MANILA, Philippines - Terrorism, external challenges and conflicts caused by patronage politics brought down the Philippines’ ranking in an international study that measures global peace.
The Philippines ranked 134th out of 162 countries in the Global Peace Index 2014, five notches lower than its rank last year and one of the lowest in Asia-Pacific.
The country’s peace ranking was the second lowest in Southeast Asia, beating only Myanmar, which ranked 136th.
The Philippines’ ranking paled in comparison with those of its neighbors Singapore, which was at 25th, Malaysia (33rd), Laos (38th), Vietnam (45th), Indonesia (54th), Timor Leste (69th), Cambodia (106th) and Thailand (126th).
The country was third to the lowest in the Asia-Pacific region, only performing better than Myanmar and North Korea (153rd).
New Zealand at fourth place was the most peaceful in the region, followed by Japan (eighth) and Australia (15th).
“The last year was marked by heightened tensions in the Ukraine, the ongoing conflict in Syria, civil war in South Sudan and a broadening and increased intensity of terrorist activity in many countries including Afghanistan, Iraq, the Philippines and Libya,” the report read.
“These factors have contributed to the world becoming slightly less peaceful, continuing the global slide in peacefulness which has now been in effect for the last seven years,” it added.
The Philippines’ ranking and score were almost at par with those of Kenya (132nd), Libya (133rd) and Mali (135th),
Iceland remained as the most peaceful country in the index followed by Denmark, Austria, New Zealand and Switzerland.
At the bottom is Syria, which is torn by a civil war that has claimed more than 190,000 lives, as the least peaceful country.
Medium state of peace
The Philippines scored 2.456 in the index and was among the countries with “medium” state of peace. The report used a one to five scale with one being the highest in terms of state of peace.
In the Index sub-categories, the Philippines scored 2.6 on “ongoing domestic and international conflict.” The country got a grade of 1.732 on “militarization” and 2.691 on “societal safety and security.”
“Corruption, poverty and the patron-client nature of relations in the Philippines means that problems exist across all levels of society – not just in areas under conflict – with high levels of violent crime and kidnapping,” the report read, using patron-client relations as its term for patronage politics.
“Further, the decades-long conflict on the southern island of Mindanao, between the government and Muslim separatist groups, continues.”
The index noted that in some parts of the Philippines, the patron-client system combines with disputes over ethnicity-related matters, resulting in violence between wealthy political families.
“Corruption and poverty are equally pervasive among the factors that have seen the decades-long endurance of the various conflicts between the government and separatist Islamic groups on Mindanao,” it said.
The report also cited China’s efforts to assert its claim over parts of the West Philippine Sea that deteriorated its relationship with the Philippines.
“Diplomatic efforts to resolve tensions have failed, in part because China is only willing to discuss the SCS (South China Sea) question on a bilateral basis with individual claimant countries,” it said.
“This puts its smaller Asian neighbors at a significant disadvantage.”
The report warned the difficult task of implementing the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro – the deal that will form a new region with enhanced political and economic powers – is still to come.
“But continued high levels of trust in the president, Benigno Aquino, should work in favor of a lasting peace,” it added.
The report said the abolition of the pork barrel system last year was “an important, albeit insufficient, step towards ensuring that the allocation of public funds is rationalized and politics becomes less personalized.”
“However, the strengthening of political parties and local governments’ capacity to deliver basic services will be crucial going forward,” it added.
The Global Peace Index assessed 22 indicators that fall into the broad themes of ongoing domestic and international conflict, societal safety and security and militarization.
The Index was developed by the Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace and was based on data gathered by the Economist Intelligence Unit.
The data were based on various sources including the International Institute of Strategic Studies, the World Bank, various agencies of the United Nations and peace institutes.