Who is navigating the peace process ship?
The
second round of the Union Peace Conference went ahead in the Burmese capital, Naypyidaw,
from May 24 to 29. During those six days of talks, stakeholders signed partial
agreements.
Host
of the conference, Burma’s State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, addressed
delegates at the closing ceremony, saying: “These agreements were not reached
without challenges. They came about after we were able to move beyond two
extremes: distraction and excitement.”
So,
how exciting was the peace conference? What benefits and positive signs
can the general public take from this round of negotiations? Shan Herald spoke
exclusively to Col. Sai Nguen, Secretary 3 of the Restoration Council of Shan
State (RCSS), who represented his organization at the peace summit, which has
been dubbed the 21st Century Panglong Conference, or 21CPC.
 |
| Photo SHAN- Col. Sai Nguen, Secretary 3 of the Restoration Council of Shan State/Shan State Army (RCSS/SSA) |
Question: A debate on
the principle that each state and region would accept that there is ‘no-secession
from the Union’ was the hottest point at the 21CPC. Would you explain how the
talks transpired?
Answer: ‘No part of territory
constituted in the Union such as Regions, States, Union Territories, and
Self-Administered Areas shall ever secede from the Union’ (2008: 10) – that is
one of the basic principles of the Union of Myanmar’s 2008 Constitution, and it
was arguably the most debated topic at 21CPC.
Many
ethnic people were curious and anxious about the outcome from the summit about
this very point. Some of the EPPs [ethnic political parties] and [ethnic armed
groups] argued that this clause is not required within the basic principles of
the Federal Union, while the military representatives disagreed, saying this
matter should be decided upon at the UPDJC [Union Peace Dialogue Joint Committee] Secretariat meeting. For this
reason, the conference was extended by a day, and the UPDJC Secretariat meeting
was called on May 28. At this meeting, the no-secession clause was the overwhelming
point of debate. One of the RCSS’s political allies suggested that this
controversial topic be dropped.
In
the end, we were unable to come to an agreement, and all five political
negotiating groups agreed to postpone the discussion to the forthcoming summit.
Q:
What do you personally think about the inclusion of a no-secession clause as a
basic principle of the constitution?
A: This has much more to do with how respectable a state we
are intent on building. No-secession as a basic principle is not compatible with
federalism. That clause is simply the voice and demand from four national-level
political dialogues convened in four different places, and its inclusion entirely
reflects the views of the Tatmadaw (Burmese government forces). In other
words, it is merely a reflection of the minority. We still don’t have a wide
spectrum of opinion, for example from those ethnic people who have not yet
convened political dialogue, and from those non NCA-signatory ethnic armed
organizations. We have not even held discussions between us—each of the
provisional groups. We must especially note that that there have been no solid
discussions or negotiations resulting in a common agreement among the EAOs and
EPPs at this point. For this reason, we request that the non-secession clause
is removed from the agenda.
Q:
When you dropped the
‘no-secession’ clause, the government representatives and the Tatmadaw reportedly insisted that the drafting of independent constitutions for states
and regions should also be postponed. Is that true?
A: Yes, that is correct. This is a kind of
‘trade-exchange’ peace process. The message from the government and the Burmese
military is that if you want self-determination and a state constitution, you
must accept the ‘no-secession’ clause.
Q: Do you think that
the Burmese government and Tatmadaw used give-and-take tactics to turn the
situation to their favor?
A: Yes, I do. They should not play
this kind of game. It goes against the state counsellor’s opening remarks at
the 21CPC. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi said: ‘We are navigating the nation towards the
future, and at every step we will consult with all parties. We will not use
force; we will not use ‘give-and-take’ tactics to advance our political terms.
We will discuss, negotiate, and consult with everyone transparently to find common
ground that we all can agree upon.’
In
trust-building, it is very important to be straight forward and commit to your words
and deeds. Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing said that they will always welcome the non
NCA-signatory groups with an open door and open arms. But honestly, I am worried
that if such unfair tactics are employed, the ‘door of peace’ will shut
permanently for those non-ceasefire groups.
Q: Prior to the 21CPC being scheduled on May 24-28, the RCSS sent out a
very clear message, saying that it is too early to sign any agreement resulting
from the summit. Nevertheless, on May 29, the additional day of the conference,
Padoh Kwe Htu Win, vice-president of the KNU [Karen National Union], signed a
document as a representative of an umbrella group of EAOs. The people of Shan
State are curious to know - what is the RCSS’s reaction to this?
A: We are responsible for the
drafting of the NCA that paved the way for this peace process. We do not want
to see the peace process collapse; all EAO stakeholders must help rescue it.
Q:
What issues can be rescued?
A: The general EAO opinion is that
some of the outcomes of this conference regarding federal principles are
incomplete. They merely represent a minority views. That is why we proposed that
the basic principles of federalism, debated and agreed at the 21CPC, should
only be included in a Union agreement, as a collection of opinion for the time-being,
but not as a signal of a final agreement.
On
the other hand, our negation counterparts will not accept our proposal, but
rather they insist that the NCA’s ‘pathway to peace’ is the only way; therefore
we are all obliged to affirm the agreements from this conference.
They
argue that the entire peace process cannot proceed if we don’t sign. ‘We don’t
mind if the peace process collapses,’ was one uncultured statement used during
the talks. At that point, we called for a break, then discussed among ourselves
[EAO representatives] as to what the next move should be. Although some of the
EAOs, including RCSS, did not agree with signing, we respect the majority
opinion and the Terms of Reference. That’s why we signed the documents – out of
necessity.
Nevertheless,
we agreed at the UPDJC Secretariat meeting that the basic principles of federalism
that are included in the Union-level agreement are only provisional, and will
be amendable as and when is deemed appropriate.
Q: What is your view of
the peace conference results?
A: Looking from an NCA perspective, we can certainly say
that there is some progress, some significant steps. The NCA Roadmap is now in
its fifth out of seven steps. However, from a realistic perspective, we must
say that there is no solid tangible outcome yet. Being the most sensitive
topic, the security sector has not yet been touched*; we haven’t even come to
the point yet as to what aspects of security can and should be prioritized for
discussion.
Q:
What is your overall comment about the peace conference?
A: At the negotiation table,
everyone should be equal and have the same status. I can say from my own observation
at this summit that this did not happen. We also need adequate time for
discussions. I think that – whether NCA-signatory or non -signatory, all EAOs should
take action collectively and be united.
There
is also a need to review the whole NCA Peace Process and Framework for
Political Dialogue [FPD]. Obviously, this conference did not follow the
procedure of the FPD accordingly. Recklessly obtaining individual opinions and
rushing to conclude the decision are among a few examples. According to the NCA
implementation procedure, there should be mechanisms properly built into the
process. It is also very important that the door of the peace process remains
open to those non NCA-signatories. Thank you.
*Stakeholders
at the Union Peace Conference discussed five major topics: politics, economics,
social issues, land and environment, and security. Reportedly, 37 of 41 points
from four of those sectors have been agreed, while the negotiation points on
the security sector are yet to be tabled.
By
Shan Herald Agency for News (SHAN)
Read More
Sao Shwe Thaike’s daughter demands return of Yawnghwe Palace
Burma’s Ministry of Hotels and
Tourism recently announced that it plans to turn the compound of Yawnghwe
Palace into a marketplace.
Located in Taunggyi District, close
to the popular resort of Inle Lake, Yawnghwe Palace, known locally as Yawnghwe Haw,
was the residence of Sao Shwe Thaike, an ethnic Shan prince who became the
first president of the Union of Burma in 1948 on the day that the country
gained independence from Britain. He was deposed and arrested when Gen. Ne Win
seized power in 1962, and he died in prison soon after.
Sao Haymar Htaike is a daughter of Sao Shwe Thaike.
She spoke to Shan Herald recently about her hopes of getting custody of
the palace back in her family’s hands, and her expectations for the newly
elected government led by the National League for Democracy (NLD).
Question: The government says it will
transform your family’s former residence, Yawnghwe Palace, into a marketplace.
What are your thoughts on this?
Answer:
This is simply not right. In Burma, there are so many heritage places, such as
Bagan. So why does the government want only Yawnghwe Palace to be converted
into a marketplace? I would speculate that they want to destroy our history.
They want to eliminate our valuable sites. In doing so, people in the future will
never know who built the palace. It will all gradually disappear. Who is
responsible if our history disappears? Because of the 21st Century
Panglong Conference, people are now talking about peace. But in fact, a peaceful
mind is what should be important to us. If we, the family, see our palace being
used as a market, how can we be at peace?
Q: Assuming that the government knows
that Yawnghwe Palace is a Shan State heritage site, but they insist on using
the compound as a marketplace, what would be your message to them?
A: I strong oppose
the plan. They say they wish to enhance our heritage and culture, but then why
would they create such a market in the palace grounds? Why don’t they do the
same at Bagan or Mandalay Palace? Why only on a Shan heritage site?
I am so worried about this. I am afraid the palace will
be erased just as Kengtung Palace was. Nowadays, the new generation knows nothing
about Kengtung Palace.
Q: Have you written to the government,
addressing the matter?
A: Yes, I have. On
July 28, I sent a letter to the Ministry of Hotels and Tourism. I stated that I
strong opposed their plans to create a market in the compound. I also sent letters
to the President’s Office, the State Counselor’s Office, the Ministry of Culture
and Religion, the Shan State government, the Shan State Ethnic Burman minister
and the Ethnic Intha minister.
Despite this, during a parliament session on
September 7, the minister of hotels and tourism stated that they would create a
marketplace. This means they disrespect my father’s family.
Q: If the government insists on pursuing
the project, what will you do?
A: This would not
be a rightful way of governance. Good governance must be based on listening to people’s
voices. I am a citizen of this country. They should discuss the issue with citizens.
But what they are doing is flexing their own muscles. This is not right. If
they insist on doing this, people will react against them in the next election.
Q: The minister of hotels and tourism
has said that they had a plan to discuss the issue with local people, and work
with experts in order to stay neutral. What are your thoughts on this?
A: Right now, I am
just an ordinary person, not a sao pha [feudal lord]. But nonetheless,
why did they not talk to us? This palace belonged to us. I lived there when I
was a child; therefore I am the rightful owner. They said they would ask for
local participation. But they didn’t even engage with the family.
The government tried to explain to the public that
they had a good relationship with the family of the sao pha, but that is
a lie. We totally disagree with them. Because of this, the issue has now grown
into a huge problem.
Actually, our country faces problems with building
peace and consolidating the NCA [Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement]. So why do
they insist on focusing on the Yawnghwe Palace? I really do not understand, and
I want to help solve the problem through peaceful means.
Q: As a member of a royal family, can
you explain to us your lifestyle and experiences during your time in the palace?
A: Yawnghwe Palace
was built during the time of my grandfather and father. We, the family, lived there
and we love it. In fact, I can say this about all the people of Yawnghwe town,
not just my family members. It is very important to all of us.
We had some lovely traditions at Yawnghwe Palace.
During my father’s reign, there was a dharma exam every month, and monks
from across Shan State were invited to come and stay as a place for relaxation.
At the time, the local residents would gather at the palace to offer food to
the monks. It was an enjoyable and remarkable occasion.
Another event was during Buddhist Lent [October or
November] when we held a ceremony at Inle Lake, and paid respects to the elderly.
This event was held both inside and outside the palace. However, all such activities
stopped after 1962.
I am now 72 years old. The only thing I can do to
keep our culture and tradition alive is by writing about it. I love the palace.
I have good memories there. So, now I am writing some history about the palace.
Q: You said that you sent letters to the
government. What is the current status?
A: In July 2013, the
central government put the palace under the control of the Shan State
government. Regarding the properties that were seized by the government, many
people demanded they be given back to the rightful owners. On July 23, 2013, my
mother Sao Mya Win, then aged 94, who was the wife of Sao Shwe Thaike, sent a
letter to President Thein Sein and the Shan State chief minister to request the
return of the palace. But she received no response. My mother passed away in
2014. In July 2015, I wrote to the Shan State government, and then again after
a new government was elected [in November 2015]. But still no response.
Q: So what do you expect from the
government now?
A: I expect that
the government will give the palace back to us.
Q: If you get the palace back, what will
you do with it?
A: We have studied
the details of the U Thant museum in Yangon [Rangoon]. But first, we will
discuss the matter with the Shan State government, the Culture and Tradition Department,
and with local people and monks.
The palace grounds cover about seven acres. We would
build a playground and a study center for youths. This center would be free of
charge.
Q: And if you cannot get it back, what
do you plan to do?
A: I will continue
campaigning and demanding until I get the palace back. And I will oppose any
project that eliminates our culture and traditions. I will protect our valuable
heritage. I will also start discussions with our Shan leaders.
Q: You and the minister of hotels and
tourism know each other, so why did he not talk with you about this matter?
A: I also want to
ask him about this. We have known each other about 14-15 years. I do not
understand why he is behaving like this. Even though we cannot meet in person,
he can talk to me by telephone. Neither has U Nay Myo, the representative of
Yawnghwe Township, spoken to me about it. What they are doing is disrespectful to
me.
Read More
Lt. Gen. Yawd Serk : If this conference is wrong, it will affect the future of the union
Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma’s State Counsellor and leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD), has pledged to hold a national conference later this year that would follow in the footsteps of the historic Panglong conference attended by her father General Aung San and representatives of Burma's ethnic groups.
The agreement reached at Panglong, stipulated a significant level of autonomy for Burma's ethnic groups in exchange for their decision to support Aung San's bid for independence from Britain. Aung San, was assassinated just months after the agreement was reached, his successor U Nu, did little to implement the agreement before he was overthrown by General Ne Win in 1962. The subsequent military regimes that ruled Burma also disregarded the commitments made by General Aung San at Panglong.
This week SHAN interviewed Lt. Gen. Yawd Serk, Chairman of the Restoration Council of Shan State/Shan State Army (RCSS/SSA), to discuss his thoughts on Aung San Suu Kyi's proposed summit, the ongoing situation in Shan State and his recent meeting with the Shan State Chief minister, Dr. Linn Htut.
Lt. Gen. Yawd Serk's organization the RCSS/SSA is one of eight ethnic armed groups that signed the nationwide ceasefire agreement (NCA) last year with the central government. While the RCSS/SSA has not clashed with government forces since signing the NCA, there have been repeated clashes over the past 6 months between the RCSS/SSA and the Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA). The TNLA is member of the United Nationalities Federate Council (UNFC), who unlike the RCSS/SSA did not sign the NCA.
Q: In your meeting with the Shan State Chief Minister, what did you discuss with him?
A: As he is the new Shan State Chief Minister, I met with him to build a good relationship. We also talked about how the RCSS/SSA can cooperate with the new government for Shan State's development and the betterment of the people.
Q: What are your thoughts on the 21st Century Panglong conference which is going to be led by Aung San Suu Kyi?
A: Regarding the 21st Century Panglong conference which Aung San Suu Kyi will lead, I do not know in detail how will this conference will be. However, what we have to know is that the Panglong conference has three main points; the commitment of Panglong, the Panglong Agreement and the spirit of Panglong. Regarding these three points, I have no idea which points she will work on and how she will deal with it.
Q: As an RCSS/SSA leader, what would you say about this 21st Century Panglong conference?
A: I hope that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will do her best for this Panglong conference. However, I am also worried that she might misunderstand and do it in a wrong way. If this conference is wrong, it will affect the future of the union. The result from the first Panglong Agreement is the ongoing civil war in the country. I don’t think anyone knows how this 21st Panglong convention will look like. I would like to say that before holding this conference every group should discuss how he/she wants the conference to be like. I’m afraid if we do not discuss clearly first, this will affect the conference.
Q: The RCSS has been said to be recruiting new soldiers in Nam Sarng Township, what would you say about this issue?
A: This news is wrong. We were accused by the government military [Tatmadaw] of recruiting villagers. If the media wanted to know you should go to villagers and ask them. The RCSS held its Shan State Resistance Day on May 21st at the Loi Tai leng headquarters so that these people could join the ceremony.
We have a policy that if anyone does not want to be a soldier, we won't force them.
Q: With the new government how will you work with them on the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA)?
A: The NCA was led by the previous government. But, for this new government we do not know how they will proceed. I can only wait and see.
Q: How will the problems between the RCSS and TNLA be solved?
A: The problems between us and the TNLA cannot be solved with armed fighting. The best way to solve the problems is for both sides to meet and discuss these problems. The United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC) formed a committee during Tingngan (water festival) for talking. However, after the water festival, the TNLA attacked us again. They intentionally created problems between the Shan and the Palaung people. In order to solve the problems we have avoided fighting with them. But, there were over 30 clashes with them and we lost eight soldiers and over 30 were injured. The loss is normal in conflict, but it affects the people. I felt depressed about this.
BY Staff / Shan Herald Agency for News (SHAN)
Read More
Shan State Chief Minister: I feel saddened that people are disappointed
Dr Linn Htut, the National
League for Democracy (NLD)'s pick as Chief Minister for Shan State says he is
saddened that some people are disappointed by his being made the head of Burma's
largest state.
 |
| Dr Linn Htut, the newly Shan State Chief Minister Photo by SHAN |
The 56-year-old Shan State
Hluttaw MP, who was elected from Lashio Township, originally hails from Yangon
region. He has been criticized as ill-suited to become Chief Minister by some
due to a perceived lack of ties to Shan State. He has lived in Lashio Township
since 1994 when he took up a position at Lashio hospital.
In an interview with SHAN, Dr
Linn Htut discussed his thoughts about the challenges that he will face during
his term as the head of Shan State.
Q: Why did the NLD appoint you as the Shan
State Chief Minister?
A: Frankly said, it’s because the NLD does not
have a person for this position. That’s the reason they chose me. I was chosen
for this post because of this. I was not a member of the NLD when they first
formed. I was just a civilian. But, I was a supporter of the NLD party. I
always supported the party in the past. Therefore the NLD asked me to compete
during the November election which I won in Lashio Township. I won the election
because I was lucky, not because I am an expert.
Q: You are not a resident of Shan State but now
you have become the Shan State Chief Minister, how do you feel about this?
A: Of course I know, I think people who accept
me for this position; they have their reason for that. But I know that for my
personality they don’t like me. I know that they don’t like me because I am a
Burmese person. However, I accept it. I understand how they feel. I feel
saddened that people are disappointed. Even though people are criticizing me, I
will have to ignore it because they are saying the truth. I’m not a Shan
person. I cannot say anything because I’m just a product that was produced by
the NLD.
Q: In your opinion, what is the biggest problem
in Shan State?
A: The biggest problem is the ethnic armed groups.
If we can solve this problem, we will be able to reach the door of peace. We
have to solve the problem by peaceful means not by fighting. This should be the
priority.
Q: What is your priority issue to solve when
you come into power?
A: Even when I hadn't been named chief
minister, I had already received requests from people who asked me to solve
problems relating to the peace process, land confiscation and so on. However, I
think that peace process will be my priority. Other problems such as the drug
issue, youth issues, human trafficking and unemployment issues as well as
environmental ones such as the water issue. Right now, we are facing a water
shortage issue. Therefore, we will focus on this problem. Then, we will find
the solution for education, health and economics.
Q: People are now worried about dam
construction on the Salween River, what are your thoughts on this issue?
A: Regarding this issue, we have to look at the
benefits of this project. If it has more benefits than the impact, it should be
carried on. If it still leaves our people in the dark but Thailand and China
have all the benefits, in that case, we will not do it. We have to listen to
the people’s voice.
Q: What would you say about the role of former
Shan State chief minister Sao Aung Myat?
A: I have nothing to say about this. We have to
understand that there were rules and regulations that controlled him. It was
military rule during his term as a Chief Minister. Therefore, he could do what
he was allowed to do. I don’t think it is his fault.
Q: As you are from the NLD, do you think the
NLD will have power over you?
A: Of course, they will have power over me.
But, it will not be the same [with military rule]. What I have to do is to
cooperate with the community. We will have to look out for the people's needs.
If concerns the international level, it has to be done at the central
committee. For me, I’m a country man I have never been abroad before.
Q: When the cabinet for the Shan State government is established,
who do think will be in the cabinet?
A: I wanted to have as many ethnic
representatives as possible. I will try to do something for that. However, it
has to be approved by the central committee. We requested that the Shan
Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD) take a position but we understand
that due to their policy they were not able to accept this.
Q: What message would you like to give to the
people of Shan State?
A: I understand that they are not happy. I also
feel the same. At this moment, it’s not a time to question why my mother was
married to a Burmese. However, please give me a chance. I will try to do my job
for a year or two. But, if people still want me to quit, I’m sure Aung San Su
Kyi will ask me to quit. I gave my promise that I will not steal anyone’s
property. I have never received a bribe from others and I will not do it.
Read More
Lt. Gen. Yawd Serk: We Have To Stand On Our Own Two Feet
Lieutenant General Yawd Serk,
chairman of the Restoration Council of Shan State/Shan State Army (RCSS/SSA),
is the leader of an organization that is one of the eight ethnic armed groups
that signed the nationwide ceasefire agreement (NCA) in October last year. In
late November 2015, the RCSS/SSA clashed with the Ta’ang National Liberation
Army (TNLA), a member of the United Nationalities Federate Council (UNFC).
Unlike the RCSS the TNLA did not sign the NCA.
In an interview conducted with Lt.
Gen. Yawd Serk in Shan on March 23, 2016, the veteran leader discussed his
opinion on the role of the new government led by Aung San Su Kyi’s National
League for Democracy (NLD), the party that won a landslide election victory
last November.
Q: What are your
thoughts on the newly elected government and the on-going conflict in Shan
State?
A: Even though this government was
elected by the people, there will be a lot of difficulties for them. This is
because Burma's military remains superior in the country. However, we have to
wait and see how much they can do. Now, the ethnic armed groups and the people
are waiting to see the policies of the new government under the leadership of
Aung San Su Kyi. We want to see how much power she will have over the military.
Q: Before the
election, Aung San Su Kyi was denied a chance to meet with Burma's military
leaders but after the election she met with them. With regards to their
meeting, will there be any benefits for ethnic groups?
A: I think there will be very
little benefits for ethnic people. Now the NLD and military became one group
with the president being from the NLD and Vice president from the military.
This shows unity amongst the groups. Even though U T Khun Myat [a Kachin ethnic
MP from Shan State’s Kutkai Township] was selected as one of the parliament
speakers, he is from a military-backed party.
Q: Aung San Su
Kyi once said that when she was released from house arrest that she would lead
a hold the 21st century Panglong Agreement. But when fighting
broke out between the Burmese military and the Kokang Myanmar National
Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), she said that the Burma military was right to
step in. What do you hope for the solution of the issues surrounding the ethnic
group?
A: We, the ethnic people, have to
rely only on ourselves. It’s very hard to ask for others to help us. We have to
stand on our own feet. Don’t wait for others to help, this should be our
priority. Should we also rely on Aung San Su Kyi? Yes, we should because her
party is serving as the country’s government. They have the responsibilities to
solve the ethnic problem.
The problems that have been occurring in our country are
not only about politics, but it’s about ethnic problems as well. Therefore, in
order to solve the political problem we have to solve ethnic problems. I was
once told that we have to build trust amongst us. When we trust each other we
can build unity and with unity we can build peace. Until now, ethnic problems
have not yet been solved.
Q: When we look
at the new cabinet of this government, will the ethnic problem be prioritized?
A: It’s not prioritized; it will be
put at a fourth or fifth level.
By: Shan Herald Agency for News (SHAN)
Read More
Without federalism, “democracy itself will discriminate against us”
The
Ethnic Nationalities Affairs Center (ENAC) was founded in 2013 to support
Burma’s political dialogue through the development of inclusive policy recommendations
created by both grassroots and elite stakeholders.
Ma
Htung, Program Manager at ENAC, spoke with SHAN about his organization’s
contributions to and views on the peace process, the Framework for Political
Dialogue and ENAC’s longterm vision for building a federal union.
 |
| Ma Htung works in ENAC’s Thailand office. (Photo: Simma Francis) |
Question: What is ENAC and what work does the organization do?
Answer: This organization is here to support the peace process, and the
final goal is to build a federal union. That is what we aim for. What we are
doing is making it all-inclusive, particularly the Framework for Political
Dialogue. We want the UNFC [United Nationalities Federal Council] to be
included in this framework. Currently, we are not able to make [the Framework]
inclusive for all groups. Eight groups have already signed the NCA [the
Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement], but the rest, the bigger groups, are still
left behind. Unless we can bring them into the Framework for Political Dialogue,
we cannot make genuine peace.
Q: SHAN has reported on criticisms that the Framework for Political
Dialogue is not as inclusive as some actors would like it to be. Can you
comment on this?
A: As far as I know, initially ENAC wanted a tripartite framework. One
part is government, another is political parties, and finally, EAOs [Ethnic
Armed Organizations]. But the government is talking about a political dialogue
which has seven parts—parliament, government, military, EAOs, political
parties, ethnic nationalities, and stakeholders. I am very concerned about
this. We cannot say this is inclusiveness. The military has 150 persons out of
700, and in the parliament, there could already be military people. In the
government, USDP [Union Solidarity and Development Party] is a political party
and part of the military, too. They are in alliance, even if we cannot say they
are one group. Out of seven parts, the military is dominating four parts. How
can we say that this framework can lead to a fair and just political
negotiation? That is what I see.
Unless the Framework for Political Dialogue
is fair, I don’t think it will lead to a genuine peace process. No group should
take a big share in the framework. The military wants to take a big share, but
they say they are taking an equal share. They should not stand separately from
the government. If they stand separately, it means they still want to dominate
other groups, even the government. This means that the military wants to get
legal legitimacy. That’s why they are participating as a separate actor. If
they reduce their power, [a genuine peace process] is really possible.
Q: Why do you think things have unfolded in this way?
A: The eight groups—we call it the Eight-C-A, instead of the NCA—these
eight groups are trying to legitimate their process, because they have already
signed [the NCA]. For both the eight groups and the government, they are trying
to manipulate this process by excluding other groups. They can amend [the
agreement] whenever it is necessary—they worded it like this—for the other
groups to join. They could make changes, if the non-signatories wanted to join.
Q: The non-signatories to the NCA will be able to participate in the
political dialogue as ‘observers.’ What does this mean to you?
A: If they decide to participate as observers…this means it will be
very formal, from a legal perspective. This is clear: You are participating. You are interested. Your aim is to join the
process, so it means you are supporting their process. If [the government]
wants these groups to participate, they should have started from the NCA. After
the signing of the NCA, these groups were no longer part of the process. They
were in the process until the NCA, but what stopped them was [a lack of] inclusiveness—their
only demand was to include all groups [in the agreement]. Why did the
government not want to accept all groups? This is nonsense, real nonsense.
Q: ENAC is working parallel to the ongoing peace process. What is ENAC
doing to influence or shift the process?
A: Currently, we have four centers [of focus]: policy development,
constitution and legal affairs, the peace process, and information and
publicity. We now have eight draft policies, through workshops. In the
workshops, we invited EAOs, civil society organizations [CSOs] and ethnic
political parties. We are developing our policies ‘bottom-up’, not ‘top-down.’
All of these policies are guidelines, guiding principles that lead to a federal
constitution. Later, these policies will affect the Framework for Political
Dialogue through the bargaining process between EAOs and the government. If
they agree on these [policies], they could be part of a federal constitution.
We believe that will be able to lead to a federal union.
Q: You mentioned “bottom-up” policy development. How are grassroots-level
organizations involved?
A: The next step of what we are going to do is to consult with EAOs. We
have already consulted with very top leaders and now we will consult with the
middle-level. The armed groups have been around for more than 50 years, so they
have several different departments—education department, land department. They
have been inserted inside of the system.
At the same time, we have policy on
education, health, natural resources, agriculture, all of those. So we are
going to consult to develop a common understanding with the EAOs… At the next
step, we will consult with the CSOs and proceed on that level as well. Before
these policies become part of the Framework for Political Dialogue, this
process will have already proceeded. It is not possible to consult with every
citizen, but what we aim for as much as possible is to consult with the CSOs to
represent the people.
Q: Has ENAC received any criticism for this approach?
A: As far as I know, we haven’t received any direct criticism. But for
sure, pro-government, pro-MPC [Myanmar Peace Center] groups will criticize us,
saying we should work together with them. From the eight ethnic armed groups,
some of them have some ideas that our organization should work not only with
non-signatories, but also signatory groups. I think we can work hand in hand.
But the problem is, how can we work together if our ideas and our concepts are
totally different? We can have different opinions, but we should have the same
aim.
Q: What would show you that you share the same aim? What would you be
looking for to build trust?
A: Without peace with the EAOs, there will never be any genuine peace.
Democracy, whatever you name it, is that the majority rules. In our country,
the Burmese population is the biggest. We, the ethnic nationalities, cannot
compete with them. If they just build democracy, it is not enough for us. We
will be discriminated against again, constitutionally and lawfully. Democracy
itself will discriminate against us. We are totally different from that trend.
We want not only democracy, we want federal
democracy. This means we will be fair stakeholders in the parliament, in the
government. The Burmese have two seats, and we have two seats; that’s what we
call federal democracy. If we just have democracy, ethnic nationalities will
never be able to come up to the top level.
Q: Why does the peace process need ENAC?
A: The process needs us because the way that we are working is based on
a federal union. Like for policy development, we do not leave out any groups.
We keep on inviting others to the [policy] workshops—signatories, non-signatories,
ethnic political parties, civil society organizations. We invite
representatives, two from each group. That’s what you can see from the way that
we are working.
By SIMMA FRANCIS / Shan Herald Agency for News
(S.H.A.N)
Read More
Sai Win Myint: “We started ESSDDP because the two Shan parties do not cooperate”
Sai
Win Myint is a member of the three-month-old Eastern Shan State Development
Democratic Party (ESSDDP) also known as the “Kongjai Party.” He was competing
for a People's Assembly (Pyithu
Hluttaw) seat in Mong La Township, or Special Region No. 4, an area controlled by
the Nationalities Democratic Alliance Army (NDAA). However, candidates’
ambitions were suppressed in early August, when it was announced that residents
of Mong La would not be able to vote in November’s election, due to “security
concerns” and missing voter lists.
 |
| sai win myint, a member of Eastern Shan State Development Democratic Party (ESSDDP) |
Before
joining ESSDDP, the 66-year-old politician served as a former Central Executive Committee member of the National League for Democracy (NLD), the
opposition party which won by a landslide in the Burmese general election of
1990, but whose victory was not recognized by the military.
In
a face-to-face interview with S.H.A.N, Sai Win Myint discussed his decision to
resign from the NLD, his views on the Shan parties and his reaction to the
cancelled election in his constituency.
Q: Since you held a high position in the NLD, what made you decide to
quit the party?
A:
It’s the right time for the Shan to be united. When I was in the NLD, it was
difficult to work for our people. I know well because I was in the party for 27
years. They have a good system and a good leader but not [a good] working team.
For example, there are twelve seats for Amyotha Hluttaw (House of
Nationalities) in Shan State so the [NLD] candidates should be ethnic people,
but not many ethnic representatives were selected.
Q: Why did you decide to join ESSDDP?
A:
It’s time for all the Shan to join hands together. If we are still separated,
it’s difficult to be in the Parliament. In eastern Shan State, there are three
Shan parties and the NLD. If I’m running for the NLD, then there will be four
Shan people competing against each other. As a result, we all will lose.
Q: There are three Shan parties now. Do you think that each party will
get only some of the votes and then all the Shan parties will lose to others?
A:
It might be the case for the whole of Shan State. But I don’t think it will
happen in eastern Shan State. We [ESSDDP] believe we can win. The reason I say
that is because the SNLD party has been set up for 27 years, but they cannot
get support from the people. The SNDP is also the same. What’s more, these two
parties have never asked for cooperation with us [ESSDDP’s members].
Q: You said that you want to help Shan people. Why didn’t you join one of
the two Shan parties, SNLD or SNDP? Why was a new party formed?
A:
The party is new, but the members are not. All of the members have been working
in politics for many years. When SNLD started in 1988, we were leading in this
area, but none of the eastern members were put into high positions at the headquarters.
My opinion is that if they really want to cooperate, all of the members from three
parts of Shan State should be included. The reason we set up a new party is not
to compete with our Shan parties. We started [ESSDDP] because the two Shan
parties do not cooperate. For us, we want all Shan to be united in all parts of
Shan State as well as Tai Leng. [Editor’s
note: Tai Leng refers to the ‘Red Shan,’ who largely live in Kachin State]
Q: How long will it take for the Shan to be united?
A:
I think it will take at least ten years, because many Shan people still do not
understand politics. Only the leaders do not unite.
Q: How is your party campaign going right now?
A:
The party has been set up for only about three months. In Kengtung, we have
reached about 60 percent [of the township]. We get a lot support from the
community because our party includes every nationality in eastern Shan State.
Q: You were selected as a candidate in Mongla, but the election there was
canceled. How do you feel about this?
A:
I don’t think it is the point whether the election is held or not. Even though
we are in the parliament, it’s meaningless to be an MP (member of Parliament) if
we cannot change the 2008 Constitution. It is very difficult to amend the Constitution,
because 25 percent of parliament seats are reserved for the Burmese military.
The key for change is the constitution. For us [ESSDDP], we will support any
group that wishes to change the constitution.
Q: What message do you want to give to
the new generation?
A:
The most important thing is that our new generation has to focus on education. I
encourage all youth to be united and work for our people, including all ethnic
groups in Shan State.
By SAI AW / Shan Herald Agency for News (S.H.A.N)
Read More
“I joined politics to amend the 2008 Constitution”: Nang Mya Oo, SNLD Candidate
Nang Mya Oo is one of 24 female candidates from
the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD), who will be competing for a
State Assembly seat in Taunggyi Township Constituency No. 1 in the November 8
general election.
In the interview, 46-year-old community
advocate-turned-politician Nang Mya Oo discusses the role of women in politics
and the challenges she faces as a female candidate.
Q:
What was your role in the community before you became a politician?
A: I joined the Shan Literature and Culture
Association in Taunggyi in 2005. During that time, I was responsible for youth
leaders. Later on, I was promoted to be the association secretary. At the same
time, I helped at the Namkhong Organization, a healthcare services group.
Q: When
did you become involved in politics?
A: The reason I became involved in politics
is that I have been working in the community for over 10 years. While I was
working, I questioned why other people gave our land to other people—I really
didn’t understand. Since then I tried to study this issue and found out that the
cause was the 2008 Constitution.
Another reason is that our leaders were put
in prison. Each of them was sentenced to over 90 years and together they were
sentenced to over 1000 years in prison. These reasons stuck in my heart. I
realized that working in the community alone could not change anything about the
2008 Constitution. So it was then that I began to understand that the only way
to make a change was to work in politics.
There was also no good education available
to us. The Burma military has their own hospital but not one for us. I felt
like there was no equality.
Q: if
you won the election what would be your priority?
A: If I won, I would be put at the Shan
State government level…But our priority is to amend the 2008 Constitution, we
will be working together from both houses (Upper House and Lower House).
There are also other issues that we will
have to deal with such as ongoing fighting and education development, and so
on. However, we cannot do anything without solving the 2008 Constitution issue.
We will keep fighting.
Q: There
are two main Shan parties. Why did you choose to join SNLD?
A: Actually I was one of the team members
helping SNDP (the Shan National Democratic Party) when it started. But, I was
not ready to join because I was a member of Shan Culture and Literature
Association. As a member, we had to think about our security because at that
time it was quite dangerous to participate in politics. Another thing was that
my children were very young back then. That’s why I did not join. Later on we
set up youth group called Shan Youth Organization. At the same time, SNLD
registered again and I decided it was the right time for me to join SNLD.
Q:
Why do you think SNLD is the right party for you?
A: I was ready when SNLD set up the office
in Taunggyi. At that time, Sao Khun Htun Oo was just released from prison. They
did not have enough members because Shan people had already joined the Union
Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) or the SNDP. Also, SNLD’s policy is
based on the Panglong Agreement. Thus, I decided to join SNLD.
Q:
Can you describe some of your experiences during the campaign?
A: Even though Taunggyi is the capital city
of Shan State, there are not many Shan people there. The largest group is
Burmese, the second group is Pa-O; Shan is the third group. When we went to the
community to collect data, we found out that the population of Shan people in
Taunggyi is very low. For example, in four villages in the west of Mai Daw we
did not see any Shan people. In other areas, like east of Mai Daw, the
villagers didn’t know anything about the election. They didn’t know where or
how to check whether they are eligible to vote. Some people did not even have
ID cards. Shan people who are living in Pa-O and Danu-controlled areas do not dare
to speak out about Shan and there are no Shan people serving high positions these
areas. I feel very sorry to see things like that. There are so many things that
we need to do.
Q: What
are the biggest needs in the communities?
A: What they want is no fighting, no
soldier recruitment, and no harassment from other ethnic groups. They also want
to have ID cards. Many of them do not have any sort of documentation. Many
people who worked in another country, like Thailand, are facing problems
returning because they do not have money or do not have the documents to travel
back. In many places, there is also no electricity and not enough water to grow
crops.
Q: What will you do for them?
A: I want to do many things for them but it
is impossible if the 2008 Constitution is not changed. First, the 2008 Constitution
has to be amended. If we win enough seats, it will allow us to be able to work
for them. But, I want to tell the public that the infrastructure development is
the responsibility of anyone in parliament. For me, I will provide them with
human rights and women’s rights because many people are fearful to speak out. For
example, they do not dare to speak to the leader of the village if their names
are not on the voting list.
Q: What
will you do if you win the election?
A: Our priority is to amend the 2008 Constitution.
If we win enough seats in the parliament we will try to hold a Panglong-style
meeting which will include every group in the country in order to bring peace
in the country. We will work with those who are in the parliament and outside
of the parliament to amend the Constitution.
Q: How
many parties are you competing against in your constituency?
A: There are eight parties including USDP,
NLD, SNPD, PNO, FUP, Danu, two individuals and SNLD.
Q: There
are not many Shan in Taunggyi. What challenges have you faced in preparing for
the election?
A: In the area where I’m competing, there
are seven Burmese government troops’ camps and ethnic armed groups which is
very difficult to deal with. I also have to compete in areas which are
populated with Burmese people, such as Nyaung Shwe and Aye Thar Yar Townships. This
is a very big challenge for me. Every time we give a speech, we have to speak
in Burmese or put Burmese language in our campaign leaflets.
Q: Which
challenge has been the biggest?
A: My biggest challenge is being a woman. I
understand that it’s hard for men to accept women as their leaders. Another
challenge is that many people go out to work in the daytime and we have to campaign
in the evening, but for a woman, it is not appropriate to go out at night.
Q: There
are very few women who are in leadership roles. What will you do in order to
get support from the public?
A: We have to try harder and we have to
show that we can also be in leading roles. However, this does not mean we push
the men away. We just need a chance to prove that we can do the job just as
well. We have to create a positive image of a woman leader. While we have other
responsibilities such as taking care of children, I believe women can also be
leaders. We want all men to understand and believe in us.
Q: What
words of encouragement would give to women wanting to get involved in politics?
A: Nowadays things are changing, including
in parliament where there should be at least 30 percent women participating. I
always say that even though our body is not free our brains can help thinking
[of ideas]; one of our hands is feeding our children but the other hand can help.
So, I urge all women to get involved.
Read More
