THE GRP-MILF PEACE TALK 2

I said in my last blog that already three peace talks, including the Framework Agreement signed yesterday, 15 October, had been concluded by the government with the Muslims of Mindanao.  I have to apologize that I was wrong;  there has actually been four already, that which I failed to mention was the FPA or so-called Final Peace Agreement concluded in 1996 during the incumbency of former President Fidel V. Ramos. So-called "final," it really was not, as indeed two others -- the MOA-AD in GMA's time and now the Framework Agreement at present.  To sum up, the first two were signed with the MNLF, the latter two with the MILF.

The more indeed does this tend to cast some clouds of doubt on the eventual success of the current one.  Before anybody gets me wrong, I do not wish to sound a "kill-joy" in this connection.  The thing is, as Misuari of the MNLF now tends to show, the new agreement may be on for rough sailing during PNoy's remaining terms, or in his exact words, tantamount to a suicide for the MILF.  Of course, he also said, the MNLF is not going to war owing to their disagreement to the ongoing negotiation.  Well, my only remaining hope is when the government realizes the need to first agree to between themselves and sincerely assert that either is no longer interested in "liberation,"  but now in true "autonomy."   My common sense -- as well as that of others, I am sure -- would simply suggest that the MILF and MNLF unite under one I-don't-know- what name or calling that has totally shed off or removed the letter "L" for liberation.

As we all know, the purpose for the establishment of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) is give the kind of autonomy -- let's not forget, not liberation -- that the Muslims need towards optimum peace and co-existence with their Christian brothers and sisters in that part of the country.  And as everybody, the ARMM's noble objective has failed.  But why did it fail, in the first place.  Less be honest:  isn't it essentially because of graft and corruption and the greed for power among those that governed the ARMM.  If that is the case, then doesn't the common-sense solution simply lie in solving that graft and corruption and addressing the ARMM governors' insatiable greed for power?  Then, why must the government abolish the ARMM rather than squarely address its basic problems and give it a chance?

As I said, I am no lawyer nor a political analyst.  I may be analyzing problems not really as much from the standpoints of law and politics as merely from that of plain common sense. But I have always believed that all laws and governmental policies anywhere in all democratic societies must first and foremost be common-sensical.  And I am sure I am not alone in that conviction.