History ignored: Sulu not part of Mindanao

• 2 Nov 2009
• Philippines Daily Inquirer
•
—EMMANUEL D. MANGUBAT, mannymangubat@yahoo.com
History ignored: Sulu not part of Mindanao


THERE IS A PROPOSED LAW THAT would add another ray to the sun in the RP flag. The authors claim that the additional ray would symbolize the courage, bravery and integrity of Muslim Filipinos who fought for Philippine independence.
Such claim shows ignorance of history. The Muslims fought against Spain which sold their country to America without the knowledge and consent of their sultan.
The Sulu Archipelago is owned by the Sulu Sultanate, an independent and sovereign state established in the middle of the 14th century when the Philippines did not yet exist. Thus Spain sold a state, a territory she did not own. The authors of the proposed law have only to read the Dec. 10, 1898 Treaty of Paris. In the treaty, not one of its 17 articles states that the Sulu Archipelago is a part of the Philippines. The authors must also read RA 4166, the law that moved our independence from July 4 to June 12. Implication: If the Philippines was already an independent state on June 12, 1898, then Mindanao is not a part of the Philippines. So there must only be two stars in the Philippine flag.
The eight rays of the sun represent the eight provinces that revolted against Spain which are: Batangas, Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, Manila, Nueva Ecija, Pampanga and Tarlac. Take note that there is not a single province in Mindanao. Then the three stars in the Philippine flag represent the three major geographical divisions of the Philippines: Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao.
Take note that there is no mention of Sulu. Again this is ignorance of history because Sulu is not a part of Mindanao. We don’t know if the Muslims in the Sulu Sultanate will appreciate the addition of another ray to the sun in the Philippine flag because they also have their own flag that symbolizes and embodies the ideals and traditions of their own country and heroes. We hope the National Historical Institute will oppose this proposed law for historical accuracy.