PEACE PROCESS OUTLOOK IN 2017: Stakeholders' views don't look promising for the country
As 2017
begins, speculation and assessment on which way Burma's political wind might be
blowing becomes an important task to determine for stakeholders and
opinion-makers alike, in order to map out and adjust their political moves
accordingly to their advantage.
In trying to
determine it, let us look at the National League for Democracy (NLD) leader and
State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi's peace talk discussion with the youths,
President Htin Kyaw's independence day anniversary speech, Commander-in-Chief
Min Aung Hlaing's speech on the occasion of inferring honorary bravery titles
to some 15 soldiers and some ethnic leaders opinions concerning the ongoing peace
process, which have just recently taken place over the new year.
Aung San Suu
Kyi's peace talk discussion with the selected youths
Although
State Counsellor was not giving a new year speech, on 1 January, in Nay Pyi
Taw, she did held a peace talk discussion with eighteen selected youths from,
eleven states and regions, excluding the Karenni, Kachin and Chin, across the
country, where critical questions were posed by the youths.
During the peace talk discussion with the youths State Counsellor said that the need for peace has to be reiterated and repeated, as often as possible, so that those who intended not to hear or deaf would be alerted and awakened, or something to that affect.
Responding
to the discussion of a youth from southern Shan State, where he said that
without stopping the war there could be no peace, Suu Kyi said: “Say it (the
importance to achieve peace) repeatedly. Some are deaf, so they might hear it
only by repeatedly saying it.”
Earlier, the
Shan youth pointed out how racial hatred has been on the rise, due to the war
in ethnic areas by giving an example that even a child would show facial
expression of dislike when he or she hears someone speaking Bamar language.
She made it quite plain the need to have nationwide ceasefire in place if the country is to achieve peace through negotiation, when she stressed: “In order to hold 2nd Panglong Conference, there are many steps that have to be taken. Among these steps, nationwide ceasefire is one of them. We could only achieve genuine peace after the ceasefire. Peace cannot be realized by continuing to fight and shoot at each other. Genuine peace can only come through discussion.”
In her closing speech, Suu Kyi said that all should
ponder even though there have been common ideas and aspirations why peace is
still elusive.
“Is it because the urge for peace is still weak within
the groups of people that ought to be involved in achieving the peace or not?
If it is still weak, not only the youth (should be enthusiastic), all the
citizens should all help out together to strengthen it with support and voices.
(Making it known by demanding that) we want peace, we want unity,” she
pointedly urged.
She added: “The people should coordinate and voice
their concern that they want a smooth and civilized change for all to know.”
During
the talk, one of the participants, Nang Mwe Hseing, a 34‐year‐old delegate
representing Northern Shan State, raised the issue of ongoing civil war and
recent air-strikes conducted by the Military, also known as Burma Army or the
Tatmadaw. She said the Military should be under the control of the government
in order to achieve ceasefire and peace, according to the report in The
Irrawaddy.
Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi told the participants that amending the constitution and
implementing federalism were some of her NLD’s main electoral pledges and the
government was seeking an appropriate approach that would not harm the public. “Such an approach needs more time,”
she said.
President
Htin Kyaw's independence day speech
On 4 January,
the independence day, President Htin Kyaw made a four point pledge on how the
NLD planned to go about with the country's future. They are:
·
to build a genuine Union in future in
accordance with the mutual agreement of the 21st century Panglong Peace Conference
(21CPC);
·
to safeguard non-disintegration of
the union, non-disintegration of national unity, perpetuation of sovereignty
through efforts of all national people;
·
to strive for the emergence of
appropriate state constitution in accordance with norms of democracy to build a
federal democratic state;
·
to strive for the betterment of
economic development among regions and states equally in accordance with the
objectives of the State’s economic policy.
He also outlined in his speech the accepted notion that Burma has been
an empire or a country that since time immemorial ruled by the Bamar kings.
The speech said: “Myanmar is the motherland where our national brethren
live in unity in successive kingdoms of magnificence and grandeur for
millennia, occupying a proud position in the world.”
He buttressed his believe by saying: “Myanmar became a colony in the
late 19th century when the colonialism had a strong influence all over the
world. Throughout the colonial period when Myanmar lost its independence and
sovereignty, all the national people motivated by a strong genuine Union Spirit
and an intrepid National Spirit fought against the colonists and they had to
make best endeavour and take risk on the way to regain the independence.”
It is indeed a far cry from the non-Bamar ethnic nationalities' believe
and concept that the country is a new political entity forged by voluntary
participation of ethnic states – Federated Shan States, Karenni State, Kachin
and Chin Hills as it were than called - with Burma Proper or Ministerial Burma
– covering all the rest of ethnic areas, heartland Burma included - to form a
union, prior to the British granting of independence in 1947, through the
Panglong Agreement. Thus, Panglong Agreement is the genesis of the present day
Burma, so far as the ethnic nationalities are concerned.
The fact that the Karenni and Shan States have been granted a secession
rights clause, in the 1947 Union of Burma Constitution, is the case in point
that the ethnic states and Burma Proper were separate entities all along and
the on and off suzerainty arrangement between the Bama kings and the
ethnic enclaves were in no way a testimony that the ethnic areas belonged to
the Burmese empire as a compact nation-state, in the sense of modern day
politics.
Thus,
President Htin Kyaw's concept of the emergence of Burma or Myanmar today is
very different from those of the ethnic nationalities or ethnic states.
Honorary
prize given to 15 Tatmadaw soldiers by the President
According to The Global New Light of Myanmar of 5 January, President
Htin Kyaw made an address and presented titles for bravery at a ceremony held
in the Theater Room at the President’s Palace yesterday morning.
The President noted that the ceremony was held on Independence Day, a
way to further highlight the importance and reverence for those who have served
Myanmar or Burma with distinction.
“The present ceremony is a specific and extraordinary one, in which
persons who contributed their arduous effort and unchanging enthusiasm in
building up the nation and those who served the country bravely without having
any thought for their personal interests, will be presented with honorary
awards,” the President said on 4 January.
Afterwards, the President conferred the Thiha Thura title and Thura
bravery awards on 15 soldiers. Relatives of fallen soldiers received the
posthumous awards presented by the President.
The honorary titles were given to Tatmadaw soldiers that have fought
against the Ko Kang or Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) led by
Peng Jaisheng and ethnic armies that operate in northern Shan State and Kachin
State, involving the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), Ta'ang National Liberation
Army (TNLA) and Arakan Army (AA) also.
Commander-in-Chief of the Defence Services Senior General Min Aung
Hlaing and other union ministers, including President, two Vice-Presidents, two
House Speakers and Deputy Commander-in-Chief were present at the ceremony.
Critics have voiced their opinions on the first civilian government for
doling out such bravery honorary titles that it was quite inappropriate and
senseless to just praise the Tatmadaw, as it was a war between the citizens of
union or Burma Army against non-Bamar ethnic groups, which were killing each
other and nothing to be proud of.
President of the Generation Wave, Ko Moe Thway said that it was ugly
that the Tatmadaw soldiers be given honorary titles for attacking the union
citizens and killing each others, according to the BBC report of 4 January. He
added that the act of the government contributed only to the hopelessness of
achieving national reconciliation.
The Irrawaddy on 6 January report filed a report, which were pointed out
by analysts and an influential ethnic leader the inappropriateness of President
Htin Kyaw's actions.
“It seems that by giving an award for being a hero to someone who the
other side recognizes as the enemy, it could create bitterness. […] This is a
time to be sensitive,” said Aung Myo Min, human rights activist and director of
Equality Myanmar.
“It is not suitable to give award to the army for fighting with the
ethnic people while the government is engaging in the peace process with ethnic
armed forces,” said Maung Maung Soe, an ethnic affairs analyst.“This problem
will continue to exist unless the Constitution is amended,” he added, pointing
out that neither the President nor the Parliament had the power to stop the
Burma Army from fighting.
Vice chairman of the ethnic armed alliance the United Nationalities
Federal Council (UNFC) Nai Hong Sar said that he feared fighting would
intensify following the recognition given to the Tatmadaw.
“They intend to boost morale for their army,” he said, when asked about
the military awards presented by President U Htin Kyaw. “This will not lead us
to have peace—it will lead to more fighting. To us, it looks like they want to
create a bigger conflict. They came to fight our ethnic people; we were not the
people who made the problems.”
Min Aung
Hliang's harsh words
During the honorary bravery title inferring occasion
at President's Palace, Min Aung Hlaing accused the ethnic armies of being
narrow minded, radical and lawless organizations, infringing on national
sovereignty, besides not having interest to achieve peace.
He said that until today, some
narrow-minded leaders of the ethnic armies, instead of striving for peace to
achieve democracy, were ruining or destroying the people's lives, properties
and the country's economy using destructive schemes. Apart from this, they have
very weak inclination to achieve peace, thereby pushing the Military to resort
to use of armed confrontation, which is still continuing, as it has no other
choice left.
The talk of a justified war against
the ethnic armies was unmistakably in the air.
Ethnic response to 21st Century Panglong Conference (21CPC)
Three ethnic leaders opinions on the President's urging or soliciting to
go through the 21CPC were almost the same, although slightly different on the
approach.
Dr. Tu Ja of a former Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) leader and
now Chairman of the Kachin State Democracy Party said: “For the moment the
KIO/KIA could not sign the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) yet.
Deliberation to achieve genuine peace through Panglong Conference is good and I
also supported it. But the said Panglong Conference needs to be meaningfully
held. In order to do it, regional tranquillity is important. After that there
has to be ceasefire, with ethnic representatives, who ought to be involved,
participating altogether. If we are unable to build up these steps, we would be
holding the conference, but there won't be any real benefit.”
Khernsai Jaiyane, decades-long Shan resistance fighter turned peace
mediator and now Director of the Pyidaungsu Institute bemoaned: “We, as a
(supposed to be) free people are facing a condition that is worse than when we
were not free. If there is no peace what is the use of having freedom. Without
peace development is not doable. That's why peace is important. The important
thing for the time being is to achieve a nationwide ceasefire.”
Htun Zaw, Joint-Secretary of the United Nationalities Federal Council
(UNFC), an ethnic army alliance of seven, said that he understood President
Htin Kyaw's urging holding the 21CPC as a way to achieve peace, with our
cooperation, as the ethnic nationalities
have been denied the fruits of independence for 69 years.
He pointed out: “Our opinion is affirmative to the participation of 21st
Century Panglong Conference. But it will depend on if all-inclusiveness is
accepted by the government. If the government only based its way of finding
answer to national reconciliation solely on NCA, the possibility of achievement
would be quite minimum.”
Outlook for 2017
The dilemma with Suu Kyi is understandable as her intention from the
outset might have been on how to wrestle the real decision-making power from
the Military, having won the 2015 nationwide election on a landslide.
But on the other hand, she won't be able to do anything worthwhile without rewriting or change the military-drawn constitution, which again will angered the Tatmadaw and could even stage a military coup.
Her strategy for the moment seems to be not to ruffle the Tatmadaw's feathers while buying her time and considering on how to wrestle back the decision-making power for the civilian government.
And thus, she is facing the dilemma either to undertake nothing to anger the Tatmadaw and preserve the existing status quo, enjoying limited power without real decision-making power or do something, to wrestle her justified political decision-making rights, as winner of the 2015 election, back and risks a military coup, which would spell the end of her regime.
Of course,
another version of choice would be to yield or agree to be co-opted into the
Military bloc and cement the NLD-Military genuine coalition of two most
influential Bamar political and military groups, effectively living the ethnic
nationalities out in the cold.
As for
President Htin Kyaw, his adhering to the concept that the non-Bamar ethnic
areas has all been part and parcel of today's Burma since immemorial time,
which was ruled by various Bamar kings, starkly contrasted with the ethnic
nationalities' view that Burma is a newly constructed political entity, made
possible by virtue of voluntary participation of the ethnic states anchored in
the Panglong Agreement or treaty signed in 1947.
Besides, the
honorary titles given to the Tatmadaw's soldiers made it clear enough that he
considered the ethnic armies as destructive elements and enemy of the union,
except of course those signatory ethnic armies that might be ready to dance to
the government's tune or co-opted to participate according to its game plan. In
short, he left no doubt that his government is siding with the Tatmadaw and not
a mediator, that the ethnic have at least hope for, if not their political
alliance, as it used to be when the NLD was in the opposition and the Military
the government.
Commander-in-Chief
Min Aung Hlaing, apart from demanding the adherence of military-drawn
constitution without question, has time
and again made his position known that he considered the Tatmadaw to be the
sole protector of the country's sovereignty and has steadfastly only aiming at
achieving either a negotiated surrender kind of peace settlement or total
annihilation of the ethnic armies. And he seems to be making headway in trying
to co-opt the NLD regime to his way of thinking.
For the
ethnic armed groups, that have still to yield to the NLD-Military government's
pressure of accepting its game plan of not agreeing to the all-inclusiveness
participation, forcing them to sign the NCA without amendments and not agreeing
to the tripartite dialogue composition in peace negotiation process, would be
hard to swallow. And the likelihood would be the on and off NCA amendment
negotiation between the government's Peace Council (PC) and the UNFC would drag
on, as the fighting would also go on in Shan and Kachin States, according to
the desire of the Military.
As it is
now, like it or not the NLD, headed by its de-facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi, is
tilted towards the Tatmadaw ways of policy implementation, if Suu Kyi's
praising of the Tatmadaw regarding the November armed conflict in northern Shan
State of Muse Township, while blaming the Northern Alliance – Burma (NA-B) for
launching the counter-offensives, to take away the heat of military onslaught
on KIA in Kachin State, is to be taken as an indication.
The UNFC and
the government's PC negotiation to alter the NCA through the former's 8 point
proposal would likely go on, on and off, while the Tatmadaw's offensives in
Kachin and Shan States against NA-B would continue. Adding perhaps, a
government offer for the non-signatory EAOs to join the 21CPC or Union Peace
Conference (UPC) as observers to appease the foreign donors.
Already
there is a preposition to include the non-signatory ethnic armies in funding
management, which would be contributed for the peace process from the foreign
donors.
The 21CPC
would be carried out, possibly in February, and the state and region level
political dialogue in selected areas would be conducted, as pilot project, to
lend inputs from the basis for 21CPC.
Summing up,
the prospect of peace process or negotiation is far from rosy, if one looks at
the contemporary indications available on the ground. Only radical turn around
or change, from the present government-military self-prescribed game plan to
commonly-owned game plan, which emphasizes all-inclusivity, tripartite dialogue
composition – government-parliament-military; ethnic armed organizations; and
political parties - and previously agreed basic federal form of government –
meaning: not applying unitary or semblance of federal structure but not federal
in real essence - would usher the country into a new era of national
reconciliation in a true sense. Or else, we all will continue to be bogged down
with civil wars and hatred that won't do any good to the country and the people
inhabiting it.
Tags: Opinion
