Still Distant Peace in Myanmar

Writing by Mhuu Thit

translated by , Sithu Aung

 

Photo - Myanmar State Counsellor Office

      

     Historical backgrounds are a critical component in discussing about Myanmar’s peace process and armed conflicts. Identities, cultures, territories, and levels of autonomy of each ethnic group together constitute as main factors of prolonged civil war. Even though ethnicities and dialects can be said to be addressed and identified by the colonialism, one cannot miss out the fact that particular languages, cultures and administrative systems of every ethnic group had existed long before than that.

  Another reason for the protracted peace-making process is the opposing notions on extended armed conflicts between the Burmese majority and ethnic minority groups.

 The military authorities’ excuse to every incident of armed conflicts with ethnic groups is that they are just in operations for the sake of non-disintegration of the union, the State’s security and territorial sovereignty. For ethnic groups, however, the conflicts are attempts towards their autonomy and self-determination. Battles and negations driven by self-interest may exist beyond these two ultimate aims but the quest for equality is still the major intention there.

  The catchphrase “Non-disintegration of the Union” has made some people worry about the risk of the country collapsing into small individual territories while some racistly claim it to be a responsibility of the Burmese ethnic group, who believe they have all the rights in administration of all ethnic territories over the country. Also, in reality, Burmese majority has everything in hand: from administration, legislation, and jurisdiction to resource exploitation, economic management, and the widespread usage of language and cultural celebrations. Phrases like “Non-disintegration of the Union” and “National Securities” are propagandistically used for the sake of Burmese chauvinism.

  Equality and the alleviation of Burmese racial discrimination are to be focused as essentials in tackling armed conflicts of Myanmar. Superficially, racism is often described to be not much strong in Myanmar, with incompatible evidences of movie stars and singers from various ethnic groups loved and welcomed by general public. Another example supporting that argument is that individuals of any ethnicity, through winning elections, can contribute in the nation’s legislation and administration processes.

  In fact, an ethnic minority actor winning an academy award or an ethnic minority singer gaining popularity are totally not the correct measures for equality in the nation. A true equality means creating a leveled development between the Burmese main land and the ethnic states, and giving autonomic and self-determinative rights to the ethnic groups. Constitution of Myanmar 2008 sketchily outlines a plan for equality among ethnic groups, which actually is obstructed by its structural details. It is stated in the constitution that ethnic groups can participate in the elections of state (regional) and union levels and can become part of the state’s legislation and administration. However, certain conditions like state parliaments having only limited legislative categories and no rights at all to appoint respective union ministers (as the right is of the president) and administration (the general administration department) being controlled by the Ministry of Home Affairs, show that the ethnic groups are still under the central government administration. The identification of constituencies in the 2008 constitution hinders the ethnic groups’ chance for forming a local governing body. Constituencies for the Pyithu Hluttaw are separated according to the townships, and among the total of 330 constituencies, only over 90 of them account for ethnic minority groups while over 230 constituencies are dominated by Burmese majority’s political parties. This shows that it is not quite possible for ethnic parties to form a strong, effective group in Pyithu Hluttaw, which is critical for presidential elections. In the meanwhile, the Amyotha Hluttaw allows each state or region to elect 12 representatives, but these seats are again shared between ethnic minorities of each state.

   It is not just that the 2008 constitution has a little room for the ethnics’ administration in the national level; these ethnic minorities do not have much autonomy either. The 2008 constitution officially grants the military positions in all three branches of administration, legislation and jurisdiction. Under the prolonged military regime in the past, equal rights of ethnic groups were lost due to the centralized administrations, and the exploitation of natural resources for the self-interests of the authorities. Armed conflicts caused by the absence of equality and autonomy, violations of human rights and losses of regional resources have lasted over 66 years. Conversely, such conflicts also give more reasons for the military’s presence in the political arena, as they are one of the main factors why the military should be in political decision makings.

  As long as the military has its role in politics, for the sake of national security and the non-disintegration of the union, amendment of the 2008 constitution would remain impossible, keeping the armed conflicts in continuation. This process as a whole is nothing but a vicious cycle.

  Some specialists suggest development is the main necessity in bringing an end to the armed conflicts and attaining national peace. However, in solving Myanmar’s armed conflicts, root causes to put into considerations are equality, self-determination, and respect for diverse identities and cultures. In the lack of these, discussions for peace cannot be effective at all.  To comprehend all these to an applicable level, knowing and accepting the truth is one of the necessities.

  To conduct a truly operative conversation toward peace, the essential requirements are:

1)      To accept the truth

2)      To alleviate racial discriminations

3)      To amend or reject the 2008 constitution

4)      To pace for national reconciliation in terms of the truth

1) To accept the truth

   Accepting the truth here means accepting the historical reality, and looking beyond the propagandistically-made history spread though educational texts and among the society to recognize the actual history, which does not fail to highlight the ethnic groups and their own cultural backgrounds, languages and own administrative systems. Accepting the truth also applies to a higher extent of understanding; knowing deciding whether to separate their region from the union or not is a right of respective ethnic groups.

2) To alleviate racial discriminations

     It means to deny the chauvinism supporting the idea that Burmese people have the rights to administer ethnics and their regions as it has been for several previous years. Discrimination in terms of religion, culture and language must be abolished. Portraying ethnic armed groups as terrorists and Burmese as hero warriors in movies and other media should not be allowed any more.

3) To amend or reject the 2008 constitution

  After comprehending the root causes of armed conflicts and rights of ethnics, amending or rejecting the 2008 constitution, which severely affects these two, is a necessary mission. All conducted discussions towards peace have not yet included any points about amending the 2008 constitution in their agendas. Without constitutional amendment, trust-building between the opposing armed groups is unimaginable as there is no guarantee for equality. Cease-fire agreements and actions for peace without a slight consideration about the 2008 constitution could be nothing but groundless bargains for self-interests of both parties.

4) To pace for national reconciliation in terms of the truth

  Armed conflicts, with their adverse harms to ethnic people, have been taking place in ethnic areas, keeping them prone to human rights violations, incidents of armed violence and war crimes. This bitter truth must be revealed and made heard to the public, asking for the offenders' apologies.  Burmese political leaders, in fact, have no rights to justify the wrong-doers’ deeds by telling the ethnic victims to forgive and forget them for the sake of national reconciliation. Actually, by means of such justification attempts, they are committing another crime against the ethnic groups. It is unignorable that armed conflicts bring mutual hatred and destructions, which cannot be easily dissolved.

  Throughout previous Myanmar’s peace processes, there have often been costly peace talks, without effective dialogues on the root causes of armed conflicts. The four essential requirements stated in this article have not been discussed properly and practically yet. The very basic of peace process is a simple concept “Those who have taken away other people’s properties must return them, and those who did wicked actions must apologize,” and Myanmar’s peace will remain a distant ideal as long as this fact is neglected.

Mhuu Thit wrote “Still Distant Peace in Myanmar” by his own self in Myanmar language and described in the World Today in August, 2018.

Mhuu Thit is a political analyst and a journalist in Myanmar and has been working in the media field for nine years. He is currently working as an editor at the Standard Time Digital Media, Myanmar. He has written over 100 of political and human rights articles and features in printed Journals and Magazines such as the Street View Journal, Human Rights Journal, D wave Journal in Myanmar. He has already published three books in Myanmar language; one for political articles, one for satire and one for political fiction.