Shan Herald Agency for News |
| INTERVIEW WITH KHU OO REH, GENERAL SECRETARY OF UNFC Posted: 19 Jan 2015 03:22 AM PST NCA On Union Day Unlikely KNU USDP-Military Regime Relationship Not Benifitting UNFC Monday, 19 January 2015 Interview conducted at United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC) office, Chiangmai, Thailand, on 15 January 2015, from 09:30 to 11:00, with General Secretary of UNFC, Khu Oo Reh, on behalf of SHAN. Interviewed by Sai Wansai, regular contributor to the SHAN, Opinion Section. • Do you think Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) could be signed on the upcoming Union Day, according to the wish of President Thein Sein? It won't happen. But our members could change mindset and participate individually, due to differences of political views. "Bo Shu Khan" – grand military parade - invitation on Independence Day, by the President and the attendence of some Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs), including UNFC members, is an example. • What is the position of UNFC regarding 2008 Constitution? We don't accept it, as Khun Okker, a leading Nationwide Ceasefire Coordinating Team (NCCT) member and as well UNFC member, has repeatedly said. In retrospect, we also have not formed opinion on the 2015 election's outcome. • Has KNU officially resigned from the UNFC? No. Officially it has not resigned. Medias might report differently, but the official stand of the KNU is "temporary deactivation of the UNFC membership". • What is the position of the organization, regarding the extraction of natural resources? Thein Sein government has no legitimacy to claim sole ownership on that. Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) also are representatives and the owners of their respective homelands or states and have every right to the usage and extraction for the benefit of their people, including the protection of their peoples and territories from Burmese military occupation. • What would you say of a government minister recent posturing an accusation of sovereignty infringement, regarding timber extraction in Kachin State? The government has no such legitimacy to claim total sovereignty as have mentioned earlier. And thus have no right to posture as sole ownership of the natural resources and sole resources extraction rights over all union territories. • Taxation of EAOs have been tarnished by the government by calling it as protection money or "Set-je" in Burmese, what is your response to the accusation? It's not "Set je" or protection money but revolutionary tax to fight for the rights of our ethnic peoples. • Shared-sovereignty has been mentioned several times by Gen Gun Maw of Kachin Independence Organization/Army (KIO/KIA) and top UNFC leader, what do the organization mean by that? Sovereignty belongs to the people and the present regime can't be taken as coming from the people for the people. We are still in the process of a struggle to get back our fair share of sovereignty and the rights that come with it, as individual and collective ethnic groups residing within Burma. • Please clarify the UNFC position on 8 States-based and 14 States-Regions-based federal union? We are generally for the 8 State-based union, even though we are open for more new states creation according to the needs of the people. • Will UNFC accept if EAOs are given state police administration, when DDR is implemented? Security Sector Reform (SSR) should be worked out first, after which Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) would follow. For now, it's still early to say anything about accepting the state police administration offer. • Do you have grand strategy to cope with if the peace talks break down, altogether? So far, we have still not worked on the long and short terms strategies, but this will definitely come at the appropriate time. • Is there a State-based restructuring plan for the UNFC? We have fixed our eyes on the proposition for quite sometimes, but we have to treat cautiously, due to having members in UNFC from various sub-ethnic or minorities armed resistance groups, within each state. Shan state is a good example at that; for we have Palaung (Ta'ang), Pa-O and Kokang groups as members in the organization. Perhaps individual state should take time to work out a kind of united front to represent the state as one party for the state in question. • Is President really above Commander-in-Chief or it is just the opposite? I don't think the President has such an authority on Commander-in-Chief. It looks more like the other way round. At the recently held "Bo Shu Khan" or Independence Day military grand parade, on 4 January, Commander-in-Chief MinAung Hlaing and other top ranking, military top brass didn't even salute the President, according to Eleven Media Groups' report. Unlike the days of President Sao Shwe Thaike, President U Ba Oo and President Mahn Win Maung, when the Commander-in- Chief saluted the President with pomp and ceremony on such occasions. • Is KNU closeness to Burmese army and Thein Sein government useful for UNFC? I wonder, if this relation between KNU and Commander-in-Chief /President Thein Sein relationship is benifiting us in anyway. We were not shared any information, whatsoever, or have achieved any positive understanding with the quasi-civilian regime of Thein Sein, for the UNFC as a whole. # End # | ||
| Posted: 19 Jan 2015 03:13 AM PST One bad thing that has come out of Burma's reopening to the outside world, especially to the West, is that there is less and less trust between China and its former protégé, according to news coming from Naypyitaw.
"The government, particularly the military, hadn't been happy in the first place about China's apparently strong relationship with Wa and Mong La," said an informed source. "And now it's distrust has been reinforced by grave suspicions of its support to the Kachins and Kokang." All the 4 mentioned armed groups: Kachin Independence Organization/Kachin Independence Army (KIO/KIA), Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) better known as Kokang, United Wa State Party/United Wa State Army (UWSP/UWSA) and National Democratic Alliance Army (NDAA) better known as Mong La, are based along the Sino- Burmese border. "All four groups, especially Kokang, seem to Naypyitaw have become stronger militarily during the past 3 years," said another source. "Kokang led by Peng Jiasheng, for instance, was only a group in name after the Burma Army's attack and occupation (of his territory) in 2009. But now it appears to be no less than 1,000 strong. Many of its troops captured dead on the battlefield were found to be carrying Chinese documents." A Chinese scholar that visited Chiangmai last year has an explanation for this latest development in the Sino-Burmese relations, when he was asked why China had pressured the KIO/KIA to conclude a ceasefire with Rangoon (then Burma's capital) in 1994 but did nothing when the KIO/KIA refused to sign a new one with the Thein Sein government later. "The reason is obvious," he replied. "Before 2011, Burma had no close friends outside of China. It was in China's interests to pressure the Kachins then. But now things have changed. With Naypyitaw welcoming Western countries with open arms, Beijing is no longer sure about its trustworthiness. My conclusion is that unless there is some sort of cast-iron guarantee from the Burmese government, the present state of ambiguity will continue." The Burma Army, since 2011, has broken the ceasefire with the KIO/KIA in 1994, and has been fighting against it and its allies, Ta-ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) Shan State Progress Party/ Shan State Army (SSPP/SSA) as well as the MNDAA. With regards to the UWSP/UWSA and NDAA, so far there has been little or no fighting. But the two are reported to have been beefing up their defenses. The Wa in particular are also reported to have been supporting the KIA, TNLA,SSA and MNDAA with arms and ammo. "This, together with other factors, can affect the ongoing peace process," the source returning from Naypyitaw concluded. Burma and China are the two major signatories of the Bandung Conference's famous 5 principles of co- existence in 1955, 60 years ago, which are: 1. Mutual respect for each other's territonal integrity and sovereignty 2. Mutual non-aggression 3. Mutual non-interference in each other's internal affairs 4. Equality and cooperation for mutual benefit 5. Peaceful co-existence 'Paukphaw', an affectionate name for China by the Burmese, means 'sibling'. | ||
| Posted: 19 Jan 2015 12:05 AM PST Date: 19 January 2015 by Bangkok Post A couple of major developments have taken place against the backdrop of the battle against drugs. The two cases seem to illustrate the two extremes of this long fight. In Thailand, suit-clad officials from four countries agreed politely to set up an information-sharing headquarters. No one is in charge. The specific goals are not just unstated, but appear not to exist. In Indonesia, at the other end of the pendulum, prison authorities yesterday brought six convicted drug dealers — five of them foreigners — to the killing stakes for execution by firing squad. The Indonesia action drew predictable protests. In a span of more than 30 years, Southeast Asian countries have executed several hundred people convicted of serious drug offences. Only a tiny handful have been actual traffickers. Most of those hanged, shot or drugged have been "mules", the lowest ranking of all drug sellers. The stark truth is clear. Executing low-level drug smugglers and peddlers has not changed anything about the trade. It has not affected the manufacture of drugs, the amount peddled, the attempts to carry it across borders or, in the end, the wholesale or petty peddling of drugs on the streets. Signs at immigration points warning of the possible use of the death penalty for drug offences, and brochures handed out by airlines saying the same, probably have scared some would-be smugglers. But not all of them. The truth about the death penalty is that it still is threatened, still is sentenced by the courts and still is carried out — although not as often as in the past. Indonesia's decision last week to send five foreigners and a local to the executioner's stake is a sign of desperation. Unable to halt drug smuggling, unable to consider a new, better way to fight dangerous drugs, Indonesia merely vents its failure on mules and drug abusers. The latest faltering step is the four-nation committee, established in Chiang Mai last Thursday. Officials from Thailand, Myanmar, Laos and China call it — of course — a hub against drug trafficking. The target is supposed to be drugs smuggled along and across the Mekong River, which is a long way from Chiang Mai. There is no one in permanent charge of this Safe Mekong Coordination Centre. The head of the office will be different each year, rotated by nationality. And to get everything off to a rather unfortunate start, the Myanmar delegate Myint Thein was allowed to make an unchallenged statement that boiled down to blaming ethnic minorities and countries that produce precursor chemicals for the methamphetamine epidemic. Drug mules, drug peddlers and drug smugglers are violent criminals. They deserve strong punishment. But the government must know that locking them up is barely noticed by drug merchants. The real enemies of Thai society are inside protected areas of Myanmar. They also are inside our institutions, corrupting government and security forces while directing the smuggling and money laundering on which the drug trade depends. If governments continue to take the same actions against drug smugglers, including executions, there will be no progress in suppressing the trade. Similarly, if governments respond with more committees like the one formed last week — more "task forces" without strong leadership — there can be no progress in defending society against trafficking. By employing tired old tactics, government is actually throwing up its hands. Without a viable plan to catch and shut down big traffickers, this criminal enterprise will not be stopped. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Shan Herald Agency for News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.