Today is Leni Robredo’s birthday and she and her opposition coalition made much of the endorsement she received from the United Bangsamoro Justice Party which is the political arm of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
Not only did she gain the support of the MILF but she also managed to gain the support of the divided Mangudadatu clan, which lords it over two provinces in Central Mindanao; Maguindanao and Sultan Kudarat. The Mangudadatu’s of Maguindanao are for Leni while those from Sultan Kudarat are for Bongbong Marcos.
The basic argument for the support given to Robredo is Muslim-Filipinios suffered much under Marcos, which was when the secessionist movement began under Nur Misuari and there were intense battles fought between the AFP and the then united MNLF. There were also several massacres which occurred during the same period.
The unaswered question is what exactly led Misuar to wage a war of secession against the State? Historians claim it was over the Jabidah massacre on Corregidor where Muslim Tausug recruits were being trained by Col. Eduardo Martelino for Oplan Jabidah under Project Merdeka. This was the plan to retake Sabah by force from the newly-independent Malaysians.
It is time to end the Malaysian plot to keep Sabah away from its real owners. Playing with great powers, the Sulu Sultanate was itself caught in a great power rivalry among Spain, Germany, and Britain, and between Britain and the United States. Sulu surrendered its sovereignty over its territory, including Sabah, on 22 July 1878 to Spain. When a royal charter was granted to the British North Borneo Company in 1881, Spain protested but later relented. In the Protocol of 1885, Spain renounced its claims over North Borneo, while in the boundary convention of 1930, Sabah was seemingly not included as part of Philippine territory, so that the 1935 Philippine Constitution would de!ne the national territory on this and the other earlier treaties. “e boundary convention, however, did not consider that the sultanate had come under US sovereignty, so that by 1935, upon the establishment of the Commonwealth, Sabah was implicitly placed within Philippine territory. Article III of the protocol was ambiguous, one with an intention to deceive, that Spain renounced all her claims “over the territories of the continent of Borneo, which belong, or which have belonged in the past to the Sultan of Sulu [my italics].” Political realities may have forced the sultanate to waive its sovereign authority to Spain and the US, hoping perhaps either of the two could bring it back as the patrimony of its people. “The US was not able to do so, and Filipino nationalists like Quezon seemed to have ignored the claim.Heir to the British imperialists, the Malaysians kept on ignoring
that what they claimed as theirs is only a property leased, or if they want ceded, in perpetuity from the Sulu Sultanate administered by the British, whose sovereignty remained in the sultan before it was annexed illegally in 1946. The Atlantic Charter of which Britain was signatory in 1941 stated that they “seek no aggrandisement, territorial or other.” But “twelve years later, the North Borneo cession order was promulgated. !e principle of self-determination cannot be invoked without “first settling the proprietary claims of the sultanate and the sovereign rights of the Philippines. Neither the reason of effective sovereignty as the basis of Malaysian possession (Othman 1970) could take precedence over the titular rights of the Sulu Sultanate and, later, the Philippine government as the bestower of that sovereignty. The dissolution of the Sulu sultanate by virtue of acts and treaties, as well as the enactment of the basic law of the land, made the Philippine government the successor-in-sovereignty to Sabah, while its proprietary rights are reserved for the heirs of the sultan. Instruments revoking the lease in 1957 and stipulating cession in 1962 signed by Sultan Muhammad Ismail Kiram are redundant. The revocation of the cession to the Philippine government in 1989 by the present sultan was not only unwarranted but devoid of any legal basis. He has no sovereign power to do that. If “lease in perpetuity” in international law means ninety-nine years, then Sabah had reverted back to the Philippines in 1977 (Ramos 1968, 15). Hong Kong was ceded, not leased, in perpetuity; Britain returned it to Beijing in 1997 after ninety-nine years. When Marcos decided to withdraw the claim on that year, he did not know that the lease had expired. From 1977 up to present, technically, the Philippines owned Sabah as part of its territory, because it did not renew the lease. Deportations made by Malaysia since 1977 were and are therefore illegal and acts of aggression against Philippine sovereignty. Malaysia, without surrendering Sabah or negotiating another contract in 1977 with the Philippine government, is illegally occupying Sabah, deserving their expulsion from the land by any means. Seen in this light, the Lahad Datu incident is an unjust provocation on the side of Malaysia that should have been met with strongest military action by the Philippine government. In theory, the Philippines and Malaysia are in state of war due to the illegal occupation of Sabah since 1977. Thus, it is farcical why Malaysia is kept in the peace process with the MILF as the “impartial” and “disinterested” third party. The continuation of armed struggle in Mindanao, which it supported, is in
keeping with its national interest to sidestep the resolution of the claim. The MILF has no interest in Sabah, while Misuari has realized lately that Sabah should be included as part of the resolution of the conflict. He was formerly part of the conspiracy, as he himself acknowledged in an interview with Al Jazeera, to derail the settlement of the claim (Pedrosa 2013). The Malaysian devious tactic was consistent. Lucman was deposed. Misuari was groomed to be known as the founder of the separatist movement, the MNLF. When negotiation with Philippine government was reached, a faction developed within the MNLF through MILF. If Misuari is to be believed, his MNLF faction fell out of the good graces of Malaysia, for suspicion that MNLF would turn against them. Misuari belongs to the Sama Cabingaan ethnic group but is usually known as Tausug. He grew up knowing the Sulu Sultanate and its claim on Sabah, as his great ancestor was allegedly one of the many warriors who joined the campaign to suppress the rebellion in Brunei. Salamat, founder of MILF, was a Maguindanaoan; he has no stake on the claim. MILF has issued a press statement that it would not meddle into Sabah (Free Malaysia Today 2013). Al-Haj Murad Ibrahim said in an interview with a Malaysian daily that with the coming of peace in Mindanao, he expects that Filipino immigrants in Sabah would return to their homeland, when Sabah was part of their homeland, most especially to the Tausugs, Bajaus, and Samas (New Straits Times 2013). Dealing with the MILF rather than MNLF tilts the balance in favor of the Malaysians, who wanted at all costs to deny the claim from the Tausugs and the Philippine government. What is to be done? Peace process should not be rushed. Malaysia must get out of the negotiating panel. The Philippine government must censure, in strongest terms, the role of Malaysia in fomenting rebellion in Mindanao, and that it must stop supporting rebels in the region. Other countries (Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Libya, Saudi Arabia) must also be warned. Britain deserves to be reproached for failing to honor the contract and for reneging its obligations by passing it to Malaysia. Like a conceited imperialist, it ignored the earlier moves of the Philippine government. What Sukarno and Macapagal feared as a British neocolonial design in Malaysia, happened in the long run with the phantom of Sabah hovering over the land. In a latest unverifed report, the US seems to have a hand in the Lahad Datu episode in connivance with the Malaysian opposition, which is willing to support an autonomous Sabah to make way for an American base in that area in return for US support in the upcoming elections.
It might be a part of US geopolitical strategy of containing China, and this might provide the reason why the American modern naval ship got stuck in Tubbataha reef. The Philippine government must be very cautious for any sly move by the US and the Malaysian politicians that may compromise the claim to Sabah. It was the height of folly when Cory Aquino government became hostage to Malaysia’s national interest, since the Constitutional Commission agreed to take out certain phrases in the provision on national territory. Where in the world can you “find a foreign entity dictating to a sovereign country what is to be done with its basic law? Looking back, the recognition of Malaysia was the biggest diplomatic blunder that the Philippine government did. In retrospect, the plan to invade or in”infiltrate Sabah is justifed in the name of Philippine national interests. If it took its course, it may have drastically changed Philippine history. If Malaysia keeps on pursuing its present policy of denying our claim, it is only by force of arms that we can get back Sabah.
The above excerpt is from a paper authored by Edwin S. Fernandez entitled The Malaysian Plot: Marcos, Sabah and the Origins of Moro Seccessionism. Most of his account ties in with the series of columns of Rigoberto Tiglao on the same subject. While there were Muslims shot on Corregidor during the time they were undergoing training for Oplan Merdeka, it was due to a mutiny. No massacre took place.
Also, it is not Nur Misuari who was the leader of the secessionist movement from the beginning. It was Haroun Rashid al Lucman, a close associate of Ninoy Aquino. It was Lucman who disclosed Merdeka to Aquino and began the chain of events which would create the scandal the Liberal Party needed to thwart Marcos winning a second term in 1969.
The paper was written in response to the Lahad Datu incident where a a group of former MNLF regulars dubbed themselves as members of the Royal Security Forces of the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo landed in Lahad Datu, Sabah, to assert the Sultanate’s claim to Sabah.
This happened during the administration of then President Noynoy Aquino, who went to Tokyo to meet with the officials of the MILF in a bid to get the stalled peace talks going again. Recall how at the time of the Lahad Datu incident, Aquino basically left these Muslim-Filipinos on their own. Two years later, in 2015, Aquino would find himself again in the midst of controversy with the Mamasapano incident in Maguindanao.
For the Bangsamoro, choice of president would be a vote for region’s new transition leaders
RA 11593 extended the period of transition for the BARMM owing to their inablity to staff the plantilla positions in the autonomous region. As per the enabling law, the incoming President will be appointing 39 members of parliament for the period 2022 – 2025 while the MILF will be doing the same for 41 members of parliament.
The MILF has always been hostile to Marcos, Senior and Junior. Recall how Hashim Salamat broke away from the MNLF to form the MILF just as soon as Nur Misuari was to conclude a peace deal with Marcos which was the Tripoli Agreement. One the first acts of Cory Aquino was to reach out to Nur Misuari in order to restart the stalled peace talks. Yet is is very evident that both Misuari and Salamat were in connivance with the Malaysians on the issue of Sabah in the pursuit of their selfish interests in pursuing autonomy or even outright secession from the Republic from the time of Lucman up to the present.
The same is true with all of our past leaders from Quezon to Garcia. It was only during the time of Diosdado Macapagal that the issue of Sabah was raised again. The Americans and the British, long-time colonialists and hegemons, decided on the fate of Sabah through their treaties. The lease of the British North Borneo Company pre-dated the sale of the Philippines and its other colonies in the Asia-Pacific region. The Americans conveniently excluded the rights of the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah, effectively ceding it to the British. By rights, the issue should have been addressed by the United Nations, prior to Malaysian independence in 1963.
Ninoy Aquino sabotaged Marcos’ plan to infiltrate Sabah for his own personal interest driven by his ambition to become the next President after Marcos. But he could not wait so he unleashed Jose Maria Sison and Nur Misuari against Marcos. It did not matter to him if the Republic was dismembered.
It is not obvious, but the Robredo endorsement by the MILF may be what the Americans have in mind as a way of leveraging their interest in the election. The Americans and Marcos had a tenous history and the US does not expect his son to be receptive to their overtures given the vilification they went through with Imelda being charged and tried in New York.
Marcos has reassured the US that he intends to continue with Duterte’s independent foreign policy but he is not one to hide his family’s closeness with China. It was former First Lady Imelda Romualdez Marcos who met first with Mao before the formal adoption of the Philippines of a one China policy.
Sabah and Jabidah has always been employed as propaganda against the the Marcos’. Its is time to put this to rest and lay the blame squarely at the feet of those who betrayed the country.
Comments