One of the questions frequently asked by people is why the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) has taken so long to be finalized.

Since the first draft of the NCA was produced by the ethnic armed organizations (EAO)’s  Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team (NCCT) and the government’s Union Peacemaking Work Committee (UPWC) in April, over a 100 points in dispute have been resolved, according to the government, and now only 18 points remain to be negotiated.

The fact however is that since the last joint meeting was held 22-26 September, when the controversial 4th draft came out, no one knows when the next meeting will be, although speculations are it could be during the first two weeks of December.

Some have dubbed the situation a deadlock, while U Aung Min the ever (outwardly) optimistic government key negotiator, insists it is only a natural order of things. “It is like eating roasted beans,” he said in October. “At first you eat only the crisp ones, because they are easy to chew. But now only the tough ones remain. So it will take some time either to chew or digest them.”

SHAN would like to add that it is also natural for brokers to keep everyone happy and you can’t blame them for glossing over things sometimes.

Nevertheless, there are several factors that must be taken into account‐and admitted ‐ when the question arises why it is taking so long to reach a mutually acceptable win-win agreement.

Without pulling wool over anybody’s eyes, here are some of them: deep-seated distrust, inexperience and weak political will.

They have led both sides and cheerleaders on both sides to make mistakes, according to observers who have studied peace processes in their countries:
• A negotiator is one who is trying to sell his goods. It goes without saying his job is to persuade the other party to want to buy them. But, on several occasions, the negotiators are found thinking and acting like debaters trying to prove they are right and their opposite number wrong

• Negotiations, academics often point out, must be based on relationship- orientation and not deal-orientation, trying to close the deal as soon as possible. Negotiators therefore often go for informal meetings before they decide to hold formal ones. To be sure, there are a lot of informal meetings between the two sides, but very few participation from the government’s military, considered the major decision-maker

• The NCA, as the name indicates, is about military matters. However, what really has happened is that both sides are spending more–and unnecessary ‐time on political matters which are best discussed in the upcoming stages: negotiations for Framework for Political Dialogue and the Political Dialogue itself

• Public understanding of the peace process is little or nil when the need for public participation is great to push the process to the point of no return. Few reports that are being churned out both by the media and non-media are written in the language that ordinary people can understand. Indeed even many people who are leaders of their communities have spoken of their frustration in getting relevant information

• There are splinter groups on each side who see that any achievement made by the present government may prevent them from becoming founders of the next government. (We won’t elaborate much on this point.)

 Considering these, perhaps a meeting of all those who are concerned about the peace process is in order. Somewhat like the “pentapartite” meeting of representatives from the government, legislature, military, democratic parties, and ethnic parties on 31 October in Naypyitaw. But also adding representatives from the EAOS.

Then we can perhaps expect a swifter and happier conclusion to the peace process.

Note
Li = Chinese measurement which is equal to ½ km.
The title is taken from Chinese philosopher Lao Zi who says: The journey of a thousand li begins with the first step.