ABSTRACT
Mindanao’s Conflict has been one of conflicts that notoriously perpetuated and unresolved. Negotiation regime of Final Peace Agreement 1996 – between the government of the Philippines under Fidel Ramos’s administrative regime and MNLF with the leadership of Nur Misuari – has been presumably, by many scholars, a regime that acquainted with the features of resolving the conflict of Mindanao. Nevertheless, such negotiation regime of Final Peace Agreement 1996 remains failed to overcome the Mindanao’s conflict. In this dissertational research, the writer exemplified instrumentalist approach in order to comprehensively analyze underlying factors of the negotiation regime of Final Peace Agreement 1996. Explaining the influential features of negotiation instrumentation to the regime’s incompetency in the context of conflict resolution in Mindanao, the writer argues that negotiation instrumentation has been understood as consequential strategy to overcome the problematic of actor’s legitimacy and conflict of Mindanao simultaneously. The negotiation instrumentation by particular actors, however, gives shape to the option of the negotiation regime and the compromising notion focusing more on underscoring the resolution of actors problematic rather than the deep-rooted problems of the Mindanao’s conflict. The research used qualitative research methodology with case study as the ultimate strategy. Technique of collecting data was undertaken with in-depth interview to several stakeholders in Mindanao’s conflict, negotiation practitioners as well as previous researchers whose competencies and specializations in this discourse. Besides, the research also underscored a series of interpretations of numerous documentations during negotiation process such as Tripoli Agreement 1976, Jeddah Accord 1987, Final Peace Agreement 1996, and Republic Act 9045.
Key words: negotiation regime, conflict resolution, elite’s legitimacy, negotiation instrumentation.
INTISARI
Konflik Mindanao merupakan salah satu konflik yang sampai saat ini belum dapat terselesaikan. Regim Negosiasi Final Peace Agreement 1996 antara Pemerintah Filipina di bawah pemerintah Fidel Ramos dan MNLF di bawah pimpinan Nur Misuari difahami banyak kalangan sebagai salah satu regim negosiasi yang berkarakter untuk menyelesaikan konflik Mindanao. Namun regim negosiasi Final Peace Agreement 1996 ternyata juga gagal menyelesaikan konflik Mindanao. Dalam riset disertasi ini, penulis melakukan analisis terhadap factor-faktor yang menyebabkan regim negosiasi Final Peace Agreement 1996 dengan menggunakan pendekatan instrumentalis. Untuk menjelaskan pengaruh instrumentasi negosiasi terhadap kegagalan regim negosiasi dalam penyelesaian konflik Mindanao, penulis membangun argument bahwa instrumentasi negosiasi difahami sebagai strategi penyelesaian problem legitimasi actor dan problem konflik Mindanao secara simultan. Namun instrumentasi negosiasi oleh actor secara sefihak justru mengakibatkan pilihan regim negosiasi dan pilihan kompromi lebih mengfokuskan penyelesaian problem dari actor dibandingkan penyelesaian persoalan konflik Mindanao. Riset disertasi menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dan strategi penelitian studi kasus. Tehnik pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan melakukan wawancara mendalam terhadap stakeholder konflik Mindanao, praktisi negosiasi, maupun peneliti yang memiliki kompetensi di dalam diskursus ini. Di samping itu penelitian ini juga melakukan interpretasi terhadap dokumen-dokumen negosiasi dalam menyelesaikan konflik Mindanao seperti Tripoli Agreement 1976, Jeddah Accord 1987, Final Peace Agreement 1996, maupun Republic Act 9045.
