Four questions and an argument:

by Guruh Yusuf Alih Morales al-Amawi...

(The author was a political activist in his younger years as well as an active
participant in the Moros right to self determination, now ten years later, is an
academic intellectual thinker who writes his opinions in his blogs and lectures
extensively on Islamic studies, Political economics and strategic research. He can
be reached at yusuf@groupaid.org)

The issue of statehood and nationhood has always been perrenial questions
in today's world. Prior to the collapse of the iron curtain and the revival of Islamic
ideologies, the creation of nation state was simply another manifestation of
colonial powers who have thought of practicability of having proxy states in their
proxy wars against fellow colonial powers. Take the case of Cuba, Vietnam, North
Korea and Vietnam where wars were fought in the name of the proletariat, the
masses or democracy.

This concern eventually dissipated when the iron curtain fell and out of the
behemoth USSR, republics came and go... states were created and ethnic
cleansing was the order of the day and the “clash of civilizations” were the cliché
ideology that was being pushed forward by think tanks.

Coming from the Moro perspective, I am inclined to ask a series of question

from the Western Mindanao region (I choose to disregard the ARMM context
which has brought greater problems than solutions). In the Philippines prior to
the arrival of the Spaniards, in addition to the small Datuships and Rajahships
that were eventually either eliminated or assimilated, there were two major
mechanisms of governance that has continued to exist up to this very time... the
Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo and the Sultanate of Maguindanao.

Both Royal Houses, although strewn with controversy during the recent years
(compounded by the so-called paper sultanates of Marawi), continue to exist as
traditional mechanisms (with traditional Datus still either existing by descent, or
by conferment, or by lineage).

In contemporary theories of the nation state, theoreticians elucidate the

necessary elements of a state: sovereignty, police power and a common
language/culture. Both institutions have these elements. However, in the present
guise of the Philippine governance, these institutions are merely ceremoniously
recognized..ironically... Lumad institutions and mechanisms of governance are
recognized and honored by the Philippine statutes. Moro governance however, is
confined to the legal subtleties of PD 1083 and the organic act. Does the Moro
sultanates not possess these elements?
 And thus, the Moros, detached from their traditional mechanisms of
governance, become attracted to the more alien mechanisms of governance in
the guise of democracy of Hukmah Islamiyah (predominantly Salafi-Talibani
Islam).

This has compounded with the conflict of claims of heir-apparents in their

realms; the lure of Malaysian money to the heirs aggravated the conflict.

Like any mechanism or tool, if unused would eventually atrophy, these

mechanisms of governance, indigenous and a product of years of experience
eventually have been confined to the dust bins of historical books and heirlooms.

The government has now engaged with the MILF after engaging with the
MNLF, successfully de-boning and de-fanging the armed and ideological cadres of
these fronts. But havent the state forgotten that there exists an older traditional
mechanism of governance that has been ignored?

Considering that the Traditional mechanisms of governance of the Moros is

recognized(sulatanate and the Datu systems); in recognizance of their right to
self determination; can these mechanisms as a matter of principle simple declare
their independence?

Historically, most of those in these parts of the country consider themselves

misgoverned by a state that barely understands them; sends military people to
oversee governance, and is seen in headlines as a National security problem.
Would it it not be better against state policy to allow them to self govern and
regulate their own affairs?

Should a political declaration of independence be considered an act of

treason? When these mechanisms of governance pre-dates the Philippine state?

Any answers to these arguments would in the end show light a the end of
the tunnel.