Pagpati'ut - Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue

Mediating Violence In Sulu
requires a cohesive national identity and the nascent
Philippine state seems to be operating on the belief that this can be
achieved by homogenizing the peoples of the archipelago into a cohesive
unit.
are “groups whose core members share a distinctive
and enduring collective identity based on cultural traits and lifeways
that matter to them and to others with whom they interact... (G)roup
privilege, and its members become more self-conscious about their
common bonds and interests. Minimize differences, and communal
1993,3) 4
Training its eyes on the Moros, the nascent Philippine state continued the
futile efforts (and grave mistake) of the colonizers to pacify and assimilate
the repercussions of these discriminatory policies not only strengthened
and sharpened the Moro identity; they also developed deep-seated
discontent that manifests itself in varying forms, the most dangerous of
which is the resort to armed violence.
The Moro communities resisted the campaigns of the embryonic Philippine
state. This resistance maintained the pride and honor of the ‘homeland’
but placed a heavy toll on the economic vitality of communities. More
than this, the long-drawn struggle has also stretched the resilience of
witnessed today are among the negative repercussions of this centurieslong
struggle.
In other words, the armed resistance of the politicized Moro groups
against the Philippine state, and the clan feuding that intersects with the
politicized discontent are products of the historical push-and-pull of the
the imposition of state-building efforts by the Philippine state.
This dangerous dance continues to this day.
8
4 Gurr, Ted Robert. 1993. Minorities at Risk. A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflicts.
Washington: US Institute of Peace Press