Reporting on The Mindanao Conflict

Published by fotomacder on April 11, 2010 in Opinions

Tags: Ampatuan Massacre, media, Mindanao, MNLF, MOA-AD, Moro Islamic Liberation Front, peace journalism, Philippines, rebellion, war reporting

Article Tools

1 Liked it I Like It ShareThis Subscribe to RSS

When media institutions report on the Mindanao conflict, they often miss out on the context, culture and history. As such, what comes out in television, print and online are often biased against the inhabitants of the island. In this article, the writer delves into the issue of media reportage of the Mindanao conflict and suggests ways to improve it. The Mindanao conflict, like most conflicts throughout the world, began with the intervention of a foreign power in the history of a people. In the case of this group of islands in Southern Philippines, the Spanish colonization brought in a worldview intolerant of the culture, belief system and socio-political claims of the Muslim and lumad (indigenous peoples) inhabitants of the area. The conflict region, occupying a third of the Philippine land area, is composed of 13 ethnolinguistic people-groups and as many as 30 indigenous people groups. With a population of more than 25 million, 4.5 million are Muslim inhabitants and around 1.2 million are lumads. The remaining population is composed of migrant settlers from other parts of the country.

Read more in Opinions

Corruption in Kenya and Canada Why Does Everything Have to be About Politics

In trying to classify Mindanaos population, the historian B.R. Rodil proposed two major groups the indigenous population and the migrant settlers. The first group could be further subdivided into the Islamized peoples (Moro), the lumads and the Visayan-speaking Catholic population in Northern and Eastern Mindanao, including the Chavacano speakers of Zamboanga and Basilan who were already in Mindanao when the Spanish arrived in the 17th century. Of the lumads, the main groups are the Manobo, Bagobo, Blaan, Higaunon, Mamanwa, Mansaka, Manuvu, Subanen, Tboli, Ubo Manobo, Bukidnon, Lambangian and Tendurayamong among others. They are the original inhabitants of the land even before Islam of Catholicism arrived in the country. Majority of Mindanaos population today (70 percent as of 2000) are Catholics and Chinese who are descendants of settlers who arrived in the 20th century from Luzon and Visayas following the resettlement programs that started in the American occupation. The policy was meant to integrate the contrasting history and cultures of the Catholic Filipinos of the North and the Muslim Filipinos of the South. Unlike the rest of the Philippines, Mindanao has a history of its own, different from the perspective of the colonized regions of the country. Its people are proud for being able to resist invasion while the rest of the archipelago suffered under the yoke of the Spanish crown. Muslim Mindanao started with the coming of Islam through trade with Arab merchants early in the 10th century. According to Dr. C.A. Majul, these merchants came from the Arabian Peninsula and passed through Malaysia, Borneo and Sulu, to the Visayas and Luzon en route to China.

During this time, Arab merchants and sailors and other Muslims had begun to dominate the Nanhai or Southeast Asia Trade. From the 13th century on, Islam spread throughout the islands with concentration in Southern Philippines. Long before the Spanish Conquistadores arrived in the region, an organized sociopolitical and cultural entity already existed in Mindanao. Because Islam is not only a religion but also a way of life, its spread in the Philippines also introduced a system of government and a sophisticated culture. The Sultanate of Sulu is the most famous example of the existence of government and order even before the arrival of the Spaniards. In such political structure, the Datu assumed communal leadership, providing aid and arbitration through agama courts under his leadership. And like other Muslim countries, the Quran is also their source of both secular and religious precepts and laws. But more importantly, Islam, the religion, provided one of the first concepts of nationhood in the country, bringing together a diverse group of people under one rule. It provided a sense of a sense of oneness and fraternal bond between Muslims as an Ummah or Islamic Nation (Surah 21:92). With such organization, Muslim Mindanao never really fell into the hands of the Spaniards. From the time Datu Ache united the leaders of Sulu to the present, the struggle of the Muslim inhabitants of Mindanao persisted. And the long-sought peace remained elusive. If the Moros of Mindanao find themselves marginalized in a predominantly Catholic country, the lumads are in an even worse scenario. Comprising five percent or around 2.5 million of the Mindanao population, the original inhabitants of the island are now the least represented in the countrys political and economic arena. Even before the Arabs or Spaniards reached the Philippines, these tribes are already living and thriving communities in the region. By virtue of history, many of the contested areas of Mindanao originally belonged to them. However, they were pushed to the fringes and displaced because of the arrival of several colonizers, and also because of the ongoing military operations in the island. The Mindanao Conflict At present, when people speak of Mindanao, the first images that come to mind are negative ones that of war, the Abu Sayyaf, Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), kidnappings, and death among others. Unfortunately, very few know the history behind the conflict. At the same time, only few media outfits air or print in-depth reports on the story behind Mindanao. According to Bernice Varona, in an article, Backgrounder on the Mindanao Conflict, the ongoing war in parts of Mindanao is more than five centuries old and counting. It is considered the second oldest conflict in history. In a 2005 Human Development Report, lawyer Soliman M. Santos Jr. succinctly puts the issue of Mindanao this way: The contemporary armed conflict on the Moro front is the sharpest expression of the Moro or Bangsamoro problem: the historical and systematic marginalization and minoritization of the Islamized ethnolinguistic groups, collectively called Moros, in their own homeland in much of the Mindanao islands, by Spain (from the 16th to the 19th century), the US (in the first half of the 20th century), and more recently by successor Philippine governments since formal independence in 1946. The first recorded Moro encounters date back in 1578 in a letter by Governor General Francisco de Sande to Captain Esteban Rodriguez de Figueroa. The letter contained Spains objectives for the Moro-occupied territories: to neutralize the Moros and instill Spanish sovereignty in the Philippines.

It has to be remembered, however, that this comes from the perspective of the colonizer. From the eyes of the Moros who have already established sultanates as early as the 13th century, the Spaniards are the enemy, trying to encroach upon their sovereignty as independent nation-states. Spain, however, played on the images of the Moro Wars, demonizing the Muslims of Mindanao to their own advantage. In addition, the colonizers pitted the different tribes against one another in a tactic called divide and conquer. Because the idea of the Filipino as a single political, cultural and social entity did not yet exist, Spain was successful in pacifying hostile territories with the help of local inhabitants. They emphasized the differences among the tribes to outwit them into helping Spain in their conquest of the Philippines. Throughout the Spanish colonization, Spain tried but failed to pacify the Moros. They never succeeded in placing the sultanates and tribes under the Spanish crown. Despite this, however, they filled the consciousness of the Indio (subjugated Filipinos) with prejudices against the Muslims. The best preserved cultural example is the proliferation of the moro-moro plays even to this day. After the fall of the Spanish rule and the rise of the American colonization, the new masters used almost similar but more successful strategies with the Moros. With the guise of civilizing the inhabitants of Southern Philippines under the Bates Agreement of 1904, the United States incorporated the Moros into the national body politic but only after bloody and violent encounters with them. Through the Treaty of Paris in 1898, Spain sold the Philippine Islands to America for $20 million. This treaty gave the new colonizers the right over the archipelago. Interestingly, however, even if Spain never totally controlled the Southern Philippines, it included the area in the treaty, effectively placing the Moros under the U.S. banner against their will. The pacification of the Moros officially began in 1903 with the creation of what was called the Moro Province governed by a military government, distinct from the rest of the islands. Muslim Filipinos in the island protested against these moves, arguing that they are independent nationstates and not under Spanish colonization. What ensued were bitter clashes between the locals and the new foreign invaders. Superior artillery, however, dictated the outcome of the war, culminating in the Battle of Bud Bagsak in 1913, where the United States eventually succeeded in bringing Mindanao and Sulu into the new American colony of the Philippines. But aside from military action, displacement from ancestral lands worsened the rift among the Muslim, lumad and Catholic inhabitants of the island. The American regime pursued a policy of migration, encouraging Catholic Filipinos from the North and the Visayas to re-settle into Mindanao to help integrate the islands and its people to mainstream society. Unfortunately, the new policy displaced the Moros and the lumads from their ancestral lands, even as the colonial government gave foreign corporations the right to own hundreds of hectares for crop plantation and mining. Even settlers were given more land entitlements than the original inhabitants of Mindanao. Explaining the effects of such policy to the inhabitants of Mindanao, Verona wrote: They lost their ancestral lands and fell into poverty. The displacement is still prevalent today; people in the area have to be evacuated whenever hostilities erupt as in the case during the Estrada administration where almost two million people were displaced. Throughout the American rule until today, the issue of independence for Muslim Mindanao was continuously raised. In 1910, businessmen from Zamboanga requested the isolation of the island for plantation interests. Even during the question of Philippine independence in the 1930s, Muslim sultans, and leaders aired their desire for exclusion from the projected free Philippines under Filipino rule.

This call for separation erupted once more in the late 60s with the eruption of violence in Cotabatoand the Jabidah Massacre in Corregidor. This continued on in the 70s with a group called the Mindanao Independence Movement. Also around this time, the proliferation of religious vigilante groups, notably the Ilagas, burned and destroyed Muslim villages and some units of the military. The Moro National Liberation Front came into existence, which succeeded in securing the Tripoli Agreement that led to ceasefire and the granting of autonomy to 13 Muslim provinces of Mindanao. Despite being the representative of the separatist movement, the MNLF was divided because of internal rifts in the organization. This brought about the creation of the MILF, a more radical group using arms to achieve the Bangsamoro Republic. The Tripoli agreement, however, was implemented only during the Corazon Aquino administration. It was during her administration that the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) was created. Though there were misunderstanding between the government and the MILF and MNLF, this period generally ushered in development of peace talks in the region. Even so, during the administration of Pres. Fidel Ramos, a more comprehensive peace accord was signed that created the Southern Philippines Council for Peace and Development (SPCPD) headed by MNLF chairman Nur Misuari. SPCPD, however, was not successful in fully achieving the desired peace and development in the region. During the presidency of Joseph Estrada, an all-out war policy was pursued against the MILF. This was seen as a drawback to the peace efforts of the previous administrations. The policy also brought about the displacement of more inhabitants even as war tore into the heart of the Moro Homeland. Analysts criticized the administration for tilting the fragile balance of the region away from peace and unity. The latest issues surrounding the Mindanao conflict have to do with the Global War on Terror started by America because of the September 11 bombing of the World Trade Center. Since then, the local separatist movements and a number of radical Muslim groups like the Abu Sayyaf were linked with terrorist networks operating abroad. Such conclusions further legitimized military operations throughout President Gloria Arroyos administration. These also paved the way for the continuation of the Balikatan Exercises with U.S. troop through the Visiting Forces Agreement. In 2008, the failed Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) which would have created an effective sub-state or homeland known as the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity sparked renewed fighting in the region. Alleged renegade groups of MILF went on a rampage, attacking military installations and communities as revenge on what they felt was government betrayal on the Moro people who had long been fighting for their lands. And though not directly related to the Moro struggle, the more recent Ampatuan Massacre in Maguindanao fueled the negative image already stamped on the region. Caused by political and clan wars, the mishap claimed the lives of around 60 people, involving at least 30 journalists. A summary of the conflict is proposed by Santos with additions from the author of this paper: 1. Forcible/ illegal annexation of Moroland to the Philippines under the Treaty of Paris in 1898; 2. Military pacification; 3. Imposition of confiscatory land laws; 4. Indionization (or Filipinization) of public administration in Moroland and the destruction of traditional political institutions

5. Government-financed/ induced land settlement and migration to Moroland 6. Land-grabbing/conflicts; 7. Cultural inroads against the Moros 8. Jabidah Massacre in 1968; 9. Ilaga (religious vigilante) and military atrocities in 1970-72; 10. Government neglect and inaction on Moro protests and grievances 11. Declaration of Martial Law 12. All-out war policy 13. Balikatan exercises, Visiting Forces Agreement 14. U.S. terrorist tagging 15. Failed MOA-AD Mindanao Peace Efforts Despite the deep wounds and complicated story of the Mindanao conflict, there had been many peace efforts from many sectors all over the country and abroad. And despite the many failures and clashes between the government and the Moro separatist movements, those involved always called for the resumption of peace talks and a return to the negotiating table. It is obvious, however, that the main thrust of the government is still similar to that of the colonial powers of the pastintegration. Whether or not this policy is good depends on the perspective one uses. Compared to the previous masters, however, there is greater recognition of the diversity and uniqueness of the Moro culture today. Thus, government is slowly understanding the need to move from the base up instead of the other way around in dealing with the Mindanao conflict. Sectoral discussions are becoming more frequent in the quest for lasting peace in the region. The academe also offered its expertise in providing broader insights and deeper understanding of the different issues involved in the Moro challenge. However, many of the conclusions and recommendations from such discussions are under utilized. Foreign observers continue to call on government to be more inclusive and transparent in its policies to prevent a repeat of the failed MOA-AD. Even within the military, efforts to educate troops and officials of peace and conflict management are being done. NGOs, however, remain the key catalysts in such education drives, enjoining everyone involved in the conflict. The best example came during the MOA-AD crisis. NGOs pushed the government and MILF to return to the negotiating table to stop further bloodshed and displacement of civilians. Until today, however, no concrete and lasting action plan followed the Tripoli Agreement. After the Supreme Court junked the MOA as unconstitutional, the negotiations went back to square one. Even presidential candidates in the upcoming 2010 elections are unsure on the Mindanao challenge. Most, if not all of them, still depend on military might and force to solve the conflict. It appears that they havent learned yet from the lessons of history. Media Issues When one researches on the media coverage of the Mindanao conflict, it doesnt take long to find the pattern. The problems of reportage in Mindanao reflect the overall issues plaguing the

industry. These problems are also not unique to the coverage of Mindanao. Even in the simple reporting of the police beat, or the provinces get their share of journalistic ills. In a 2008 conference on the state of media coverage of Mindanao, Carol Arguillas of the local news organization, Mindanews, shares at length her observations of how Manila covers Southern Philippines. In her talk, she mentioned several failings of mainstream media which the author summarizes in this paper. For all Manila-based mainstream media outfits, Mindanao is simply a defense beat. Thus, the newsworthiness of the region is limited to issues of war, kidnappings, security, military and rebel clashes, among others. Because of this mindset, many local events are left out even if they are newsworthy by journalistic standards. Mindanao culture is rarely reported on. This includes the local festivals, archeological findings, Moro craftsmanship, Islam, lumad industries and artifacts among others. Manila reports only a violent Mindanao. Peace in the region is never news. At the same time, the biggest networks and newspapers are preoccupied with the capital, allotting only a few minutes or pages for local news. In other words, media outfits in the Philippines are Manila-centric. Some may argue that the local stations or regional stations of the mainstream media cover what the national stations miss out. Unfortunately, even if they do, the policymakers and shapers are in the capital. They dont get to watch what Mindanao locals experience firsthand. When it comes to local stations, the need to survive financially makes them prey to opportunistic politicians or businessmen who buy airtime for their own PR. They are lucky if these programs ascribe to the standards of journalism, but most often they only worsen the fragile situation because of their inexperience handling of news and commentaries. Whenever Manila sends reporters, they send ignorant ones who know nothing about the history, culture and socio-political milieu of Mindanao. These reporters do not read about the issues they are about to cover. If ever they do, they use the less credible sources like Wikipedia. Precisely because of this, their nose for news is narrow. They cover the war only as an event instead of a process. They go about the war zone interviewing only military or government sources. They do not add context or background. The reports are also inaccurate. They even stage events like the firing of guns or artilleries for audio visual purposes. They usually go to the wrong people for interviews or they do not give voice to those directly affected. One good example raised in the forum was the absence of coverage on evacuation centers during the 2000 war in Mindanao. In recent times, however, media firms learned to include the civilians in their reports. Whenever they try to add background, these are usually the clichs that are also inaccurate, propagated by the Western media. Worse, these backgrounds always brand Mindanao as a haven of terrorists. They make it appear that the entire island is a warzone when in fact only small parts of Mindanao have actual military operations. Tagging, branding and careless use of words sensationalize the reports. For some reason they always affix the word Muslim when identifying the antagonists of the reports. This practice prejudices people of the faith. Even the point of view used is obviously Catholic because when it comes to practices of the lumads or the Moros, they quote priests calling them pagan worshippers. Unfortunately, there are very few Muslim reporters in the Manila media today. They are the best correspondents to be sent in Mindanao because they know the issues well. The danger, however, is that they may get too involved with the situation. Even the national media outfits lack broad networks to the local NGOs who could provide them with valuable information on critical issues like the social and cultural effects of war on the residents. And even if the outfits do have contacts, they rarely use them because they opt for images of action, instead of talking heads.

Lastly, because of the preoccupation of mainstream media with war, they have forgotten that there are other concerns and issues in Mindanao. Foremost are the issues of mining and displacement. There is also the issue of cultural degradation because of the destruction of artifacts and the killings of lumad elders. And of course all the other issues that are plaguing the country are also present like poverty and corruption. Media Recommendation Arguillas also gave a number of recommendations during her talk. She emphasized, however, that they have made many recommendations in the past on how to improve the reportage of Mindanao. She even showed a very old copy of a guidebook they have made to the Manila reporters just to underscore what she meant. Interestingly, however, after many years, not much changed in the reporting of Mindanao. From this anchor, the writer proposes his own strategy for coverage of the Mindanao conflict. A. Change of attitude

The writer believes that the best strategy for covering the Mindanao conflict begins with a change in attitude towards the region, its people, history, politics and culture. Whether or not media practitioners admit it, years of bombardment with negative reporting created prejudices in every person. Unless this negative feeling towards Muslims and lumads is addressed, the reporters may end up believing all the propaganda they are fed. The media outfits, then, must expose their foreign reporters to media practitioners from Mindanao. They must also invite academics and researchers who are knowledgeable of the deep issues of the region to teach the practitioners about the people of Southern Philippines. If possible, the media organizations must immerse their journalists to Muslim communities present in the metropolis just so they can get a feel of the lives of Muslims. B. Trainings and Work Reviews

The media outfits must also emphasize reporting guidelines in their stylebook that pertain to war coverage. Whether or not they are going to assign reporters, routine seminars and refresher courses are necessary to remind reporters of the basics of fair and ethical writing. They must also invite credible resource persons in the Philippines or if possible even abroad to share their experiences. In addition, they must also allow media watchdogs to review their articles in order to help the media firm see the trend in their reporting and correct it if needed. Even on the level of the level of reporters, the outfit can ask their reporters to evaluate one anothers writings to help writers see their shortcomings in their reportage. Such trainings must be done on a regular basis so that if ever war breaks out in Mindanao or in any part of the country, the reporters who are going to be sent have firm grounding before actually engaging the conflict. C. Specialized team/ Mindanao beat

Other than the general writing styles, the media outfits must organize teams specifically focused on Mindanao. They can pool writers in this team who are constantly reading, writing or researching on the culture, the people and the history of the region. This can be seen as a preemptive team where journalists can be trained in preparation for coverage of the area. In times of peace, this team can also peg culture stories for the Mindanao beat that can help improve the image of the region. They can produce primers for the organization or for mass production on the background of the people and their culture for reader education. They can also produce primers on the history of the war and on media coverage to help other reporters who are covering the beat. This team must be diverse and, if possible, must include veteran reporters as well as local reporters from Mindanao. This can help prevent bias reporting.

Also provide physical and psychological fitness programs to prepare the reporters before going on the field. D. On the field

If reporters are assigned to Mindanao, the media company must connect them to local correspondents for orientation. At the same time, the outfit must build a network of NGOs which it can tap in the area. It must also furnish the reporters with contact details and contact persons from these organizations. They can help provide other voice to the conflict to balance the military statements. If the company is capable, it must provide bulletproof vest and helmets for its reporters. It must also instruct the reporters to always wear the protective gear when going on the field. The reporters must maintain a healthy distance from the military so that their independence will not be compromised. However, they must also obey orders when their safety and lives are at stake. Veteran journalists should be the ones sent because they have better instincts than the novice. However, remind journalists never to compromise their safety when running after a story. If you die, no ones going to tell the world about your story. In between coverage, encourage the reporters to organize symposia to share with local reporters tips on covering Mindanao. At the same time, such events can help the foreign reporters get to know the beat more. Remind reporters to cover Mindanao and the conflict as an ongoing process, not just a one-time event. Encourage the journalists to blog about their experiences so that other people and other practitioners here and abroad can follow whats happening to them. This can also act as a personal documentation of the events in the region. Use all available media for information disseminationtelevision, radio, print and the internet. E. Upon return

After every coverage, require the team on field to assess one anothers work. Subject their performance to critique from media watchdogs to help them improve on their work. If they are to return from Mindanao, let them undergo thorough physical and psychological screening to check for war shock. Contribute to the development of coverage guidelines by sharing ones experiences on the field. Read More:

Read more: http://newsflavor.com/opinions/reporting-on-the-mindanao-conflict/#ixzz0rwDm0LXb