By Sai Wansai / Kachinland News (KLN) | January 7, 2017

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 belief 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’ belief 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 leaving 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.

This article originally appeared on Kachinland News (KLN) on January 7, 2017.

You may also like: