Trust is not a mere aspiration in peace processes—it is their lifeblood. It is what turns signed agreements into lasting commitments and transitions former adversaries into governing partners. In the case of the peace process between the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Philippine state, that trust is now being tested.

The Bangsamoro peace process was built on a clear understanding: that those who fought for justice and self-determination would lead the transition to peace and democratic governance. This was not just a gesture of inclusion—it was the core of the political settlement.

Yet recent developments have raised serious concerns.

The selection of a new Chief Minister absent the MILF’s endorsement, and the appointment of Members of Parliament not nominated by the MILF, run contrary to both the spirit and structure of the peace agreement. These actions subtly, but unmistakably, signal a shift—from partnership to marginalization.

While these decisions may appear procedural or administrative, they carry profound implications. They reshape the landscape of trust. When the movement that carried the hopes of the Bangsamoro is sidelined in decisions central to the transition, it weakens not only the MILF, but the credibility of the peace process itself.

This is not about personalities. It is about principles.

The transitional period was never meant to be a free-for-all. It was a carefully negotiated roadmap. The MILF was not only a signatory to the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro—it was the recognized transitional authority tasked with building the foundations of governance. To dilute that role, particularly as the region approaches its first regular elections, is to tamper with the architecture of peace.

The risks are real. When trust is eroded, so is participation. When political commitments are bent, so too is the belief that democratic processes can deliver justice. Peace does not break overnight. It is chipped away by subtle betrayals, quiet exclusions, and calculated indifference.

And yet, there is still time.

The peace process remains a living endeavor. It can still be protected, strengthened, and honored. But only if all actors remember this fundamental truth: trust is not a byproduct of peace—it is its precondition.

History will judge this process not just by what was signed, but by what was upheld.