IS PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE POSSIBLE? : Mounting offensives against ethnic armies and new violent outburst in Arakan State
Quite a lot of happening have been unfolding during the last few days.
But the most outstanding one is the new conflict in Arakan State, between the
militant “Rohingya”, that the Burmese government and the Arakan nationalist
prefer to dub as “Bengali”, and the government's security forces. And thus, the
previous headline hitting news of the Tatmadaw's (military) offensives in Kachin,
Shan and Karen States, followed by the anti-war demonstrations in Myitkyina and
elsewhere were somewhat pushed back to become a back burner.
The 14 October meeting of National Defense and Security Council (NDSC),
the first of its kind since Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy
(NLD) regime comes into power, followed by the 15 October, first anniversary of
Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) signing occasion has brought back the back
burner issues to light, portraying the woes that the country is facing, into a
package as a whole, which needs to be resolved earnestly and speedily.
The national defense and security affairs
meeting of 14 October that was attended by the President of the Republic of the
Union of Myanmar, U Htin Kyaw, the State Counselor, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the
Commander in Chief of Defense Services, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, Deputy
Commander in Chief Vice Senior General Soe Win, Union Minister for Ministry of
Home Affairs Lt-Gen Kyaw Swe, Union Minister for Ministry of Defense Lt-Gen
Sein Win, Union Minister for Office of the State Counselor U Kyaw Tint Swe,
touched on the following issues, according to the Presidential website.
·
The situations of the
battle occurred in Kachin State and the Northern Shan State
·
The situations which
occurred in “Wa” Special Region (1) and “Mailar”(Mong La) Special Region (4)
·
The management procedures
in order to enhance the capacity and ability of the Myanmar Police Force.
Remarkably, the said meeting didn't mention the issue of recent Arakan
conflict that has already taken place on 9 October.
It is not clear, whether concrete directives or solutions have been
made, but seen from the speeches delivered the following 15 October, on the
occasion of the first anniversary NCA, the NLD regime and the Tatmadaw don't
seem to have a clear understanding of cooperation, on how to go about with the
country's woes, in a coordinated manner.
Thus, it is necessary to study the speeches delivered at the occasion,
as a clue on how each stakeholder is gearing up to go about with overcoming the
obstacles.
Aung San Suu Kyi
In her speech, Suu Kyi reiterated her former position of
all-inclusiveness and advocate, or one could even say plead, for the culture of
altruism in peace-building.
“All inclusiveness is very important to our
country. Peace is a treasure which cannot be exchanged for whatsoever thing.
Reflecting in the wording NCA, the notion of fire struck my mind,” she
emphasized explicitly.
In trying to instill the culture of altruism,
she said: “Should we want peace and ceasefire, we had better start with
extinguishing of anger and prejudice which are likened to fire burning inside
our heart and soul. So, only when all the individuals and organizations
involved can subdue their fire-like anger and prejudice, will we be able to
achieve the genuine peace.”
Her ultimate message was outlined when she
stressed: “We have our own opinion, we can’t deny. But I’m confident we are all
able to overcome these bitter experiences. What we ought to compete is who the
most forgiving individuals and / or organizations are. We are not to compete in
our firing power. We need to vie with one another for our fire-extinguishing
power. The whole country is watching us with great expectation.”
Buttressing her plea, laced with urging she
said. “Instead of competing with one another in firing power, we’d better vie
in fire-fighting power.”
In addition Suu Kyi talked about the seven-point road map to amend the
military-drafted constitution, which includes the following:
1.
To review the political
dialogue framework
2.
To amend the political
dialogue framework
3.
To convene the Union
Peace Conference—the 21st century Panglong in accordance with the amended and
approved political dialogue framework
4.
To sign union agreement—
the 21st century Panglong Conference Agreement based on the results of the 21st
Century Panglong Conference
5.
To amend the constitution
in accordance with the union agreement and approve the amended constitution
6.
To hold the multi-party
democracy general elections in accordance with the amended and approved
constitution
7. To build a democratic federal union in
accordance with the results of the multi-party democracy general elections
(Source: Global New Light of Myanmar – 16 October 2016)
Min Aung Hlaing
The Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing's speech on the
NCA first anniversary occasion centered on the concept of the present union
being the continuous legacy of immemorial time; urging the EAOs to sign the NCA,
give up the armed struggle and make use of the multi-party democracy platform
to address their grievances; and acceptance of the military's six guiding
principles to achieve peace.
He said: “Our country is a Union
which has been formed since yore (immemorial). Any regions and states in the
Union are home to all ethnics, not for a single ethnic specifically.”
To make his point that armed struggle
is out of place, he said: “I would like to say the attempts to grasp the
opportunities through armed struggle line by turning a blind eye to the actual
rights and opportunities is opposition to the people’s desire.”
“Therefore, if we accept democracy,
we need to abandon the obsession to the armed struggle line which is the
opposition of democracy,” he stressed.
"Ethnic‐minority areas where armed groups are based are peaceful and have no more fighting since the groups signed the ceasefire. Mutual trust proves that. So I am urging other armed groups to learn from the
example," Min Aung Hlaing also
said, luring the non-signatories to sign the NCA.
The most important message that he
put across is the often reiterated military's controversial six guiding
principles to achieve peace, which is the actual stumbling block in the peace
process, as far as the EAOs are concerned. They are:
1.
To have a keen desire to
reach eternal peace,
2.
To keep promises agreed
to in peace deals,
3.
To avoid capitalizing on
the peace agreement,
4.
To avoid placing a heavy
burden on local people,
5.
To strictly abide by the existing laws, and
6.
To march towards a democratic country in accord
with the 2008 Constitution.
Mutu Say Poe
The Karen National Union (KNU) leader
Mutu Say Poe is a close confidant of Min Aung Hlaing and is even jokingly
depicted by many as a sample pupil of the Tatmadaw's peace process structure.
Now even he was forced to protest the Tatmadaw's heavy-handedness on the Ethnic
Armed Organizations (EAOs), as it begins to directly attack the NCA signatory
the RCSS and the KNU indirectly. The
Karen Border Guard Force (KBGF), which is jointly commanded by the Tatmadaw
conducted offensives against the splinter group of Democratic Karen Buddhist
Army (DKBA), intruding into the KNU controlled area of Hat Gyi, where a dam is
scheduled to be built by the government.
The KNU and RCSS are two core EAOs,
from a total of eight EAO signatories of the NCA, that have thousands of
troops, while the others only have token armed forces with only few soldiers,
except for the DKBA.
Mutu outlined his plea in his recent
speech during the NCA anniversary as below.
·
It is necessary to avoid the use of force in our
attempts to adopt and exercise the new political culture of the NCA and in
finding political solutions through political means.
·
For instance, it is necessary to stop the
ongoing armed conflicts in northern Myanmar.
·
Although incidents are understandable,
intentional attacks are not acceptable. Leaders from both sides are responsible
to reach an agreement on interpretation of the NCA.
·
Therefore, on behalf of NCA signatories, I would
like to call for the government and the Tatmadaw with all seriousness to ease
policies and suspend the use of force in order to pave way for non-signatories
to sign the NCA.
United
Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC)
The UNFC, an alliance of seven ethnic
armies, that is the non-signatory of the NCA didn't attend the occasion even
though it was invited. But immediately after the NCA anniversary occasion, the
government's Peace Council (PC), headed by Dr Tin Myo Win, and the UNFC's
Delegation for Peace Negotiation (DPN), led by Khu Oo Reh met in the afternoon.
After a few hours of meeting the
DPN's joint-secretary Tun Zaw was interviewed by the BBC, in which he said that
the talks were about accommodation of the UNFC's eight point proposal that was
already handed in to the government a few weeks ago. Accordingly, if the said
points could be negotiated satisfactorily, another point of signing the NCA
would be included, making the eight point proposal to become a nine point
agreement.
The UNFC proposal centers around all-inclusiveness,
unilateral or bilateral ceasefire and a tripartite dialogue proposal to make
each level of the peace negotiation to be fair and equitable.
However, Tun Zaw said that the
important point discussed was said to be on how Ceasefire Joint Monitoring
Committee (JMC) should be empowered to make it workable.
The DPN was said to proposed that the
role of international participation in the mechanism of JMC implementation and
enforcement, so that positive achievement could be evaluated, as the recent
self-employed peace keeping structure, given the inability to end the some seven decades old ethnic conflict and not producing satisfactory result and
achievement.
The idea was said to be met with cold
shoulder from the part of the military and meeting ended without any
resolution, with an understanding to meet again to resolve the remaining issues
between the two parties in the coming November.
Reportedly, four out of eight point
proposal was said to be resolved, although both sides did not spell them out.
The Rohingya
conflict
Another issue that has thrust
forcefully into the political scene is the Rohingya conflict, equally alarming
if not more than the ongoing EAOs and Tatmadaw (Burma Army) conflict.
On October 9, around 400 militants in
a coordinated action targeted three Burma border posts along the border with
Bangladesh and killed around nine soldiers.
The President’s office has also
released an official statement detailing information obtained through
interrogation of apprehended suspects, as well as apparent intelligence
sources.
However, the Burma Human Rights
Network (BHRN), based in London, on 17 October, refuted the statement of Burma
President's office described a well organized armed group called Aqa Mul
Mujahadeen, whom they said were funded by middle eastern sources and connected
to proscribed terrorist groups.
The BHRN questioned the validity of
this uprising being a well-planned military operation, as its statement said: “
If the men in the video are assumed to be responsible it should also be noted
that they depict only a few dozen adult men with assault rifles and that the
vast majority seen in the videos are children armed with swords, sticks and
farming tools. This again draws questions into any accounts describing the
group as well organized, well funded or well trained.”
Whatever the regime likes to portray
the situation, the recent violence outburst of the Rohingya is the product of
the successive military governments side-lining and oppressing of said ethnic
group. There might be some elements that have received training somewhere
abroad. But according to available data, it seems to be more of a home-grown
rebellion due to the injustice and oppression, rather than a well-planned
military operation, involving only rebel combatants.
According to the New Delhi based The
Wire, “After this major border incident, Bangladesh had moved swiftly and
arrested two of the attackers and handed them over to Myanmar.”
Accordingly on 16 October, Dhaka
“unequivocally” condemned the attack and promised to help track down the
perpetrators. “Bangladesh follows a ‘zero tolerance’ policy towards
violent extremism and terrorism of any form and manifestation,” said a
statement issued by Bangladesh foreign ministry.
Outlook
Taking cues from the events that have
been unfolding, assessment on stakeholders' political stance; the government
and military policy in dealing with the EAOs; and the government's handling of
the Arakan conflict involving the Rohingya's spontaneous rebellion or armed
outburst would be in order.
First let us look at the issue of the
stakeholders political positions in relation to the contemporary political
happenings.
Suu Kyi could be said to have
reiterated her previous commitment of all-inclusiveness and genuine ceasefire
achievement, although she is powerless to rein in the military to stop its
offensives in Kachin, Shan and Karen States, excluding Arakan State, where the
government seems to be working in tandem with the military on the recent
Rohingya uprising.
While the military is trying to
project its image that the offensives in the Kachin, Shan and Karen States are
with the blessing of the government, Suu Kyi's recent speech indicated that it
might not be the case. Because her clear urging that the conflict and warring parties
should compete more in extinguishing the flames of war and not firing power or
escalating the conflict showed that she couldn't have agreed to the heightening
of armed conflict that the military has decided to implement. And clearly,
especially the offensives in Kachin and Shan States are the handiwork of the
military and not an accidental armed engagement, while patrolling. Apart from
that, the conflict in Karen State between the KBFG and the splinter group of
DKBA unfolded as an intentional encroachment of the KNU territory, which is
against the NCA.
It should also be noted that the RCSS
and the KNU are signatories of the NCA.
The Commander-in-Chief has clearly
indicated that it is not going to abdicate from the military's self-employed
national savior role and protector of the multi-party democracy, sovereignty
and national unity, even though this image projection of the military is highly
debatable and controversial.
Its mentioning, as if it is part of
the multi-party democratic system is deplorable, as the military occupied
twenty-five percent of the MP seats in all parliaments without election; having
a bigger say in NDSC that is existing parallel with the government, where no
such structure is allowed in a real democratic system of governance; and also
the parallel military court together with the country's judicial system. As
such, the Commander-in-Chief taking cover and leaning on the elected civilian
government to blast at the EAOs has no bearings and moral weight, so to speak.
Finally, justifying the military's
offensives in the name of protecting the ethnic population is an undue credit
accumulation, as all know that how much human rights violations have the
military committed on the population during these years of war in ethnic
states. One only needs to go through tons of documentation compiled by the UN
and reputable rights organizations. Besides, even a child knows that opening
war front on the EAOs is not conducive to the peace process and trust-building
and could even be seen as sabotaging the deliberation that otherwise might lead
to peace.
As for KNU leader Mutu Say Poe, it
has made a plea that the military allowed all-inclusive participation of all
EAOs and to stop the military offensives nationwide. But whether his plea would
be heard and implemented is totally another question.
The UNFC has not budged from its
demand for either unilateral or bilateral ceasefire to be in place first,
coupled with an eight point proposal to amend the NCA, if it were to sign it,
according to the government and military wishes. But it has made clear that
military pressure on the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), with the extension of
all the UNFC members, would be counter-productive as a means of pressure to
sign the NCA and would be met with only stiff resistance.
In sum, the government and the
military positions in Kachin, Shan and Karen States seem to differ, as the
military is bent on “negotiated surrender” stance, while the NLD is for
all-inclusiveness and negotiated settlement. And this seemingly uncoordinated
strategy is not leading the country to peaceful settlement and successful
political outcome.
Still no one is quite sure whether
the NLD government and the military are doing things in cooperation or the
government just being dragged into a mum or tight-lipped situation and has to
act as if it is agreeing to what the military has been doing in ethnic states,
with the exception of the Arakan State on Rohingya issue.
Regarding the Rohingya rebellion
situation, the military and the government seems to be on the same page so far.
The violent protest, with no
doubt, stems from the building up of the
tension all through theses years that has finally exploded. The 1982 citizenship law of General Ne Win
era, that have stripped all the Rohingya of their citizenship and eventually
lumped all the Muslims with origin from Bangladesh into an illegal immigrant
category, might be the main culprit.
While Islamophobia and xenophobia
definitely might be playing important roles in this racial and ethnic conflict,
it is simply not correct not to differentiate those who are entitled to be
citizens and those who enter the country illegally, after the independence from
the British in 1948.
The angst of over foreignization or
xenophobia is understandable, especially for the Arakanese. But lumping the
whole ethnic group, legal and illegal, into inhumane treatment of illegality
might not also be correct and could even become an act of racial
discrimination, leading to racism.
As such a new set of conceptual
thinking which could accommodate the liberal democratic principles and
preserving the ethnic identity of the indigenous Arakanese must be found. All
know that assuming the policy line of Ne Win's side-lining and oppression would
only breed animosity and rebellion, as is evident by the recent violent
outburst. It might even be considered as an
act of despair and disappointment.
In a concrete term, filtering out the
illegal immigrants with the cooperation of the neighboring country and
reinstating the citizenship rights of those who are entitled is the only way to
go. As to how this could be achieve would be entirely up to the government and
stakeholders concerned, including those at the receiving end, depending on
their creativity, degree of harmony aspirations of peaceful co-existence and
innovation.
To conclude, the unless the military
could make an about turn from its “negotiated surrender” stance and top-dog,
preconceived posture, the war with the EAOs won't end and the peace process
would remain a pipe-dream. The same goes for the resolution of Rohingya issue,
so long as only side-lining and oppression is used and not humane
accommodation.
Tags: Opinion
