Critical Questions for Hillary

By Patricio P. Diaz


GENERAL SANTOS CITY (MindaNews/14 Nov) – U.S. State Secretary Hillary Clinton urged the Philippine Government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front to “not waste the opportunity to strike a peace deal before President Macapagal-Arroyo steps down next June”. She stated so at a special forum at the University of Sto. Tomas, November 13.
Most welcomed show of concern. But hasn’t this been expressed for the nth time by various groups and individuals? The only big difference: This time it is from the U.S. top State official, Secretary Hillary Clinton.

Inquirer.net (Nov. 14) reported Mrs. Clinton to have said that “the conditions for peace are ripe” and Ms. Arroyo was “very committed” and “fully prepared” to make the difficult decisions need to achieve peace with the MILF.

Who told Mrs. Clinton that – the Embassy people? Is the Secretary flattering President Arroyo? Did the Embassy not tell her that President Arroyo had sorely passed up the most critical time for her “to make the difficult decisions needed to achieve peace with the MILF” – when the MOA-AD needed her intervention?

She warned “the negotiating environment could change under a new administration,” so she pepped up: “So strike while the iron is hot, when people are in the mood and willing to make peace. Do not sleep; do not rest until we finally get there.”

Pep talk is good sales talk. Is the MILF buying? Expected – the change of negotiating environment under the new administration. What made Mrs. Clinton sound wary that the change would be for the worse?

She cautioned President Arroyo against “an agreement outside the Constitution and laws of the country” since “that will be creating more problems”. Did she know that while her advice was unnecessary the more proper and most necessary was on how to make an agreement outside of the Constitution constitutional? She missed the point.

She also warned against “rogue elements” of the MILF who do not support the peace process. It is important to isolate them. What about the “rogue elements” within the Arroyo government? What is to be done with them?

She made three promises: Washington (1) would help facilitate the talks by talking to both sides; (2) would provide social and economic aid to improve the lives of people in Mindanao; and, (3) would help “isolate those who are not interested in peace at all and are only interested in conflict and terrorism”. The promises are most welcome.

But would it have been better had Washington not ignored the petitions of the Moro leaders of Sulu and Mindanao a century ago warning of troubles that, prophetically true, are now the subject of GRP-MILF peace negotiation – the Mindanao conflict that has caused the loss of so many lives and material resources?

The third promise is enigmatic. What is Washington planning to do?

Behind and beyond all questions, what the U.S. State Secretary said about GRP-MILF peace negotiation is the official position of Washington. Will Manila and Darapanan (the present seat of the MILF Central Committee) oblige?

[“Comment" is Mr. Patricio P. Diaz' column for MindaViews, the opinion section of MindaNews. Mr. Diaz is the recipient of a “Lifetime Achievement Award” from the Titus Brandsma for his "commitment to education and public information to Mindanawons as Journalist, Educator and Peace Advocate." You may e-mail your comments to patpdiaz@mindanews.com]