THE special Philippines Development Forum on the Bangsamoro organized under the leadership of the Department of Finance (DOF) took place on November 5 to 6, 2014 in Davao City. Highlighted by the presentation of the Bangsamoro Development Plan (BDP), which is the blueprint for socio-economic rehabilitation of the envisioned Bangsamoro region, the event was not a small feat.
No less than the PDF, a high-level policy dialog mechanism involving different stakeholders including international partners, was harnessed to mobilize support for the Bangsamoro region and the BDP.
Prepared by the Bangsamoro Development Agency (BDA) with the support of local and international agencies, the BDP is to be implemented in three phases commencing in 2015, and necessitates funding in the amount of PhP225.6 billion. Since the Philippine Government is reportedly able to cover PhP116 billion of the total amount, the concern is for the PhP110 billion shortfall, for which government and official development assistance is being eyed.
The BDP’s three phases featured a transitional development plan (Phase 1, 2015 to mid-2016) to kick start the “just economy” in the Bangsamoro via stabilization and pump-priming programs; continuing on to medium-term strategic interventions and investments (Phase 2, mid-2016 to 2022) that would serve to create a strong foundation; and finally linked to the third phase, which is characterized as long-term development towards a sustained “just economy.”
It was interesting to note that a few media practitioners in their reportage and commentary framed the PDF on the Bangsamoro as signaling a new Mindanao. While contemporary Mindanao is certainly more than just the Bangsamoro, the association cannot be helped. After all, the armed conflicts that underpinned the peace process, which culminated in the signing of the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro (CAB), affected the rest of Mindanao in many ways. International media often used Bangsamoro areas as representative of the Mindanao situation, rather inaccurately.
Mindanews in their coverage of the PDF on the Bangsamoro made it a point to say that although President Noynoy Aquino had made the closing remarks in the PDF and was presumably adequately informed of the contents and scope of the plan document, “no copy of the BDP was turned over to him for donor agencies to see”. Hopefully, it would only be a matter of time before the BDP can be made accessible to the public, beyond the presentation made during the PDF itself.
Other than the peoples in the Bangsamoro who stand to be directly affected by the BDP implementation, Mindanawons like me, and other supporters of the Bangsamoro and Mindanao would certainly be interested to understand the configurations of the plan for a “just economy”.
The focus on the economy itself is worth of initial comment. Not too long ago, in the early stages of the negotiations under the administration of President Noynoy Aquino, it was often pointed out--and here I will use the words of Atty. Soliman Santos--that “the fulfillment of the legitimate aspirations of a distinct people’s identity, way of life and longing for self-rule.
This, not excessive corruption and grinding poverty, is at the root of the Bangsamoro problem, although those two particular maladies have been highlighted in the ARMM and should also be addressed as part of the problem”. Perhaps the sentiment is that with the Bangsamoro Basic Law Bill already in Congress and the political questions systematically being addressed, there is now opportunity to focus on the development aspect of the problem, hence the emphasis on the economy.
Nevertheless, it will not do to approach Bangsamoro peace and development as if these are in silos, and the economy is the only entry point. Reflecting on the point of MelotBalisalisa, a Mindanawon and longtime social researcher and development practitioner, on the need to address deep-seated mistrusts (between Bangsamoros and non- Bangsamoros, among Bangsamoros, among non-Bangsamoros), what indeed would be the processes and mechanisms for tackling social cohesion and related concerns?
It would be unacceptable if it gets declared for instance, that improved social cohesion would be the by-product of political and economic change.
Social cohesion needs to be pursued deliberately; and if this intention does not permeate political and economic efforts, initiatives related to politics and the economy could have marginalizing and divisive effects that would not sit well with the envisioned “just economy”. Obviously, there is a lot that rides on the BDP. I look forward to the chance to peruse it more closely.
***
(Email feedback to magszmaglana@gmail.com)