THE armed confrontation on January 25, 2015 in Mamasapano, Maguindanao subsequently spawned contestations in different locations, and I don’t mean other armed clashes elsewhere. I’m referring to the battles on mass media, social network sites and the court of public opinion. Many of these revolve around language, math, geography and history and are opportunities for learning.
The contestations on language are highlighted by the insistence of certain quarters that what happened was a massacre, or a misencounter, and the almost exclusivist use of the honorific "heroes" to the 44 members of the Philippine National Police-Special Action Force (PNP-SAF).
Other than being inaccurate, referring to the encounter as a "massacre" does not recognize the professional duty and the oath of the 44 PNP-SAF who perished. It is more apt to use massacre when the harmed parties include unarmed civilians. But there is nothing like the term "massacre" to crank up emotional reactions if the objective is to cloud people’s judgements and hide the truths about a problematic situation.
"Misencounter" was also proffered, referring to the mistaken exchange of fire among friendly armed forces. The neologism "misencounter," apparently a uniquely Filipino contribution, has been debunked by those who believe that had it been the case, the battle would have been brief, unlike the pitched battle in Mamasapano that raged for hours.
The declaration of January 30 as a National Day of Mourning for the 44 PNP-SAF fuelled wider awareness and provided a platform for honouring them. A veritable campaign popularized the tags "Fallen 44," "44 Heroes," "SAF 44," "Justice for the 44."
However, this inadvertently led to the further "othering" of the Bangsamoro forces involved in the encounter. Indeed, if one set is composed of heroes, it is not unlikely that the other party are villains; if one group deserves justice, it will not take a stretch of the imagination to conclude that the other group is involved in injustice.
On a minor note, the often awkward and wrong pronunciation by mainstream broadcast anchors and presenters of the name of the municipality Mamasapano bordered on the irritating. Surely media outfits could be bothered to check out a vital detail like that.
The numbers intramurals initially focused on the 44 PNP-SAFs as exemplified by #44 and #Fallen44, perhaps also because the number of PNP casualties was the one fact that was quickly established. There were calls to privilege not only the Philippine troops but also to recognize that the Bangsamoro forces and most of all the civilians were victims of the larger interests that underpinned and justified the operations. Thus, the advocacy to respect 55 fighters including the 11 initially reported killed MILF. The total number of fatalities on the part of the Bangsamoro forces and civilians were not immediately ascertained. The most recent figures cited in media were 18 Bangsamoro Islamic Armed Forces (BIAF) and seven (7) civilians, including a
child.
Not long after, InterAksyon.com came up with an infographic, the Map of Mourning that showed the geographic origins of the 44 PNP-SAF, 26 of whom came from Luzon, six (6) from the Visayas, and 12 from Mindanao. The largest group to come from a single area is the 13 who came from the Cordilleras and were presumably Igorots. Two of the 44 were Tausug Muslims who had to be buried immediately following Islamic doctrine; hence explaining the wake for only 42 at Camp Bagong Diwa.
My interest was piqued when I learned about the 13 Igorot PNP-SAFs and the two Tausugs that fought with the BIAF and the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), who most likely come from mainland Mindanao tribes who had converted to Islam like the Maguindanaos, Maranaos and the Iranuns.
The Cordilleras or the Mountain Province and the southern portion of Mindanao or the Moro Province shared the common experience of being directly governed by the United States Army during American colonial period. Social scientist Patricio N. Abinales in his book “Orthodoxy and History in the Muslim-Mindanao Narrative” wrote about the similarities in experiences of the two special provinces and how they similarly responded to -- but also in some ways diverged -- the emerging Filipino government that largely had lowland, Christianized and mainstream communities in Luzon, the Visayas and other parts of Mindanao as its base. Abinales noted in particular that younger generation Cordillerans who had become educated sought to replace departing American and Constabulary forces, and became the new powers in their region, collaborating with the lowland Filipino government.
It struck me that the same identity and interest groups -- Maguindanao, Maranao, Iranun and Tausug, Igorot, American and "Filipino" -- found themselves at play in Maguindanao a century hence with inherently the same underpinning aspirations and contradictions.
The Islamized ethnolingustic groups were asserting themselves against the homogenizing effects of a unitary social set-up that does not value governance and cultural differences. The Americans were out to further geopolitical interests and capture Marwan and Usman who represented extreme Islamist interests, the new opposing pole after the end of the capitalist-communist Cold War. The Filipino government was seeking to impose control over contested territory, and facilitating access by a foreign interest. And a segment of the Igorots and Tausugs had become enforcers of Filipino government policies.
Indeed whether via language, math, geography or history, we have a lot to learn from Mamasapano.
Email feedback to magszmaglana@gmail.com