 Once again, thank you so much, I'm delighted to be here with you. And I want to talk about the topic which the whole project came up from the curiosity. There was a lot of talking about whistleblowing, about wiki leaks and other stories related to that in public sphere. And you could read a lot of that about media. We start to wondering how much we really can find for ourselves as researchers in this archives which are open sources like now, easy, accessible. And can we find there anything interesting for us to learn about some specific region in this specific presentation about Mindanao? So I want to explore how much we can learn from the wiki leaks projects or data on the situation in Mindanao. I don't want to talk a lot about the methodology, but in this particular presentation I don't want to be very deconstructive to see the different meanings behind the text. I don't want to focus on text. I want to look at what this text can allow us to learn about the situation in Mindanao. Of course, remembering that this is specific narratives made by professionals from the United States and which have the particular position in the Philippines and in the Mindanao. So if you type Mindanao into wiki leaks browser, then it's over 5,000 documents. And it is kind of library. The biggest section is about global intelligence files which is not governmental documents. Those documents are made by the strat for company and I wasn't interested in that. I focus on the public library of US diplomats to learn something more about the American official, not public but official perspective on the situation in the Mindanao. I also look to Kissinger cables, Carter cables just to compare it to the situation nowadays because this public library of US diplomats focus on the 21st century, exactly from 2001 up to 2010. So I will focus here on the situation in the period of Bush and Macapagal-Arroy administrations. Moreover, I decided to focus only on the secret and confidential documents available in the internet because unclassified documents are usually media reviews and you can read in media exactly the same. I thought that it might be more interesting to see what are the conversations of diplomats with different persons in the Philippines or Malaysia, how they see the situations. So generally we can find four types of documents in this library, four types of secret documents or classified documents. It is my typology. First of all, you can find the setters when some officials from the United States go to the Philippines or Malaysia. He has special basic information about the situation in this country and sometimes some suggestions. What he should talk about or maybe what he shouldn't talk about with the particular actors in Southeast Asia. Reports general overviews of the situation, of the ongoing situation. If it's classified, it is usually based on the conversations with foreign ministry officers, some politicians, some conversations. If it's unclassified, usually it's based on media. Updates on military activities. I will not focus on them here at all because they are quite technical about the, usually in the case of Mindanao, about what happened and how Americans helped in the situation. And some suggestions what Washington should do about particular situation. If I made a huge file with the all secret data which are, as I said, easy accessible right now and I counted the number of words. What struck me most was the, how often Malaysian perspective or Malaysian words were present in the corpus of text. So there is a question of validity. To which extent it is a case of lack of the data, available data. There is more data from Malaysia than from the Philippines for instance. And to which extent Malaysia is really important to understand the situation in Mindanao. Because if you look just to number of words, Malaysia seems to be very important. Okay, from now on there is a lot of quotations from the reports. If you don't like to listen to me you can just read this report or passages from this report. So by this quotations I wanted to show that the international dimension of the situation in Mindanao was present from the very beginning. And different actors were involved as Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore, United Kingdom, Australia. To be somehow undirectly involved in this situation from the very beginning from the 1973 as the Kissinger Cables show. But let's focus on the situation at the beginning of this century and at the turn of the 21st century. So if you look into the secret report for US Congress, it struck that in 2000, just one year before the 9-11 attacks, the situation in the Mindanao from the American perspective was not important at all. They said, yes, however, there are some copetic defencing priorities related to escalation of hostilities after Estrada's offensive against Milv. But the most important was this, what was again important, South-East China dispute. And this report show it's quite clearly. But then everything changed from the American perspective after September 11. And what is interesting, a lot of local actors in South-East Asia were aware of this change. And because of that, Normissuari sent a clear message to Americans that I'm not terrorists, Milv done the same. They knew that it's very important to be not defined as terrorists by Americans there. Of course, as we can see in this example, Americans learn from a royal administration that probably we should talk to Milv. It's too big organization just to treat them as terrorist organizations and they have some legitimate issues. Originally Americans wanted to put Milv on the foreign terrorist organization list. They changed it after consultation with a royal administration and also after consultation with Malaysian government to double check the situation. What is the view of the Malaysian officers according to this situation? If you see to the general report on the global war on terror in the Philippines dated 2005, we can see that this is completely different situation in the Americans view than five years earlier. They say that only Afghanistan in the 19th had a mix of elements more conductive to spread of radical Islam movement and the serve groups of terrorists. There was not a problem five years ago and then in five years they see that a huge problem, a long term problem bigger than anywhere in East Asia. Of course, there is a lot about American actions. I don't want to focus on that right now. Maybe I want to draw your attention to the chemist and Kling which was according to American diplomat the situation in the Filipino police. Army is okay, there is a problem with police and I could hear this point even two months ago when I conducted some interviews in Manila. There is a problem with the police. After Mama Sapano there was the same point that there is a problem with police. They should learn something from the, the police should cooperate with foreign countries as armed forces of the Philippines cooperate. It might be interesting for some of you it wasn't so popular. It is a case where the diplomats behind closed or operate the role of Saudi Arabia which had according to different reports huge leverage over the government of the Philippines due to big number of overseas Filipino workers in Saudi Arabia. And because of that any time, maybe not any time but at least few times the Saudi ambassador asked to release some Saudi citizen from Filipino custody. It was done even though there was some, he was suspected of being a financing terrorist network in the Philippines. So United States and different countries start to pressure Saudi Arabia to stop this practice in terms to be more efficient in a fight on suspected. But Malaysia. Of course Malaysia is present in many of documents because of the role in this particular time when Manila was a facilitator as they said not mediator, impartial but not neutral in the first decade of 21st century peace process. And because of that there is a lot of information about Malaysia positions and also some of those documents which pop up when I take Mindanao were not prepared in Manila by American embassy in Manila but in Kuala Lumpur and they come from Kuala Lumpur, yes. The interesting thing is that from report to report their perspective on the peace process changed, on the peace negotiation changed. At the beginning Otmar Razak who was the key Manila Malaysian negotiator or broker was very optimistic. Then he said no it is impossible to bring a peace to Mindanao to sign the peace agreement. Then again maybe there is a chance. So right now it is quite easy to look from the perspective that we know how it's finished that it wasn't possible to be successful before 2010 even though there were some hopes that it is possible to do it in 2007. But we all remember the situation with the constitutional problem and constitutionality of the proposed agreement that it was the reason why it stopped. If we look to the documents you can see the growing involvement of the US, informal involvement of the US government into peace process. At the beginning Malaysia was kind of suspicious about the role of the US. However they recognized their role as someone who brings resources like money to the island. Maybe I shouldn't talk too much about that. Anyway there were some tensions between Malaysia and the United States. But then when Malaysia saw that the position of Gloria Mapagal Arroyo is weaker and weaker they start to ask the United States to be more and more involved in the process. And also we can see us through the time the American perspective on milk change. As I said at the beginning they suggested it to put in even not Washington suggested it but Manila Embassy suggested to put milk on the foreign terrorist organization list. At the end they start to meet with milk officials in Mindanao. So the whole 10 years all was summed up by one report according to one record as successful strategy without the final success meaning without signing the agreement. But we know very carefully and we know it very well and you can see it also in the reports that designing the agreement is not the end of peace process. They have to sell it to all actors in the region and also they have to provide the resources to make it implemented. So in conclusion I would say that it is not only a matter of documents the role of Malaysia in the first decade of 21st century. And we should remember that Malaysia took part in this peace process especially in the first decade of 21st century. Especially it was growing in time. As you can see the Filipino which is light blue it is popular in the first this phrase Filipino is popular in the first documents the earliest documents because they are more general. And then United States became more involved and Malaysia more involved due to peace process. Of course we all know that media is the message meaning that diplomatic cables talks a lot about diplomacy and the role of diplomacy in the peace process. So summing up it might be interesting additional source to supplementary source to get personal account of actors involved in the process to get some additional characteristics of some other actors. But not in this conspiratorial way that there is completely different version of history which is in contradiction to history from media. It is rather a history from specific angle and with many small interesting accounts which can somehow enrich our knowledge on the situation. Thank you so much. Right we'll follow the same format. I'm not sure the next speaker is Rogelio Braga. Yes right but whilst we're shifting power points anyone want to make a quick question. Separate movement because of the tension outside but it was just mentioned. They usually focus on the contemporary situation. Thank you.