Broken Unity Leads To Continued Burma

Conflict
May 6th, 2011
By Banya Hongsar, Canberra-
Burma has been underdeveloped, disordered, and in decline for
over half of the century. A medium-sized nation in Southeast Asia, it
has faced the unrelenting dark side of social, political, and economic
problems under the rule of unqualified leaders from the ruling
military government for too long. A new national mode has been
sought by a broad coalition of activists, students, Buddhist monks,
and foreigners who desire to see a strong, prosperous, stable Burma.
A united spirit among every Burmese and non-Burmese should be
fostered at every opportunity to lay the foundations for peace,
development, and nation building by the country’s citizens in the
21stcentury. The challenge is enormous, the task is nearly
overwhelming, and the time is limited until the whole country could
fall apart with more bloodshed, war, and armed conflict.
Working for unity in the diversity of Burma is in the common
interest of modern Burma’s social and political activists. Despite
different interpretations of ‘unity in diversity’, the principle of unity
is nevertheless not diminished by ideological conflict. ‘Unity in
diversity’ means an egalitarian social, cultural, and political society
for the human welfare of individuals and beyond.
It is only a matter of time until Burma will either implode or be
enlightened in the 21st century. A broken Burma’s disunity will lead
to a fatally fractured Burma without social or political foundations,
while a united Burma will lead to a stable and prosperous nation in
the newly globalised world’s social and political environment.
Historically, mistrust between Burman and non-Burman peoples
has darkened the soul and attitude of our communities. The past of
invading Burmans and non-Burman victims will only be healed
under a guiding principle of human rights and equality under the
law. As a native citizen of Burma and an ethnic Mon from Mon
State, I seek unity instead of disunity, advocate for constitutional
rights instead of seeking power with violence, and work to build a
harmonious society with dignity instead of oppression among
citizens. War and violence is not the best or last choice in solving
social, political, and economic issues in modern times. The best
choice is consensus political settlement with an equal partnership in
national building. A newly-formed government has to be tested to
show a sense of compromise with opposition and ethnic armed
leaders. An acceptable political consensus should be reached under
the guiding principles of human rights and the rule of law.
“For the past 20 years, foreign interest in Burma, or Myanmar, has
been understandably concentrated on the problems of democracy
and human rights. Although this is of continuing concern, the
central, unresolved issue facing the state since independence in
1948 has been finding the solution to the problem of governance of
this profoundly multi-cultural society. Through several political
incarnations, each government—civilian and military, socialist and
capitalist—has designated the country as the “Union” of Burma or
Myanmar. Yet, the concept of union is fragile and often violently
contested,” asserted David Steinberg, a Distinguished Professor of
Asian Studies at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service,
in April of this year.
The newly-formed Burmese government must solve long-standing
predicaments on two political fronts. The first is urban-based
opposition organizations led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and the
latter is armed ethnic organizations based along Burma’s borders.
Elected members of parliament have repeatedly been calling for
‘dialogue and national reconciliation’ since 1990. Burma’s ‘fragile
concept of union’ should be discussed as a key agenda item in the
dialogue among political leaders from all political persuasions.
The newly-appointed government has a responsibility in the new
history of Burma before the nation is dragged further into poverty
and disunity. Burma must be able to stand on its own feet under the
threat of China’s aggressive regional strategies. It is a mistake for
Burma to rely on China’s mercy for its own political fate in the new
century of democracy and human rights because China itself
inconsistently upholds these principles.
It is a tragedy of Burman leadership that Burma has failed to
accommodate the spirit of unity in diversity with the principles laid
by General Aung San in 1947 prior to Burma’s independence from
Britain. It is again a tragedy that the nation could not install his sole
daughter, Aung San Suu Kyi, as a new leader in 1988 when the
revolution took place calling for a restoration of democracy in the
country. The broken unity of Burma itself is a key issue to be solved
with the guiding principles of fairness and equality. Longtime
Burma observer and writer Martin Smith asserts that ‘the peaceful
and lasting solution to the long-running ethnic conflicts in Burma
is, without doubt, one of the most integral challenges facing the
country today. Indeed, it cannot be separated from the greater
challenges of social, political, and economic reform in the country at
large’.
A desire for unity in diversity in Burma has been sought for over six
decades by both domestic and international political players.
Western scholars and policy makers have expressed sympathy for
the suffering of the people of Burma, and have advocated for
institutional changes for over half a century. Professor Josef
Silverstein, an academic from the United States of America and a
prominent Burma observer for several decades, asserted on the
issue of unity and federalism in Burma that ‘a new federal
constitution is a long way off; there is no sign that the military will
agree to one which it does not dictate, and there is no sign that the
NLD leaders and ethnic minorities will agree to a basic law which is
not federal and reflects their goals and aspirations. Thus, as the
days of 2002 pass, the struggle for a new constitution remains
deadlocked. The chief protagonists still are not talking, and the
world leaders still are unable to find a way to bring about real
change in Burma’.
Burma-born, USA-educated Aung Naing Oo also concluded in his
recent piece in Irrawaddy magazine, “True, forging unity has been,
and will continue to be, a difficult task. Without doubt, it will be a
continuing process as the interests of political stakeholders and
political paradigms shift. It will be even more difficult to build unity
across the political divide, particularly with the Burmese armed
forces”.
Searching for peace and unity in diversity in Burma is not only the
concern of western scholars and Burman leaders, but also from a
wider perspective has been the goal of ethnic leaders and scholars
for decades. “A long-lasting solution to Burma’s problems needs
sincerity, honesty, and the participation of all ethnic groups.
Different ethnic groups should be brought into confidence, and
their legitimate demands should be looked into. In sum, this
process of democratization must have an inclusive approach,” said
Nehginpao Kipgen, who is the General Secretary of the US-based
Kuki International Forum and a close watcher of Burma’s ethnic
conflicts in the modern era.
Burmese journalist Ko Htwe recently commented in his piece from
Irrawaddy News, ‘Despite leading to Burma’s independence in 1947,
ethnic groups represented at the Panglong conference complained
that the constitution it produced failed to guarantee equal rights,
autonomy, and self-determination, as agreed upon at the meeting. It
was one of the factors that led many ethnic groups to launch
military operations against the central government’. It is clear that
new and veteran social and political activists of Burma have been
calling for unity in diversity with a genuine purpose of nation
building. Modern Burma’s scholars since the 1988 uprising have
been confronting the misjudgment of the ruling elites locally,
nationally, and internationally. This is a sign of healthy debate on
the state of Burma’s unity in diversity.
Dr. Maung Zarni bluntly asserted in his recent article from
Irrawaddy News, ‘It is worth stressing that the ruling generals have
rejected the federal spirit of ethnic equality and violently opposed
any struggle towards a genuine federated Union. They have declared
dead the Panglong Agreement of 1947, the founding document of a
modern, post-colonial Burma, wherein ethnic equality was
enshrined as an inviolable pillar of multi-ethnic Burma. In Burma’s
new colonial rule under its own military, anything and anyone that
doesn’t bend to the generals’ will is to be controlled, subjugated or
crushed’. Dr. Zarni is research fellow on Burma at the London
School of Economics and Political Economics.
Martin Smith remarks in his recent paper ‘Ethnic Conflict and the
challenge of civil society in Burma’, “Certainly, no one is expecting
the next stages to be easy. Given Burma’s troubled past, failure can
never be ruled out, and, indeed, the real difficulties may have only
just begun. Nevertheless, there remains a belief that, if Burma’s
deep political problems are ever to be resolved, the establishment of
peace is a priority, and this must eventually spread to those areas
where fighting is still continuing so that the vexed issues of ethnic
minority rights are addressed in tandem with democracy and
greater national reform”.
A human rights-based approach underpins the best interest of each
individual, community, and country at large in searching for peace,
unity, prosperity, and democracy in Burma in the 21st
century. National unity is the most essential requirement for the
perpetuation of the sovereignty of the state, which includes a
plethora of people of different ethnicities.
Even Senior General Than Shwe, Commander-in-Chief of Defence
Services, at the Graduation Parade of the 11th Intake of the Defence
Services Medical Academy, stressed that ‘Today true patriotism
means not to harbor narrow-minded nationalism, but to have the
true patriotic spirit desirous of working together for the
perpetuation, progress, and prosperity of the Union. National unity
is the most essential requirement for the perpetuation of the
sovereignty of the state, which is presided over by over one hundred
national races. Although we have different faiths and traditions, all
the nationalities are the citizens of the Union of Myanmar with the
same characteristics such as kindness, helpfulness, patience,
bravery, and patriotism’. This statement is not tested in practice in
the country that locks up political activists, jails senior politicians
and ethnic leaders, bans freedom of the press, and intimidates the
aspiration of democracy and human rights activists in present days.
Searching for unity in diversity in Burma is a common interest of
social and political activists of Burma that aspire to freedom,
equality, and principles of human rights in the 21st century. A
broken unity will never lead to peace and stability that sustain social
and political welfare of the nation. U Thein Sein, Burma’s new
president, will be judged not by his words, but by his actions toward
unity in diversity and equality under the laws and rights of
individuals under the constitution. Time is history.
Short URL: http://monnews.org/?p=2631

Given URL is not allowed by the Application configuration.