By Arjay L. Balinbin, Reporter
THE DUTERTE administration’s move towards stronger localized peace talks with communist guerrillas is an “innovation worth pursuing,” but the 2019 target to quash the insurgency is not very realistic, analysts say.
“Setting a specific deadline, i.e. 2019, does not exactly offer any assurance because this administration has a very poor track record when it comes to meeting their self-imposed deadlines. It would be more helpful if the administration presents to the public a detailed plan with realizable milestones,” Ateneo Policy Center research fellow Michael Henry Ll. Yusingco said in an e-mail to BusinessWorld on Monday, Dec. 17.
“Just making a blanket promise, quite frankly, is simply being dishonest to the Filipino people… But the ‘localized’ approach is an innovation worth pursuing,” he added.
Armed Forces of the Philippines Spokesperson Edgard A. Arevalo told BusinessWorld in a phone interview on Dec. 10 that the government targets to end the communist armed conflict in 2019 through its “whole-of-nation approach” in localized peace talks as contained in Executive Order (EO) No. 70, which President Rodrigo R. Duterte signed on Dec. 4.
Last September, the President said in his remarks at the Camp Melchor F. Dela Cruz in Gamu, Isabela that the 50-year old communist armed conflict will be over by next year.
“I think that kung maawa ang Panginoong Diyos (with God’s mercy), this will be over by about the second quarter of next year. Ang rami na kasi nagsu-surrender (Many are surrendering),” he said on Sept. 18.
Mr. Arevalo also said this new directive practically cuts out the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) and the Communist Party of the Philippines in the peace process.
The planned localized peace talks would give bigger involvement among local government units and members of the New People’s Army (NPA), the CPP’s armed units spread in different parts of the country.
However, Mr. Yusingco said the government would eventually still need to reach out to the mother organizations.
“Negotiating a peace agreement with the NDFP is still necessary to end the communist insurgency with finality…. Ensuring all relevant parties are in the negotiating table will always be a positive boost in arriving at a viable peace agreement.”
University of Santo Tomas (UST) political science professor Marlon M. Villarin, in a phone interview on Monday, opined that the administration’s 2019 target should not be taken “literally but seriously.”
“I think what he meant by ending it by 2019 is ending the impossibility of finally thinking that it’s possible for the government to find better solutions to this insurgency,” he said.
Mr. Villarin also stressed that “it is really difficult to say that the communist insurgency will end during the Duterte administration.”
“For the 2019, we will see more chances for the peace talks to resume because the way I look at where the government is embarking is more on the progressive way of resolving the issue. We cannot take the President’s declaration literally, but seriously. We don’t take it literally because we know that the problem is deeply rooted on social inequality, and therefore you don’t expect the government to really pin down the problem of communism within his term, but what the President is trying to communicate is that the government will make sure that starting next year, they will be able to, little by little, show this administration’s interest to really resolve the problem,” Mr. Villarin explained.
For his part, Ateneo School of Government professor Edmund S. Tayao said in a phone interview that it is difficult to give a deadline for determining whether the localized approach will work or not.
“All the presidents we had after the end of the dictatorship, all the presidents were engaged in peace negotiations with the Reds, and you know already what happened. Nothing,” he said.
He stressed, however, that “as long as there is openness or willingness on the part of both parties to continue talking, there’s always hope for finally achieving some resolution as far as the peace negotiations with the Reds are concerned.”
Mr. Villarin also said that the approach is worth trying. “This is what you call a community-based solution on the part of the Duterte administration,” he said.
LESSONS FROM THE MORO PEACE TALKS
In a phone message, social science assistant professor Marlon B. Lopez of the Mindanao State University-Tawi-Tawi College of Technology and Oceanography said: “I think it’s quite difficult to end it by next year because local NPA leaders have various objectives as of now.”
Mr. Lopez did say that he believes that the exiled founding leader of CPP, Jose Maria C. Sison, and his close associates “don’t have control over these units” anymore.
Mr. Lopez also noted that Mr. Duterte’s creation of a task force to end local communist armed conflict “is very similar to the response of the Marcos administration when it formed the Integrated Civilian Home Defense Forces (ICHDF) through PD (Presidential Decree) No. 1016 to address local insurgency.”
The only difference this time, he added, is that the Duterte administration’s approach “is focused against the NPA.”
“What we need to learn from our experience in the MNLF (Moro National Liberation Front)/MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front) talks is that you have to negotiate with somebody who has a control over the forces on the ground. When (Hashim) Salamat factioned away from (Nur) Misuari, the Tripoli Agreement didn’t do much significance aside from the ARMM (Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao) formation. But peace remains elusive due to MILF, which we have negotiated by now with BOL (Bangsamoro Organic Law),” Mr. Lopez explained.
As for the communist rebels, he said: “Who is really in control of the forces on the ground should be negotiated with, and I doubt if it is the NDFP. Not even the CPP (Communist Party of the Philippines).”
Mr. Tayao said this new approach is actually “consistent with what has been taking place from the very start.”
“You must remember that when he started his presidency, he had members of his Cabinet from the militant groups. It suggested that the President was really serious in making the Reds feel that he was sincere in partnering with them in terms of resetting the direction for his government. But you know already what happened after… that even if there were negotiations before, in the previous administrations, violence and operations continued as far as Reds are concerned,” he explained.
But the dynamics of the insurgency has evolved, Mr. Tayao said.
“The current dynamic, meaning that before, Joma Sison and (NDFP leader Luis) Jalandoni used to hold a really significant sway as far as the operations of the Reds are concerned. But it showed recently that this is no longer the case. Hence, the need to expand the participation in the negotiating table,” he said.
“Instead of continuing the usual negotiations with the leaders of the Reds, this time he is bringing it to the doorstep of the operatives themselves.”

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR