Reviewing the Mamasapano tragedy with the Political Science department

In the wake of the recent tragedy that killed police officers, militants, and civilians, we went to DLSU’s Political Science Department to ask for their take on the unfolding issue.

Who is to blame for the tragedy?

Dr. Montefrio: To be honest I think it’s really too early to answer this question because investigations are still on-going, although it’s very tempting to draw conclusions on what we see on television and reports from newspapers… The other day they showed actual footages on MILF… Based on that it’s easy to conclude that the MILF is to blame cause it sort of shows there that clearly the SAF force were overrun and didn’t have the resources to sustain themselves but still they were under fire.

But you know these are piece-meal information and we really can’t draw conclusions from that. Like the other day there were reports on the number of casualties that were allegedly counted on the side of MILF and BIFF. I think the number goes by the hundreds.

Clearly it is a clash. I think that there are definitely accountabilities that need to be determined and processed, and of course the government is definitely not free from that whether it’s a mandate or an order that came all the way from above or a decision made by a few commanders, from the mismanagement… But whatever the result of the investigation, the right accountability should be addressed.

Prof. Montemar: The President—as Commander-in-Chief and being privy to the planning of the mission from the onset. The first time I commented on this issue was when I posted on FB about the silence of the President being deafening. I took him about four days before he spoke on the issue. Now we know that he knew about the mission all along. Why the long silence? One word: GUILT.

Would you call these people terrorists?

Dr. Montefrio: It’s really hard to say. I guess before I answer that, I’d like to say that these organizations are not homogenous. MILF is not one unit where there’s one person making decisions for everyone. It’s actually an organization that is in crisis, meaning that there are different factions within the org, hence the splinter groups BIFF who are former members of MILF which eventually break away from the org.

Even if BIFF is no longer associated with MILF or loosely associated with MILF, there are other competing groups. Some of them would actually see themselves as revolutionaries. Some of them wouldn’t mind if they are called terrorists.

So for me I guess the question, what’s the point of calling them revolutionaries? Of course if we are to go through the peace process, once we brand them as terrorists, that would compromise the peace process. But because I am for the peace process, I wouldn’t brand them as terrorists. This is my bias… At the same time I wouldn’t disregard the fact that the organization is under crisis and that there are small factions in MILF that are probably indeed are acting like terrorists or have to intention to act like terrorists.

Prof. Montemar: The MILF? I’d call these MILF simply “Filipinos,” or “rebels,” at worst. Their families and kin would call them heroes and freedom fighters. Why should I or should we call them terrorists? What is a terrorist? Rebels aren’t necessarily terrorists. Some of those who can’t see the distinction may have an unpalatable political agenda.

Misencounter or massacre?

Dr. Montefrio: I still would like to believe that it’s a misencounter. I tried to imagine myself in the situation where in, if you are an MILF guard and then you see 50 soldiers walking in front of you, you sound the alarm right, and then everything becomes blurred; of course that’s how I imagine it. I don’t know the story behind it. Maybe they are expecting them in the first place, but then these are subject to investigation. But I guess for the sake of the peace process, and for the sake of us who believe in the peace process, we’re really hoping that it’s a misencounter.

But if it really comes out that it’s not, then it’s very subject to discussion and something that can be considered whether we indeed should go on with peace process or not.

If for example we found out that it’s really a massacre… They were really expecting it, and they were really expecting a lot of deaths on the side of SAF. Whether that would be grounds to discontinue the peace process, perhaps yes and perhaps no as well cause there’s a lot of things that we need to know about. Again going back to the idea that MILF is an organization in crisis. So the people who are working on the PP may not know about that happening, so I wouldn’t jump to conclusions.

I guess the initial point of assumption is it’s a misencounter, and I kind of understand why the government did that because they are in the perspective of the PP, they couldn’t just immediately say it’s a massacre. Start with the assumption misencounter then you move towards wherever direction based on the findings.

Prof. Montemar: Calling it a massacre unduly amplifies the tension between the contending forces or stakeholders. I think it is best to call it a “clash” or a “tragedy.” In fact, reports and eyewitness accounts have it that it was one of the involved SAF units which fired first at the MILF unit that got engaged. The first casualty in the so-called massacre site — the riverside — was on the side of the rebels, according to an MILF commander.

What happened to the police units was as tragic as it could get, and the killing of those already maimed is uncalled for, even in war. It is just so easy to label it a massacre — the facts and the relevant background to this incident, however, suggest that we should be more prudent in labeling what happened. In fact, a civilian was found dead inside a mosque hogtied, allegedly tortured by the SAF. A child was also among the casualties along with two or three more civilians. At least 16 MILF rebels fell, too.

Where do we go from here?

Prof. Montemar: Educate ourselves to know more about Mindanao, our national history, the BBL, and Moro/Lumad/Mindanaoan concerns. For the faculty and support staff, especially—they must help themselves; they need to get updated on the issue. We must pursue peace even more ferociously, as it were. The proposed BBL must be reviewed and more stakeholders from Mindanao (e.g., the Lumad) must be involved and engaged in its crafting.

We must pursue peace even more ferociously, as it were, even as we seek justice for all those who were killed—the SAF, the civilians, and the rebels. The proposed BBL must be reviewed and more stakeholders from Mindanao (e.g., the Lumad) must be involved and engaged in its crafting.’’

Disclaimer:

This is the first of three articles wherein we ask faculty from DLSU’s Political Science Department for their take on the Mamasapano Clash. This is an issue that is currently unfolding, and each day more information comes to light. Because the professors in this article were interviewed at different points in time since the clash, the opinions expressed here may not necessarily reflect the interviewees present views on the issue.

READ MORE ON THE MAMASAPANO INCIDENT:

Reviewing the Mamasapano incident with Dr. Antonio Contreras

Reviewing the Mamasapano tragedy with the Dr. Ador Torneo