THE indefinite ceasefire announced during the resumption of peace talks in Oslo last week between the government and communist rebels was a welcome development in efforts to end Asia’s longest-running insurgency.
The Norwegian government, which acts as a go-between for the two sides, announced that the indefinite ceasefire was a way to facilitate negotiations for a lasting peace.
“[T]he two sides commit to unilateral ceasefires without a limitation in time,” the Norwegian foreign ministry said in a statement after government and rebel negotiators ended two days of initial talks.
The government, in a bid to speed up the peace process, has proposed to discuss outstanding issues of social and economic reforms, political and constitutional changes, and measures to end hostilities simultaneously, instead of one at a time, as in the past. The proposal is pragmatic, and may well succeed in meeting the government’s stated goal to have a peace agreement in a year’s time.
In another welcome development, the communist New People’s Army released three police officers that they had seized as prisoners of war, just as the Oslo talks drew to a close, in what might be viewed as a goodwill gesture.
Somewhat less welcome are accusations, coming from the communists just one day later, that government troops are being left in communities despite the promise to recall them from combat operations.
“The CPP strongly criticizes the Armed Forces of the Philippines [AFP] for maintaining their presence and continuing to make aggressive moves in and around the areas of operations of the NPA,” the CPP said in a statement.
“There have been persistent reports of continuing presence of armed operating troops of the AFP in barangay centers, occupying barangay halls, community schools and day care centers, senior citizen centers and other civilian structures. They continue to set up detachments or physical bases in the center of civilian population,” the group added. “The presence and operations of the AFP in rural communities undermine the credibility of the Duterte government… as it projects an image of disunity… or refusal of the AFP to abide by the order of its commander-in-chief.”
The CPP added: “According to our reports, when questioned, field commanders invariably justify their presence with claims of ‘peace and development’, ‘anti-drug’, ‘anti-logging’ and ‘visitations’. To the people, these are nothing but thinly-veiled pretexts to impose their armed presence and to carry out psywar, surveillance and search and combat operations against the NPA.”
The military, on the other hand, says that routine law enforcement operations and patrols will continue despite the ceasefire to ensure the safety of their bases and the community.
Given the ideological differences on both sides, it’s tempting to dismiss such accusations as so much rhetoric, but disagreements such as this must be nipped in the bud immediately, if the ceasefire is to hold.
Both sides clearly need to refine the ceasefire agreement so that it spells out exactly what actions are expected of each other.
It would make sense, too, to establish an international ceasefire monitoring team, similar to the one at work in Muslim Mindanao.
The ceasefire isn’t the final objective, of course, but it does set the correct environment for discussing a lasting peace. Both sides need to do more to assure that the shooting doesn’t resume.