNMDP ACT for Peace Programme. Areas of partnership focus on supporting 18 PDCs in the Province by providing institutional development mechanisms to PDCs[9].
Lighting the Candle: 2007 Highlights
The formal birth of Kalinaw Sarangani on September of 2007 was a challenging start. The staff have formed and capacitated as early as July of 2007. As an initial mechanism to remove the feeling of apathy of the former combatants (MNLF) towards the government, the staff underwent teambuilding workshop with the Peace and Development Advocates (PDAs)[10].
This could mean a necessary prelude to the implementation of the program. There have been ground-working on the field. On September 1, 2007 the first Culture of Peace Training were attended by 30 barangay officials in Maligang, Kiamba, seven days after the formal inception of Executive Order # 16, Series of 2007[11] on August 24, 2007.
The following are some highlights in the campaign of the Province to stop conflict and arm struggle[12]:
Kalinaw Sarangani staff (called Peace Coordinators) jointly worked with the Peace and Development Advocates (PDAs) who are former MNLF as community organizers in the ACT for Peace identified PDCs (2007);
Yield of 89 sympathizers of NPA on August 30, 2007 through inter-agency coordination;
Active partnership with government, civilian, and military authorities for the Balik Kinam Project. (Kinam is an interior Barangay in Malapatan. It was identified as neglected and rebel-influenced Barangay. Now, government interventions for development are coming in the area.)
Some tangible projects[13] for the PDCs were also delivered in the hope to alleviate poverty. However, stressed is given on the need to capacitate the people in the identified PDCs. Capacitating them include mechanism for active participation of the community in the local barangay units, formation of people’s organization for enterprise and economic development, activating the tanods and CVOs in the barangay for peace and development.
For the Madaris for Peace Project, 45 Madrasah Centers for established and supported headed by 85 Asatiz. Muslim students are having informal/ private Arabic Language and Islamic Values classes during weekend. This is in line with the goal of the Province to protect the Muslim Cultural heritage in the area.
Before the year ended, a Peace Forum jointly facilitated by the Kalinaw Sarangani and the ACT for Peace Programme through the Mindanao Economic Development Council (MEDCO) and the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP) was held on November 26, 2007. This was attended by major peace stakeholders in the Province with the aim of revealing and sharing the experiences and the efforts towards peace and development.
Recent Interventions
The initial activities conducted in 2007 continue to present. For 2008, 35 PDCs are supported by the Kalinaw Sarangani. Bringing rebel returnees[14] closer to the government is the aim for 2008 while it is understood that key result areas will continue to focus in strengthening peace and development mechanisms in the PDCs.
The 2007 Barangay Elecrtion resulted to the need for continued orientation and reorientation of the program and institutionalization of the culture of peace. Some undelivered 2007 projects were turn-overed to the concerned PDCs.
The opening of 2008 triggered the need to emphasize peace dialogues to resolve conflict in the community. For example, a shooting of Barangay Kagawad in Tuyan, Malapatan resulted to a Peace and Order Dialogue between the B’laans and Muslims in the community facilitated by the Barangay with the assistance of Kalinaw Sarangani. On the other hand, a feeling of apathy between the BLGU in Datu Dani in Kiamba and the residents led to Kadsisinabute (An Intercultural Dialogue for Peace) on March 15, 2008. This was done with the help of the Peace Network[15] and other partners.
Medical missions to various PDCs with the assistance of Intenational Monitoring Team (IMT) highlighted the first quarter of 2008.
Organization & Management
Kalinaw Sarangani, the peace and development program of Sarangani Province, is implemented by the Kalinaw Sarangani Unit under the Office of the Governor. The Governor generally acts as the head approving persona of all transactions of the Unit. The Unit is headed by a Peace Program Officer who heads the program implementation.
Meanwhile, the Program Manager helps the supervision and management of the program. There are also Peace Coordinators (acting as project coordinators in each of the municipalities in the Province). They facilitate the community organizing/ planning and social marketing of the Peace and Development Program.
On the other hand, a Madaris Coordinator manages the Madaris for Peace Project. He is assisted by 85 Asatiz. A Liaison Officer handles the coordination of peace efforts for the PNP, tanods, and CVOs.
A Technical Asssistant assists the Kalinaw Team in data banking and profiling of technical documents.
An administrative assistant and administrative aides plus the driver assists in the overall undertaking of the Program.
Challenges
The Kalinaw Sarangani continues to work on the goal of the Province to promote and preserve a peaceful and livable Sarangani. The specific mandate of the Program is to peace-building in the post-conflict and conflict vulnerable PDCs.
However, the Program cannot escape from the reality that it is critiqued as political. The challenge is for it to be tagged as developmental more than political or at least both. Although its political personality is never a hindrance to achieve goals. After all, everything works in a political spectrum.
A debate on territoriality will also come in. This means that other offices would debate as to the replication of the activities of the program rather than its unique persona. Thus, the Kalinaw Sarangani maintains the effort of institutionalizing the culture of peace at the local level with the inclusion of the promotion of participatory governance. Transforming communities may take decades but at least an initial step has been done.
On the issue of alleviating poverty, Kalinaw Sarangani knows its limit. Remember that Sarangani Province is 4th of the poorest Province in the country. It is good to note however that the Provincial Government has been taking the lead to address this problem.
The above are general challenges to the Program implementation. At the ground level, (I mean at the organization and management level), there is an immediate need to address a gap.
While the Program Management satisfies the requirement for the implementation of the three project-components, there is an increasing demand to more developmental work. The limitation of the program structure is anchored on these three project components. The demand for possible partnerships and collaborations with other agencies are getting high. There are on-going partnership meetings with Habitat for Humanity. Petron Foundation is eyeing the Province for partnership through building mosques. GTZ has long wanted the Province to be its partner in peace and conflict transformation. Asia Foundation is courting the Province for a project engagement.
These were challenging engagements that are useful in the aim of the Province to reduce poverty and provide development to its constituents.
There are questions that are to be answered not now but in the future academic discussion. However, it is best that these are lay down now.
Should the Unit restructure itself now in the advent of coming of new partners or should it wait for 2010 when the program is expected to have delivered its mandate as required in the key result areas?
How do we balance the issue of political persona and developmental persona of the Unit and of the Program?
Is there really public administration of peace and development? Or is it left inculcated in the mandate of other offices in the local government?
To answer this, a dynamic exchange of unfettered ideas or pursuit to intellectual orgasm must be employed. Developmental planners have their own unique way of making things done and being able to achieve it goals.
But for now, I must tell you---Kalinaw Sarangani shines in terms of peace and development advocacy.
Sukran!
[1] A paper presented to visitors from the National Defense College on April 18, 2008 at the ECPC, Capitol Compound, Alabel, Sarangani Province. Unedited and unpublished.
[2] Ernesto C. Casiple is a Peace Coordinator of Kalinaw Sarangani. He is currently acting as OIC Program Manager of the Kalinaw Sarangani.
[3] SPCPD stands for Southern Philippines Council for Peace and Development.
[4] The identified PDCs in the Province included Sapu Masla, Tuyan, and Lun Padidu of Malapatan; Daliao, Lumatil, and Kanalo of Maasim; and Datu Dani, Tambilil, and Katubao of Kiamba.
[5] The official publication of the local program is also named Kalinaw Sarangani.
[6] The Comprehensive Peace and Development Plan was packaged by the Peace and Development Task Force in 2004.
[7] The culture of peace is based on the principles established in the Charter of the United Nations and on respect for human rights, democracy and tolerance, the promotion of development, education for peace, the free flow of information and the wider participation of women as an integral approach to preventing violence and conflicts, and efforts aimed at the creation of conditions for peace and its consolidation."
[8] Kalinaw Sarangani commenced on September 2007 to 2010.
[9] Institutional Development mechanisms service delivery of projects such as Barangay Health Station, Botika ng Barangay and other livelihood projects for the PDCs.
[10] The PDAs were former MNLF. During the reconciliation effort of the Government to integrate returnees to the arm forces, they are those who opted to work as peace advocates (community organizers). PDAs form the Peace and Development Advocates League (PDAL).
[11] Executive Order # 16, Series of 2007 institutionalizes the Kalinaw Sarangani.
[12] From Kalinaw Sarangani, Vol. 1. No.1: December 2007 issue.
[13] Some tangible projects delivered in the PDCs for 2007 are ambulance in Pinol, Maitum, road extension for Tambilil in Kiamba health center in Lagundi, Kiamba Day Care Center for Katubao. Carabao dispersal, water systems etc.
[14] A Kalinaw Sarangani Program Orientation and Intro. to Culture of Peace were given to 18 former NPAs on February 27, 2008 at the 66th IB, Malapatan.
[15] Peace Network is an informal circle of organizations working for peace in SOCSARGEN.
The Sarangani Experience[1]
By: Ernesto C. Casiple Jr.[2]
(A paper presented to the Class 43rd of Masters in National Defense of the National Defense College, Camp Aguinaldo in Quezon City. Presentation was held at the Environmental Conservtaion and Protection Center (ECPC), Capitol Compound, Alabel Sarangani Province, Philippines on April 18, 2007.)
The unique multicultural view of Mindanao and the challenging frontiers it has experienced showed by the occasional setbacks in development is a breakthrough to redefine livability in terms of the needs of the community. This is brought about by conflicts surrounding the island. Peace and development is viewed as eclectic in terms of definition and applicability. Like public administration per se, peace and development has become inseparable terms to look at growth of a community.
Incorporating peace and development with public administration has even become more complicated and more challenging. But it has never become a burden rather an opportunity to explore the needs of the community and being able to deliver appropriate projects and programs we will call “tool for peace.”
This paper would like to explore on the attempt of the Provincial Government of Sarangani to institutionalize peace and development in its public administration. Institutionalization here would mean formal creation of an office that would both oversee and promote peace and development initiatives of the Province and by external accessing support to fund its resources.
Initial Initiatives
& the Malabod Experience
The signing of the Final Peace Agreement (FPA) in 1996 paved way to attainment of peace in Mindanao. The FPA has gained support from the United Nations. It gave birth to the first phase of the GoP-UN Multi-Donor Programme in Mindanao. SPCPD[3] was created to oversee the second phase of the Programme until the initial months of the phase three (3). This have identified 11[4] Peace and Development Communities in the Province. It must be stressed that Phase 2 focused on MNLF members and their families while the Phase 3 included the Christians and the Lumads as beneficiaries.
During the Phase 3, the PDCs became the central institution of the programme to where the Local Peace and Development Program of the Province was founded.
On the other hand, the Local Peace and Development Program of the Province has a unique beginning. In an article published by the Kalinaw Sarangani[5] on December 2007, it was mentioned that “intermittent crimes such as cattle rustling and robbery became famous in the identified hotspots of the Province. One of the areas of concern on banditry was the Barangay Malabod in Malungon.” The situation in Malabod has worsened that the case has to be coordinated by religious groups and local leaders. Thirteen lawless elements surrendered in December 2000 through the collaborative efforts of local government units. This led to the creation of the then Provincial Task Force for Peace and Development (PTFPD). The LGU Executives believed that the Malabod experience has to be sustained and that the PTFPD was tasked to document the negotiations as well as address the various issues and concerns of the local government units.
Moreover, the peace and development initiatives in the Province was even recognized during the initial partnership between the UN-MDP3 with other stakeholders such as military, police and other cooperating agencies and national government agencies.
On June 2003, Sarangani launched the Provincial Peace Summit (first in the Province and in the Region). The Summit “provided the blueprint for the crafting of the Provincial Peace and Development Strategic Plan.” Still on the same year, “the provincial government replicated the UNMDP3 experience in the Barangays of Ticulab, Mindupok, Upo and Kalaong in Maitum, as its pilot expansion areas for peace and development communities.” The Provincial Peace and Order Council (PPOC) saw the need to oversee the efforts of the Province. Thus, the Peace and Development Committee was created as sub-committee.
Later, Executive Order No. 29, Series of 2004 expanded the membership of the Provincial Task Force for Peace and Development to “include other key national agencies and NGOs.” This paved way to the signing of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Province and the ACT for Peace Programme (the successor pahse of the GoP-UNMDP 3) in 2006. The Province acted as the service provider while the ACT for Peace funds it with the aim to build the gains of the past three phases of the UNDP.
KSU Overview
In 2004, the Provincial Government of Sarangani adopted the Comprehensive Peace and Development Plan[6]. Subsequently, peace and development initiatives are underway through the Special Concerns Division under the Office of the Governor. Branded as a duplicate and replication of functions of other government units, the Province saw the need to mainstream peace and development into one compact unit that will formalize the institutionalization of the culture of peace[7]. Like in other places, the question is always on the difference of a peace and development office to the function of other offices.
Having realized that there is a unique way to resolve conflict, maintain peace and create peace, thus, brings peace and development, Executive Order # 16, Series of 2007 created the Kalinaw Sarangani as the Peace and Development Program of Sarangani Province. The Kalinaw Sarangani[8] handled the Kalinaw Sarangani Unit (referring to the office) under the Office of the Governor.
What made Kalinaw Sarangani unique? While we concede to the fact that the tangible projects delivered to the community may be the same with other offices, the way the projects are realized make it more acceptable and accessible to and by the community. “Kalinaw Sarangani aims to promote and preserve a peaceful and livable Sarangani where the people enjoy basic services and are actively involved in planning development and exercising governance.”
While other offices focus on addressing the issues of poverty and unemployment, the Kaliaw Sarangani incorporated marginalization, lack of access and cultural insensitivity as problems resulting to poverty and conflicts.
Kalinaw Sarangani works with Peace and Development Communities (PDCs). PDCs are Barangays in Sarangani Province that are identified as post-conflict areas and conflict-vulnerable areas. Kalinaw Sarangani also attempts to reach interior Barangays in the Province (e.g. Kinam, New Aklan, Datal Anggas, etc.) The Program would like to capacitate and uplift the living conditions of 50 Barangays in 2010. This is through incorporation of the Culture of Peace (CoP). Of the goals, objectives, and principles of program the makes emphasis on:
pursuing the tenets of peace and development by being catalyst, facilitator, and advocate of peace and development initiatives;
transforming the local communities that have been disturbed by strife and conflict into peace and loving communities meeting basic needs and providing access to basic social services;
facilitating assistance to different force multipliers/ extenders to include tanods, CVOs, rebel returnees, MILF, MNLF and community members affected by conflict; and
adhering to the principle of parallel governance and co-existence of ethno-linguistic group under the paradigm of community living and mutual respect.
The Program operates on three (3) project components namely PEACE, MaP, and Special Project with ACT for Peace. The three (3) project components are necessarily complementing each other. Although, 18 of the 50 PDCs covered in the Program are identified in the Special Project with A4P while the remaining PDCs are called regular PDCs that are PLGU funded.
PEACE Project
The PEACE Project is an acronym of Peace Education through Alliance-building and Community Empowerment. Among others, the projects aims to “increase involvement of key partners (MNLF, MILF, NPA, former bandits, religious groups, CSOs, CVOs, line agencies and others) in peace building, development planning, decision-making and governance.”
MaP Project
The MaP Project stands for Madaris for Peace Project. In has been an enduring objective of the Province preserve its Muslim Heritage through educating the youth in the establishment of Madaris.
A4P Project
The Special Project with the ACT for Peace Programme is a partnership agreement between the Province and the GoP-UNMDP ACT for Peace Programme. Areas of partnership focus on supporting 18 PDCs in the Province by providing institutional development mechanisms to PDCs[9].
Lighting the Candle: 2007 Highlights
The formal birth of Kalinaw Sarangani on September of 2007 was a challenging start. The staff have formed and capacitated as early as July of 2007. As an initial mechanism to remove the feeling of apathy of the former combatants (MNLF) towards the government, the staff underwent teambuilding workshop with the Peace and Development Advocates (PDAs)[10].
This could mean a necessary prelude to the implementation of the program. There have been ground-working on the field. On September 1, 2007 the first Culture of Peace Training were attended by 30 barangay officials in Maligang, Kiamba, seven days after the formal inception of Executive Order # 16, Series of 2007[11] on August 24, 2007.
The following are some highlights in the campaign of the Province to stop conflict and arm struggle[12]:
Kalinaw Sarangani staff (called Peace Coordinators) jointly worked with the Peace and Development Advocates (PDAs) who are former MNLF as community organizers in the ACT for Peace identified PDCs (2007);
Yield of 89 sympathizers of NPA on August 30, 2007 through inter-agency coordination;
Active partnership with government, civilian, and military authorities for the Balik Kinam Project. (Kinam is an interior Barangay in Malapatan. It was identified as neglected and rebel-influenced Barangay. Now, government interventions for development are coming in the area.)
Some tangible projects[13] for the PDCs were also delivered in the hope to alleviate poverty. However, stressed is given on the need to capacitate the people in the identified PDCs. Capacitating them include mechanism for active participation of the community in the local barangay units, formation of people’s organization for enterprise and economic development, activating the tanods and CVOs in the barangay for peace and development.
For the Madaris for Peace Project, 45 Madrasah Centers for established and supported headed by 85 Asatiz. Muslim students are having informal/ private Arabic Language and Islamic Values classes during weekend. This is in line with the goal of the Province to protect the Muslim Cultural heritage in the area.
Before the year ended, a Peace Forum jointly facilitated by the Kalinaw Sarangani and the ACT for Peace Programme through the Mindanao Economic Development Council (MEDCO) and the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP) was held on November 26, 2007. This was attended by major peace stakeholders in the Province with the aim of revealing and sharing the experiences and the efforts towards peace and development.
Recent Interventions
The initial activities conducted in 2007 continue to present. For 2008, 35 PDCs are supported by the Kalinaw Sarangani. Bringing rebel returnees[14] closer to the government is the aim for 2008 while it is understood that key result areas will continue to focus in strengthening peace and development mechanisms in the PDCs.
The 2007 Barangay Elecrtion resulted to the need for continued orientation and reorientation of the program and institutionalization of the culture of peace. Some undelivered 2007 projects were turn-overed to the concerned PDCs.
The opening of 2008 triggered the need to emphasize peace dialogues to resolve conflict in the community. For example, a shooting of Barangay Kagawad in Tuyan, Malapatan resulted to a Peace and Order Dialogue between the B’laans and Muslims in the community facilitated by the Barangay with the assistance of Kalinaw Sarangani. On the other hand, a feeling of apathy between the BLGU in Datu Dani in Kiamba and the residents led to Kadsisinabute (An Intercultural Dialogue for Peace) on March 15, 2008. This was done with the help of the Peace Network[15] and other partners.
Medical missions to various PDCs with the assistance of Intenational Monitoring Team (IMT) highlighted the first quarter of 2008.
Organization & Management
Kalinaw Sarangani, the peace and development program of Sarangani Province, is implemented by the Kalinaw Sarangani Unit under the Office of the Governor. The Governor generally acts as the head approving persona of all transactions of the Unit. The Unit is headed by a Peace Program Officer who heads the program implementation.
Meanwhile, the Program Manager helps the supervision and management of the program. There are also Peace Coordinators (acting as project coordinators in each of the municipalities in the Province). They facilitate the community organizing/ planning and social marketing of the Peace and Development Program.
On the other hand, a Madaris Coordinator manages the Madaris for Peace Project. He is assisted by 85 Asatiz. A Liaison Officer handles the coordination of peace efforts for the PNP, tanods, and CVOs.
A Technical Asssistant assists the Kalinaw Team in data banking and profiling of technical documents.
An administrative assistant and administrative aides plus the driver assists in the overall undertaking of the Program.
Challenges
The Kalinaw Sarangani continues to work on the goal of the Province to promote and preserve a peaceful and livable Sarangani. The specific mandate of the Program is to peace-building in the post-conflict and conflict vulnerable PDCs.
However, the Program cannot escape from the reality that it is critiqued as political. The challenge is for it to be tagged as developmental more than political or at least both. Although its political personality is never a hindrance to achieve goals. After all, everything works in a political spectrum.
A debate on territoriality will also come in. This means that other offices would debate as to the replication of the activities of the program rather than its unique persona. Thus, the Kalinaw Sarangani maintains the effort of institutionalizing the culture of peace at the local level with the inclusion of the promotion of participatory governance. Transforming communities may take decades but at least an initial step has been done.
On the issue of alleviating poverty, Kalinaw Sarangani knows its limit. Remember that Sarangani Province is 4th of the poorest Province in the country. It is good to note however that the Provincial Government has been taking the lead to address this problem.
The above are general challenges to the Program implementation. At the ground level, (I mean at the organization and management level), there is an immediate need to address a gap.
While the Program Management satisfies the requirement for the implementation of the three project-components, there is an increasing demand to more developmental work. The limitation of the program structure is anchored on these three project components. The demand for possible partnerships and collaborations with other agencies are getting high. There are on-going partnership meetings with Habitat for Humanity. Petron Foundation is eyeing the Province for partnership through building mosques. GTZ has long wanted the Province to be its partner in peace and conflict transformation. Asia Foundation is courting the Province for a project engagement.
These were challenging engagements that are useful in the aim of the Province to reduce poverty and provide development to its constituents.
There are questions that are to be answered not now but in the future academic discussion. However, it is best that these are lay down now.
Should the Unit restructure itself now in the advent of coming of new partners or should it wait for 2010 when the program is expected to have delivered its mandate as required in the key result areas?
How do we balance the issue of political persona and developmental persona of the Unit and of the Program?
Is there really public administration of peace and development? Or is it left inculcated in the mandate of other offices in the local government?
To answer this, a dynamic exchange of unfettered ideas or pursuit to intellectual orgasm must be employed. Developmental planners have their own unique way of making things done and being able to achieve it goals.
But for now, I must tell you---Kalinaw Sarangani shines in terms of peace and development advocacy.
Sukran!
[1] A paper presented to visitors from the National Defense College on April 18, 2008 at the ECPC, Capitol Compound, Alabel, Sarangani Province. Unedited and unpublished.
[2] Ernesto C. Casiple is a Peace Coordinator of Kalinaw Sarangani. He is currently acting as OIC Program Manager of the Kalinaw Sarangani.
[3] SPCPD stands for Southern Philippines Council for Peace and Development.
[4] The identified PDCs in the Province included Sapu Masla, Tuyan, and Lun Padidu of Malapatan; Daliao, Lumatil, and Kanalo of Maasim; and Datu Dani, Tambilil, and Katubao of Kiamba.
[5] The official publication of the local program is also named Kalinaw Sarangani.
[6] The Comprehensive Peace and Development Plan was packaged by the Peace and Development Task Force in 2004.
[7] The culture of peace is based on the principles established in the Charter of the United Nations and on respect for human rights, democracy and tolerance, the promotion of development, education for peace, the free flow of information and the wider participation of women as an integral approach to preventing violence and conflicts, and efforts aimed at the creation of conditions for peace and its consolidation."
[8] Kalinaw Sarangani commenced on September 2007 to 2010.
[9] Institutional Development mechanisms service delivery of projects such as Barangay Health Station, Botika ng Barangay and other livelihood projects for the PDCs.
[10] The PDAs were former MNLF. During the reconciliation effort of the Government to integrate returnees to the arm forces, they are those who opted to work as peace advocates (community organizers). PDAs form the Peace and Development Advocates League (PDAL).
[11] Executive Order # 16, Series of 2007 institutionalizes the Kalinaw Sarangani.
[12] From Kalinaw Sarangani, Vol. 1. No.1: December 2007 issue.
[13] Some tangible projects delivered in the PDCs for 2007 are ambulance in Pinol, Maitum, road extension for Tambilil in Kiamba health center in Lagundi, Kiamba Day Care Center for Katubao. Carabao dispersal, water systems etc.
[14] A Kalinaw Sarangani Program Orientation and Intro. to Culture of Peace were given to 18 former NPAs on February 27, 2008 at the 66th IB, Malapatan.
[15] Peace Network is an informal circle of organizations working for peace in SOCSARGEN.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
A Paradigm Shift in Celebrating Victory: Challenge to the Youngsters
(An unedited speech delivered by Ernesto C. Casiple, Jr. during the 11th Recognition Day of Elementary and High Departments of General Santos City Special Education Integrated School on April 2, 2008 at KCC Convention Center)
Theme: "Filipino Achievers: Celebrating Achievements; Pursuing Opportunities"
Greetings!
Today mark another momentous yet symbolic event of recognizing the efforts of the young generation in their still long way of academic carrier. Truly, every Filipino is an achiever in his own right.
On the other hand, forgive me for I will be twisting some part of what I assume what our students, guests, and proud parents would like to hear. Perhaps they would like to hear a biography of mine—my hopes, dreams, and achievements that would inspire the children of this generation. I wish I could talk to you who was I, and who am I now and where I am heading. Sadly, I will not be talking of that this time. Surely there have been many of that in the past recognition you have had. Rather, I wanted to give everyone a different challenge.
I need help!
My message today needs repetition and further explanation. A task that I will leave to the parents and teachers present at this juncture.
But how do we suppose to celebrate our achievements and pursue opportunities?
Let me take you to what we will call looking beyond borders. To dream and vision! My question is? Are we ready to dream? Are we ready to vision?
The concept of a new world order was classic. Time of Hitler. The year 2000 gave us the term Y2K or millennium bug. In the year 2004, a national group of linguists listed the term information superhighway as the word for the year. What does these mean? Today, we are confronted with realities of getting closer in both business and politics and even in entertainment because of technology. The present order of global trend brings us all to technological advancement—from PCs, ipods, internet, wi-fi, etc.
I met Fr. Eliseo Mercado last December 2007 in a partner’s forum and he put it this way:
“Today, we are witnessing a global revolution that involves, at first glance, the rapid advances in technology and the rapid movements both of trade and peoples across known frontiers and borders. At a second glance, a new horizon is emerging, which points to knowledge “explosion” and an opening into the cyberspace. Yet, on the other hand, humankind continues, ironically, to be “plagued” by the residue of divisions, fragmentations and conflict that have characterized, in a special way, the past two millennia of our human encounters.”
Children, this is where I am taking you. Let me simplify it for you. I believe you are amaze with the rapid shoot in technology. Maybe you have asked your parents, “Ma, Pa, I wanted to have a cellphone.” Few months later, you asked for an Ipod. Often, you compete with older kids in the complexity of the technological age.
Nothing is wrong with that anyway if done responsibly. However, we must not forget the basics—the things we actually naturally have. Take note of my term, naturally. Have we forgotten the lilies? The croaks of the frog. … and that when we all recite… all things bright and beautiful, all creatures great and small.
By looking beyond borders, we both look to extra-imaginable dreams and aspirations. Yet, there is another course of looking beyond borders, which is again going back to the basics. Now on my second term, basics. We have now two key terms—natural and basics.
As I said, there are rapid advances in technology and rapid movements of both trade and peoples across known frontiers and borders. On the other hand, there is an explosion of knowledge and opening of the cyberspace. These bring us all to a common dimension of our dreams. Our parents would then advice us to become engineers, IT specialists, (the fad still at least of many) nurses, etc. We are amaze with the wealth of the earth by looking at inventions in all forms. From computers to skyscrapers and now robotics. All in the name of rapid development. We are cyber-dreaming! We become cyber-dreamers.
Nothing is wrong with that. The kaginhawaan sa buhay need of us become a self-centered principle to fight poverty. While we all advocate for unity, we are faced with the reality that we actually always compete to the piece of space we have on this earth. I believe there has been so much in technological advancement that our earth has become overweight. Perhaps, there have been so much lasers thus energy consumed because of our exploration of knowledge. By exploring so much, we miss a very important part—we are exploiting the earth. We forgot the natural care she needs.
This is where I take you to the other dimension of dreaming—the natural or basic dreaming. I want you guys to become basic dreamers.
How do I start with that? I would to bring into your attention what is threatening the earth now and this is not threatening you either but giving you a warning and an eye-opener. Few months ago, all leaders in the world gather in Greenland—from military, to politics and business and even religion. They were there to witness the most historical movement in the face of the planet. You know what was that? Behold the melting of the glaziers. The too much heat on the earth brought about by rapid development has caused our lands to dry up and melt the glaziers and very soon very very soon we will all water down.
Believe it or not, this phenomenon will force all of us to become one earthling of the earth. The plagued of residue of divisions and fragmentations that have characterized our human movement for the past two millennia will force to come to its end. But should we wait for that thing to arrive. We should act now and become natural or basic dreamers.
My work as a peace coordinator requires me to bridge the conflicting gap between cultures, beliefs, traditions and even ideology. But now, peace and development has created another movement more than resolving conflict. It leads me to the fact that we all need to embrace each other, work hand and hand and please not wait for the total melting of the glaziers.
I want you all to dream basic. Dream for our Mother Earth. Dream about environmental protection. We celebrate our achievements by putting all our skills and talents in caring for the earth. We can pursue the opportunity of caring for the Earth. Till the soil and plant trees. Provide venue in discussing global warming, etc. Let us blend our knowledge of cyberspace to caring for the Earth. Let us fight poverty not necessarily facing the trend of globalization.
The challenge is:
a. for the government to provide the young generation an opener of the Caring for the Earth to celebrate their achievements rather than concentrating on cyber exploration;
b. for the parents to instill to their sons and daughters the value of helping the environment rather than helping themselves;
c. for these generation to celebrate achievements and pursuing the opportunity to focus your dreams, ambitions, affections and passions to caring for the Earth; and
d. for every one to balance the achievements in business and technology with the opportunity to heal the wound we have caused to our Mother Earth.
This is not difficult. It is more difficult to invent a robot. It may cost millions. Plant a tree. It may not cost a dime; yet will give you fruits.
Theme: "Filipino Achievers: Celebrating Achievements; Pursuing Opportunities"
Greetings!
Today mark another momentous yet symbolic event of recognizing the efforts of the young generation in their still long way of academic carrier. Truly, every Filipino is an achiever in his own right.
On the other hand, forgive me for I will be twisting some part of what I assume what our students, guests, and proud parents would like to hear. Perhaps they would like to hear a biography of mine—my hopes, dreams, and achievements that would inspire the children of this generation. I wish I could talk to you who was I, and who am I now and where I am heading. Sadly, I will not be talking of that this time. Surely there have been many of that in the past recognition you have had. Rather, I wanted to give everyone a different challenge.
I need help!
My message today needs repetition and further explanation. A task that I will leave to the parents and teachers present at this juncture.
But how do we suppose to celebrate our achievements and pursue opportunities?
Let me take you to what we will call looking beyond borders. To dream and vision! My question is? Are we ready to dream? Are we ready to vision?
The concept of a new world order was classic. Time of Hitler. The year 2000 gave us the term Y2K or millennium bug. In the year 2004, a national group of linguists listed the term information superhighway as the word for the year. What does these mean? Today, we are confronted with realities of getting closer in both business and politics and even in entertainment because of technology. The present order of global trend brings us all to technological advancement—from PCs, ipods, internet, wi-fi, etc.
I met Fr. Eliseo Mercado last December 2007 in a partner’s forum and he put it this way:
“Today, we are witnessing a global revolution that involves, at first glance, the rapid advances in technology and the rapid movements both of trade and peoples across known frontiers and borders. At a second glance, a new horizon is emerging, which points to knowledge “explosion” and an opening into the cyberspace. Yet, on the other hand, humankind continues, ironically, to be “plagued” by the residue of divisions, fragmentations and conflict that have characterized, in a special way, the past two millennia of our human encounters.”
Children, this is where I am taking you. Let me simplify it for you. I believe you are amaze with the rapid shoot in technology. Maybe you have asked your parents, “Ma, Pa, I wanted to have a cellphone.” Few months later, you asked for an Ipod. Often, you compete with older kids in the complexity of the technological age.
Nothing is wrong with that anyway if done responsibly. However, we must not forget the basics—the things we actually naturally have. Take note of my term, naturally. Have we forgotten the lilies? The croaks of the frog. … and that when we all recite… all things bright and beautiful, all creatures great and small.
By looking beyond borders, we both look to extra-imaginable dreams and aspirations. Yet, there is another course of looking beyond borders, which is again going back to the basics. Now on my second term, basics. We have now two key terms—natural and basics.
As I said, there are rapid advances in technology and rapid movements of both trade and peoples across known frontiers and borders. On the other hand, there is an explosion of knowledge and opening of the cyberspace. These bring us all to a common dimension of our dreams. Our parents would then advice us to become engineers, IT specialists, (the fad still at least of many) nurses, etc. We are amaze with the wealth of the earth by looking at inventions in all forms. From computers to skyscrapers and now robotics. All in the name of rapid development. We are cyber-dreaming! We become cyber-dreamers.
Nothing is wrong with that. The kaginhawaan sa buhay need of us become a self-centered principle to fight poverty. While we all advocate for unity, we are faced with the reality that we actually always compete to the piece of space we have on this earth. I believe there has been so much in technological advancement that our earth has become overweight. Perhaps, there have been so much lasers thus energy consumed because of our exploration of knowledge. By exploring so much, we miss a very important part—we are exploiting the earth. We forgot the natural care she needs.
This is where I take you to the other dimension of dreaming—the natural or basic dreaming. I want you guys to become basic dreamers.
How do I start with that? I would to bring into your attention what is threatening the earth now and this is not threatening you either but giving you a warning and an eye-opener. Few months ago, all leaders in the world gather in Greenland—from military, to politics and business and even religion. They were there to witness the most historical movement in the face of the planet. You know what was that? Behold the melting of the glaziers. The too much heat on the earth brought about by rapid development has caused our lands to dry up and melt the glaziers and very soon very very soon we will all water down.
Believe it or not, this phenomenon will force all of us to become one earthling of the earth. The plagued of residue of divisions and fragmentations that have characterized our human movement for the past two millennia will force to come to its end. But should we wait for that thing to arrive. We should act now and become natural or basic dreamers.
My work as a peace coordinator requires me to bridge the conflicting gap between cultures, beliefs, traditions and even ideology. But now, peace and development has created another movement more than resolving conflict. It leads me to the fact that we all need to embrace each other, work hand and hand and please not wait for the total melting of the glaziers.
I want you all to dream basic. Dream for our Mother Earth. Dream about environmental protection. We celebrate our achievements by putting all our skills and talents in caring for the earth. We can pursue the opportunity of caring for the Earth. Till the soil and plant trees. Provide venue in discussing global warming, etc. Let us blend our knowledge of cyberspace to caring for the Earth. Let us fight poverty not necessarily facing the trend of globalization.
The challenge is:
a. for the government to provide the young generation an opener of the Caring for the Earth to celebrate their achievements rather than concentrating on cyber exploration;
b. for the parents to instill to their sons and daughters the value of helping the environment rather than helping themselves;
c. for these generation to celebrate achievements and pursuing the opportunity to focus your dreams, ambitions, affections and passions to caring for the Earth; and
d. for every one to balance the achievements in business and technology with the opportunity to heal the wound we have caused to our Mother Earth.
This is not difficult. It is more difficult to invent a robot. It may cost millions. Plant a tree. It may not cost a dime; yet will give you fruits.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Inter-cultural dialogue provides venue for understanding
Ernesto C. Casiple, Jr. /March 15, 2008
Kiamba---Aimed at providing venue for better understanding among Lumads, Muslims, and Christians in the community, an Inter-cultural Dialogue for Peace dubbed as Kadsisinabute (a Maguindanaoan term for understanding) was held on March 15, 2008 at Brgy. Datu Dani in Kiamba, Sarangani Province.
Kiamba---Aimed at providing venue for better understanding among Lumads, Muslims, and Christians in the community, an Inter-cultural Dialogue for Peace dubbed as Kadsisinabute (a Maguindanaoan term for understanding) was held on March 15, 2008 at Brgy. Datu Dani in Kiamba, Sarangani Province.
The activity allowed the members of the community to share their local ethnohistory and identify their needs that are hoped to be addressed by the government personalities present.
“It was a way of in seeing tri-people’s patriotism and activism channeled to more positive involvement in the community development, local and national undertakings and thereby helped transform their dreams and aspirations into reality through proper motivation and dialogues,” according to George P. Young, Peace Program Officer of the Provincial Government of Sarangani.
In an opening message given by Punong Barangany Monir Wata of Datu Dani, he said that the Barangay is very glad that the Peace Network granted their idea of holding a peace dialogue.
The Peace Network led the activity through the initiative of Kalinaw Sarangani Unit and Kapayapaan Kapatid Council. The network is composed of organizations working for peace and development in the SOCSKSARGEN. According to Wata, the activity is a real venue to where people in the community could participate deliberately in local governance, thus, promoting
The Peace Network led the activity through the initiative of Kalinaw Sarangani Unit and Kapayapaan Kapatid Council. The network is composed of organizations working for peace and development in the SOCSKSARGEN. According to Wata, the activity is a real venue to where people in the community could participate deliberately in local governance, thus, promoting
culture of peace.
On the other hand, Fr. Angel Buenavides (convenor of the Peace Network) said that efforts of dialogue are better done in collective efforts of various networks working for peace and development. He added that it is good to see that various organizations in the promotion of peace and development are converging efforts to help local initiatives for peace realized.
During the activity, representatives of the tri-people presented their ethnohistory and the issues and concerns they have in the community. They expressed their gratitude to the members of the Peace Network for conducting the activity.
Tony Adon (an elder B’laan leader) said that their aspiration is for equal treatment of the people
in the community. He admitted though that his people lack education or illiterate. He asked the government to address this problem.
On the other hand, Datu Alano Gibbon (a local Muslim leader) differentiated Moro from Muslim. He emphasized that a Muslim is God-fearing person and thus anybody caught killing is not a Muslim. He warned everyone not to misquote lawless individuals as Muslim rather call them according to their tribes. According to him, Moro is the general term for the 13 “Muslim” tribes in Mindanao. He added that when he came in Datu Dani, people are afraid of them. They are seen as criminals and creators of violent conflict in the place. Though, he admitted that many of the members of his tribe became rebels, he asked people not to generalize because it made them less human.
Lastly, a settler Danilo Panilo shared that we he arrived in 1970’s he felt that he is out of place. Until now, he has some thoughts of being out casted because it seems that the Christian settlers are not yet welcome in the community. He hoped that he will not feel it anymore.
On the other hand, representatives LGUS and organizations under the Peace Network updated the community of their local intervention in Kiamba.
Vice Governor Steve Chiongbian Solon of Sarangani Province also graced the affair. He said that the activity was a direct way of empowering the people by listening to their aims and aspirations.
Mayor Rommel Falgui of Kiamba on the other hand was optimistic that his programs and projects are anchored through community participation.
Vice Governor Steve Chiongbian Solon of Sarangani Province also graced the affair. He said that the activity was a direct way of empowering the people by listening to their aims and aspirations.
Mayor Rommel Falgui of Kiamba on the other hand was optimistic that his programs and projects are anchored through community participation.
SPO3 Rolando Aguelo who represented the PNP said their basic role in peacekeeping is to stop criminality. He asked the residents in the Barangay to report any criminality in the area.
In behalf of the Peace Network, Fr. Angel Buenavides said that the network is committed to address local efforts for peace and development through collaboration with other partners.
Butch Batilong, the project coordinator of Habitat for Humanity announced their peace intervention in Datu Dani through building homes in the area called Peace Build.
Butch Batilong, the project coordinator of Habitat for Humanity announced their peace intervention in Datu Dani through building homes in the area called Peace Build.
A statement of commitment to lasting peace was signed by the members of the tri-people representatives and Barangay Local Government Unit. Vice Governor Solon, Fr. Buenavides, SPO3 Aguelo, Mr. Young also signed as witnesses of the commitment.
Equally important events during the Kadsisinabute are the “Kids Art Workshop for Peace” and the Medical and Dental Mission. Fifty kids from the Barangay benefited from the art workshop facilitated by renowned visual artist Prof. Al-Nezzar Ali.
More than 200 patients (mostly children) were catered in the medical mission and 90 patients were given tooth extraction. The medical service was sponsored by Doctor’s Hospital, ACT for Peace Programme and student volunteers from Golden State Colleges while the dental mission was sponsored by the Municipal Government of Kiamba through its Municipal Health Office.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
How do we crack under pressure? Tales of the Kalinaw Team
Although the work in the field isn't that tiring anyway...enjoyable and experimental that is. Here are some glimpse behind field work; still captured by the silent worker Gandhi.
Int'l peace monitors lead free clinic for Lumads in Sarangani
KIAMBA, Sarangani (MindaNews/20 Feb) – Not as publicized or as controversial as the US troops’ “humanitarian assistance” in Mindanao are the medical missions for the Moro, settler and Lumads (indigenous peoples) in far-flung villages in Mindanao's conflict-affected areas, by Malaysian medics who are part of the International Monitoring Team (IMT). Last Tuesday, a total of 358 T’bolis from the villages of Maligang and Gasi availed of the free services of the "Joint Medical Mission for Peace" by the Malaysian-led IMT, the local government unit of Kiamba and Kalinaw Sarangani Unit under the Office of the Governor, at the compound of the barangay hall of Maligang. Malaysian doctor Meor Adzary from the IMT’s medical team was joined by Dr. Harry M. Famular of the regional office of the Department of Health to provide free medical check up. The IMT medical team brought boxes of medicines that could cater to 600 patients.Cough, fever, flu, headache, skin allergy and diarrhea were the major complaints among the children. Adult patients complained mostly of gastritis, flu, body ache, migraine, sleeping disturbance and difficulty urinating.Cmdr. Zainudin Mat Zain, RMN, Team Site 4 leader of the IMT, said the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP) and the Malaysian government provided the medicines and vitamins.He thanked the local government unit of Kiamba and the governor’s office for the assistance to the medical mission. “If we work as a team, we can achieve whatever we plan,” he pointed out. Aside from the free medical services to the Lumads, the mission also included free birth registration by the local civil registrar, distribution of free seedlings of trees, and immunization and branding of livestock by the Municipal Agriculture Office.The regular session of the municipality’s Sangguniang Bayan was held simultaneous with the medical mission. Vice Mayor Dr. Elmer T. de Peralta explained it was intended to let the people know that the local government is reaching out to its constituents and hear their voice. He added that they will hold their session in the various barangays once a month. The staff of the Kalinaw Sarangani Unit (KSU) and Maligang barangay health workers served as interpreter, crowd controller and assistant in the distribution of medicines. Maligang is identified as one of the 35 peace and development communities (PDCs) of the province. PDCs receive intervention from the peace and development program of the province through the KSU. These services include seminars on mediation, culture of peace, provision of Tindahan para sa Kalinaw, Botika ng Barangay, and other social services. T’bolis comprise 95 percent of the population of both villages with high illiteracy rate among the adults. Abaca, corn and copra are the major produce of the two villages, farming being the major economic activity.The IMT, composed of contingents from Malaysia, Libya, Brunei, and Japan, is tasked to monitor the ceasefire agreement between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) while the peace talks are ongoing. The Malaysian government facilitates the GRP-MILF peace process. Gov. Miguel Rene A. Dominguez and Kiamba Mayor Rommel Falgui expressed their thanks to the IMT for their humanitarian mission. (Gandhi C. Kinjiyo / MindaNews)
Thursday, February 7, 2008
I saw peace in Kinam
The sun was about to set and I found myself sitting in one of the cemented benches in the barangay compound of Barangay Kinam, Malapatan, Sarangani Province. Kinam is only approximately 4o kilometers away from the Provincial Center—the Municipality of Alabel. Yet, the travel time would last more than two hours in the snake-rolling roads, with steep slopes. Crossing 14 rivers added to the thrill of both fear and amazement. Feared of falling from the mountains and amazed of beautiful gift of nature—the mountains, the river, and waterfalls. I was one of the members of the advance party-team sent by the Provincial Government to arrange the activities for the outreach activity in line with the governor’s birthday.
The sun is about to kiss my skin goodbye. The air was already cold. In the corner, I saw children playing on the grounds. They were running around. Many were playing also in the neatly trimmed greenfields. Youngsters were playing basketball in the court. I was alone in the bench…I thought.
Kinam is a sitio in the middle of a mountain-range. It was pretty nice place (never mind the travel going to the place). It’s a nice place because it has electricity powered by solar energy, a school, a barangay hall. Stores lined-up beside the barangay compound. But I bet, it is a poor place. But according to the community their, there are now interventions coming-in the b
arangay. Before, it was a rebel infested area where help from any institution could not come in. But just recently, government can now intervene and slowly, development is about to come in. The place is now peaceful and is ready to accept development. I saw children paying on the fields. I SAW PEACE IN KINAM!
While I was imagining of peace and development mechanism, I did not notice (to my surprise), a child, about 5-6 years old sat near me. He was sitting crossed-leg while folding his hands on his chin. He was neither smiling nor sad. He was just plain-looking the children I saw playing. Then I asked him: What’s your name? There was no reply. I asked again three or four times and he answered, “Jaime.”
“Ah Jaime. How old are you?” I added.
“I don’t know,” he replied.
“Why?” Re replied with a frown face.
“Are you in school?” I continue.
“No. I haven’t gone to school.”
“Why?” Still no reply.
“Where are your parents?”
“They are gone. They are dead.” He casually answered.
“Why?”
“I don’t know. “
“Where are you staying?”
“I am with my aunt and uncle now.”
“And you are not attending school? You don’t know your age. You don’t know how to write your name?”
He did not answer. He stood and run away.
And I said silently to myself: “There is something missing.”
Yes, I saw children playing on the green fields. But there was Jaime. Not until Jaime will know how old is he. Not until Jaime will remember why his parents died. Not until there is Jaime who is not attending school. Then there is no yet peace. Not yet for now. May be I go back there and find that peace in Kinam again.
The sun is about to kiss my skin goodbye. The air was already cold. In the corner, I saw children playing on the grounds. They were running around. Many were playing also in the neatly trimmed greenfields. Youngsters were playing basketball in the court. I was alone in the bench…I thought.
Kinam is a sitio in the middle of a mountain-range. It was pretty nice place (never mind the travel going to the place). It’s a nice place because it has electricity powered by solar energy, a school, a barangay hall. Stores lined-up beside the barangay compound. But I bet, it is a poor place. But according to the community their, there are now interventions coming-in the b
arangay. Before, it was a rebel infested area where help from any institution could not come in. But just recently, government can now intervene and slowly, development is about to come in. The place is now peaceful and is ready to accept development. I saw children paying on the fields. I SAW PEACE IN KINAM!While I was imagining of peace and development mechanism, I did not notice (to my surprise), a child, about 5-6 years old sat near me. He was sitting crossed-leg while folding his hands on his chin. He was neither smiling nor sad. He was just plain-looking the children I saw playing. Then I asked him: What’s your name? There was no reply. I asked again three or four times and he answered, “Jaime.”
“Ah Jaime. How old are you?” I added.
“I don’t know,” he replied.
“Why?” Re replied with a frown face.
“Are you in school?” I continue.
“No. I haven’t gone to school.”
“Why?” Still no reply.
“Where are your parents?”
“They are gone. They are dead.” He casually answered.
“Why?”
“I don’t know. “
“Where are you staying?”
“I am with my aunt and uncle now.”
“And you are not attending school? You don’t know your age. You don’t know how to write your name?”
He did not answer. He stood and run away.
And I said silently to myself: “There is something missing.”
Yes, I saw children playing on the green fields. But there was Jaime. Not until Jaime will know how old is he. Not until Jaime will remember why his parents died. Not until there is Jaime who is not attending school. Then there is no yet peace. Not yet for now. May be I go back there and find that peace in Kinam again.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Crafting the ‘Normalcy’ of the Philippine Foreign Policy
by: Ernesto C. Casiple Jr. & John Michael P. Castino
The Philippines has not escaped from the conduct of foreign relations. In fact, it is impossible for the country to settle in isolation for its political history did not permit such. Having been exposed to the complex world politics (colonialism in particular), the Philippine foreign policy remains an ambitious adherence to national integrity.
As a general understanding, Philippine foreign policy is always profoundly guided in seeking and serving national interest and security may it be military or economic. Because the country could not get rid of foreign intervention, it is necessary for her to create bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations with other states. Explicitly, the country’s membership to the UN and other regional organizations also requires it to get involved in the dynamics and processes of international relations. More so, the United States of America has been special player in shaping the direction of Philippines’ global affairs.
This is the ‘normalcy’ of the Philippine foreign policy. But this is not just the basic understanding of any state as it undergoes politics of change. This is not just about the emergence, the stability, and the decay of relations. Thus, we are crafting the normalcy of Philippine foreign policy at the assumption that its orientation and roles has not significantly changed for the last fifty (50) years.
Allow us to recall some specific instances in the country’s external affairs. Manuel L. Roxas, for example, stated that his foreign policy was anchored on the commitment to the United Nations, continued ties with the US, maintenance of friendly relations with other states, and devotion to world peace1. Consequently, the foreign policy of the Philippines did not arrive to any critical change in the general sense. Although on the other hand, the ‘Asia for Asian Policy’ during the Magsaysay administration became a controversy because of the prevailing non-recognition of the government on communist China. The rhetoric of President Magsaysay on stating that his administration is recognizing the right of self-determination and independence of all Asian
countries cleared the gray issue that time. Carlos P. Garcia, on the other hand, has recourse to bilateral and multilateral defense mechanisms for external security, among other goals. Finally, the anti-communist role was only lifted up during the dictatorial years of President Ferdinand E. Marcos upon the recognition of the participation of communist China in world affairs.
Meanwhile, Corazon Aquino focused on the restructuring of internal democracy but the issue on the United Nation Convention on the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS) with the inclusion of the ‘principle of archipelagic state’ was a significant impact for the state’s international territorial rights and claims, thus, boosting its territorial integrity from external conflicts.
All in all, including the administration of President Fidel V. Ramos and the resigned President Joseph E. Estrada, the normalcy of Philippine foreign relations is on maintaining and preserving national security; expanding military relations; maintaining ties with the US, regional and international organizations, and other countries and helping the UN in the attainment of world peace.
Using the above background statements, this paper aims to identify the continuing normalcy that the Philippines is experiencing. It will comprehensively focus its discussion on the conduct of external relations under the Gloria Macapagal Administration when it finished the term of the resigned President Estrada from 2001-2003. The paper will present the foreign policy orientation, national roles, and general policy actions while it will first identify the goals and objectives of the Philippine foreign affairs during the PGMA Administration. It will also present a special report on the controversial Balikatan Exercises as well as draw and forecast the future of the Philippine foreign policy. Finally, the paper will ambitiously conceptualize a unique model or paradigm in treating a country’s foreign relations of which the researchers will call ‘the normalcy syndrome.’
FOUNDATIONS OF THE PGMA FOREIGN POLICY
As the former Vice-President of the resigned President Joseph Ejercito-Estrada, the writers of this paper assumed continuity, rather than change, of the foreign policy undertakings of Estrada Administration. Thus, the main pillars of the foreign policy of Estrada are treated as the foundation of PGMA’s foreign policy.
The report of the Department of Foreign Affairs on 20002 can be summarized as to the following pillars:
to safeguard national security where matters directly concerning national security are non-negotiable;
economic and development cooperation with partner countries have enabled the Philippines to obtain the resources to attain economic growth and sustainable development as keys to peace and stability within the country and the region;
to ensure that the right of Filipino migrant workers are respected in the workplace; and
foster ideals of peace, democracy, and respect for universal and fundamental human rights.
Later, when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assumed the office of presidency, she announced the realities facing the Philippines3 now, as follows:
a. the paramount influence of China, Japan, and US in the security and economic evolution of East Asia;
b. the growing context of the ASEAN in global affairs;
c. the role of internal Islamic Community;
d. the looming importance of inter-regional organizations;
e. the protection of the environment, natural resources, and maritime territory;
f. the drive for foreign market and foreign investments in which Europe in also a major source ally with US, Japan, China, and ASEAN;
g. the importance of international tourism; and
h. the crucial roles of the overseas Filipinos in the socio-economic stability.
Thus, the GMA’s foreign policy pillars are simply as follows4:
national security;
promotion and protection of the rights of Filipino overseas; and
development diplomacy.
Department of Foreign Affairs Undersecretary for Policy, Lauro Baja, in his statement before the diplomatic corps in the Philippines (on 2001) spoke broadly about the certain things the Philippines will do… on what is seems to be our foreign policy thrust5 :
join the international counter-terrorist coalition and to work with the United Nations;
work closely with the United States on intelligence and security matters concerning terrorism;
make available Philippine air space and facilities once required as transit or staging points;
contribute logistical support in the form of surplus, medicine, and medical personnel;
to provide combat troops if there is an international call for such troops subject to the concurrence of the Philippine Congress; and
prevent the flow of funds to terrorist groups through the Philippines by passing and implementing the anti-money laundering law.
But to J. Apolinario Lozada Jr., this statement is more of specific actions rather than thrusts. Thus, on December 10, 2001, in his speech at the 25th Anniversary of the Philippine Foreign Service Institute he outlined the national objectives of our foreign policy6 as follows:
to sustain and increase our economic growth to enable us to spread not poverty but prosperity to the greatest number of people;
to promote the welfare of the Filipinos abroad and rally their support behind our effort to pole-vault the country into league of newly recovered economies; and
to enhance our growing roles and influence in the Asian-Pacific and in world affairs.
Similarly, the Department of Foreign Affairs7 strategic plan for 2001-2004 lay down the following visions:
to pursue bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations to advance the interests of the Philippines and the Filipinos;
to endeavor to promote regional and global cooperation in order to achieve peace, security, and stability; and
to work for social justice especially for the poor, human rights and fundamental freedoms, and democratic way of life in the global arena.
And in order to realize these visions, the “advancement of interest of the Philippines and the Filipino people”8 is a necessary mission.
Moreover, the strategize foreign policy objectives9 are as follows:
Key Political Strategy:
to contribute the enhancement of national security and protection of territorial integrity and national sovereignty;
to promote Philippine interest by working closely with other countries in addressing threats to national security and human rights; and
to assist national government in enhancing its defense capabilities.
Key Developmental Strategy:
to harness foreign relations in the active pursuit of sustainable development of growth with social equity through;
· trade, investment, and tourism promotion;
· external technological, scientific, and financial resources;
· education and human resource development; and
· advancing the human and economic security of the Filipino people through bilateral, regional, and multilateral social and economic mechanisms.
Key Cultural Strategy:
to promote Philippine culture for increased improved relations with other countries;
to encourage genuine partnership between civil societies of the Philippines; and
to promote national development concerns among Filipino overseas.
Key Consular, Labor, and Migration Strategy:
to protect the rights and promote the welfare of overseas Filipino overseas.
Key Public Information Strategy:
to project a positive image of the Philippines.
These are the statements to the foundation of the Philippine foreign policy which are guides for the government’s specific initiatives and/ or understanding outside the country. We are now to present a comprehensive survey of state’s foreign policy actions.
foreign policy actions
The above vision, mission, goals, objectives, thrusts, and the like are the guide of the GMA Administration in order to realize specific policy actions.
The Department of Foreign Affairs on its accomplishment report (2003) stated that “continuity and change have both characterized the Department (the country) approach on its conduct of foreign policy10. Of course, the Philippines, as a participant, in the new world order, is always challenge by a more dynamic economic and political environment. As previously stated, it cannot escape from the complexity of world relations.
General External Security Arrangements
The protection of the country’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity remains the most important concerns. For the Philippines, national security is attained by working closely with other countries through different forms of external relations. “Peace and security are important components of national security. The government continued to seek a permanent solutions to the problem in the southern Philippines….11” To this, the government has sought the assistance of the outside parties. Between the MILF and the GRP, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) participated with other countries such as Malaysia and Libya. Meanwhile, Norway act as the host of the ongoing CPP-NPA (communist insurgency) peace talks with the Government of the Republic of the Philippines.
Philippines is still cooperative in regional and international groups such as ASEAN and its partners such as the APEC, to establish the condition of necessary peace and development.
In general, “the war against terror continues to be a major agendum of our foreign policy. The Philippines is actively engaged in counter-terrorism initiative and measures to ensure maritime security12.” In fact the Philippines has participated in the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ of 45 countries to bear the duty and share the honor of service in our common defense13. “The coalition of the willing is assembled by the US to topple down Saddam Hussein’s regime and assure Iraq’s stability”. To this aim, the Philippines send 51-member humanitarian contingent to Iraq14. The coalition is also formed to outrage the war against the weapons of mass destructions of Iraq (which was not proven in the large scale).
Other important external security measures of the Philippines are outlined in this manner:
State Visit of President Nursultan Nazarbagev of Kazakhstan was expected to boost support for the Philippines to gain observer status in the OIC;
Bangladesh, a member of the OIC Committee of the Eight, conveyed its full support for the Philippine government peace efforts on Muslim Mindanao and agreed to renew all existing agreements between the two countries and explore new avenues of cooperation specially education (when Foreign Minister Morshed Khad visited the Philippines on November 13-16, 2003;
Enhancement of the Philippine Indonesian relation especially between the southern Philippines and the Eastern Indonesia in terms of security and trade matters (when the late Foreign Affairs Secretary Blas Ople visited North and South Sulawesi on May 1-3, 2004. Meanwhile, just recently on February 2, 2004, the Philippine tourists visiting Indonesia are exempted to pay for their new visa policy15 (apart from other nationals).
For Mindanao rehabilitation, the following actions were made:
1. Two of the projects under the 26th Yen Loan Package of Japan were signed on May 25, 2003. These are the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) Social Fund for Peace and Development worth 2.47 Billion Yen and the Central Mindanao Road Project worth 3.71 Billion Yen;
2. Growth Equity in Mindanao (GEM), a USAID Project managed by the Philippine government through the Mindanao Economic Development Council (MEDCO) that aims to accelerate economic growth in Mindanao focusing n enterprise development assistance for small and medium scale businesses and investors, infrastructures assistance for local government units and policy analysis, extended its operation by the GEM-2 Program that will end on 2007. The project will focus on the conflicting areas of Mindanao; and
3. Canadian International Development Agency funded a government nationwide Public Awareness Campaign on the Danger Small Arm and Light Weapons in Mindanao.
Meanwhile, the ASEAN remains to be an important ‘ingredient’ of Philippine foreign policy. The country participated in the 9th ASEAN Summit at Bali on October 7-8, 2003 where Bali Concord II was signed to identify the three pillars of ASEAN Community: ASEAN Economic Community; ASEAN Security Community; and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community16.
On ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), specifically the Philippines:
a. Actively participated in the inaugural ARF Inter-sessional Meeting on Counter-terrorism and Transnational crime on March 20-21, 2003 which produced the draft ARF Statement on Cooperative Counter-Terrorist Actions on Border Security and was subsequently adopted by the ARF Ministers on June 18, 2003 in Phnom Penh;
b. Joined the ARF in the fight against piracy and other threats to maritime security through the adoption of the ARF Statement on Cooperation Against Piracy and Other Threats to Maritime Security17.
To highlight the anti-terrorism campaign of the Philippines, it hosted the 23rd ASEAN Chief of National Police Conference (ASEANPOL) on September 10, 2003 which also included discussion on illegal drug trafficking, commercial crimes, bank offenses, credit card fraud, and transnational fraud.
On not of a lesser value, the country:
focused on the role of the ASEAN in the context regional security on the issue of the South China Sea (during the 14th ASEAN-EU Ministerial Meeting held in Brussels in January;
viewed the tension in the Taiwan Straits as an immediate threat to peace and stability with the regime and expressed support for the One-China Policy and the Principle of Peaceful Reunification;
manifested its desire to intensify and deepen its relation with countries in the Southeast Asia particularly with India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh; and
expressed support for the continued international peace in East Timor, thus, sending six military personnel and 60 civilian police to East Timor and Kosovo, as an act of peace-keeping operation.
Furthermore, the special RP-US relations continued to exist. As a result of the US State Visit of PGMA in May 2003, US President George Bush designated the Philippines as a Major Non-NATO Ally. The visit also received amounts as defense and security assistance from US:
US $ 30M aid for counter terrorism and training of AFP;
US $30M developmental assistance to conflicting areas;
US $25M for training of engineering unit for humanitarian project in conflict areas;
US $47M support for Balikatan 03-1;
30 units of UH 1 H helicopters for military mobility; and
US $10M in Presidential draw Down Authority for equipment, spare parts, and maintenance.
To further its anti-terrorism initiatives as well as regional relations, the Philippines coordinated its commitment to the Security Trade in the APEC Region as a direction to counter terrorism. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Cooperation to Combat International Tension between the Philippines and Australia was signed by Sec. Blas Ople and Foreign Minister Alexander Down on March 4, 2003. The MOU was signed to increased cooperation between intelligence, security, law enforcement, and defense officials. Also, an RP-Australia MOU on Transnational Crimes was concluded on July 19, 2003.
The DFA has also has also obtained project proposals from the European Union consisting of one million euros: 1.) Policy Advice in Fight Against the Financing of Terrorism and 2.) Border Management.
Preservation of Territorial Integrity
The Philippines has always exerted efforts in promoting national sovereignty and territorial integrity especially that the country is an archipelago.
With the creation of the Bipartisan Executive Legislative Advisory Council on the Sabah Issue (BELACS), the DFA (the country in general) was able to traced pertinent records for the purpose of facilitating the formulation of the Philippine positions on the Sabah Issue18.
The Philippines hosted the High-Level Meeting of APEC officials on Capacity Building in Maritime Security on September 8-9, 200319 with the following objectives:
Information exchange in maritime security;
Strengthening private-public sector partnership;
Assessment of Technology requirement needs for APEC economy;
Addressing human capacity needs.
Moreover, the Philippines participated in the following decisions on maritime security20:
RP-Indonesia 1st Joint Permanent Working Group Meeting on Maritime and Ocean Concerns (JPWG-MOC) in Manila on December 1-5, 2003; and
RP-Socialist Republic of Vietnam Technical Working Group Meeting on Maritime and Ocean Concerns here in Manila on December 1-5, 2003.
Economic Development
The following are the highlights of the foreign policy efforts of the Philippines towards the end of 2003 for economic development21:
European Union adopted Council Resolution Number 975/2003 on January 5, 2003 which grant a most favored nation based tariff grant of 25,000 tons and tariff rates up to 12 percent of imports canned tuna by the lobbying of the Department of Foreign Affairs;
RP-US Cooperation in Science & Technology was signed on May 20, 2003 where the Philippines received US $1.1 billion GSP benefits for new RP products, an estimated $300,000 million for Remittance Facilitation Project, a US $ 500,000 worth of medical equipment for Veterans Memorial Center among others;
On August 2003, Philippines won approval for the Chinese State Council for a US $400 Million loan that will help finance the construction of the Phase I of the Northall project envisioned to integrate the provinces of Luzon with Manila and with key cities in Clark and Subic; and
Drafting of the Philippine-Egypt Agreement on Reciprocal Protection of Investment on May 23, 2003.
Promotion of the Welfares of the Filipino Abroad
Reaffirming the importance and contribution of our (Filipino) workers to the social and economic stability of the country, the department (of foreign affairs)has embarked on an even more proactive and progressive role in the protection of the welfare of the overseas Filipino workers22.
Here are some of the specific foreign policy actions by the DFA:
Repatriation of the remaining 23 seaman detained at UAE after being jailed for three years;
Processed a total of 60, 491 claims paid by the Philippine Compensation and Committee for the Gulf War worth US $ 153,000,000 from the UN-approved reparation (as of September 30, 2003; and
Formulation, creation, and implementation of RA 9189 or the Overseas Absentee Voting (OAV) Act of 2003.
Strengthening of Special Phil-US Relations: The Balikatan and MLSA
Whether the influence of the USA placed the Philippines positively or negatively in the map, what is very obvious is the continuing ‘love affair’ of the two countries. The USA serves as the star of the Philippines’ darkest nights and as the penetrating sun in the dawn of its development.
Relations with the US remain the major aspect of the country’s foreign policy: the former colonial power remains the top military and economic partner. And the Balikatan Exercises and the Mutual Logistic Support Agreement or MLSA are latest examples of this special relation in the light of mutual security.
The Balikatan Series is an annual event (2001-2004) aimed at improving the RP-US combined planning, combat readiness, and interoperability while enhancing security relations and demonstrating US resolve to support the RP against external agression23. It is conducted to meet the RP-US obligations under the Mutual Defense Treaty and to fulfill RP-US mutual training and readiness requirements. More specifically, it aims to dismantle the Abu Sayyaf.
The following shows the salient point of the joint military exercise from 2001 to 2004.
“Exercise BALIKATAN 2001 was held from 26 April to 10 May 2001 in the Republic of the Philippines (RP). RP and U.S. military personnel from all branches of service, working shoulder-to-shoulder in the heat and the rain, cross-trained in military operations such as air rescue, amphibious operations, close air support, small arms training, and staging support. They also built and renovated schools and provided much-needed dental, medical, and veterinary services for barangays near Clark International Airport. Barangays are basic Philippine political units for planning and implementing government policies, programs and activities in the community.
BALIKATAN 2001 provided joint/ combined training to improve combat readiness against an external attack on the Philippines, as covered by the1952 Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States.
BALIKATAN was part of the Exercise TEAM CHALLENGE series. Designed as an umbrella exercise, TEAM CHALLENGE's goal is to improve combat readiness and interoperability by tying together joint combined exercises with Thailand, Philippines, Singapore and other interested countries. BALIKATAN 2001 incorporated TEAM CHALLENGE scenarios, such as training in peacekeeping, humanitarian and civic-assistance operations.
Balikatan 2001 was specifically designed to improve RP-US armed forces combat readiness in joint and combined operations, and interoperability between RP and US services through the exchange of training skills and techniques. Balikatan 2001 specifically serves as the base line concept and benchmark for future Balikatan exercises.
Balikatan 2001 was composed of eight major events and several support activities. These events are seminar/workshop, cross trainings, field training exercises and civil military operations. Support activities include command and control, force protection and security operations, information and public affairs, protocol, personnel, medical and evacuation, logistics, communications, legal, engineering and exercise related constructions, and liaison.
Balikatan 2001 was conducted within the constraint of the available resources of AFP and US, consistent with the provisions, intent and spirit of the Mutual Defense Treaty and the Visiting Forces Agreement. The conduct of Balikatan 2001 was approved by the RP-US Council of Foreign Ministers through the Mutual Defense Board Co-Chairmen, the CSAFP and USCINCPAC. For the year 2001, the exercise area was limited to the islands of Luzon and Palawan.
BALIKATAN 2001 began 26 April with formal ceremonies at the General Headquarters of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) at Camp Aguinaldo. Philippine Vice President and Foreign Affairs Secretary Teofisto Guingona welcomed the American forces with these words, "Our relationship with the United States is borne out of longtime friendship and partnership that remains steadfast ...over 100 years. We are committed to a new page in Philippine-American relations - one founded on equality and mutual respect. We want to share better experiences, so that we can promote a more meaningful peace in the years ahead."
Exercise events began 27 April. Participants in a combined joint seminar, held 27 April to 3 May, addressed crisis-action planning followed by a practical exercise. They focused on peacekeeping and noncombatant evacuation operations in conformity with the TEAM CHALLENGE concept. The various services of the two nations also began field training 27 April. The cross-training in various tactics, techniques and procedures represented the type of combined operations that would occur if the two nations were to work together in a contingency operation.
The United States has announced that the purpose of the Balikatan 2002 exercise is to improve the Philippines/US combined planning, combat readiness and interoperability. The exercise will also enhance security relations and demonstrate U.S. resolve to support the Philippines against external aggression and state sponsored terrorism through training in joint/combined operations and conduct of other related activities consistent with the Mutual Defense Treaty. 2002-2 is a regularly scheduled exercise that was planned well before September 11. Its scenario does not directly involve counter-terrorism, and it is unrelated to Balikatan 2002-1 in the southern part of the country.
Balikatan 2002-2 is the eighteenth in this series of exercises, which began in 1981.
Phase I of Balikatan 2002, a Combined Task Force seminar/command post exercise, will be conducted from April 22 through May 6, 2002. This will exercise a Combined Joint Task Force Headquarters Staff and augmentation personnel on crisis action planning and course of action execution at the operational level with a focus on peace enforcement operations. Phase II includes cross training, field training and humanitarian civil assistance exercises from April 22 through May 6, 2002. The cross training and field training portions will enhance the interoperability of U.S. Armed Forces and the Armed Forces of Philippines (AFP). The humanitarian civil assistance will improve U.S./AFP military civic action cooperation while training civil military operators to work together in a Combined Joint Task Force structure with a focus on civil assistance. They will conduct multiple medical, dental, veterinary and engineering civil assistance projects during this phase.
There are several humanitarian and civic assistance projects scheduled during 2002-2 by both Philippine and American forces. These include veterinary and dental teams providing free clinics, and engineering projects designed to improve the local infrastructure.
The exercise is held on the island of Luzon.
In July 2002 Manila agreed to host for nine months beginning in October 2002 joint military exercises involving what could be the biggest deployment of US troops since the Americans left their bases in Clark and Subic in 1991. The exercises, with eight battalions totaling 4,000 troops, in Luzon and Mindanao would be the biggest and longest to be undertaken by Filipino and American soldiers. The training of light reaction companies (LRCs) alone would take up to four months and three months for the battalions. An agreement covering the transfer and storage of supplies and weapons to be used during the war games or similar activities would be concluded before the start of the exercises. Maneuvers would likely be held in an army boot camp north of Manila as well as in the southern Philippines, possibly including the southern island of Jolo, an Abu Sayyaf stronghold.
More than 450 U.S. service members along with a variety of standard military cargo were offloaded at Subic Bay on April 17, 2003 to take part in Exercise Balikatan 2003. The personnel were transported from Okinawa, Japan, to here via the High Speed Vessel to make early arrangements before the exercise kicks off. The exercise is designed to better train Philippine and U.S. air, ground and naval forces to handle any contingencies, emergencies or disasters which may arise throughout the Asia-Pacific region.
The exercise is to be conducted in two simultaneous phases including a combined command post exercise on crisis planning and execution on an operational level focusing on peace enforcement operations. The second phase is to consist of cross-training, field-training, and humanitarian civil assistance exercises designed to enhance interoperability between Philippine and US forces.
Unlike Balikatan 2002-1, the 2003 exercise is in no way related to the ongoing counterterrorism training in the southern Philippines according to military officials.
The exercise officially began on April 17.
Exercise Balikatan 2004 is an annual exercise that runs through March 7, 2004 and is designed to improve combined planning, combat readiness and interoperability of the U.S. and Republic of the Philippine military forces and opportunity to hone their collective skills and cooperation.23”
But the joint military exercises did no escaped from negative feedbacks and criticisms. Example, the proposed Balikatan Exercises in Carmen, North Cotabato was criticized as it will only “exacerbate the peace” in the area24.
Another controversy in the foreign policy of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is the promulgation of the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement or MLSA. “Leftist, professional Anti-Americans and politicians desperate for publicity speak against the RP-US MLSA25. Well, the MLSA was signed on November 22, 2002 at Camp Aguinaldo between the Philippine Department of Natioonal Defense and the US Department of Defense26.
Not to give more focus on the critical controversy of the agreement, the writers have digested the following as the salient points (intention) of the MLSA27:
a. To ensure that we (the Philippines) get the most value for the time, material, and expenses that go into increasing military and security cooperation;
b. To eliminate red tape in the government specially the military; and
c. To maximize respective comparative advantage (in military).
Meanwhile, “the MLSA can only come into play in conjunction with approved actions under the Mutual Defense Treaty or the Visiting Forces Agreement28”. Let it be clear that, this an agreement and not a treaty. The MLSA is not also covered by anti-bases provision of the Constitution29 but covered by Section 21 of Article VII.
In the United Nations
The RP is committed to global peace and as a founding member of the United Nations, abides by its charter and recognizes that the maintenance of international peace and security is a primary responsibility of the UN30.
The Philippines was successful in winning support for its bid for a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council31.
Moreover, the Philippines: (a.) reaffirms the primary responsibility of the Security Council under Chapter VI of the Charter and the role of regional organizations under Chapter VIII in the maintenance of international peace and security ; (In honoring its obligations, the Philippines participate in several peace initiatives under the aegis of the United Nations) and (b.) recognizes that peace making, peacekeeping, peace enforcement, and peace building through the concept of multi-dimensional peace operations, remain as key and indispensable instruments for the maintenance of international peace and security.
Conclusion & The Future of Phil. Foreign Policy
From the Administration of Manuel Roxas to GMA , the Philippines has a fair record of promoting democracy in the global field . It will still remain the future goal of the country aside from national security and economic development. In these efforts, the foreign policy is still dominated by the regional issues concerning the countries in the South-East Asia (military and economic). Persistently, the Arroyo Administration has strengthened the need to protect its nationals (Filipino) abroad. It paves way of the thrust of the government to promote the welfares of Filipino abroad as important partners and tool for economic development.
The idea of a ‘strong republic’ is also founded on the use of bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations with other states. ASEAN, APEC, and other allied organizations are tools for the Philippines to at least strengthen its military and economics ties with other states amidst crisis in the country. Thus, more specifically, foreign relations in the future will hew even more closely relation with the ASEAN. Relations with other states are expected to stem from the ASEAN cooperation through the ASEAN Regional Forum. . Regional organizations are still vital agencies through which the aspirations of the government are attained.
The Philippines has still maintained friendly relations with other countries through bilateral and multilateral arrangements while the United States remain the partner of the country in security and military operations. The influence of the United States will not be set aside. Meanwhile, there is no way that the Philippines will be able to get rid of the ‘end of history and the last man’ as Francis Fukuyama puts it. Globalization will always make its own way to shape the country’s economic relations with other countries.
Special mention will be the growing impacts of the European Union that will expilicitly have some bearing to the country’s foreign relation. The Philippines has already started to be closer to the European community basically on economic relations.
In summary, the goal of foreign policy from 2001-2003 were:
a. enhancement of military security ;
b. utilization of developmental diplomacy;
c. promotion of the welfare of Filipinos abroad;
d. institutional development (economic security); and
e. public diplomacy.
In conclusion, the Philippines still maintain a ‘coalition-making/ alliance construction’ foreign policy orientation. It has continued to embrace independent and faithful ally national roles.
Finally, this will always be the ‘normalcy’ of the country’s foreign policy. Thus, it is appropriate to draw a model we will call normalcy syndrome. ‘Normalcy Syndrome’ is a condition where the state’s foreign policy orientation and national roles are unilinear; that it did not make any significant shift or change and where its objectives are restructured just to reaffirm and strengthen the previous goals and thrusts. The syndrome may either occur in bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations. In this concept, the foreign policy actions of the state do not generally affect its objectives although reforms are expected to take place.
Hence, the foreign policy of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
End Notes:
1. Domingo, Benjamin. The Re-making of Philippine Foreign Policy.
2. See “Annual Philippine Foreign Policy Overview for Diplomatic Corps” released by the DFA on January 12, 2001. Taken from www.dfa.gov.ph.
3. Evidence for the statements in this paragraph can be found in “The Annual Philippine Foreign Policy Overview for Diplomatic Corps” released by the DFA on January 17, 2002. (Taken from www.dfa.gov.ph./archive/fpo2002.htm-61k) See also: “GMA Stresses 8-Point Realities in RP Foreign Policy Meeting with DFA Officials” released by Malacanang on July 7, 2002 (www.newsflash.org/2002/07/peframe.htm) Also read Julie Javellana-Santos, “New DFA Chief Spells Out Arroyo’s Foreign Policy (Arab News: Manila, 25 August 2004) taken from www.arabnews.com . Hon. J. Apolinario Lozado Jr. (Representative, 5th District of Negros Occidental) also included in his speech entitled “Phil. Foreign Policy in a World of Change” on February 27, 2002 at MSU Marawi and Iligan Cities (taken from www.jounlozada.com/sp_Phil_Foreign_policy.htm)
4. As interpreted by Hon. J. Apolinarion Lozada in speech entitled “Phil. Foreign Policy in a World of Change” on February 27, 2002 at MSU Marawi and Iligan Cities (taken from www.jounlozada.com/sp_Phil_Foreign_policy.htm)
5. ibid
The Philippines has not escaped from the conduct of foreign relations. In fact, it is impossible for the country to settle in isolation for its political history did not permit such. Having been exposed to the complex world politics (colonialism in particular), the Philippine foreign policy remains an ambitious adherence to national integrity.
As a general understanding, Philippine foreign policy is always profoundly guided in seeking and serving national interest and security may it be military or economic. Because the country could not get rid of foreign intervention, it is necessary for her to create bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations with other states. Explicitly, the country’s membership to the UN and other regional organizations also requires it to get involved in the dynamics and processes of international relations. More so, the United States of America has been special player in shaping the direction of Philippines’ global affairs.
This is the ‘normalcy’ of the Philippine foreign policy. But this is not just the basic understanding of any state as it undergoes politics of change. This is not just about the emergence, the stability, and the decay of relations. Thus, we are crafting the normalcy of Philippine foreign policy at the assumption that its orientation and roles has not significantly changed for the last fifty (50) years.
Allow us to recall some specific instances in the country’s external affairs. Manuel L. Roxas, for example, stated that his foreign policy was anchored on the commitment to the United Nations, continued ties with the US, maintenance of friendly relations with other states, and devotion to world peace1. Consequently, the foreign policy of the Philippines did not arrive to any critical change in the general sense. Although on the other hand, the ‘Asia for Asian Policy’ during the Magsaysay administration became a controversy because of the prevailing non-recognition of the government on communist China. The rhetoric of President Magsaysay on stating that his administration is recognizing the right of self-determination and independence of all Asian
countries cleared the gray issue that time. Carlos P. Garcia, on the other hand, has recourse to bilateral and multilateral defense mechanisms for external security, among other goals. Finally, the anti-communist role was only lifted up during the dictatorial years of President Ferdinand E. Marcos upon the recognition of the participation of communist China in world affairs.
Meanwhile, Corazon Aquino focused on the restructuring of internal democracy but the issue on the United Nation Convention on the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS) with the inclusion of the ‘principle of archipelagic state’ was a significant impact for the state’s international territorial rights and claims, thus, boosting its territorial integrity from external conflicts.
All in all, including the administration of President Fidel V. Ramos and the resigned President Joseph E. Estrada, the normalcy of Philippine foreign relations is on maintaining and preserving national security; expanding military relations; maintaining ties with the US, regional and international organizations, and other countries and helping the UN in the attainment of world peace.
Using the above background statements, this paper aims to identify the continuing normalcy that the Philippines is experiencing. It will comprehensively focus its discussion on the conduct of external relations under the Gloria Macapagal Administration when it finished the term of the resigned President Estrada from 2001-2003. The paper will present the foreign policy orientation, national roles, and general policy actions while it will first identify the goals and objectives of the Philippine foreign affairs during the PGMA Administration. It will also present a special report on the controversial Balikatan Exercises as well as draw and forecast the future of the Philippine foreign policy. Finally, the paper will ambitiously conceptualize a unique model or paradigm in treating a country’s foreign relations of which the researchers will call ‘the normalcy syndrome.’
FOUNDATIONS OF THE PGMA FOREIGN POLICY
As the former Vice-President of the resigned President Joseph Ejercito-Estrada, the writers of this paper assumed continuity, rather than change, of the foreign policy undertakings of Estrada Administration. Thus, the main pillars of the foreign policy of Estrada are treated as the foundation of PGMA’s foreign policy.
The report of the Department of Foreign Affairs on 20002 can be summarized as to the following pillars:
to safeguard national security where matters directly concerning national security are non-negotiable;
economic and development cooperation with partner countries have enabled the Philippines to obtain the resources to attain economic growth and sustainable development as keys to peace and stability within the country and the region;
to ensure that the right of Filipino migrant workers are respected in the workplace; and
foster ideals of peace, democracy, and respect for universal and fundamental human rights.
Later, when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assumed the office of presidency, she announced the realities facing the Philippines3 now, as follows:
a. the paramount influence of China, Japan, and US in the security and economic evolution of East Asia;
b. the growing context of the ASEAN in global affairs;
c. the role of internal Islamic Community;
d. the looming importance of inter-regional organizations;
e. the protection of the environment, natural resources, and maritime territory;
f. the drive for foreign market and foreign investments in which Europe in also a major source ally with US, Japan, China, and ASEAN;
g. the importance of international tourism; and
h. the crucial roles of the overseas Filipinos in the socio-economic stability.
Thus, the GMA’s foreign policy pillars are simply as follows4:
national security;
promotion and protection of the rights of Filipino overseas; and
development diplomacy.
Department of Foreign Affairs Undersecretary for Policy, Lauro Baja, in his statement before the diplomatic corps in the Philippines (on 2001) spoke broadly about the certain things the Philippines will do… on what is seems to be our foreign policy thrust5 :
join the international counter-terrorist coalition and to work with the United Nations;
work closely with the United States on intelligence and security matters concerning terrorism;
make available Philippine air space and facilities once required as transit or staging points;
contribute logistical support in the form of surplus, medicine, and medical personnel;
to provide combat troops if there is an international call for such troops subject to the concurrence of the Philippine Congress; and
prevent the flow of funds to terrorist groups through the Philippines by passing and implementing the anti-money laundering law.
But to J. Apolinario Lozada Jr., this statement is more of specific actions rather than thrusts. Thus, on December 10, 2001, in his speech at the 25th Anniversary of the Philippine Foreign Service Institute he outlined the national objectives of our foreign policy6 as follows:
to sustain and increase our economic growth to enable us to spread not poverty but prosperity to the greatest number of people;
to promote the welfare of the Filipinos abroad and rally their support behind our effort to pole-vault the country into league of newly recovered economies; and
to enhance our growing roles and influence in the Asian-Pacific and in world affairs.
Similarly, the Department of Foreign Affairs7 strategic plan for 2001-2004 lay down the following visions:
to pursue bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations to advance the interests of the Philippines and the Filipinos;
to endeavor to promote regional and global cooperation in order to achieve peace, security, and stability; and
to work for social justice especially for the poor, human rights and fundamental freedoms, and democratic way of life in the global arena.
And in order to realize these visions, the “advancement of interest of the Philippines and the Filipino people”8 is a necessary mission.
Moreover, the strategize foreign policy objectives9 are as follows:
Key Political Strategy:
to contribute the enhancement of national security and protection of territorial integrity and national sovereignty;
to promote Philippine interest by working closely with other countries in addressing threats to national security and human rights; and
to assist national government in enhancing its defense capabilities.
Key Developmental Strategy:
to harness foreign relations in the active pursuit of sustainable development of growth with social equity through;
· trade, investment, and tourism promotion;
· external technological, scientific, and financial resources;
· education and human resource development; and
· advancing the human and economic security of the Filipino people through bilateral, regional, and multilateral social and economic mechanisms.
Key Cultural Strategy:
to promote Philippine culture for increased improved relations with other countries;
to encourage genuine partnership between civil societies of the Philippines; and
to promote national development concerns among Filipino overseas.
Key Consular, Labor, and Migration Strategy:
to protect the rights and promote the welfare of overseas Filipino overseas.
Key Public Information Strategy:
to project a positive image of the Philippines.
These are the statements to the foundation of the Philippine foreign policy which are guides for the government’s specific initiatives and/ or understanding outside the country. We are now to present a comprehensive survey of state’s foreign policy actions.
foreign policy actions
The above vision, mission, goals, objectives, thrusts, and the like are the guide of the GMA Administration in order to realize specific policy actions.
The Department of Foreign Affairs on its accomplishment report (2003) stated that “continuity and change have both characterized the Department (the country) approach on its conduct of foreign policy10. Of course, the Philippines, as a participant, in the new world order, is always challenge by a more dynamic economic and political environment. As previously stated, it cannot escape from the complexity of world relations.
General External Security Arrangements
The protection of the country’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity remains the most important concerns. For the Philippines, national security is attained by working closely with other countries through different forms of external relations. “Peace and security are important components of national security. The government continued to seek a permanent solutions to the problem in the southern Philippines….11” To this, the government has sought the assistance of the outside parties. Between the MILF and the GRP, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) participated with other countries such as Malaysia and Libya. Meanwhile, Norway act as the host of the ongoing CPP-NPA (communist insurgency) peace talks with the Government of the Republic of the Philippines.
Philippines is still cooperative in regional and international groups such as ASEAN and its partners such as the APEC, to establish the condition of necessary peace and development.
In general, “the war against terror continues to be a major agendum of our foreign policy. The Philippines is actively engaged in counter-terrorism initiative and measures to ensure maritime security12.” In fact the Philippines has participated in the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ of 45 countries to bear the duty and share the honor of service in our common defense13. “The coalition of the willing is assembled by the US to topple down Saddam Hussein’s regime and assure Iraq’s stability”. To this aim, the Philippines send 51-member humanitarian contingent to Iraq14. The coalition is also formed to outrage the war against the weapons of mass destructions of Iraq (which was not proven in the large scale).
Other important external security measures of the Philippines are outlined in this manner:
State Visit of President Nursultan Nazarbagev of Kazakhstan was expected to boost support for the Philippines to gain observer status in the OIC;
Bangladesh, a member of the OIC Committee of the Eight, conveyed its full support for the Philippine government peace efforts on Muslim Mindanao and agreed to renew all existing agreements between the two countries and explore new avenues of cooperation specially education (when Foreign Minister Morshed Khad visited the Philippines on November 13-16, 2003;
Enhancement of the Philippine Indonesian relation especially between the southern Philippines and the Eastern Indonesia in terms of security and trade matters (when the late Foreign Affairs Secretary Blas Ople visited North and South Sulawesi on May 1-3, 2004. Meanwhile, just recently on February 2, 2004, the Philippine tourists visiting Indonesia are exempted to pay for their new visa policy15 (apart from other nationals).
For Mindanao rehabilitation, the following actions were made:
1. Two of the projects under the 26th Yen Loan Package of Japan were signed on May 25, 2003. These are the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) Social Fund for Peace and Development worth 2.47 Billion Yen and the Central Mindanao Road Project worth 3.71 Billion Yen;
2. Growth Equity in Mindanao (GEM), a USAID Project managed by the Philippine government through the Mindanao Economic Development Council (MEDCO) that aims to accelerate economic growth in Mindanao focusing n enterprise development assistance for small and medium scale businesses and investors, infrastructures assistance for local government units and policy analysis, extended its operation by the GEM-2 Program that will end on 2007. The project will focus on the conflicting areas of Mindanao; and
3. Canadian International Development Agency funded a government nationwide Public Awareness Campaign on the Danger Small Arm and Light Weapons in Mindanao.
Meanwhile, the ASEAN remains to be an important ‘ingredient’ of Philippine foreign policy. The country participated in the 9th ASEAN Summit at Bali on October 7-8, 2003 where Bali Concord II was signed to identify the three pillars of ASEAN Community: ASEAN Economic Community; ASEAN Security Community; and ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community16.
On ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), specifically the Philippines:
a. Actively participated in the inaugural ARF Inter-sessional Meeting on Counter-terrorism and Transnational crime on March 20-21, 2003 which produced the draft ARF Statement on Cooperative Counter-Terrorist Actions on Border Security and was subsequently adopted by the ARF Ministers on June 18, 2003 in Phnom Penh;
b. Joined the ARF in the fight against piracy and other threats to maritime security through the adoption of the ARF Statement on Cooperation Against Piracy and Other Threats to Maritime Security17.
To highlight the anti-terrorism campaign of the Philippines, it hosted the 23rd ASEAN Chief of National Police Conference (ASEANPOL) on September 10, 2003 which also included discussion on illegal drug trafficking, commercial crimes, bank offenses, credit card fraud, and transnational fraud.
On not of a lesser value, the country:
focused on the role of the ASEAN in the context regional security on the issue of the South China Sea (during the 14th ASEAN-EU Ministerial Meeting held in Brussels in January;
viewed the tension in the Taiwan Straits as an immediate threat to peace and stability with the regime and expressed support for the One-China Policy and the Principle of Peaceful Reunification;
manifested its desire to intensify and deepen its relation with countries in the Southeast Asia particularly with India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh; and
expressed support for the continued international peace in East Timor, thus, sending six military personnel and 60 civilian police to East Timor and Kosovo, as an act of peace-keeping operation.
Furthermore, the special RP-US relations continued to exist. As a result of the US State Visit of PGMA in May 2003, US President George Bush designated the Philippines as a Major Non-NATO Ally. The visit also received amounts as defense and security assistance from US:
US $ 30M aid for counter terrorism and training of AFP;
US $30M developmental assistance to conflicting areas;
US $25M for training of engineering unit for humanitarian project in conflict areas;
US $47M support for Balikatan 03-1;
30 units of UH 1 H helicopters for military mobility; and
US $10M in Presidential draw Down Authority for equipment, spare parts, and maintenance.
To further its anti-terrorism initiatives as well as regional relations, the Philippines coordinated its commitment to the Security Trade in the APEC Region as a direction to counter terrorism. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Cooperation to Combat International Tension between the Philippines and Australia was signed by Sec. Blas Ople and Foreign Minister Alexander Down on March 4, 2003. The MOU was signed to increased cooperation between intelligence, security, law enforcement, and defense officials. Also, an RP-Australia MOU on Transnational Crimes was concluded on July 19, 2003.
The DFA has also has also obtained project proposals from the European Union consisting of one million euros: 1.) Policy Advice in Fight Against the Financing of Terrorism and 2.) Border Management.
Preservation of Territorial Integrity
The Philippines has always exerted efforts in promoting national sovereignty and territorial integrity especially that the country is an archipelago.
With the creation of the Bipartisan Executive Legislative Advisory Council on the Sabah Issue (BELACS), the DFA (the country in general) was able to traced pertinent records for the purpose of facilitating the formulation of the Philippine positions on the Sabah Issue18.
The Philippines hosted the High-Level Meeting of APEC officials on Capacity Building in Maritime Security on September 8-9, 200319 with the following objectives:
Information exchange in maritime security;
Strengthening private-public sector partnership;
Assessment of Technology requirement needs for APEC economy;
Addressing human capacity needs.
Moreover, the Philippines participated in the following decisions on maritime security20:
RP-Indonesia 1st Joint Permanent Working Group Meeting on Maritime and Ocean Concerns (JPWG-MOC) in Manila on December 1-5, 2003; and
RP-Socialist Republic of Vietnam Technical Working Group Meeting on Maritime and Ocean Concerns here in Manila on December 1-5, 2003.
Economic Development
The following are the highlights of the foreign policy efforts of the Philippines towards the end of 2003 for economic development21:
European Union adopted Council Resolution Number 975/2003 on January 5, 2003 which grant a most favored nation based tariff grant of 25,000 tons and tariff rates up to 12 percent of imports canned tuna by the lobbying of the Department of Foreign Affairs;
RP-US Cooperation in Science & Technology was signed on May 20, 2003 where the Philippines received US $1.1 billion GSP benefits for new RP products, an estimated $300,000 million for Remittance Facilitation Project, a US $ 500,000 worth of medical equipment for Veterans Memorial Center among others;
On August 2003, Philippines won approval for the Chinese State Council for a US $400 Million loan that will help finance the construction of the Phase I of the Northall project envisioned to integrate the provinces of Luzon with Manila and with key cities in Clark and Subic; and
Drafting of the Philippine-Egypt Agreement on Reciprocal Protection of Investment on May 23, 2003.
Promotion of the Welfares of the Filipino Abroad
Reaffirming the importance and contribution of our (Filipino) workers to the social and economic stability of the country, the department (of foreign affairs)has embarked on an even more proactive and progressive role in the protection of the welfare of the overseas Filipino workers22.
Here are some of the specific foreign policy actions by the DFA:
Repatriation of the remaining 23 seaman detained at UAE after being jailed for three years;
Processed a total of 60, 491 claims paid by the Philippine Compensation and Committee for the Gulf War worth US $ 153,000,000 from the UN-approved reparation (as of September 30, 2003; and
Formulation, creation, and implementation of RA 9189 or the Overseas Absentee Voting (OAV) Act of 2003.
Strengthening of Special Phil-US Relations: The Balikatan and MLSA
Whether the influence of the USA placed the Philippines positively or negatively in the map, what is very obvious is the continuing ‘love affair’ of the two countries. The USA serves as the star of the Philippines’ darkest nights and as the penetrating sun in the dawn of its development.
Relations with the US remain the major aspect of the country’s foreign policy: the former colonial power remains the top military and economic partner. And the Balikatan Exercises and the Mutual Logistic Support Agreement or MLSA are latest examples of this special relation in the light of mutual security.
The Balikatan Series is an annual event (2001-2004) aimed at improving the RP-US combined planning, combat readiness, and interoperability while enhancing security relations and demonstrating US resolve to support the RP against external agression23. It is conducted to meet the RP-US obligations under the Mutual Defense Treaty and to fulfill RP-US mutual training and readiness requirements. More specifically, it aims to dismantle the Abu Sayyaf.
The following shows the salient point of the joint military exercise from 2001 to 2004.
“Exercise BALIKATAN 2001 was held from 26 April to 10 May 2001 in the Republic of the Philippines (RP). RP and U.S. military personnel from all branches of service, working shoulder-to-shoulder in the heat and the rain, cross-trained in military operations such as air rescue, amphibious operations, close air support, small arms training, and staging support. They also built and renovated schools and provided much-needed dental, medical, and veterinary services for barangays near Clark International Airport. Barangays are basic Philippine political units for planning and implementing government policies, programs and activities in the community.
BALIKATAN 2001 provided joint/ combined training to improve combat readiness against an external attack on the Philippines, as covered by the1952 Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States.
BALIKATAN was part of the Exercise TEAM CHALLENGE series. Designed as an umbrella exercise, TEAM CHALLENGE's goal is to improve combat readiness and interoperability by tying together joint combined exercises with Thailand, Philippines, Singapore and other interested countries. BALIKATAN 2001 incorporated TEAM CHALLENGE scenarios, such as training in peacekeeping, humanitarian and civic-assistance operations.
Balikatan 2001 was specifically designed to improve RP-US armed forces combat readiness in joint and combined operations, and interoperability between RP and US services through the exchange of training skills and techniques. Balikatan 2001 specifically serves as the base line concept and benchmark for future Balikatan exercises.
Balikatan 2001 was composed of eight major events and several support activities. These events are seminar/workshop, cross trainings, field training exercises and civil military operations. Support activities include command and control, force protection and security operations, information and public affairs, protocol, personnel, medical and evacuation, logistics, communications, legal, engineering and exercise related constructions, and liaison.
Balikatan 2001 was conducted within the constraint of the available resources of AFP and US, consistent with the provisions, intent and spirit of the Mutual Defense Treaty and the Visiting Forces Agreement. The conduct of Balikatan 2001 was approved by the RP-US Council of Foreign Ministers through the Mutual Defense Board Co-Chairmen, the CSAFP and USCINCPAC. For the year 2001, the exercise area was limited to the islands of Luzon and Palawan.
BALIKATAN 2001 began 26 April with formal ceremonies at the General Headquarters of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) at Camp Aguinaldo. Philippine Vice President and Foreign Affairs Secretary Teofisto Guingona welcomed the American forces with these words, "Our relationship with the United States is borne out of longtime friendship and partnership that remains steadfast ...over 100 years. We are committed to a new page in Philippine-American relations - one founded on equality and mutual respect. We want to share better experiences, so that we can promote a more meaningful peace in the years ahead."
Exercise events began 27 April. Participants in a combined joint seminar, held 27 April to 3 May, addressed crisis-action planning followed by a practical exercise. They focused on peacekeeping and noncombatant evacuation operations in conformity with the TEAM CHALLENGE concept. The various services of the two nations also began field training 27 April. The cross-training in various tactics, techniques and procedures represented the type of combined operations that would occur if the two nations were to work together in a contingency operation.
The United States has announced that the purpose of the Balikatan 2002 exercise is to improve the Philippines/US combined planning, combat readiness and interoperability. The exercise will also enhance security relations and demonstrate U.S. resolve to support the Philippines against external aggression and state sponsored terrorism through training in joint/combined operations and conduct of other related activities consistent with the Mutual Defense Treaty. 2002-2 is a regularly scheduled exercise that was planned well before September 11. Its scenario does not directly involve counter-terrorism, and it is unrelated to Balikatan 2002-1 in the southern part of the country.
Balikatan 2002-2 is the eighteenth in this series of exercises, which began in 1981.
Phase I of Balikatan 2002, a Combined Task Force seminar/command post exercise, will be conducted from April 22 through May 6, 2002. This will exercise a Combined Joint Task Force Headquarters Staff and augmentation personnel on crisis action planning and course of action execution at the operational level with a focus on peace enforcement operations. Phase II includes cross training, field training and humanitarian civil assistance exercises from April 22 through May 6, 2002. The cross training and field training portions will enhance the interoperability of U.S. Armed Forces and the Armed Forces of Philippines (AFP). The humanitarian civil assistance will improve U.S./AFP military civic action cooperation while training civil military operators to work together in a Combined Joint Task Force structure with a focus on civil assistance. They will conduct multiple medical, dental, veterinary and engineering civil assistance projects during this phase.
There are several humanitarian and civic assistance projects scheduled during 2002-2 by both Philippine and American forces. These include veterinary and dental teams providing free clinics, and engineering projects designed to improve the local infrastructure.
The exercise is held on the island of Luzon.
In July 2002 Manila agreed to host for nine months beginning in October 2002 joint military exercises involving what could be the biggest deployment of US troops since the Americans left their bases in Clark and Subic in 1991. The exercises, with eight battalions totaling 4,000 troops, in Luzon and Mindanao would be the biggest and longest to be undertaken by Filipino and American soldiers. The training of light reaction companies (LRCs) alone would take up to four months and three months for the battalions. An agreement covering the transfer and storage of supplies and weapons to be used during the war games or similar activities would be concluded before the start of the exercises. Maneuvers would likely be held in an army boot camp north of Manila as well as in the southern Philippines, possibly including the southern island of Jolo, an Abu Sayyaf stronghold.
More than 450 U.S. service members along with a variety of standard military cargo were offloaded at Subic Bay on April 17, 2003 to take part in Exercise Balikatan 2003. The personnel were transported from Okinawa, Japan, to here via the High Speed Vessel to make early arrangements before the exercise kicks off. The exercise is designed to better train Philippine and U.S. air, ground and naval forces to handle any contingencies, emergencies or disasters which may arise throughout the Asia-Pacific region.
The exercise is to be conducted in two simultaneous phases including a combined command post exercise on crisis planning and execution on an operational level focusing on peace enforcement operations. The second phase is to consist of cross-training, field-training, and humanitarian civil assistance exercises designed to enhance interoperability between Philippine and US forces.
Unlike Balikatan 2002-1, the 2003 exercise is in no way related to the ongoing counterterrorism training in the southern Philippines according to military officials.
The exercise officially began on April 17.
Exercise Balikatan 2004 is an annual exercise that runs through March 7, 2004 and is designed to improve combined planning, combat readiness and interoperability of the U.S. and Republic of the Philippine military forces and opportunity to hone their collective skills and cooperation.23”
But the joint military exercises did no escaped from negative feedbacks and criticisms. Example, the proposed Balikatan Exercises in Carmen, North Cotabato was criticized as it will only “exacerbate the peace” in the area24.
Another controversy in the foreign policy of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is the promulgation of the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement or MLSA. “Leftist, professional Anti-Americans and politicians desperate for publicity speak against the RP-US MLSA25. Well, the MLSA was signed on November 22, 2002 at Camp Aguinaldo between the Philippine Department of Natioonal Defense and the US Department of Defense26.
Not to give more focus on the critical controversy of the agreement, the writers have digested the following as the salient points (intention) of the MLSA27:
a. To ensure that we (the Philippines) get the most value for the time, material, and expenses that go into increasing military and security cooperation;
b. To eliminate red tape in the government specially the military; and
c. To maximize respective comparative advantage (in military).
Meanwhile, “the MLSA can only come into play in conjunction with approved actions under the Mutual Defense Treaty or the Visiting Forces Agreement28”. Let it be clear that, this an agreement and not a treaty. The MLSA is not also covered by anti-bases provision of the Constitution29 but covered by Section 21 of Article VII.
In the United Nations
The RP is committed to global peace and as a founding member of the United Nations, abides by its charter and recognizes that the maintenance of international peace and security is a primary responsibility of the UN30.
The Philippines was successful in winning support for its bid for a non-permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council31.
Moreover, the Philippines: (a.) reaffirms the primary responsibility of the Security Council under Chapter VI of the Charter and the role of regional organizations under Chapter VIII in the maintenance of international peace and security ; (In honoring its obligations, the Philippines participate in several peace initiatives under the aegis of the United Nations) and (b.) recognizes that peace making, peacekeeping, peace enforcement, and peace building through the concept of multi-dimensional peace operations, remain as key and indispensable instruments for the maintenance of international peace and security.
Conclusion & The Future of Phil. Foreign Policy
From the Administration of Manuel Roxas to GMA , the Philippines has a fair record of promoting democracy in the global field . It will still remain the future goal of the country aside from national security and economic development. In these efforts, the foreign policy is still dominated by the regional issues concerning the countries in the South-East Asia (military and economic). Persistently, the Arroyo Administration has strengthened the need to protect its nationals (Filipino) abroad. It paves way of the thrust of the government to promote the welfares of Filipino abroad as important partners and tool for economic development.
The idea of a ‘strong republic’ is also founded on the use of bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations with other states. ASEAN, APEC, and other allied organizations are tools for the Philippines to at least strengthen its military and economics ties with other states amidst crisis in the country. Thus, more specifically, foreign relations in the future will hew even more closely relation with the ASEAN. Relations with other states are expected to stem from the ASEAN cooperation through the ASEAN Regional Forum. . Regional organizations are still vital agencies through which the aspirations of the government are attained.
The Philippines has still maintained friendly relations with other countries through bilateral and multilateral arrangements while the United States remain the partner of the country in security and military operations. The influence of the United States will not be set aside. Meanwhile, there is no way that the Philippines will be able to get rid of the ‘end of history and the last man’ as Francis Fukuyama puts it. Globalization will always make its own way to shape the country’s economic relations with other countries.
Special mention will be the growing impacts of the European Union that will expilicitly have some bearing to the country’s foreign relation. The Philippines has already started to be closer to the European community basically on economic relations.
In summary, the goal of foreign policy from 2001-2003 were:
a. enhancement of military security ;
b. utilization of developmental diplomacy;
c. promotion of the welfare of Filipinos abroad;
d. institutional development (economic security); and
e. public diplomacy.
In conclusion, the Philippines still maintain a ‘coalition-making/ alliance construction’ foreign policy orientation. It has continued to embrace independent and faithful ally national roles.
Finally, this will always be the ‘normalcy’ of the country’s foreign policy. Thus, it is appropriate to draw a model we will call normalcy syndrome. ‘Normalcy Syndrome’ is a condition where the state’s foreign policy orientation and national roles are unilinear; that it did not make any significant shift or change and where its objectives are restructured just to reaffirm and strengthen the previous goals and thrusts. The syndrome may either occur in bilateral, regional, and multilateral relations. In this concept, the foreign policy actions of the state do not generally affect its objectives although reforms are expected to take place.
Hence, the foreign policy of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
End Notes:
1. Domingo, Benjamin. The Re-making of Philippine Foreign Policy.
2. See “Annual Philippine Foreign Policy Overview for Diplomatic Corps” released by the DFA on January 12, 2001. Taken from www.dfa.gov.ph.
3. Evidence for the statements in this paragraph can be found in “The Annual Philippine Foreign Policy Overview for Diplomatic Corps” released by the DFA on January 17, 2002. (Taken from www.dfa.gov.ph./archive/fpo2002.htm-61k) See also: “GMA Stresses 8-Point Realities in RP Foreign Policy Meeting with DFA Officials” released by Malacanang on July 7, 2002 (www.newsflash.org/2002/07/peframe.htm) Also read Julie Javellana-Santos, “New DFA Chief Spells Out Arroyo’s Foreign Policy (Arab News: Manila, 25 August 2004) taken from www.arabnews.com . Hon. J. Apolinario Lozado Jr. (Representative, 5th District of Negros Occidental) also included in his speech entitled “Phil. Foreign Policy in a World of Change” on February 27, 2002 at MSU Marawi and Iligan Cities (taken from www.jounlozada.com/sp_Phil_Foreign_policy.htm)
4. As interpreted by Hon. J. Apolinarion Lozada in speech entitled “Phil. Foreign Policy in a World of Change” on February 27, 2002 at MSU Marawi and Iligan Cities (taken from www.jounlozada.com/sp_Phil_Foreign_policy.htm)
5. ibid
Max Weber’s Ideal Bureaucracy
By: Ernesto C. Casiple, Jr.
I. Summary:
The absolute exercise of authority requires bureaucratic functioning of an institution. It follows then that an organization is bureaucratic if it employs bureaucratic administrative staff. While it recognizes that the head of the organization may occupy position through appropriation, election, or designated in succession, it is necessary that the administrative staff under the supreme authority shall be appointed. This is to exercise control powers.
Appointment of staff shall be based on principles of division of labor, impersonal orientation, hierarchy of authority, regulations and control mechanisms, career orientation, efficiency, salary as a form of remuneration, and selection through technical qualifications. This type of organization is applicable to wide variety of different institutions. It may be applied to capitalistic (business) enterprise, charitable organizations, military, political, and religious institutions. The development of modern forms of the organization of corporate groups is identical with the emergence and spread of bureaucratic organization.
Its historical existence can also be demonstrated in all these fields. Experience would tell that the purely monocratic type of bureaucratic organization is capable of attaining highest degree of efficiency and is the most imperative control over human beings. Moreover, those who tend to escape the influence of the existing bureaucratic apparatus, thus creating their own organization are found subject to the general processes of bureaucratization. As a result, the existing bureaucratic institutions continue to function that are not only material and objective but also ideal in character. Without it, society like our own could no longer function.
The capitalistic system is said to be the basis of bureaucratization. Capitalism strongly tends to foster development of bureaucracy, though both capitalism and bureaucracy have arisen from different historical sources. On the other hand, socialism would also in fact require a higher degree of formal bureaucratization. Both capitalism and socialism needs a system of control. On the basis of knowledge, bureaucratic administration means exercise of control.
In general, the development of bureaucracy greatly favors the leveling of social classes. Rational bureaucracy provides the necessity of formalism of any structure. This means that regulatory measures have formal character and tend to be treated in formalistic spirit.
II. Points of Agreement:
Max Weber raised some “unbreakable” points that are very important in any organization.
First, I would like to agree with him on pointing out the use of formalistic structure. Bureaucracy thus becomes a way of organizing work in which people are treated as interchangeable and replaceable cogs to fill specialized roles. Sets of rules of an “ideal bureaucracy” describe the duties of members, a set of standard operating procedures, and impersonal relations between members.
Second, it is recognized that capitalistic enterprises necessitates extreme bureaucratization that Weber, himself, labeled it as the “purest type.” Systematic production of goods needs the emergence of a strict division of labor to produce with utmost efficiency. Weber’s ideal type of bureaucracy is a tool for giving us new or at least fruitful perspectives on the past and for coping with modern developments, especially in post-industrial technologically highly advanced societies.
Third, it is of course important to provide salary for the staff as fruits of their work. There is no dysfunction in providing remuneration to workers; it is always a functional term.
Fourth, it is as imperative to treat official obligations separately. Impersonality of official obligations is a key to delivery services to its highest efficiency.
Fifth, hierarchy of offices is unstoppable. They exists in any form of organization may it be formal or informal, small or large.
III. Points of Disagreement:
There are some fundamental flaws on the arguments presented by Max Weber.
First, what he seemed to proposed is emphasis on extreme division of labor as applicable to any given society. While division of labor provides expertise, it creates boredom among workers. Applicability of extreme division of labor is limited to the production of goods that requires mechanistic approach. A production of a canned tuna for example needs this. Delivery of services on the other hand requires professionalized system rather than routinization.
Second, the appointment of workers by the supreme authority emphasized the control mechanisms. . In this model of ideal bureaucracy, initiatives and policy directions come only from the top echelons. Weber seemed to promise that it provide for continuity and stability in the work place. But what was misplaced here is that in many cases workers' control is interpreted in ways which co-opt rather than mobilizes forces for change.
Third, the role of technical knowledge is overly treated as a very important criterion in the selection of administrative staff. While technical knowledge is essential
AIM-World Bank Mindanao Bridging Leaders Programmme (MBLP)
CLICK ON PIC FOR LINK: The overall objective of the program is to build a cadre of Bridging Leaders in Mindanao, who can address issues like peace, education, health, land conflicts, poverty, and poor local governance, among others. The MBLP is implemented by AIM Center for Bridging Leadership.
Bamboo Craft
South Cotabato is proud of its bamboo craft. Please call ProTech Center for orders: 083-228-9738 or DTI SC at 083-2282659
B'LAAN INDIGENOUS NITO PRODUCTS
Let's help B'laan Communities in Tampakan earn additional income by buying their products made of nito. Products include plates, baskets, hats, and others. Call directly the Municipal Agriculture Office of Tampakan at (083) 227-2902.
SWEET, SPICY AND CRUNCHY
Mommy Juling's Atsara of BKR Foods continue to increase productivity, hence increasing its job generation and income. On its launching of its expanded processing plant on Oct. 23, BKR reported that it has increase its production from 60 kgs a month in the late 2008 to 600 kgs a month in 2010. Mommy Juling's Atsara is available at Gaisano Mall, KCC Malls, ACE Centerpoint and other convenient store. See its processing plant at Bayan, Polomolok, South Cotabato. Rona Ortiz will be happy to hear and know from you through (+63) 0919-461-0152.
CORN HUSK NOVELTY ITEMS
Help protect environment, help our rural women and out-of-school youth from Surallah. Buy Novelty items for Christmas and any occasions (souvenirs and corporate giveaways) to Pag-Asa Youth Association of Centrala, Allah Valley Crafters Association and Neza's Novelty Items. Text or call (+63) 0917-347-0832.
HEALTH AND WELLNESS! CLEANSE TO A HEALTHY LIFE
Food supplements are never expensive and should never be. What we need now are 100% natural products (no synthetic materials or foreign bodies and no artificial preservatives added). For Jong Bajunaid of Tupi, South Cotabato helping others is very important. Her advocacy of natural healing and remembering old ways of healing and bring that to present scenario is never old. Buy mangosteen tonic, papaya cider, and coco-papaya vinegar from JNB Industries in Tupi, South Cotabato. Mam Jong will be happy to share her knowledge on the wonders of natural healing. She is a Gawad-Saka Awardee (farmer-scientist). You can reach her through (+63) 0916-795-3154.
BDS
