RCSS General Yawd Serk Worries of More Conflict If Peace Talks Fail

Prospect of peace talks

What is your assessment about the recently concluded Nay Pyi Taw summit?

A: I think it was not very good. It didn’t look like a bilateral meeting, as the Commander-in-Chief went out of the meeting once he had finished delivering his speech. It was like commanding, “Do as I say.”

What did you discuss with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi during your separate meeting with her?

Actually, that meeting was meant for mutual friendship and trust-building only. We didn’t discuss political matter.

In the speech by the Commander-in-Chief, he warned that the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement must not be misused, and the RCSS has been expanding beyond its boundaries. What is your response to that?

I think it is irrelevant. The Shan Army has confined its activities to Shan State. We don’t go to the rest of Myanmar, to Karenni State or Kachin State. Since we signed the NCA, we agreed to remain active only in our areas.

The ultimate goal of the ethnic groups at the onset of the talks with the government on shaping the NCA was to build a federal union. The current direction of the peace talks seem more towards amending the constitution. Is that in line with your objectives?

The government has just opened the door to becoming a democratic country. The State Counsellor is a key figure in politics. She wants to reform the executive branch; she wants to amend the constitution as much as the ethnic people.

Unless the 2008 Constitution is amended, democracy in its full essence will not be attainable. Until now, the Tatmadaw still holds 20 percent of the seats in the parliament. The Tatmadaw is still involved in politics. That is why the State Counsellor cannot carry out all her plans.

The ethnic groups have been discussing making reforms to the country after amending the 2008 Constitution. If the Tatmadaw sticks to the one-sided adherence to the 2008 Constitution, there will be difficulties. There appears to be a question about whether the pursuit of peace by the Tatmadaw is real. It is questionable why they are discussing the sectors that were not mentioned in NCA.

Is there any possibility of a constitutional amendment via the NCA? Would it be a waste of time? What is the view of the RCSS?

For amending the laws in line with procedures, it must go to the parliament. We are not in the parliament. We are not involved in the legislative role. That is why the NCA-signatories, the government, the Tatmadaw and political parties will discuss it together outside parliament. Based on those discussions, parliament will have to approve it as a Union agreement. It is the peace-shaping role of the NCA as well as the route to amend the 2008 Constitution.

There is no progress in the current talks. When the Commander-in-Chief stated in his speech the task must be completed by 2020, I saw two points to discuss. It means if the talks are not progressing, the NCA might become void. We will no longer be able to walk the path of the NCA. Peace can’t be enforced. We might go back to our battlefront.

Non-secession clause

What is the issue with no secession?

Everyuthing needs to be united and implemented based on the NCA in shaping peace. In line with what is agreed in the NCA, a democratic federal union must be realised. “No secession” is neither included in the NCA nor compatible with federalism. Federalism is the principle of protection which ensures that no one is willing to secede. Non-secession need not be written on paper. It is related to administrative matters. If the executive branch is unjust, despite a non-secession rule, people will secede. When we arrived at the table as a group from Shan State, we didn’t come there for secession.

When we discuss the topic of secession, there emerges a question about whether we have been trying to secede. Actually, it cannot be decided by a single person. If we continue like that, it will affect the drafting of the federal union. If the Tatmadaw insists on discussing the topic of secession, it will be difficult to move forward.

Why is the non-secession issue so sensitive?

That phrase is related to politics and so is the history. According to the 1947 Constitution, which was based on the Panglong agreement, there was a right for Shan State to secede after 10 years. In today’s political situation, there is no initiative by us to re-discuss the 1947 Panglong. We are just discussing how to cooperate, to co-exist better. If we want to discuss non-secession, we need to go back to the agreements made in 1947. Then the political issues will become more complicated.

The non-secession issue need no longer be addressed. It depends on how much the ruler leads and governs the nation. If there is equality and justice, no one will secede, but if there is no justice, we will secede regardless of whether we sign 10 agreements not to secede.

Do you have ways to overcome the current dilemma?

Non-secession needs not to be an option to discuss. If they insist on discussing it, it will need public participation. Do we have the right to call a referendum? Are we allowed to? The RCSS alone cannot decide on the matter of non-secession.

On a single army

At the last summit, the ethnic groups agreed to Myanmar having a single army. Can you explain this?

The positions and views among armed ethnic groups are different. For Shan State, we had the Panglong agreement, but some did not take part in it. So, their situation is different. We were cohesive, but it was not ethnic-based.

Was the RCSS on the team that agreed to a single army?

What the participants from the NCA signatories agreed to was not that. It is true that there must be a single army from the point of view of universal trust and international practice. But we will have to continue our discussions on how to establish a federal union army.

Quoting the Commander-in-Chief on the single army issue, he didn’t seem to accept the calls by the ethnic groups for proportional representation of all national races and rotating the position of Commander-in-Chief. What will be the main point raised by the RCSS if this issue needs to be discussed at the peace talks? 

To change our nation to a democratic federal union, the Tatmadaw in the security sector needs to be changed too. The current Tatmadaw took power after a coup. It must be changed to a public-supported Tatmadaw as well as one that is under a popularly elected government. The armed ethnic groups are necessary to discuss how to ensure security for the states, how to protect the states.

DDR (Disarmament, Demobilisation, and Reintegration) matters cannot be decided unilaterally. It needs mutual discussion. In reintegration, which sectors will be reintegrated? How will ethnic people be positioned? We will have to discuss this. Reintegration doesn’t mean “surrender and just be subordinate to us”.

On the NCA

Do you have any regret signing the NCA?

We thank U Thein Sein’s government for paving the path to the peace process, and we are also proud of it. During the term of U Thein Sein, groups in peace talks were friendly and it was easy to discuss issues. It may be due to our own willingness to agree to a ceasefire. We also understand the NLD-led government. The Tatmadaw holds 20pc of the seats in parliament, so the NLD-led government cannot do well for the peace process.

Message to the people

What message would you like to convey to people on the peace talks and the situation in RCSS areas?

I have three messages to convey. All things happening in the country are related to the people and they all are subject to the people, so people need to study all the developments in the country, because if they live in fear, those who will be in trouble are the people themselves.

The second message is about the political situation. People need to study all political parties and organisations. There are a lot of parties now. Politicians are very good at talking but not at doing.

After studying which parties support and represent them, people will have to vote. If the people don’t value their votes, it will like selling oneself as a prostitute.

The third is that economic conditions in the country are very weak. Who caused this and let it happen? People need to understand. Our political leaders are not united and are on bad terms with each other. Thus, it is no help for the nation’s development.

The extent to which peace can be made also depends on the people. Without shaping the nation’s peace, the economic, social and administrative issues cannot be solved. Unless the leaders are wise and open-minded, they won’t be able to lead the nation, so I would urge the leaders to be open-minded.