For more than a month since the end or the 6^th Union Peacemaking Work Committee-Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team (UPWC-NCCT) negotiations, no new formal meeting has been called. According to the Myanmar Peace Center (MPC) that is currently visiting Chiangmai for an informal meeting with the NCCT, it will be coming only after 13 November, when the Asean Summit chaired by Naypyitaw drew to a close.

Looking through the 4^th draft that was produced by the UPWC-NCCT meeting, 22-26 September, one may be able to make an informed guess whether we may or may not see a Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) signed soon.

First, let us see what both sides have agreed so far:

§  The Three National Causes (Non-disintegration of the Union, Non-disintegration of the national sovereignty and Perpetuation of national sovereignty)  as proposed by the UPWC

§  The Spirit of Panglong (but not the Promises of Panglong) as proposed by the NCCT

§  Military preparations either for defense of the country or defense against external dangers should be discussed and implemented by both sides in ceasefire zones (Questions may arise as to the difference between “defense of the country” and “defense against external dangers” and whether there should be “non-ceasefire zones”)

§  Establishment of liasion offices in locations deemed necessary

§  Non-participation of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in the planned political dialogue, as proposed by the NCCT (They have other roles to play, according to the NCCT)

§  Violations of NCA will be resolved peacefully by parties concerned instead of by Union Peacemaking Central Committee (UPCC) as proposed by UPWC (UPCC, to all intents and purposes, is another name for the National Defense and Security Council, the most powerful organ in the whole Union)

N.B The NCCT had proposed a Joint Union Peace Dialogue Committee (JUPDC)

The following are points that need to be further discussed:

§  The UPWC says the present Tatmadaw (armed forces), being made up of multi-ethnic nationalities, is already a Union Armed Forces (or even a Federal Union Armed Forces though the military is against using the word “Federal”). Somehow this doesn’t sound right to the NCCT

§  The NCA must be signed by all acceptable Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) as proposed by the NCCT which the UPWC doesn’t agree

§  The formation of Joint Ceasefire Monitoring Committee at different levels and Joint Union Peace Dialogue Committee (The UPWC only agrees to have a Joint Ceasefire Monitoring Committee but still undecided about setting it up at different levels. It is also for the UPCC to oversee the whole peace process)

§  As mentioned earlier, the term “Ceasefire Zones” as proposed by the UPWC. The NCCT argues after the NCA is signed, all territories in the Union become ceasefire zones. “Does designation of specific ceasefire zones mean we will still fight outside them?” one NCCT member has remarked.  

§  The removal of the chapter dealing with Interim Arrangements and Code of Conduct by the UPWC which counter proposes that a new team be formed to negotiate them

§  The UPWC proposal that the EAOs don’t expand their forces and recruit new members (The NCCT has counter proposed that the EAOs will discuss and implement reduction of recruits instead)

§  On the NCCT side, it is considering UPWC proposal that there should be a joint management of local development, environmental conservation,  promotion of literary and cultural activities and peacekeeping  (Some NCCT members, notably the Shan State Progress Party, has proposed that local civilian representatives be included)

§  The NCCT proposal that apart from the UN Secretary General, representatives from other countries such as India, China, Japan, Asean, US and UK be witness signatories and that they are allowed to play significant roles such  as being observers to the Joint Ceasefire Monitoring Committee)

§  Further details on repositioning of troops

The two sides also need to discuss further on points that were agreed earlier but backed out from at the latest meeting:

§  That the NCA should be submitted to the Union Assembly instead of should be ratified by the Union Assembly (The MPC says “submitting the NCA” is a proper technical wording because the executive cannot give orders to the legislature. However since the government party has 53% of seats and the military 25% of seats in the Union Assembly, that should be no problem.)

§  Implementation of the DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization and Re-integration) before political dialogue begins instead of after political settlement has been reached as agreed earlier (The MPC says the UPWC has once again agreed to keep it as it was in the third NCA draft)

§  The President and the Commander-in-Chief will be witnesses at the NCA signing ceremony instead of being signatories as agreed earlier (The MPC says the change was prompted by the growing military distrust of the NCCT following the Congress of the United Nationalities Federal Council which announced its takeover of the negotiation team on 2 September)

The question now is: Do the people have any chance for peace in our time?