-Preamble, United Nations' Charter

Freudian Slips and Peace Talks
The Freudian slip was at work when President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, asked by a foreign correspondent about her sex life, daringly responded, "Plenty." As expected, this has been the most quotable sound byte that landed in major dailies, tabloids, street talks, kapihan, and even text messages that signals mixed reactions from the general audiences for the last few weeks.

If Freud were alive today, perhaps Macapagal would be the most cooperative subject of psychoanalysis-talking more of power and sex-that is unhindered by social prohibitions to the extent of thinking of marketing a "Plenty of sex" shirt—as one newspaper headline put it.

Yet, I would appreciate more if she would slip on an "ALL OUT PEACE" shirt to show that her life instinct is stronger than her death instinct as expressed in her position to wage an all-out war in dealing with the remnants of Abu Sayyaf and that of the alleged terrorist CPP-NPA-NDF.

Unfortunately, the President, adhering to her self-created image of a strong republic remains vocal in concentrating her psychic energies on delivering a final blow on the fate of the peace negotiations with the CPP-NPA-NDF, which have been in recess for the last few months or so.

I had a first-hand view of the Presidential response to the matter of pursuing peace talks with the CPP-NPA-NDF in an en banc meeting of the National Anti-Poverty Commission, where we (the appointed basic sector representatives) presented the resolution it passed urging both peace panel negotiators to end the impasse. Little attention was given by Her Excellency, who dismissed it as just the resolution of the sectoral representatives and she should not be the one to be convinced because 95% of Filipino doesn't want peace talks as shown in an unfounded survey.

Although at the course of the meeting, as if regaining her executive personality, Macapagal stresses that the government maintains an open line of communication to allow the peace talks to move on with an end view of urging the CPP-NPA-NDF to lay down their arms and the process not to be used in the communist propaganda, in the end, it made me realize that there is a need for the doves both in the government and the civil society to unite and flag down the self-destructing hawks. Even more, I want to tell the President that what's popular is not always morally right.

Of ID, Ego and Superego
Hopefully, National Security Adviser Roilo Golez would be able to understand the essence of uniting peace advocates to achieve a sustainable and long-term resolution on security issues rather than experimenting on the efficiency of a national ID system as a preventive instrument against terrorism. The proposals for a national ID system popped up days after the car bombing of the island resort Bali, Indonesia.

Showing stubbornness over existing jurisprudence penned by the Supreme Court when the issue came up years ago over its implication on our privacy, Sec. Golez is currently lobbying for the legislative passage of a bill on a national ID System. In the national discourse over the issue, Sec. Golez failed to realize the "ingenuity" of some Filipinos in circumventing laws and tampering with great efficiency even extreme illegal documents.

Logic is missing in the proposals since rebels and terrorists uses multiple identification cards in the same way that military intelligence—deep penetrating agent and 007 military assets—have their multiple identifications for covert operations. Knowing the bureaucratic red tape and Pinoy sub-culture's "padrino" system, national IDs can be forged at the whims of even a single Ninoy or Dado bill in the same manner that flying voters do their own stuff.

Sharing the sentiments of progressive forces, we might as well think of fighting the resurrection of the proposal for a national ID system since vital information embodied in it might be used to politically harass active citizens that is critical of the government to push for their own personal ends. Putting the entire nation under surveillance or under an unwritten martial law might be exaggerated but still it's worth an ounce to note that history itself tells the same story.

If that would be the case, "fighting tooth and nail" will be the best offensive to disengage any attempts to clampdown civil rights at its best. Besides, the government needs to tie loose ends on the national ID measures such as the issue of who will be held accountable and responsible for the implementation of the system.

Nonetheless, if the government can't resolve basic administrative problems of registering childbirths in the far-flung areas, how can a complex problem of terrorism be resolved by a national ID system? If the United States (US) of America, which happens to be the most advanced military power, failed to anticipate a terrorist attack amidst sophisticated instruments, what more could an ID do?

War Fixation and Global Governance for Peace
Whether it's an attempt to re-establish its image as the sole global power or just plain redefinition of its foreign policies, the US is badly stepping into the innate sovereignty of independent nations to self-determination and governance to the extent of undermining the multilateral processes of the United Nations.

Apparently, the Philippine government has been dogged by its avowed allegiance with the international campaign against terrorism and basically dilly-dallying whether we will be supporting the unilateral effort of the United States of America to broaden the support it may get to legitimize its movement against Iraq.

As of the moment, what is clear to the international community is the fact that it is déjà vu having Washington luring all member countries of the United Nation Security Council to follow the marching order based on the new US military doctrine. Thus, it is imperative that international networks of peace and human rights advocates strengthen and their presence in advancing alternative solutions through global governance for peace.

In our little way, supporting House Resolution No. 822, A Resolution Expressing the Sense of the House of Representatives that the Philippines Should Not Get Involved in Any Unilateral Military Action by the United States Against Iraq Not Authorized by the United Nations Security Council—introduced by Reps. Loretta Ann P. Rosales, Apolinario L. Lozada, Jr., Teodoro L. Locsin, Jr., J.R. Nereus O. Acosta, Jr., Carlos M. Padilla, Ronaldo B. Zamora, Gilbert C. Remulla, Rolex T. Suplico, Enrique T. Garcia, Jr., and other legislators—is a good way to tell the world that:

1. We don't want the Philippines to support US military action against Iraq because this would constitute an act of war against another country with whom we are at peace;

2. The Philippines opposes the US' imminent unilateral war against Iraq, and , instead, as a matter of principle, moves for the peaceful resolution of the dispute through diplomacy and negotiations.