NAMING PROBLEM: A bridge too far in Mon State?
With the United Nationalities Alliance (UNA)
taking up position on the naming of the bridge as “Bogyoke Aung San”, in Mon
State known as “Thanlwin” bridge, the controversial issue has taken an active
spin, which was followed by a massive protest on March 19 Sunday, to keep to the old name that is preferred by
the local people.
It all started out as the bridge’s proposed name became known when the Ministry of Construction
sent a letter to Aung Naing Oo, deputy speaker of the Mon State parliament,
announcing a celebratory opening ceremony for it on February 13, the 102nd
birthday of Gen Aung San. Locals were outraged by the decision and the opening
was canceled, according to the Irrawaddy report of March 15.
On March 2, some three thousand
Mon population, including the Mon State deputy parliament speaker protested against the naming of the
bridge, which was endorsed without the consent of the people.
On March 14, however, Speaker
Win Myint put it to a vote after 15 Hluttaw representatives spoke on the bridge
name, the motion to name it Bogyoke Aung San Bridge was approved with a
majority vote from NLD representatives. Accordingly, the proposal resulted in
217 lawmakers voting in favor, 43 against and 116 abstaining.
On March 18, the UNA, which
consists of a dozen ethnic political parties, issued a 5 point statement
underlining that the parliamentarians of
the ruling NLD party should not use their majority vote to override the desire
of the local Mon State population.
Furthermore, the statement warned that this act
of using majority vote could harm the life security of the ethnic peoples in
the future.
Sai Nyunt Lwin, general secretary of the Shan
Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD), whose party is also an UNA member
elaborated to the Radio Free Asia recently, regarding the statement: “In any
issues they [the National League for Democracy (NLD)] could decide according to
their desire, as they have the majority in lower, upper and union parliaments.
They should avoid taking measures that could hurt the minorities and pay
attention to the minorities' desire. And if issues would be decided neglecting
the minorities' concern, a lot of worries could arise. (For example), we won't
be able to do anything if they want to change the name of Taunggyi (the Shan
State capital)”.
On March 19 Sunday, over twenty thousand people,
involving Mon, Pa-O, Karen and locals, staged a demonstration in Mawlamyine,
also known as Moulmein, strand road
against the naming of the bridge as “Bogyoke Aung San”, chanting slogans that
they rejected the parliament endorsed name.
The combined demonstrator groups also issued a
statement to acknowledge the local people's desire; perpetuation of national
unity; national reconciliation; emergence of a genuine democratic country and
federal union that is anchored in the rights of self-determination.
Difficult choice of name?
According to Union Minister for
Ethnic Affairs Nai Thet Lwin: “Whoever you ask – local resident, monk, historian
or politician – you will get a different answer. There was a suggestion to name
it Thamein Bayan Bridge. Another person preferred the name Thanlwin Bridge,”
reported the Myanmar Times of March 17.
“If you ask a local from
Mawlamyine, they would reply “Mawlamyine Bridge” and if you ask a local from
Chaungzone, it would be “Chaungzone.” If you name it
Mawlamyine-Chaungzone-Thanlwin Bridge, that may satisfy residents on both
banks,” said the Ethnic Affairs Minister.
But March 14 report of the
Irrawaddy said that residents favored naming the bridge linking Moulmein and
Chaungzon townships “Yamanya”, meaning Mon State in Mon language, or “Salween
Bridge” or “Thanlwin Bridge”.
Whatever the case, one thing is
sure and that is the rejection of the parliament approved name that is given
after the independence struggle hero “Bogyoke Aung San Bridge”.
Minority right in jeopardy?
As it is, even though there is already an
endorsement by the parliament to go ahead, nothing has yet been decided.
But alarm bell has been rung, especially in the
ears of the ethnic population, that the NLD is ready to bully with its majority
votes to achieve its desire, whether such a generalization is logically valid
or not is, of course, debatable.
It is true that the country is still not a full
fledged federal union, but the NLD should make use of its majority vote
cautiously where the minorities are involved, so that minority rights could be
protected, has been the main concern of the ethnic states.
The argument goes that if such a small matter of
even naming the bridge could be bullied, how would it look like when hardball
political bargaining would come into play.
It should be noted that this episode is viewed by
the non-Bamar ethnic as the NLD catering to Bamar ethnocentrism, no different
from the successive military regimes, and is pushing the ethnic states'
population to accept assimilation and acculturation, at the expense of diluting
their own identity and culture.
In the same vein, in February, the locals in the
Kachin State capital Myitkyina and Mon State’s Mudon Township have raised
objections to planned statues of Burma’s independence hero Gen Aung San in the
two locations.
Construction has already begun on plinths for the
statues in the town centers of Myitkyina and Mudon but civil society groups
complained that they cannot accept the statues while there is ongoing conflict
in Kachin State and the federalism and equality pledged by Gen Aung San in the
Panglong Agreement of 1947 remains unfulfilled, according to the report of the
Irrawaddy on February 8.
Although polite arguments were being given, in
reality the non-Bamar ethnic nationalities consider all these moves to be a
camouflage assimilation or Burmanization scheme, which they must resist. But
this is not to say that they don't respect Aung San. They still consider him –
then in 1947 and also now - to be a great statesman and Bamar national leader,
whom they could trust and work together for ethnic harmony. But unfortunately
he was assassinated before the achievement of independence from the British, in
1947. Subsequently, all the promises made by him as a Bamar national leader
were watered down during the constitutional drafting, which has left the
non-Bamar ethnic nationalities at disadvantage, leading to the constitutional
crisis that isn't able to be resolved, up to these days.
For now, it seems the NLD is confronting in Mon
State “A bridge too far” - meaning: A
step or act that is regarded as being too drastic to take - sort of scenario,
which it has lightly thought out that it could be overcome easily.
Given such controversy and emotionally charged
atmosphere, the NLD and its boss State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi should be
cautioned and reminded that a withdrawal from such confrontation would be a
wiser way to go than pushing it stubbornly through, if the gradually depleting
trust of the ethnic nationalities is to be restored.
Tags: Opinion
