No War, No Peace in Burma

(Response to Harn Yaunghwerns Can President Thein Sein be trusted?)

Kanbawza Win Harn Yaunghwe, the youngest son of the first President of the Union of Burma, Sao Shwe Thaike, the last Saopha of Yaunghwe 1 seems to hit the nail squarely on the head, when he vividly describe the contemporary history of the Union of Burma the raison d'tre of why the current problem existed. I have no axe to grind with him as he is one of my benefactors, the only aspect which I like to point out is that he is too far a gentleman to give the answers not that he is afraid that he may not be able to return to Burma, where he still holds a substantial amount of immovable assets and claims its place in the sun as a successful person working behind the scene to bring peace to the beseech country.

Lessons of Contemporary History

When Bogyoke Aung San and the whole ethnic architects of the making of the Union of Burma were assassinated on 19th July 19472 they took with them the real vision of the Federal Union of Burma. Five months earlier, to be exact on Feb. 12th when the Panglong Agreement was inked the Shan, Chin and Kachin want to speed up their own search for freedom together with the Myanmar brothers based on the principle of equality mutual trust and recognition3 and not to integrate their societies and their lands into the Myanmar Buddhist society or the Myanmar kingdom.4 Here the concept of coming together means coming in difference and not one being merge into another. The idea of Bogoke Aung San was to build a Union of Burma, an entirely new country through a state building and not to create a nation through nation-building. In the submission of the Union constitution to the AFPFL at Jubilee Hall on May 1947, Bogyoke Aung San himself has said, When we build our new Burma, shall we build it as a Union or a Unitary State? In my opinion it will not be feasible to set up a Unitary State. We must set up a Union with a properly regulated provision to set up the rights of the ethnic nationalities.5 But the Myanmar historians never pick up this phrase. Even the arch supporter of the Burmese Junta Dr Maung Maung points out that, The Union States should have their own separate constitutions, their own organ of states, viz parliament, government and Judiciary.6 On the eve on the historic Panglong Conference to be exact on 11th Frb.1947 Bogyoke Aung San said, The dream of a unified and free Burma has always haunted me. We who are gathered here tonight are engaged in the pursuit of the same dream. We have in Burma many
1

The Myanmarnize version of the Shan language is spell Saopha, Shan Chief as Sawbwa and Yaunghwe as Nyaungshwe in their attempt of Myanmarnization of the Non Myanmar (the ethnic nationalities of Burma . 2 For the first time since the military coup of 1962, the government of Burma, the government has publicly allowed the population of Burma to mark as a Martyr Day. See all the press reports both English and Burmese published inside the country. 3 So when we speak of the ethnic nationalities we say Shan, Chin, Kachin and not the Myanmarnize alphabetical order of Kachin, Ka Yin, Ka Yar, Myanmar, Mon, Shan and Rakhine, 4 David C William & Lian h Sakkhong; Designing Federal Union in Burma. p20 5 See Bogyoke Aung Sans speech pp 306-307 6 U Maung Maung Burmese National Minorities 1940-1989- p170

indigenous peoples, the Karen, the Kachin, the Shan, the Chin, the Myanmar and others. In other countries too there are many indigenous peoples, many races. Thus races do not have rigid boundaries. Religion is no barrier either for it is a matter of individual conscience...If we want the nation to prosper; we must pool our resources, manpower, wealth, skills and work together. If we are divided, the Karen, the Shan, the Kachin, the Chin, the Myanmar, the Mon and the Arakanese, each pulling in a different direction, the Union will be torn, and we will come to grief. Let us come and work together.7 This is the essence of coming together but as everybody knows it Bogyoke Aung San and his key leaders were assassinated by none other than a Myanmar, a Burmese political rival,8 and it was U Chan Htun the only proficient Myanmar whom the leaders had put their trust on him shows his Mahar Myamar (r[mjrefrm) chauvinist spirit by betraying Bogyoke Aung San and the ethnic nationalities of Burma by completely changing his vision made it a unitary state. U Nu betrayed Aung Sans vision and use religion as an integration process which gives rise to the resentment of the non Buddhist especially among the ethnic nationalities. This spoils the theory of unity in diversity itself.

Interpretation of the Contemporary History of Burma

The international community has been trying to understand or solving the Burmese ethnic crisis for more than half a century but little could they comprehend because their approach is entirely on a platform and construe Burma Buddhist kingdom as a monolithic whole, and accepted the Mahar Myanmar version that Burma Buddhist kingdom has existed since the dawn of authentic history in the days of Pagan dynasty, save the British colonial interlude of a century (1850-1948). Whereas the truth is that modern Burma was entirely a new creation where all the different nations of Shan, Chin, Kachin, comes to a consensus to live peacefully together in a federal set up as a test case for ten years after which they will can decide on their own.9 So currently there are two types of Myanmar, Democracy loving Pyidoungsu Myanmar (jynfaxmifpjk refrm) who really believes in the Union of Burma and those Mahar (chauvinist) Myanmar (r[mjrefrm ) who still believe and interpret history only from their narrow nationalistic Myanmar perspective. The latter are both hegemonic and myopically nationalistic believe that linear progression of Myanmar. These Mahar Myanmar imagine them, as a historically cohesive nation whose organizational integration with the ethnic nationalities in the peripheries only needs to be completed either democratically or by force. The Mahar Myanmar led Juntas better known by their acronym as the Revolutionary Council, BSPP (Burmese Socialist Programme Party) and later as SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council), change to SPDC, (State Peace and Development Council) and in 2010 became the quasi civilian government all harbours a Mahar Myanmar mentality somewhat akin to Adolf Hitlers Nazi theory of the superiority of the Aryan race.10
7

See the speeches of Aung San also reprinted in The New Panglong Initiative, Rebuilding the Union of Burma p 13 by Chao Tzang and LH Sakong 8 Harn Yaunghwe is absolutely when he describe that there was intense personal rivalry amongst the Myanmar leaders and instead of a national vision, they had illusions of personal grandeur. It can still be seen between the hard and the soft liners today. 9 This was vividly written in the first 1947 Constitution of the Union of Burma
10

Vividly written by Adollf Hitler in Mein Kamf, the Theory of Lebensraum and living space, is now interpreted by the Mahar Myanmar that it has a lineage since the establishment of the 1st dynasty of king Anuruddha (Anawrahta) in 1044 AD

It was this philosophy that compels to change the countrys name from the Union of Burma to Myanmar displaying their homogeny stance which becomes the fait accompli for the international community proving that dictators can change the fair name of the country without the peoples consent. It was also this philosophy of one religion, one race, and one country that started the ethnic cleansing for more than half a century currently with the Rohingyas and the latest is with the Muslim crisis in central Burma. Hence these Mahar Myanmar did not have an ounce of the Union Spirit (Pyidaungsu Seikdat) and is unable to accept any ethnic nationality as an equal. They construe that they are imbue with a special quality far superior than others and that they must always be leaders in every aspect of society. On the other hand the Pyidaungsu Myanmar are those genuine Myanmar especially from upper Burma known as Ah Nyar(tnm) of our beloved Bogyoke Aung Sans lineage that want to share equally their weal and woe with the ethnic nationalities. They are the real followers of Bogyoke Aung Sau and are desirous to build the country in a modern way, humane and want to take a place in the hall of civilized nations. Unlike the Mahar Myanmar they did not want to be a pariah nation or to be seen as uncivilized. Hence, to put it in a nutshell in the study of the Union of Burma, firstly it can be explained as the capture of the state by the majority Myanmar ethnic group as arising out of the impact of the introduction of the modern state system upon which the authority structure of the Myanmar society stands. This definitely, dispels and dislocated the elites and the masses of the existing system many of who belong to the ethnic nationalities. 11 Secondly the domination of the state by one ethnic group give rises to the Ethnocratic Tendencies in which the state acts as an agency for that community in promoting its ethnic values as the core component of the nationalist ideology. Thirdly, ethnic struggles are explainable as the reaction to this disruptive penetration of the peripheral communities by the weak ethnocratic state. This penetration provoked the collapse of the old authority structure existing before the 2nd World War in the British era and dislocated the old societal cohesion. It was replaced by the new emergent elites with new levels and forms. This is the apex of the Non Myanmar ethnic nationalities struggle against the Myanmar ethnic dominated state. So until and unless one could see it from a proper perspective to the Burmese problem there is little or no hope of understanding Burma. History has proven that the Myanmar ethnic race in spite of its long history and the exploits of the three warrior kings12 had never ruled the country as a united whole and as such could not be treated as a country or monolithic whole? On the other hand, some of the educated and well meaning Pyidoungsu Myanmar and all the non-Myanmar maintains that the Union of Burma is a newly developed territorial entity, founded by a treaty, the Panglong Accord, where independent territories merged together on equal basis to obtain independence from Britain and this is what Bogyoke Aung San, the architect of Modern Burma envisage. This Pyidaungsu Myanmar wants to instil the real Union Spirit which in Burmese calls it Seikdat ( jynfaxmifpkpdwf"gwf). Hence to understand the ethnic conflict, it is essential to look into the issues of conceptual differences, constitutional crisis, national identity, majority-minority configuration and other pressing issues like human rights violations, drugs and environmental management. Burmas fundamental problem is not just about leadership, policy failure, dysfunctional institutions, rights
11
12

For example displacing of all the ethnic commanders and replace with the Myanmar ethnic group The mammoth statues of the three warrior kings can be seen standing in Naypyidaw

abuses or fractured opposition movements. Categorically speaking, Burma is confronted with nothing less than a full-scale pathological process of internal colonization, this time by its own Tatmadaw. This is an evolutionary process which was set in motion since the coup of 1962 decisively established one-party military rule, where the Tatmadaw and the State cannot be separated. Indeed Burma has evolved into a dual-colony in which the population of more than 50 million citizens is being herded into a political space via the Orwellian Seven-steps road map for democracy. For those who have viewed the emerging parliamentary and formal political processes as the only space in which the peoples voices can be heard, policies debated and public welfare advanced, it is time for a serious rethinking and soul-searching. The generals, of course, dont see themselves as native colonialists. They feel no need for reconciliation along ethnic or political lines with any person, organization or community. They construe that they have done nothing wrong, and they can do no wrong. For they perceive themselves as the countrys sole national guardian, untainted by partisan politics. They will never ask for forgiveness and all the people whether in democracy movement or the ethnic nationalities will have to cooperate with them and are committed to the abstract idea of a multi-ethnic nation while trampling on the very idea in reality, an absolutist notion where sovereignty lies with the Tatmadaw, not the people. They love the country more than anyone else while the rest does not have a pale of patriotism especially those who refuse to go along with their design.

Lie-ing the Very Concept of Truth

History has proven that Myanmar is the only race that did not love the Union of Burma. First and foremost as said, all the architects of modern Burma including its leader Aung San were killed by a Myanmar. Then a Myanmar Thakin Soe led the Red flag Communist against the young republic and later a formidable Burma Communist Party led by another Myanmar Thakin Than Htun. When the MyanmarTatmadaw under the name of PVO (Peoples Volunteer Organization) mutinied it was the Karen that defended the Union and later the Chin, Kachin and the Shan joined in defending the Union proving beyond doubt that the ethnic nationalities loves the Union of Burma more than the Myanmar nationalists and the Myanmar Tatmadaw. So the clause that no one must leave the Union should be making binding to the Myanmar race only and not the Non-Myanmar. It is true that the ethnic nationalities takes up arms only when it is very clear that the Mahar Myanmar in lieu with Myanmar Tatmadaw is embarking on the ethnic cleansing policies of the 3 As (Annihilation, Absorption and Assimilation) was imposed. The Mahar Myanmar by their tricks, cunning and treachery have gained the upper hand over the Pyidoungsu Myanmar and continue to use its standard policy of Lie-ing the very concept of truth, This concept started since 1949 when at the height of Insein battle the Myanmar Generals under the pretext of peace parley arrested Saw Ba U Gyi and only when the latter trick him that he agree to their terms and would like to relay the message back to his comrades, was he released. What more prove is wanted when in 1990 Tatmadaw announced to the world that they will hand over power to the winning party was never honoured and if we were to cite examples of lie-ing by Mahar Myanmar in lieu with rk'drf; Mudane (rapist) Tatmadaw it will never end. During the 17 years the KIA had a ceasefire agreement with the government, there was never a political parley with the Kachin while vast tracts of forest land in the far north of the country were denuded, with the majority of the timber exported to neighboring China. Minerals were also extracted at rapid rates, and Kachin State saw an unprecedented influx of businessmen

from China as well as southern Myanmar. Evidently many KIA leaders were involved in those businesses. Only after hostilities resumed in June 2011 did the Kachin public rally behind the movement, as some of the old leaders were sidelined and a new generation of rebel leaders took over.13 So also with the Karen, after signing a ceasefire agreement with the government, KNU leaders were also awarded major business concessions. For example, top KNU officials have been given licenses to import cars from Thailand, and the sons of one KNU leader are reportedly running a human smuggling network and fake ID business. During recent talks in Naypyidaw between Thein Sein and the Shan leader, Yawd Serk, the leader of SSA (South), permission to establish rubber plantations in Thai border areas was a main topic of discussion, as was the possibility of mining concessions. The government is evidently using economic incentives to neutralize ethnic minority demands for political change, as it did with the KIA in the 1990s.14 The same pattern may soon be repeated in other ethnic areas now with UNFC. In fact the peace process is a protection racket for vested interests, financed by the international community. Even as I am writing now the Thein Sein Administration has refused, to let Tomas Ojea Quintana, the special UN rapporteur to go to Laiza and what more have not provided security in investigating the Muslim crisis in central Burma and discreetly encourage its thugs to demonstrate and threaten Quintana because they have to hide something in their endeavour to continue to lie the very concept of truth. The conclusion is that Thein Sein, a former general cannot be trusted as he is just a puppet with limited powers while the Tatmadaw is a state within a state and controlled by the hard liners in lieu with the USDA the butchers of Depaeyin, the ruling Tatmadaw backed party. Sao Harn has vividly describe as a hoax15 to wipe the ethnic out once and for all as what the Myanmar king U Aung Ze Ya has done to the Mons in the 1760s or what Rome has done to Carthage.

Divide and Rule Strategy.

The colonialist whether they are British or the Mahar Myanmar Generals always seems to use the same techniques and tactics of dividing the enemy and ruling them, what in Burmese we say(tdrf=uufcsif;tdk;rJokwfIcGwfcdkif;) smear a coke on one of the domestic cocks and let them fight. For the past half a century, the Myanmar Tatmadaw was able to use this technique of letting the Shan fight the WA, the Karen Buddhist against the KNU, Rakhine against the Rohingyas and now the Buddhist against the Muslims and so on. The ethnic nationalities see the writings on the wall and knew very well that if they dont stand together they will fall one by one, in Burmese we say if the bull dont stand together they will be taken one by one by the tiger (EGm;uGJvSsifusm;qGJrnf) and hence they come together under the umbrella of UNFC (United Nationalities Federal Council)16 and somewhat became united in their approach vis a vis the quasi military government. This action poses the greatest threat to the Mahar Myanmar and the Myanmar Tatmadaw.
13 14 15 16

Lintner: Bertil, Rain for Myanmar's peace parade Asia Times 25-6-2013 Ibid

Harn Yaunghwe; Can President Thein Sein be trusted? 16-8-2013

The amalgamation of the Northern alliance of Shan, Kachin and WA and the Southern alliance of Karen, Karenni, Mon and Arakandese

However, the Thein Sein Administration through its sham reformed policies has recruited many of the Diaspora Burmese intellectual dissidents who are of great use to them now as they have international experience and applied their theories. Of course many of them are apologists (the majority of them are former ABSDF leaders who had successfully reduced the 20,000 strong brave students army to 200) and had gone back because of nostalgia and the lure to secure a place in the sun, and many of them have become VIPS. One of them is Min Zaw Oo ( A doctorate in Conflict Resolution) lovingly called Min Min, who at one time came all the way from Singapore to battle the Tatmadaw, is now chairperson of the controversial Myanmar Peace Centre, sponsored by the regime. Together with Harn Yawnghwe, director of the Brussels-based Euro-Burma Office (EBO), they have set up a rival multi-ethnic Working Group for Ethnic Coordination (WGEC) in June, to coordinate negotiations with Naypyidaw.17 It members were chosen from ethnic nationalities, all from inside the country handpicked by the authorities to work as cronies under the directions of the government, a sort of a rival group of UNFC. The government's position has remained unyielding: it demands that the country's ethnic armies accept, at least in principle, the 2008 Nargis constitution, which paved the way for a general, but blatantly rigged, election in November 2010 . That constitution is not federal in character and gives far-reaching powers to the military, including the right to take over power if so requested by the president. During the talks with the ethnic resistance the government negotiators insisted that they must transform themselves into proper political parties, take part in elections and, if elected to the national assembly, then raise their grievances and suggestions for constitutional change through parliamentary processes. In an interview with the Washington Post on January 19, 2012, Thein Sein stated bluntly that the ceasefire procedure "requires the two sides to sign an agreement and [for ethnic armed groups to] return to the legal fold without carrying arms." But even if the ethnic rebels became parliamentarians and pressed to change the constitution, it would entail a complicated procedure where no substantial progress could be made without the consent of the powerful Tatmadaw. The first chapter of the new 2008 Nargis constitution states specifically that the "Defense Services" shall "be able to participate in the National political leadership role of the State". That provision allots 25% of the national parliament's seats for soldiers But the UNFC has consistently called for the 2008 Nagis constitution to be re-written outside of parliament and for the government to agree on a timeframe for political dialogue. But the government has demanded that ethnic groups make amendments within Burmas existing 2008 Nargis constitution, the so called legal framework, (meaning a prerequisite for the recognition of the constitution) that would require the support of 75 percent of the militarydominated legislature. It is our challenge, but we must struggle to change the 2008 constitution, the UNFCs technical team leader, Mahn Mahn, told DVB. If you go inside the parliament you cannot change or establish a new constitution. But Harn Yawnghwe, Director of the EBO, insists that ethnic groups have to take a more pragmatic approach. Everybody wants a federal union, but if you look at it realistically this government has a mandate only until 2015, he said. There is no way you can get agreement on a complete federal union before 2015, but there are steps you can begin to take in that direction.

17

Hindstrom; Hana, Federalism debate fractures Burmas armed ethnic groups 30-7-2013

You are negotiating with a government, which is in power because of this constitution.18 So theres no way of getting around accepting this government if you want to talk to them? 19 Khun Okkar, a spokes person for UNFC has confirmed that the Ethnic representatives are reportedly are very much concerned and worried that EBO is directly pressuring them by discreetly advising them to work within the governments framework to change the constitution, he said.20 It should be recalled that when Bogyoke Aung San went to London, he frankly said, My colleagues and I have come to London in response to the invitation of His Majesty Government in order to discuss the constitution question of Burma.... 21 he knew that the Constitution was wrong and he would not abide by it. Even in colonial Burma the opposition has the right to speak so why the UNFC shouldnt have the right to make its stance known? The the whole world know that it is a wrong constitution without the peoples participation followed by a sham election; hence the UNFC should not go into the legal fold to speak, but must stand as an equal to the Quasi military government. In fact while Thein Sein claims to be pursuing national reconciliation, his government's policies aim to divide the country into "135 national races". In Kachin State, where community leaders have for years made efforts to unite tribes and linguistic groups in the area, the government has divided them into nearly a dozen different groups, of which most are more accurately described as sub-tribes, clans and extended families.22 "This is pure divide-and-rule policy," said a community leader in Myitkyina. The same could be said about the Shan and others, which have been sub-divided into numerous smaller entities that cannot reasonably be classified as distinct ethnicities. While declaring peace and reconciliation, the government is simultaneously bolstering its Tatmadaw presence in the Kachin, Shan and Karen states After the Thein Sein administration came into being, according to those NGOs involved in distributing humanitarian aid to displaced persons in Burma and to refugees, at least 500,000 ethnic Karen, Karenni and Shan people are displaced in the jungle, having abandoned their homes due to attacks launched by government troops.23 Some 145,000 persons, mostly Karen villagers, are currently sheltering as refugees at camps along the Thai-Burmese border As said earlier Sao Harn, being one of my benefactors,24 I knew him well how he works as he is the one who indirectly stop the funding of AEIOU25 and am quite positive that he will implement the same idea to UNFC slowly smouldering to be replaced by WGEC.26 By studying
18

The Constitution is not a citizen document, rather it allows the military to continue to rule and financially benefit from more international investment. 19 Hindstrom; Hana, Federalism debate fractures Burmas armed ethnic groups 30-7-2013 20 Ibid 21 The recorded speech of Aung San from General Aung San Song (Re edited version) 22 Lintner: Bertil, Rain for Myanmar's peace parade Asia Times 25-6-2013
23

Yan Naing: Saw And Now the Ethnic Crisis Irrawaddy 20-10-2012

24

It was through his connections that I got able to work as a Senior Research Fellow at the European Institute of Asian Studies in Brussels 25 All Ethnic International Open University, the only Burmese university that works in conjunction with Chiang Mai University and in cooperation with Simon Fraser University of British Columbia 26 By using the MPC, media and other means, it is pressuring the Nippon Foundation to limit its humanitarian activities helping the ethnic nationalities under UNFC

his hypothesis he seems to draw the conclusion that might is right, and the ethnic nationalities are at the mercies of the Mahar Myanmar spearheaded by the Tatmadaw and that we should grab the chance while the olive branch is still waving. Or otherwise in another millennium we ethnic nationalities will be in the history books of vanishing tribes as the Pyu, Kanyan and Thet.27 Many thousands of ethnic nationalities have made a supreme sacrifices for the federal union including my childhood friend Sao Myi Myi Thaike on the very day the Tatmadaw took power on 2nd March 1962 and another friend who fights to his last breath Eugene Thaike, and of course Mahadevi who chose to die melancholy in an old age home far away from home. They had never kow tow to the superior enemy. So also will many of the patriotic ethnic leaders still fighting by various means. The ethnic nationalities of Burma never believe that power comes out of the barrel of the gun. They will all chose to be Spartacus of the Roman Empire and will die with their boots on instead on living on their knees. Everybody knows that Mahar Myanmar and Tatmadaw are the last persons to be trusted in the world and even though we could comprehend of the Myanmar Diaspora going back to Burma why a prominent ethnic nationality like Sao Harn has unwittingly become an axe handle of the Mahar Myanmar and the Tatmadaw by his appeasement theory? There will be continued skirmishes between the ethnic freedom fighters and the hated Tatmadaw, a no war and no peace condition. For UNFC and all ethnic nationalities, there is only one single way i.e. to join hands with the Pyidoungsu Myanmar led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, (the fathers daughter) U Win Tin of the NLD, the 8888 generations led by Paw Htun Oo (Min Ko Naing) and the likes and those from the Diaspora like be Dr Maung Zarni for they are not afraid to speak the truth and fights on until victory is won.28 All these people believe in the Truth and Truth shall make you free. In this aspect UNFC declaration might prove to be true when it says, Since its formation in 1997, the EBO and its craven followers have increasingly attempted, time and again, to highjack the freedom movement of the non-Myanmar nationalities of Burma, through liberal use of cash and brainwashing with the ideology of Appeasement and Development, that have caused confusion and weakening of unity within the movement.29 I strongly think that the ethnic nationalities of Burma will have to unite with the prodemocracy movement led by Pyidougsu Myanmar and fight the Mahar Myanmar spearheaded by the evil Tatmadaw and let us set up the Genuine Federal Union of Burma.

27 28 29

Pyu inscriptions can be still be seen in Myazeddi stone inscriptions in Pagan set up by king Kyanzitthas son

One wonders why Harn did not meet all these eminent people.
Riposte to Article in EBO Briefing Paper No. 8, dated August 2013 ,dated 15-8- 2013