Point Blank laquino@theguidon.com

The recent signing of the peace deal between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) rekindled the glimmer of hope for peace in Mindanao, which seemed to grow dimmer and dimmer as the armed conflict raged on. However, the impending birth of the Bangsamoro political region in 2016 raises new challenges that require more hard work and sincere engagement from both the government and the MILF. The foremost of our concerns should be the kind of society the Moro people want to build in their homeland. Here, we can draw lessons from history. Although the Philippines was successful in eventually driving American military presence out of its shores, Philippine society has remained largely neocolonial in character. This can be attributed to the fact that——as in the rest of the developing world——the conception of development that has gained dominance in the Philippines is that of Westernization. It is at least reassuring that the MILF wants to first focus on the basics. Rappler reports that, in a press conference last October 25, MILF Chair Murad Ebrahim said that the more immediate objective is to focus on livelihood programs, basic necessities, health and education. At one point, though, there would be a need to start thinking beyond the basics and debate about how progress must be furthered in Bangsamoro. In this regard, the Moro struggle must resist the relegation of Bangsamoro to a mere annex of the rest of Westernized Philippine society. The Moro people must explore the alternative discourses that reject the dominant conception of development as Westernization. Agustin Rodriguez of the Philosophy Department critiques Westernization as the marginalization of rationalities that do not conform to the dominant rationality espoused by the Western-dominated global capitalist system. Indeed, there is something distinctly hegemonic in the way contemporary Western-dominated global society forces participation in the marketplace as a condition for inclusion. The likely outcome of bringing such a narrow-minded conception of development to Bangsamoro (e.g. through commercialization in target areas) is the marginalization of the Moro’s indigenous rationality, which may manifest in a multitude of ways, such as the emergence of feelings of inadequacy in the face of the luxuries of consumerism. The Moro struggle then achieves nothing more than kick-starting the alienating game of the market in a new locale, failing to secure for the Moro people the spaces for their genuine self-actualization. The call now is thus to see the Moro people’s right to self-determination as something beyond mere territorial legislation. Their right to self-determination must be understood in the broader sense of allowing their indigenous rationality to define their cultural world, their economic systems and their human relationships. The Moro struggle, after all, has been a struggle for freedom. As such, the victory secured for the Moro people by the peace deal allows for their rebuilding of their native land through their own imagination. What we are now called to do is to be humble enough to stand back and allow the richness of the Moro people’s indigenous rationality to take its course in Bangsamoro, so that they may truly find happiness in their land.