Shan Herald Agency for News |
- State Counselor’s words: Lost in transmission?
- THINKING OUT OF THE BOX: The aftermath of Suu Kyi and UNFC meeting
- SNLD shocked by death of vice-chairman Sai Saw Aung
- Lashio protesters call for end to killings
| State Counselor’s words: Lost in transmission? Posted: 18 Jul 2016 07:26 AM PDT  The speech of the Buddha was without defect: 1. True, beneficial, and pleasing to others. This speech the Buddha used on many occasions. 2. True, beneficial, but not pleasing to others. This speech the Buddha used whenever it was necessary to correct those who were deviating from the path. "How good is his English?" "It varies. Depends on whether he wants misunderstandings or not" Venus with Pistol, Gavin Lyall( 1932-2003) . On 28 June 2016, State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi met leaders of the 8 signatory ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) in Naypyitaw. Bitter controversies have been aroused both among those who were there and those who were not, depending on how they interpret what she had said. I have gone through the transcript several times in order to make sense of her words, most of which were clear and left no room for second interpretation. But the rest, especially when she was speaking about Panglong and the right of secession, were spoken as though her proficiency in Burmese had suddenly taken a plunge and she was groping frantically for the right words. The following shoddily translated excerpts, I hope, may prove my points. Here are those that are deemed non-debatable, and indeed praiseworthy : · Worry comes from lack of faith. No worry is possible, if there is faith in success. · When we are not on good terms, there is no peace. Peace is the natural outcome, when we are on good terms. · Father said: if the ethnic peoples cannot be convinced in ten years not to want to secede, it's because the government's hopeless. (The right quote appears to be: If the ethnic peoples cannot be convinced in ten years not to want to secede, it's because we Burmans are hopeless.) · Federalism protects a country from separatism. It does not propel a country to separation. · When there is sufficient guarantee of citizen's rights, no one wants to secede. · Whosoever wants to forge peace must avoid words displeasing to others as best possible. · All have ownership to the Peace Conference, whether or not they have signed( the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement ) And here are those that have been drawing arguments. I have not tried to do a word- for- word translation, only to paraphrase them. I hope I'm forgiven for taking such liberty. · People ask what I mean by using the word "Panglong" for the Union Peace Conference? Does it mean it should be based on its original spirit, agreement and promises? What I would like to say is it's not going to be based on the Panglong Agreement, which was concluded in order to achieve independence. On the contrary, I believe it must be based on the spirit of Panglong, which upholds Unity in Diversity. · Secession was part of the promise given at Panglong, Some people are worried and have asked whether I would allow secession. My answer is when the decision is made to establish a union, it must be with the determination that we would make it an enduring one. Please take a look at world history. Some countries that are granted the right continue to hold on together, while others that are not given it are breaking away from each other. Summing up, it all rests on whether there is genuine unity or not. I hope I have not lost in translation the intended meaning of her words, unless she was deliberately trying to confuse us. Granted I haven't, the reader should now be able to make up her/his mind whether the peace process will go further under her leadership. At least that's what I hope. | ||
| THINKING OUT OF THE BOX: The aftermath of Suu Kyi and UNFC meeting Posted: 18 Jul 2016 06:12 AM PDT  In nearly 70 years of civil war and several peace talks have been conducted, two nationwide major negotiations during the rule of General Ne Win and a couple of on and off ceasefire arrangements with various ethnic armed groups. The latest ongoing one, initiated by the former president Thein Sein that started in 2011, is still being bogged down in talks about talks, without clear and radical concept on how to break out of the traditional way of doing things. Let us ponder on the point, if thinking out of the box will help us accelerate the peace process and enable us a break-through by using "lateral thinking" in solving the problems through an indirect and creative approach, rather than through reasoning that may not be obtainable by using only traditional step-by-step logic. In this respect, it would be helpful for us to start with what a well-known political commentator has to say. · NRPC Old wine in the new bottle? Dr Yan Myo Thein, a well-known political commentator made known his disappointment in the National Reconciliation and Peace Center (NRPC) formation, which in his opinion is populated with the people from the former president Thein Sein clique of Union Solidarity and Development Party's (USDP). He said the NRPC is made up of 6 members from the government, 2 from the parliament, 2 from the military (Tatmadaw), 1 from 21st Century Panglong Conference (21CPC) preparatory committee, with 11 members altogether. Of the 6 representatives from the government sector, 1 active-duty and 2 retired military officers are included. Further, from the 2 parliamentary representatives, 1 is from the National league for Democracy (NLD), while the other is from the ethnic party closed to the former ruling party, the USPD. As the NRPC has 3 Lt. Generals from the sum of 11, Thus the military is made up more than 25% of the organization. The ethnic participation could also be seen as ineffective, as the NRPC member Daw Shela Nan Tong (NLD) of Kachin State being a retired professor could be out of touch with the politics and peace process. U Khun Maung Thaung of Shan State, Pin Laung Township is also closely linked to the USDP. Apart from that the organization's think-tank is made up of old people from the Myanmar Peace Center, now defunct, such as Hla Maung Shwe and Min Zaw Oo, further reinforced by the retired General Aung Kyi, who had worked for the military and the former USDP regimes. As such, Yan Myo Thein stressed that new inputs and innovative new approaches won't come by and could be taken as still unforeseeable. He further added that the key for the formation of NRPC should be the achievement of federal democracy through innovative, new pattern based on all-inclusiveness of all Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs), equality and justification. Besides, the NLD should not forget that the people have given the party the mandate to lead, which is met with disappointment from many of the other policy implementations. However, even as pessimistic view of Yan Myo Thein could be seen as quite a logical assessment, the contemporary political landscape continues to change remarkably at a speed that could be said as "incredible". · Current development Following the meeting between the 8 EAOs that signed the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) and the state counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, a series of meeting between the NRPC and the non-signatory EAOs, the United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC), United Wa State Army (UWSA), National Democratic Alliance Army (NDAA) were followed, although the much talked about excluded 3 EAOs – Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), ta'ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) and Arakan Army (AA) – planned meeting could not still be materialized, reportedly due to the difficulties in choosing the meeting venue, according to the rebel and governmental sources. Nevertheless, after numerous interactions between the NRPC and UNFC in various locations like Chiang Mai and Rangoon, the much awaited face-to-face meeting between Suu Kyi and the UNFC finally happened on 17 July. On the government side, Suu Kyi was accompanied by Dr Tin Myo Win, Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Union Peace Conference — 21st Century Panglong, Union Minister for the State Counsellor's Office Kyaw Tint Swe and Moe Zaw Oo of the State Counsellor's Office, while the UNFC's delegation were represented by General N'Ban La of Kachin Independnece Organization (KIO), Naing Htaw Mon of New Mon State Party (NMSP), Able Tweed of Karenni People progressive Party (KNPP), Sao Hsur Hten of Shan State Progress Party (SSPP) and Khu Oo Reh, the leader of the UNFC's Delegation for Political negotiation and also Vice-Chairman of the KNPP. The one hour and forty-five minutes meeting was described as cordial, family-like and fruitful, even though core issues like all-inclusiveness and how the participation of UNFC in fine-tuning the Framework for Political Dialogue (FPD), 21CPC or Union Peace Conference (UPC) decision-making rights would be considered, if it were to refuse to sign the NCA. Suu Kyi has resolved that within her all-inclusiveness notion, all EAOs could participate on all levels of the peace process, even though it is not at all clear regarding the decision-making rights, as the NCA said that in order to have that voting right, individual members of EAOs must first sign the NCA. Suu Kyi has not taken position on this crucial point, but the NRPC functionaries on a lot of occasions have pointed out this necessity. The UNFC, following the meeting issued a statement the same day emphasizing the following: · Pragmatic and practical approaches to be all-inclusive, with follow up meetings · Urging the government to help end military offensives in the northern part of the country (Kachin and Shan States) · Hopes that the nationwide ceasefire declaration could be made together all at once · Acknowledges the state counsellor's reiterated commitment to federalism; peace and federal constitution to be materialized through the rule of law · To continue the materialization of the peace process through continued negotiations However, the seemingly easy to answer and resolve issues become hindrances as all parties are bogged down in preconceived ideas and dogmatism that are hard to bridge. · Different conceptualization Coming back to the notion of "thinking out of the box", the best place to start falls back, as time and again argued in many of my opinion pieces, on the conceptualization of the making or the emergence of the country, we now come to know as Burma or Myanmar. The reason we have to begin with this is due to the fact that "common national identity, sharing of political decision-making power or question of self-determination rights, sharing of natural resources, equality, democracy and human rights" among others, are all intertwined with the issues mentioned. And to have a grip on all these, thinking out of the box is the only way to do. From the outgoing point that we have never being able to agree upon the making of the country, which the Bamar political class, including the Tatmadaw, believed to belong to them since the immemorial reign of the Bamar ancient kings, the ethnic nationalities are convinced the newly formed political entity came into being only after the British left in 1948, through the Panglong Agreement, voluntarily signed by both the Bamar and 3 ethnic nationalities – the Chin, Kachin and Shan - in 1947. Now let us take the "common national identity" question, for instance, to ponder as to why it is still unresolved, after nearly seven decades of independence from the British. The short answer to it is that the nation-building has shattered and common national identity formation has never taken of the ground, due to the lack of political settlement, which has its roots in constitutional crisis. Inevitably, the debate on "secession" has also to do with the conceptual differences in the making of the country. · Is there a way out? Obviously there isn't much idea left to ponder on, given that the conflict has been raging for nearly 7 decades, with no tangibly solution in sight, constantly reinforced by dogmatism from both adversary camps. Such being the case, why don't we give a try by thinking aloud or out of the box? And where exactly should we start or what catchphrase should we make use of? The answer is to rethink our dogmatic views from a different light. For example let us examine the very concept regarding the emergence of the country, Burma or Myanmar. Can't we forget about the immemorial ownership of the country by the Bamar political class, while the non-Bamar ethnic nationalities could also take it that it is just a multi-ethnic state and they are being part of the union, without invoking their historical rights of secession anchored in Panglong Agreement of 1947? Suu Kyi during her meeting with the 8 signatory EAOs said regarding the secession and federalism issues that some federal system of governance have secession rights and some not. But there were secession in countries that didn't have secession rights included in their constitution, while there were countries with secession rights that didn't see secession being made use of. In other words, secession could be made use of even if an ethnic group signed to remain in a union a hundred times, depending on its population's desire and value, which could be constantly changing according to the space and time of the day. Thus, there is no point in arguing about it at the present. Why can't both parties agree on the shared-sovereignty and work out a common national identity that all could live with? Why can't we work out a trade off, by agreeing that the ethnic nationalities would abandon their rights of secession, while the Bamar would fully guarantee the equitable, genuine, federalism that it would also become a part on equal basis? Besides, the Bamar political class and the military don't need to be afraid that its supremacy over the other ethnic nationalities would be in jeopardy, if they are really for equitable, fair federal union set up that they have all along been saying to be their real commitment. If this kind of critical approach that leads to the out of the box thinking could be instilled, all the other seemingly hard to crack nuts like genuinely, implementable nationwide ceasefire; unilateral nationwide ceasefire of the government; a concerted bilateral ceasefire nationwide; levelling the political playing field; and all-inclusiveness issues could easily be overcome in no time. Of course, it needs tremendous courage, unyielding resistance to just adhering to the dogmatic, preconceived, traditional way of doing things and above all, the often repeated political will to tread the path of thinking out of the box, so that we all will be able to avoid this vicious circle and unending, fruitless negotiation process, as has been the order of the day for the last five years. | ||
| SNLD shocked by death of vice-chairman Sai Saw Aung Posted: 17 Jul 2016 11:59 PM PDT  SNLD spokesperson Sai Lek confirmed that Sai Saw Aung had passed away on the evening of July 16 due to a respiratory tract disease. "Sai Saw Aung used to suffer from respiratory problems," he lamented. "At about 6:30 p.m. on that day [Saturday] he was having breathing difficulties, but we thought that was just normal for him because he had been working the day before." Sai Saw Aung was born in Mongyang Township in Kachin State. He joined the SNLD, commonly referred to as the Tiger Head Party, soon after its founding in 1990. The party was one of the major winners in the parliamentary elections that year, the results of which were rejected by the then military government. Sai Saw Aung took over responsibility of the party for a period during 2005 while SNLD Chairman Khun Tun Oo and other leaders were imprisoned. As a firm ally and member of the United Nationalities Alliance, an umbrella group comprising 12 ethnic political parties, he played a key role and was renowned for working tirelessly for the group. SNLD General-secretary Sai Nyunt Lwin lamented the loss, and said that Sai Saw Aung had been an important person in the party. "He worked in an important position for our party," said Sai Nyunt Lwin. "Even though he was not imprisoned like some of us, while we were put in jail he worked hard for the party." Sai Saw Aung was among five SNLD leaders who did not run for a seat during the 2015 election. By Shan Herald Agency for News (SHAN) | ||
| Lashio protesters call for end to killings Posted: 17 Jul 2016 11:39 PM PDT More than a thousand local residents in northern Shan State's Lashio Township on Saturday staged a protest demanding an end to the arbitrary killing of civilians in the area.
"Innocent civilians have been killed arbitrarily, but no group is taking responsibility," he said. "The Tatmadaw and ethnic armed groups must work together through the peace process and show respect for human rights." Led by the Tai Youth Organization, Kachin Youth Organization, Ta'ang Women's Organization and Ta'ang Students and Youth Union, the demonstrators demanded justice for the recently murdered civilians in northern Shan State. Seven persons were shot dead, allegedly by Burmese government troops, in Mong Yaw sub-township in late June, while a man was murdered by an unknown group in Namkham Township last week. "Please stop killing innocent people," said protester Sai Tuen Thor. "These human rights abuses must end." Shan Herald reported on July 6 that civic groups had published a statement urging the National League for Democracy-led government to take the lead in investigating the Mong Yaw case and bring the culprits to justice. By: Shan Herald Agency for News (SHAN) |
| 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 | |
Aung Zaw: Welcome to Dateline Irrawaddy! This week, we will discuss positive and negative trends, and successes and failures, of the National League for Democracy (NLD) government, just over a hundred days since it took office. Ko Khine Win from the Sandhi Governance Institute and political columnist Ko Ye Naing Moe are joining me for the discussion. I'm Aung Zaw, the chief editor of The Irrawaddy.