TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

Sirs,
The LINKS below for 18 articles of THE IRRAWADDY ONLINE NEWS and 3 articles of the
MYANMAR TIMES deal with the ongoing PEACE-BUILDING PROCESS in Burma since a few
years ago. (These two Online News are among the most influential media organs in the country.)
So for those who may have to deal with Burma in one way or another, these articles could, I hope,
be very valuable in many ways. And the readers' comments in several articles in THE
IRRAWADDY could enable them to see some insights into the country's real situation from
different perspectives as well. (I myself have had made comments on a number of them.)
However, those comments can no more be seen since THE IRRAWADDY changed its Internet
portal on October 17, 2016. I have therefore combined these articles and comments into pdfs and
uploaded them on this SCRIBD website under the title of A COLLECTION OF 21 ARTICLES ON
BURMA'S ONGOING PEACE-BUILDING PROCESS. They altogether made up 88 pages and a
volume of 31MB.
https://de.scribd.com/document/330266406/A-COLLECTION-OF-21-ARTICLES-ON-BURMA-S-ONGOING-PEACE-BUILDING-PROCESS

Sincerely yours.
Thang Za Dal (Mr)
Monday, November 7, 2016
(Text on this page has been modified once again for more clarity. December 4, 2016.)
Note: I'm using these articles without having first secured the permission of The Irrawaddy Online News and the
Myanmar Times. I hope that they would not mind since I'm not using their materials for any commercial interest as I
do not earn even a single cent by putting them on this website. And I'm deeply thankful to them. The articles are
arranged chronologically so as to enable the readers to more easily follow the events and their consequences.

___________________________
1. Govt Concerned by New Hardline Ceasefire Negotiating Bloc
By LAWI WENG / THE IRRAWADDY| Monday, June 15, 2015 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/govt-concerned-by-new-hardline-ceasefire-negotiating-bloc.html

2. Where Next in Latest Ceasefire Deadlock?

By NYEIN NYEIN / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, June 24, 2015 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/news-analysis/where-next-in-latest-ceasefire-deadlock.html

3. Dealing with Defeat: Where it All Went Wrong for the USDP
by AUNG ZAW / THE IRRAWADDY | 27 Nov 2015
http://www.irrawaddy.com/election/opinion/dealing-with-defeat-where-it-all-went-wrong-for-the-usdp

4. Nationwide pact turns into disaster

By Fiona Macgregor, Friday, 19 February 2016 I Myanmar Times
http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/opinion/19086-nationwide-pact-turns-into-disaster.html

5. The Price of Peace

By SAW YAN NAING / THE IRRAWADDY| Thursday, March 17, 2016 |

http://www.irrawaddy.com/factiva/the-price-of-peace.html
6. Govt dissolves MPC, transfers assets
By Guy Dinmore | Friday, 25 March 2016I Myanmar Times
http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/yangon/19648-govt-dissolves-mpc-transfersassets.html

7. The price of peace: Western governments pledge millions

By Guy Dinmore - Monday, 28 March 2016I Myanmar Times
http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/19664-the-price-of-peace-western-governments-pledge-millions.html

8. Bertil Lintner: Its High Time the MPC Be Investigated for Corruption
By AUNG ZAW / THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, March 29, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/dateline-irrawaddy/bertil-lintner-its-high-time-the-mpc-be-investigated-for-corruption.html

9. Where Has Burmas Peace Money Gone?

By SAW YAN NAING / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, April 1, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/where-has-burmas-peace-money-gone.html

10. Embattled Ethnic Armed Groups Cast Doubt on Suu Kyis Peace Drive
By LAWI WENG / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, May 25, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/commentary/embattled-ethnic-armed-groups-cast-doubt-suu-kyis-peace-drive.html

11. Gen. Gun Maw: We Hope to Gain an Equal Status in the Political Dialogue
By NYEIN NYEIN / THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, June 7, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/kio-vice-chairman-gen-gun-maw-we-hope-to-gain-an-equal-status-in-the-political-dialogue.html

12. Aung Kyi to Head Govt-Linked Peace Think Tank

By KYAW KHA/ THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, July 15, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/photo-week-july-15-2016.html

13. Burmas Peace Process and the Swiss Bank Account

By THUTA / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, August 3, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/contributor/burmas-peace-process-and-the-swiss-bank-account.html

14. Who Is The Head Of The Country?

By LAWI WENG / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, August 12, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/who-is-the-head-of-the-country.html

15. Ye Htut: Policymakers Need to Be More in Touch With International Norms

By KYAW HSU MON / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, September 7, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/ye-htut-policymakers-need-to-be-more-in-touch-with-international-norms.html

16. Armed Forces Chief to Kofi Annan: Solutions Must Win Arakanese Approval
By KYAW PHYO THA / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, September 9, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/armed-forces-chief-to-kofi-annan-solutions-must-win-arakanese-approval.html

17. There is a New Cold War in Asia: Bertil Lintner

By THE IRRAWADDY| Monday, September 12, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/there-is-a-new-cold-war-in-asia-bertil-lintner.html#comment-998310

18. US Training of Burmas Military Could Help Democratization: David Steinberg

By THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, September 13, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/us-training-of-burmas-military-could-help-democratization-david-steinberg.html

19. Military Officials, Cronies Released from US Blacklist

By KYAW PHYO THA / THE IRRAWADDY| Saturday, October 8, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/military-officials-cronies-released-from-us-blacklist.html

20. Burmas Misguided Peace Process Needs a Fresh Start

By BERTIL LINTNER / THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, October 11, 2016 |
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/burmas-misguided-peace-process-needs-a-fresh-start.html

21. We have seen a certain degree of deadlock in the peace process.

By THE IRRAWADDYI 5 November 2016
http://www.irrawaddy.com/in-person/dateline-irrawaddy-we-have-seen-a-certain-degree-of-deadlock-in-the-peace-process.html

SUPPLY AND COMMAND is a report produced by the Shwe Gas Movement on the environmental and human rights
situation affected in Arakan and Chin States by the natural gas extraction in the Arakan coastal regions. And the other
paper is a 377-page excerpt of my own paper (685 pages) on the Chins. They are not integrated into the 21 articles.
SUPPLY AND COMMAND: Natural gas In western Burma set to entrench military rule
https://de.scribd.com/document/327864361/Supply-and-Command

The Chin/Zo People of Bangladesh, Burma and India: An Introduction (XIX)

https://de.scribd.com/document/18092021/The-Chin-Zo-People-of-Bangladesh-Burma-and-India-An-Introduction-XIX

Govt Concerned by New Hardline Ceasefire Negotiating Bloc

By LAWI WENG / THE IRRAWADDY| Monday, June 15, 2015 |
1

Dr. Laja of the Kachin Independence Organization, who will be the deputy leader of the new ethnic negotiating bloc.
(Photo: Hein Htet / The Irrawaddy)
RANGOON The Burmese governments hopes of finalizing a nationwide ceasefire agreement before this years
election appear to have shrunk considerably, after this months ethnic summit in Law Khee Lar voted to cede
negotiating power to a new hardline committee.
From the perspective of government peace negotiators, two problems have arisen from the Law Khee Lar summit,
which concluded at the beginning of last week. First, ethnic leaders have refused to endorse the draft ceasefire text,
demanding fresh negotiations over 15 amendments. Second, the new negotiating committee, which will assume the
responsibilities of the Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team (NCCT), is comprised of people likely to be much less
receptive to government overtures.
We prefer to deal with the NCCT instead of a new committee, said Hla Maung Shwe, a director of the Myanmar
Peace Center. The NCCT members have become friendly with us already. But now they have formed a new committee
and replaced the leaders. This could be a problem with our government as it will take time to build rapport, and the
people leading the new committee are hardliners.
The government has positioned the successful conclusion of a nationwide ceasefire agreement one of the most
important ambitions of President Thein Seins tenure, but ethnic armed groups remain aloof, cautious of committing
themselves to an accord that would impede their push for a federal reform of the Constitution.
Of course, the president wants to pass his exam, said NCCT chief Nai Hong Sar. He would be credited for being
able to bring a ceasefire agreement during his term. But for us, we are worried that we will be trapped by the
government after the agreement is signed.
The formation of a new negotiating coalition is indicative of majority opinion at the Law Khee Lar summit: ethnic
leaders believe that the government has not made enough concessions to warrant signing the ceasefire accord as it
stands. For that reason, the new committee will be headed by Naw Zipporah Sein, the vice-chair of the Karen National
Union (KNU), with Dr. Laja of the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) as her deputy. Both spent time on the
central executive committee of the United Nationalities Federal Council ethnic coalition, and both are representatives of
factions less amenable to compromises with the government within their respective organizations.

Ballots Before Pens, Rights Before Ballots

On the sidelines of the Law Khee Lar summit, ethnic leaders appeared to be rankled by what they saw as pressure from
the international community to sign an accord sooner. KNU member Naw May Oo Mutraw reportedly lashed out at UN
envoy Vijay Nambiar, claiming that the international community did not understand the reality of the situation faced by
ethnic armed groups in Burma.
Sources close to the organizations said that both the KIO and KNU, the political wings of the two most powerful ethnic
armed groups, had decided withhold any agreement to sign the nationwide ceasefire agreement until the general election
expected later this year is demonstrated to be free and fair, and would not yield to any international pressure to expedite
the process.
At the same time, the international community may prove to be a sticking point in future negotiations for very different
reasons. Ethnic leaders want international observers present to witness the signing of the nationwide ceasefire
agreement, while the government has rejected calls for their oversight, saying that a ceasefire accord is a purely
domestic affair. The issue came up during previous negotiations between the government and the NCCT, before it was
struck from the draft text of the ceasefire agreement unveiled on March 31.
Other exceptions to the draft text also emerged at the summit. Ethnic leaders resolved to have provisions relating to a
federal army included in any ceasefire agreement. As with other issues, this was excluded from the draft text after
negotiations in the expectation that a settlement would be reached after the accord was signed. Some leaders at Law
Khee Lar criticized the draft text for lacking strong guarantees of political rights for ethnic groups, and said an
agreement could not be signed without more explicit commitments on this front from the governments Union
Peacemaking Working Committee (UPWC).
Khun Okkar, a member of the NCCT, said he was skeptical of the new committees ability to secure more concessions
from the government, but said the previous negotiators would abide by the summits decision.
Some leaders thought that they could push for more rights, and this is why they told us to step down and let others talk
to the UPWC, he said. We worked the best we could and it took a year and a half. Let them try, they may understand
afterwards that it is not easy to talk with the military.
He noted, however, that some of the ethnic leaders at the summit wanted to sign the nationwide ceasefire agreement as
it stood, without waiting for three armed groups that had been excluded from negotiations by the government.
Hla Maung Shwe warned that the government might not be willing to accept either a new negotiating bloc or a new
discussion on amending the ceasefire text, noting that a date and time for further negotiations had not yet been set.
They should have proposed [the amendments] before, why are they just proposing them now? he asked. This could
be a problem. I feel the government might not accept this.
Though his own position will eventually become redundant if the new committee proceeds, Nai Hong Sar said that the
decision was in the hands of ethnic leaders and not negotiators.
[The NCCT] cannot do anything, he said. Even if the government cannot accept the new committee or sign our draft
text, this was the majority decision made by ethnic leaders.

14 Responses to Govt Concerned by New Hardline Ceasefire Negotiating Bloc

1.

maykalar Monday, June 15, 2015 - 8:40 pm

Enthic leaders is trapped by political games of KIA leader who does not want peace eagerly.
KIA is trying to destroy the the whole peace process.
Reply

2.

Menrihei Tainamkawng Tuesday, June 16, 2015 - 10:48 am

The best is yet to come.
Reply

3.

George Than Setkyar Heine Tuesday, June 16, 2015 - 4:09 pm

Some leaders thought that they could push for more rights, and this is why they told us to step down and let
others talk to the UPWC, he said. We worked the best we could and it took a year and a half. Let them try,
they may understand afterwards that it is not easy to talk with the military.
Khun Okkar got the point already of course and his view on the ethnic rebels changing the negotiating team
has no grain of salt as well I agree.

The previous team (NCCT) did their best during their stint lasting a year and half to get results but to no avail
until today they say.
Naw Zipporah Sein leading the next negotiating team will fare NO BETTER as well as she is only a GREEN
HORN with nary a bit of experience much less expertise for that matter signing the countrywide ceasefire
specifically with the men in green running Burma since more than a half century ago until today.
And CHANGING JOCKEYS only will not SERVE BETTER for that MATTER sign ceasefire agreement
as long as BOTH SIDES of the FENCE LACK the CHARISMA, DETERMINATION, GOODWILL and
TRUST most important and vital in GETTING the JOB (sign the ceasefire accord) DONE and MOVE
FORWARD hold political dialogue for PEACE and NATIONAL RECONCILIATION to REIGN
SUPREME in BURMA guys!
Of course the BURMA ARMY will be LAUGHING ALL THE WAY to ETERNITY as long as the ethnic
minority armed groups SQUABBLE OVER the LEADERSHIP and ELBOWING EACH OTHER for a SEAT
ACROSS the TABLE with the WILY GENERALS RUNNING BURMA today since more than half a century
ago, I say!
Good luck guys!
Reply

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 17, 2015 - 3:47 pm

Dear George
Please, show all of your peace negotiation agreement with bama military on the newspapers to let all
ordinary Burmese people to read and give opinions in the transparent manner. Or where can i read all
of your peace negotiation agreement with bama military.
You said the talk with bama military is not easy . It make me and other to be more scary to sign the
peace agreement. Are they very powerful or capable to attempt another ethnic cleansing any time , any
reason in Burma from the military support of China and Russian(jet fighters, political killers)?

4.

Reply

Thang Za Dal (Mr) Tuesday, June 16, 2015 - 9:31 pm

I am the author of some political papers on Burma. The latest one (266-page) was publisized early this year and
called: Grand Strategy for Burma (VII). Since I dont have firthand information on the negotiations,
I can only say the following few words on this latest development:
1. Both the government (+ military) and ethnic armed forces have strong and weakpoints of themselves, but
they all failed to use them in the right way. Therefore, this latest development was from the very beginning of
the negotiations foreseeable.
2. Because ofthe open comments of various former negotiators of the ethnic armed forces on the new
development,the new negotiators will surely have to use new negotiating strategy some tactics. If I were they, I
would try to make as a condition for the final signing of the agreement the sincere willingness of the
government (+ military) to radically reform all major sectors of the whole country. Its just an example!
Reply

5.

Phoe Kwar Wednesday, June 17, 2015 - 1:39 am

Dear Readers,
Now that the corrupt KNU leaders can do nothing. They want to barter the Karens land to get richer for their
families, by signing the nationwide ceasefire agreement. As a Karen at the grass-root level, I dont know whom
I shall have to trust in the KNU.
But I am proud to be an ordinary Karen.
The ordinary Karen are honest.
The ordinary Karen love their land and nature.
The ordinary Karen are steadfast.
The ordinary Karen do not trust the Burmese military government.
And the ordinary Karen do not trust the corrupt KNU leaders.
Saw Ba Oo Gyi would not happy if he saw what corrupt KNU leaders are doing.
No brainer!
Reply

6.

Thang Za Dal (Mr) Wednesday, June 17, 2015 - 4:20 am

I am the author of some political papers on Burma. The latest one (266-page) was publisized early this year and

called: Grand Strategy for Burma VII. Since I dont have firt-hand information on the negotiations,
I can only say the following few words on this latest development:
1. Both the government (+ military) and ethnic armed forces have strong and weakpoints of their own, but they
all failed to use their strongpoints in the right way. Therefore,the outcome was already foreseeable from the
very beginning of the negotiations.
2. Because of the negative open comments made by the various former negotiators of the ethnic armed forces
on the new development the media,the new negotiators will surely have to use new negotiating strategy and
some new tactics. If I were they, I would try to make as a condition for the final signing of the agreement the
sincere willingness of the government (+ military) to radically reform all major sectors of the whole country.
Its just an example!
Reply

Myanma Star Forever Saturday, July 4, 2015 - 3:04 pm

Reform all major sectors of the whole country that is what the quasi-military selfdeclared
democratic regime of Burma is denying outright. This is where the opposition have started to bargain.
There is nothing wrong with it only the regime is sticking to its brute mentality and anti-people
policy that has destabilized Burma for the last 60 years and more!
Reply

7.

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 17, 2015 - 3:32 pm

Sources close to the organizations said that both the KIO and KNU, the political wings of the two most
powerful ethnic armed groups, had decided withhold any agreement to sign the nationwide ceasefire agreement
until the general election expected later this year is demonstrated to be free and fair, and would not yield to any
international pressure to expedite the process.
My opinion:
i totally agree with the above statement. Be united and careful are the crucial in this moment. Present bama
military government is fox than shwe men and his 2008 nargic constitution so what is the difference between
signing now and late signing (i.e. after election result and knowing fox than shwes way of presidential
election). Will now signing get more bribes from bama military ? Repeated meeting and listening from fox
than shwes offers to you all are important and crucial. Current bama military government is not the real true
government so fox can change the name of government any time any reason before and after election if USDP
unfairly win the faked election. Or you all will get the faked second panglong agreement.
Reply

8.

Thang Za Dal (Mr) Wednesday, June 17, 2015 - 7:03 pm

I feel that I need to elaborate briefly more on the strongpoints of the government plus military and the ethnic
armed forces that I have in mind, otherwise the readers may probably not get my points clearly. Two of the
strongpoints of the government and military are: abundant facilities such as finance and armed forces are in
their hands, and powerful and wealthy nations and external institutions are willing to help implementing the
peace process in every possible (although the intention of many of them may not necessarily be selfless). So if
the government and military were sincerely willing, they are in a very stong position to materialize it. But until
now it seems that they failed to do so. Two of the ethnic armed forces strongpoints are: the great majority of
ethnic Burmans them have already realized since a long time ago that their own fate is closely intertwined with
that of all non-Burman indegenous ethnic nationalities, which in turn means that without a lasting peace in the
country, there could never be a real prosperity, and second point is the whole world is already aware of their
decades-long plight or in other words, their plight has already been internationalized. But these armed forces
seem until now not to be able to exploit these golden chances.
So, when I said in my recent postings If I were they, I would try to make as a condition for the final signing of
the agreement the sincere willingness of the government (+ military) to radically reform all major sectors of the
whole country., I did not mean it to be either a cheap trick or a bargaining chip. The simple logic behind it is
that even if a nation-wide cease-fire agreement were signed and the guns fell silent, there could never be a
long-lasting guarantee for peace and prosperity unless major sectors of the country are also radically reformed.
Financial resorces that may be saved as the result of cease-fire may most likely simply disappear into some
unknown channels.
Reply

Norman Hla Friday, June 26, 2015 - 12:07 pm

There is no signs of remorse and wrong doing from the confess of fox than shwe. After the last

election, fox than shwe starts to kill Kachin for the reason of implementation of border guard force
under the bama military thugs to fulfil 2008 nargic fox constitution. Then, fox continue to kill local
Muslim to show off that bama army is crucial need for Burmese people with the slogan of
nationalism. Now fox continue to kill Kokang shan. Your 2 points are respectable for all of us for real
reform and real needs but it is not feasible for the time being because those psychopath of fox than
shwe, his men and his cronies have no insight for their illnesses. If those thugs have no insight to
confess their crime, we can not go to the second stages ( your 2 points). I hear that Karen leaders are
bribed by bama military so your research should be more in this area, corruption and transparency in
this peace negotiation. Next step from fox are to kill local Chinese to downgrading rich China
influence for cheating Obama again to release more sanctions to benefit himself and his men. Fox
looks down rich China who is now showing their military might in the aspect of expansion of sea by
creating new demarcating lines for their defence and oil exploration. In history, China was frequent
invasions from Japan, EU and UK so it is not strange for me that China will behave in that way for
their safety and discrimination. But Burma (rich natural resources) is still the world poorest country in
the world because of lack of insight of their wrong doing in bama military low standard. I request you
that your research should more emphasise on the integrity (leadership ability as well) of our all
ethnics leaders and transparency in negotiation with fox. I hope to see the ethnic president of Burma
in future according to panglong treaty.
Reply

9.

Myanma Star Forever Monday, June 22, 2015 - 5:57 pm

Some of the ethnic leaders have been bought by the government, and it wants the deal signed and peace award
given to it before any real peace is restored in Burma through a seamless treaty. This is hogwash. Dreaming of
a 60 year bush war to end with one signing of deal is just crap. The government should come out clean by not
only giving respect to the spirit of the peace negotiations, but also engaging in a real peace process, not by
buying a couple of opposition opportunists. The people of Burma need real peace, development and rights
ensconced in the words and also in the constitution.
Reply

10.

Zung Ring Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - 12:51 pm

The main blames (from ethnic groups) perspective to ethnic armed groups leaders for taking revolution this
long over a half century!
Three reasons:
1. Ethnic armed groups (leaders) only think about their personal business almost all ethnic armed group
leaders own properties in cities while soldiers are eating and wearing poorly. They invest zero in their human
resource development.
2. Ethnic armed group leaders are stupid enough not to learn the benefit of strong coalition against the central
government. This gives the perfect condition for the Burmese military/ government to play century-old tactic
of divide and rule. It works well times and again!
3. The Burmese military is extremely smart. It doesnt invest in public education, BUT it invests a great deal
resources in their military academies. It sends hundreds of military officers overseas for training every year!
Therefore, ethnic armed leaders will fail again if they dont invest in human resource development among their
ranks and files; if they dont unite; and if they dont stop accumulating their personal wealth instead of
strengthening their respective organizations!
Reply

11.

Tun Aung Thursday, January 14, 2016 - 11:44 pm

To build the peace in Myanmar is always overdue because Myanmar government and his counterpart,
Myanmar Army play the game among the armed ethnic groups. Unfairness and dishonesty are their acts on
peace talk. Both of them are not willing to give up their prosperity and power. One is city warlord; others are
jungle warlords.
We see no difference between them.
Only people awareness can abolish their evil wish.
Reply
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/govt-concerned-by-new-hardline-ceasefire-negotiating-bloc.html

NEWS ANALYSIS

Where Next in Latest Ceasefire Deadlock?

By NYEIN NYEIN / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, June 24, 2015 |

Government chief negotiator Minister Aung Min shakes hands with NCCT leader Nai Hong Sar as they exchange the
draft nationwide ceasefire text on March 31. (Photo: JPaing / The Irrawaddy)
CHIANG MAI, Thailand Cynicism, suspicion and deadlock have occasionally boiled over in the course of Burmas
arduous ceasefire talks, and so they have once again.
The 18-month-long talks between government and ethnic peace negotiators culminated in a provisional agreement on
the draft text for a nationwide ceasefire agreement at the end of March, the first step towards political dialogue and the
emergence of a genuine federal system of governance.
Things seemed to be proceeding smoothly and the mood in government circles was optimistic until the conclusion of an
ethnic armed group conference, in the Karen National Union-controlled Law Khee Lar region, on June 8. There, ethnic
leaders established a new negotiating bloc to replace the Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team (NCCT) in order to
press their demands for 15 amendments to the draft text.
On Monday, the governments Union Peacemaking Working Committee (UPWC) made clear its reluctance to accept
the amendment proposals and accept the new negotiating bloc, which it regards as comprised of hardliners, during an
informal meeting with a delegation led by NCCT chair Nai Hong Sar. Meanwhile, government and ethnic negotiators
plan to hold yet another meeting with an unknown agenda next month in the Thai city of Chiang Mai.
The lack of trust in the government side is reflected in the stated desire of ethnic leaders at Law Khee Lar summit to
postpone the nationwide ceasefire accord until after this years general election. Underpinning that lack of trust is a
wariness of the old divide-and-rule tactics employed against ethnic insurgents during the junta era, which also explains
why the summit resolved to withhold an agreement until armed groups currently battling the government are allowed to
participate as signatories.
As a result of the summit, ceasefire negotiations could stretch years into the future. After placing such a premium on
reaching an accord before the 2015 elections, the government is now uneasy and embarrassed after having touted the
success of the draft text agreement in March.
Rangoon-based political analyst Yan Myo Thein told The Irrawaddy that the government should accept the new

negotiating bloc in the hopes of expediting a ceasefire agreement.

The longer time the government takes to accept them, the longer the delay in finalizing the nationwide ceasefire
agreement text, and the longer the delay in signing it, he said.
But government negotiators, who said after the draft text agreement they were ready to sign and waited more than two
months before they were ultimately rebuffed, do not want a repeat of the experience.
According to sources close to the government-affiliated Myanmar Peace Center (MPC), Presidents Office minister and
MPC chief Aung Min, as well as the military, are upset that they have been blindsided by the new bloc. The
government would prefer the bloc included the heads of the various ethnic armed groups it represents, rather than those
who were not in a position to make binding promises.
On the other side, ethnic leaders have remained steadfast in their commitment to a ceasefire agreement and subsequent
peace talks that guarantee autonomy and a federal union. The prevailing sentiment at the Law Khee Lar summit was
that the NCCT had bent too far to the governments will, and a new team was needed to enshrine ethnic demands that
would have otherwise been deferred until after the agreement was signed.
How negotiators will overcome the present deadlock is yet to be seen, but there is a growing sense of inevitability that
the next steps in the ceasefire negotiations will be the responsibility of the next government.
In the words of Dr Emma Leslie, the executive director of Cambodia-based Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies and a
close observer of ceasefire talks in Chiang Mai, This peace process will continue into next administration and will
have to be robust enough to face many more changes and many more setbacks.
The last 18 months have shown that both sides are willing to set aside lingering mistrust and negotiate their way out of
periodic stalemates. At the same time, past experience suggests this latest deadlock wont be the last.

Related Posts:

Govt Ministers Meet Ethnic Leaders in Lead-Up to Ceasefire Summit

Military Presence Grows in Hpakant Amid Further Clashes

Burma Army Blocked Aid to Fleeing Arakan Villagers: Relief Group

As Fighting Rages in Northeast Burma, Govt Claims Territorial Gains

31 Charged Over Unlawful Association with Arakan Army

6 Responses to Where Next in Latest Ceasefire Deadlock?

1.

Menrihei Tainamkawng Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - 9:18 am

After more than 50 years of being cheated, it is not an easy thing to put our trust on foxy junta. Because their
words have never been matched by their actions. The Myanmars do not even trust this regime. Therefore, we
need to take time, i mean lots of time before we sign the agreement.
Reply

2.

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - 9:38 am

What is the difference between signing now and signing after coming presidential election? I do not believe
signing now will get more advantages or fairness from fox than shwe without any inclusion of all ethnics.
Child soldier ming aung hlaing is still invading and killing all ethnics what he likes for any reason and any
time. If you all do not sign now, will another ethnic cleansing occur from child soldier ming aung hlaing with
his jet fighters ( Russian made)? Who can tell that the coming election is fair or not. Fox men with his 2008
nargic constitution is permanent valid if all ethnics signing now and then. Make clear the matter of 2009
nargic constitution if all ethnics agree with this constitution before signing all. Do all ethnics agree to be ruled
under the nargic fox 2008 constitution? Karen signs with fox than shwe and ask puppet thein sein to be next
president so it means Karen recognises the nargic 2008 constitution. Nargic constitution is the worst one, and
equal to the faked panglong agreement from fox strategy. Burma does not need military because any foreign
invasion will be expelled by US or China. Burmese needs equality in all aspects because of union of Burma but
fox than shwe changes the Burmese flag which does not mean union of Burma as it has only one star in new
flag instead of 6 stars in the previous flag. Do all ethnics agree this current flag bearing only one star with the
representation of or fox than shwe ( self-claimed bama king ) or bama army colors copied from India, Pakistan,
China and Japan respectively. Psy wirathu copies 969 from Muslim who has numerical numbers already but
969 represents sex symbol and Muslim numbers are meaningful religious. Not very long psy wirathu with the
support of stone face aung thaung to kill all Christian, dominated in Kachin and karen. Then, fox than shwe
will give reason that all ethnics armies should be under the bama army. Do you all ethnics agree this tricks and
traps from fox than shwe. World will understand that all ethnics are under the control by bama military in this
agreement or signing. Use your wisdom and legality to deal with fox, particularly Karen leaders who mostly
accused by their own people of acceptance of corruption, bribed by fox private army.
Reply

3.

Thang Za Dal (Mr) Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - 6:23 pm

Let me quote a few passages from my paper: Grand Strategy for Burma VII*
How can one believe that the government is sincerely willing to build up peace since its so-called peacemaking delegation is travelling around and negotiating with various armed movements, the military has even
been intensifying its ruthless military campaigns against these armed movements, despite the fact that the
President is said to have had ordered it three times until February 2013 to stop its offensives?
How can one believe the sincerity of the government if it has alloted the military $ 2.4
billion for this fiscal year (2013/2014), yet the government itself is still begging around in the international
community to defray the cost of the peace-building process?
How can one believe the sincerity of the government if its begging around in the international community
for the cost of its peace-making efforts without spending the countrys own billions of dollar of financial
resources and the military is squandering hundreds of millions of dollars for its military campaigns against
ethnic armed movements? [p. 51]
I, therefore, see only one solution for the UNFC to overcome this great hurdle: They should simply deploy a
completely new Strategy!
Their new Strategy should be like this: Simply wait patiently without pushing on with their newly drafted
constitution until the coming 2015 general election has finally been held without trying to influence the

process of the election in order to find out if the election was fair and correct enough and if the winning parties
and the would-be newly formed government are powerful enough to bring the military under their control.
Since the present governments term in office is running out very soon anyway and the military had even
openly and defiantly defied the Presidents orders for three times to stop its brutal offensives against the
KIO/KIA and a number of other cease-fire signatory armed organizations its simply senseless for the UNFC
to either present their new constitution draft now, or to go on negotiating or to sign a treaty with it (the present
government). This point has been confirmed by U Aung Mins statement to the KNPP (Karenni National
Progressive Party) negotiating team which is still right now negotiating with the government in Loikaw, Kayah
State. He told them that the draft treaty (the governments national ceasefire accord draft) had yet to be
approved by Burmas National Defense and Security Council. This statement clearly shows where the real
power lies! (See Where Is Ethnic Reconciliation Going? under EXTRA INFORMATION
ITEMS HEREWITH ATTACHED) [p. 56]
Reply

Norman Hla Thursday, June 25, 2015 - 11:16 am

Thaung ZD
Thank for your highly analytical skills regarding to the ethnic issue and fox than shwes tricks and
traps. Yours (strong evidences) is good enough to warn the Karen leaders and all ethnics.

4.

Reply

Thawng Tunngo Thursday, June 25, 2015 - 8:27 pm

The deepest problem is they (Burmese army) never respect and keep any agreements, treaties they had with
minorities. I am wondering when will we see a good, dignity and respectful Burmese government in the future.
The disrespectful, indignity, untrustworthy and deceitful Burmese army is the main problem maker in Burma.
Reply

5.

Myanma Star Forever Tuesday, September 29, 2015 - 9:01 pm

Tatmadaw goons can cheat the people once, twice, and not forever. Goons are goons. They change no colour.
A good percentage of guaranteed presence of these goons in the Parliament is the biggest question about the
sincerity, dignity and promises made by them towards the minorities, the international community and to
themselves. You can change clothes, but never your hateful behaviour unless there are visible changes in your
speech and action. The same pigheaded bully-like behaviour, speech and action are still there. You can only
put trust in these uniformed goons words if you are a real lunatic.
Reply

6.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/news-analysis/where-next-in-latest-ceasefire-deadlock.html

COMMENTARY

Dealing with Defeat: Where it All Went Wrong for the USDP
The depths of its unpopularity now clear, the ruling party will need to embark
on some serious soul-searching if it wishes to retain political relevance.
by AUNG ZAW / THE IRRAWADDY | 27 Nov 2015
Officials of Burmas ruling party will be forced to embark on some serious soul-searching if they
wish to remain relevant in Burmese politics.
The results of the Nov. 8 general election, in which the Union Solidarity and Development Party
(USDP) won only 41 Union Parliament seats, showed in no uncertain terms the depths of the
military-backed partys unpopularity.
Why did the incumbents suffer such a resounding electoral defeat?
First and foremost, the USDP has no solid support on the ground. The Burmese publics abhorrence
of the former military regime runs deep and the ruling party is seen as inseparable from that
authoritarian legacy.
The USDPs forebear, the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA), was founded on
the instructions of former dictator Snr-Gen Than Shwe in 1993. The organization gained a notorious
reputation for engaging in activities suppressing Burmas pro-democracy movement and was
branded a gang of thugs in 1997 by National League for Democracy (NLD) chairwoman Aung
San Suu Kyi.
In 2003, USDA members were among the pro-junta group that violently attacked Suu Kyis
motorcade in Sagaing Division in what became known as the Depayin massacre.
Despite his ostensible departure from public life, Than Shwe himself still casts a shadow over the
Burmese political scene, with many believing he wields some influence over the current leadership.
It was this repressive legacy that many Burmese voters would have reflected on when casting a vote
on polling day. In short, the ruling party is seen as largely filled with corrupt, incompetent and
reactionary officials, despite the political opening under Thein Seins administration since 2011.
During the campaign period, these former generals turned politicians firmly demonstrated they had
little feel for the public pulse, with the partys pitch as the architect of Burmas democratic reforms
falling flat.
When Thein Sein went on to insinuate in one memorable speech in his hometown that Burma had
experienced enough change (including the comment: What more change do you want?), the die
was effectively cast.
In addition, the nationwide ceasefire agreement, which was meant to be a signature achievement
of Thein Seins government, has been ridiculed.
Only eight non-state armed groups signed the pact with Naypyidaw in mid-October, with several
major ethnic armies, including from Kachin and northern Shan states, withholding their support.
Fighting in these areas has if anything only intensified after the accord, leading several ethnic armed
factions to question the governments willingness to pursue genuine peace.
Pre-Poll Discord
The party also struggled with disunity ahead of the poll. This was publically brought to the fore
after former party chairman Shwe Mann was removed from his post in a late night coup brought on
by a growing rift with President Thein Sein.

On the instructions of the presidents office, security personnel surrounded the USDP headquarters
in Naypyidaw to ensure the swift removal of the current Union Parliament speaker, who had
cultivated what observers saw as a constructive working relationship with Aung San Suu Kyi.
But Shwe Manns allies within the party did not entirely desert him. When an impeachment bill that
could have been used to unseat the deposed party chairman came before Parliament on Aug. 20,
lawmakers, apparently including Shwe Manns factional allies, voted to suspend discussions until
after the election.
High-ranking officials such as newly minted party co-chair Htay Oo had supported passage of the
bill and voiced displeasure at its deferral, lending credence to the portrait of a party riven by
discord.
Speaking to Radio Free Asia recently, Thura Aung Ko, a former colonel in his 60s and a senior
member of the USDP, admitted the party had been divided since Shwe Manns sudden ouster.
Interestingly, while other USDP leaders talked up the partys chances in the lead-up to polling day,
Shwe Mann publically admitted, It will be very difficult to win.
Barely a Whimper
When Thein Sein introduced political and economic reforms from 2011, he won the praise of
observers both domestically and abroad. The NLD was a beneficiary of the political opening,
winning over 40 seats in an April 2012 by-election.
However, lingering doubts over the government were never fully dispelled. Leaders grew adept at
saying the right things, but failed to deliver. The relationship between Thein Sein and Suu Kyi, far
from cozy to begin with, appeared to further wane.
Many activist groups also suspected that powerful officials were involved in funding and supporting
radical Buddhists, namely involved with the Buddhist nationalist Ma Ba Tha, and fueling antiMuslim sentiment.
Burmese people thought enough was enough.
The NLD waged a simple but effective campaign, based on the time-worn slogan of change. This
was a message the majority of voters could relate to; a message not based on fear, but hope for the
future.
Since 1988, when a pro-democracy uprising took hold around the country before it was brutally
suppressed by the military regime, millions of Burmese have invested their hopes in Suu Kyi and
the NLD.
In stark contrast to popular, charismatic figures in the pro-democracy movement, from Suu Kyi to
88 Generation student leaders such as Min Ko Naing, the USDP had no star power; no leader the
public would rally behind.
The NLD was also aided by broader sympathy within independent local media outlets and many
Burmese civil society organizations, including prominent activists that have been part of the prodemocracy movement for over two decades.
During the campaign period, at the sight of tens of thousands of supporters clad in the NLDs
signature color red at political rallies around the country, many logically inclined USDP officials
must have at least considered a looming defeat.
Now the scale of that loss has been tallied, the partys future is in doubt.
Top Photo - ( Olivia Harris / Reuters ) President Thein Sein attends a meeting of political parties in
Rangoon following the Nov. 8 general election, November 15, 2015.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/election/opinion/dealing-with-defeat-where-it-all-went-wrong-for-the-usdp

The Myanmar Times

Nationwide pact turns into disaster
By Fiona Macgregor, Friday, 19 February 2016
The surge in fighting in northern Shan State in recent weeks has highlighted what a disaster
the nationwide ceasefire agreement has been. International organisations who supported it
must answer questions about their role, but right now urgent help is required for those
suffering the consequences.

Refugees gather at
Kanbawza Shan Kyaung Kyee monastery in Kyaukme, northern Shan State, on February 17. Photo: Kaung Htet / The Myanmar
Times

Hostilities have broken out between previously cooperating ethnic armed groups the TaAng
National Liberation Army (TNLA) and the Restoration Council of Shan State (RCSS) in the wake
of last Octobers ceasefire part with the government and the Tatmadaw. While the RCSS signed the
agreement, the TNLA was excluded from doing so by the government.
The greatest fears about the NCA have become manifest: Rather than being a step toward peace, the
NCA has exacerbated conflict in this country, split ethnic relations and started what has been
described as a new war.
Organisations that spent large amounts of international cash and pushed for the deal in the face of
warnings from key figures, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, bear a responsibility for what is
happening to people on the ground now.
At least 5000 people have fled their homes to IDP camps in the past couple of weeks alone, with
countless others believed to have sought shelter in the homes of friends and relatives.
Communities are being torn apart, not only by dispersal but by increasing intercommunal tensions
between people of Shan and TaAng ethnic backgrounds. Villages have been bereft of young people
as they abandon their homes to avoid forced conscription.
Reports of beatings and even executions of civilians, landmine laying, and troops commandeering
property and food illustrate further the impact this new conflict is having on the lives of ordinary

people.
Men and women are both suffering the consequences of this violence, but women and girls living in
IDP camps are at particular risk.
The UN describes IDP women as one of the most vulnerable groups in the world.
Displacement poses some very specific threats to girls and women related to immediate living
conditions including: increased risk of sexual violence; medical dangers related to reproductive
health issues; and nutrition needs of pregnant women and nursing mothers.
A UN Security Council open debate paper from 2014 makes the following observation, which sums
up the longer-term impact of displacement.
Even though each refugee and IDP situation is unique, displacement and statelessness exacerbate
existing gender inequalities, amplifying the discrimination and hardship faced by women and girls,
it stated.
Through a combination of factors, including gender-based discrimination in access to resources,
education and employment, poor reproductive health care and exclusion from decision-making
processes, refugee and IDP women constitute one of the most vulnerable groups in the world.
The conflict in northern Shan shows little sign of easing in the near future. This country is already
dealing with hundreds of thousands of people still displaced by historic conflicts and renewed
fighting after long-term ceasefires broke down in 2011. The very last thing the people of Myanmar
needed was for that number to be added to because of a deal designed to give kudos to certain
power holders and justify the activities of certain organisations.
But that is what has happened. The very least that those who supported and pushed for the NCA can
do is ensure that new IDPs and other people affected by the conflict get as much practical support as
possible not just in terms of basic food and shelter, but also in protecting everyone, particularly
the most vulnerable, from further harm.
http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/opinion/19086-nationwide-pact-turns-into-disaster.html

BURMA

The Price of Peace

By SAW YAN NAING / THE IRRAWADDY| Thursday, March 17, 2016 |

Burmas outgoing President Thein Sein (center, with yellow ribbon) greets international witnesses
after the signing ceremony of the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) in Naypyidaw on
October 15, 2015. (Photo: Soe Zeya Tun / Reuters)
Since the initiation of Burmas reforms in 2010, major policy shifts have emerged among Western
nations that had long supported opposition forces and ethnic organizations committed to the
democracy movement.
As aid to these groups has decreased, funds fulfilling the aspirations of the outgoing quasi-civilian
government have increased.
Critics and observers point out that many within Western governments believe economic
development will end Burmas political stalemate and resolve decades of armed conflict. This has
led to hundreds of millions of dollars in both aid and investment being filtered through Naypyidaw,
the government capital, instead of through long-established community-based infrastructure
networks.
Myanmar Peace Center
The Myanmar Peace Center (MPC), a four-year-old Burmese government affiliate in Rangoon, is
one institution that has benefitted from these funding shifts.
Hla Maung Shwe, an advisor within the MPC, would not elaborate on the organizations foreign
monies; the Myanmar Peace Monitor has reported that the MPC has received around US$2.5
million in funds from Japan, the EU and the United Nations in its first year of operation. Hla Maung
Shwe pointed out that hundreds of foreigner-led groups receive funds for peace-building as

well.
But has it worked? The MPC advisor said that his organization has played a major role in shaping
the perspectives of military generals in dealing with ethnic armed groupsof which there are more
than 20 nationwidein the peace process. But the MPC-brokered signing of a so-called nationwide
ceasefire agreement (NCA) by only eight of the armed groups and the state military last year has
not ended civil war in Burma. Instead, critics say it is has served as a divide and rule tactic by the
government.
The MPC may be well funded, but it lacks legitimate decision-making power and the trust of many
ethnic armed groups, who, Hla Maung Shwe said, think in black and white, when it comes to
peace, rather than a more desirable grey.
Yet Hla Maung Shwe also admitted that despite many outward changes, the former military regime
remains a driving force in Burmas political scene, which continues to attract international interest
to the peace process.
It is true, he said. Reforms [came] from a transition initiated by the government regime, and it is
the elites who began this transition. But, he insisted that throughout the process, government and
Tatmadaw [Burma Army] officials have accepted many demands from ethnic groups.
Supporting Government Policy
At a development forum in Naypyidaw in January 2013 attended by around 600 delegates from 55
countries, foreign donors committed to actively supporting Burmese government structures in
ceasefire and conflict-affected areas in ethnic regions. In 2014, international aid for health care
began increasingly coming through the governments centralized structure.
Donors are just supporting the Burmese governments policy and not listening to other voices,
said Bertil Lintner, a veteran journalist focused on ethnic affairs in Burma, who also lamented the
prioritizing of shortsighted economic interests by investors.
One long-time Burma watcher, who spoke to The Irrawaddy on the condition of anonymity, said
that this foreign aid policy fuelled local resentment and continues to push long-standing ethnic
health and education structures under the control of the central government rather than integrating
them into a devolved federal system.
It seems business interests have become the first priority. Human rights and democracy is
secondary, she said regarding donor priorities.
The source highlighted Norwegian action in Burma as an illustration of this phenomenon.
In 2013, Telenor, a largely state-owned Norwegian telecommunications firm, signed a lucrative
deal with Burmas government; its telecommunication services now operate widely throughout
Burma.
Yet Katja Nordgaard, who served as the companys executive vice president, had previous political
ties to Burma: she was formerly Norways ambassador to Burma, a role from which she resigned
and then joined Telenor. Nordgaard reportedly introduced Telenor to Burmese government officials
in 2012, while she was acting as Ambassador.
US Engagement
As interests change, increasing commercial engagement with Burma can be expected from other
countries that once firmly supported the political and ethnic opposition. There is increasing pressure
on the US government by business associations not to renew sanctions on Burma in May of this
year, when the policy will go under review.
The United States eased sanctions in December 2015 against Burmas largest conglomerate, Asia
World Company, by extending a six-month waiver for use of Rangoons Asia World Port by
American companies. Asia Worlds owner is Burmese tycoon Steven Law (also known as Htun
Myint Naing), who is linked to illicit drug trade through his father, Lo Hsing Han, a notorious drug
kingpin.

Relief from US sanctions in Myanmar is challenging, said Kristine Gould, the head of PACRIM
Research Associates, an American research firm that studies Burma. In the case of Steven Law and
the Asia World Port terminal, the United States had to balance sanctions policies regarding a
Specially Designated National against pressure from the international business community for
access to his port facilities.
Decisions on sanctions, Gould said, involve striking a delicate balance between US national
interests, pressure from American and international business communities and National League for
Democracy (NLD) chairwoman Aung San Suu Kyis wishes.
On Tuesday, a president selected by the NLD was voted in by the Union Parliament, since Suu Kyi
herself is barred from holding the position due to constitutional restrictions based on her sons
British citizenship. The incoming president Htin Kyaw, a relatively unknown political player, is
joined by two vice presidents, Henry Van Thio, also of the NLD, and Myint Swe, a former
lieutenant-general selected for the post by the military. He remains on the USs Specially
Designated Nationals list, due to his role in crushing the 2007 Saffron Revolutiona series of
protests for political change led by Buddhist monks.
The nomination of U Myint Swe to the Vice Presidency will further compound sanctions
decisions, explained Gould. This will certainly pose challenges to the US government.
In an interview with The Irrawaddy last month, Derek Mitchell, the former American ambassador to
Burma, said he anticipates further engagement between Burma and international communities, but
that there was also a need to acknowledge the countrys turbulent history.
There must be respect for the past. The younger generations are just outstanding. There is
tremendous potential, said Mitchell. We need to invest in that even though we deal with the pain
of the past.

http://www.irrawaddy.com/factiva/the-price-of-peace.html

Myanmar 'Times

Govt dissolves MPC, transfers assets

By Guy Dinmore | Friday, 25 March 2016
In one of the last acts of his government, President U Thein Sein has dissolved the Myanmar
Peace Center and ordered its assets to be transferred to two NGOs reported to have been set
up by senior officials in his administration.

A man walks past

the entrance to the Myanmar Peace Center in Yangon last week. Photo: Zarni Phyo / The Myanmar
Times
Order No 3/2016, dated February 4 and published in the official state gazette on March 11, says the
MPC, which played a key role in ceasefire negotiations with ethnic armed groups, would become
independent non-government organisations called the Myanmar Peace Building Dialogue Center
and the Peace and Development Foundation.
The presidential directive orders the transfer to the two NGOs of leased buildings and land
office equipment, vehicles, funds and other undefined assets. It also decrees, without elaboration,
that the transfer of contributions from international donors should be negotiated.
Foreign government donors and organisations have poured millions of dollars into the Yangonbased MPC and its staff of more than 100 since its founding in November 2012. Some diplomats
have privately expressed concern that the outgoing government would distribute the MPCs assets
without agreement with Daw Aung San Suu Kyis incoming administration, which has not decided
what it wants to do with the MPC.
According to the European Union, a major donor to the MPC, talks were held yesterday over the
issue.
In all our recent meetings, including this morning, 24 March, the MPC senior management with
senior representatives of the incoming NLD government present assured us that the
internationally sponsored assets of the MPC will be managed by the government as state property
and remain available for the MPC or any successor institution, the EU said, adding that this was
standard procedure.
The EU did not elaborate on what were defined as internationally-sponsored assets. Japan, for

example, said it gave US$1.2 million to the MPC in March 2013 and said at the time it would
provide MPC with more offices, meeting spaces as well as furniture and electric materials.
The presidential order did not name the heads of the two new NGOs. The BBC reported last week
that U Aung Min, chair of the MPC and chief government negotiator in the peace process, and U
Tin Maung Than, a senior MPC adviser, were setting up a Center for Peace and Development. A
government source told The Myanmar Times that MPC executive director U Kyaw Soe Hlaing was
also setting up an NGO.
Plans for dissolving the MPC were approved by U Soe Thein, a minister in the Presidents Office,
according to two sources close to the peace process. U Soe Thein did not respond to a request for
comment.
Responding to a question by The Myanmar Times over its future, the MPC stated on March 17,
The assets procured with donor funding are regarded as state-owned property. A final decision as
to what happens to the MPC and the associated assets will be taken by the new government. The
MPC is in close contact with decision-makers from the NLD in order to make sure that the
handover is as smooth as possible.
A senior NLD official involved in the peace process said last week the new government, to take
office on April 1, had no knowledge of the transfer of the MPCs assets to the two new NGOs.
Under the presidential order, the scope of the Myanmar Peace Building Dialogue Center would
include engagement in the peace process, providing technical aid to ethnic armed groups involved
in peace talks, youth training, coordination of aid for mine-clearing, implementing civil-military
cooperation, and peace-related research and education.
The Peace and Development Foundation is to be involved in peace-related development projects
and cooperation on projects for women and children.
The MPC and its officials won praise from their international donors for their contribution over
three years of peace talks leading to the October 2015 nationwide ceasefire accord. But the majority
of ethnic armed groups that were either excluded from the pact or refused to sign it have been
highly critical of the agreement as well as the MPC. Fighting has increased significantly since then.

Translation by Thiri Min Htun

http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/yangon/19648-govt-dissolves-mpc-transfersassets.html

Myanmar Times

The price of peace: Western governments pledge millions

By Guy Dinmore - Monday, 28 March 2016
When Daw Aung San Suu Kyis new government finally takes office this week and turns to
her stated priority of the peace process, it will find the international community has also been
busy during the long transition period in assembling a joint peace fund, with over US$100
million committed so far.

Restoration Council of
Shan State soldiers watch the sun go down at an outpost in Kyaukme township, northern Shan State, on February 21. Photo: Kaung
Htet / The Myanmar Times

The fund, designed to stretch over the five-year term of the National League for Democracy
government, is backed to date by the European Union and eight governments, with the EU and the
UK the largest donors.
The financial commitment, to come in tranches, can be seen as a vote of confidence in Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi herself. But as yet no one is sure exactly how and where it will be spent.

Critics see millions of dollars spent on salaries of international civil servants as another wasteful
example of the peace industrial complex. There are also serious policy concerns that, as happened
under President U Thein Seins government, funding will get diverted from conflict-torn
communities on the fringes and be channeled centrally into a peace process that has failed to
deliver.
Doubts are also being raised about the propriety of having such a foreign-heavy structure in place
even before Daw Aung San Suu Kyi steps through one of the doors of the four ministries she is to
head.
Five years ago, peace became a hot item and a lucrative industry in Myanmar, and the vultures
descended, says U Khin Zaw Win, director of the Tampadipa thinktank. He fears a repeat, while
noting U Thein Seins stripping of assets in his governments last weeks from the Myanmar Peace
Center, with the EU attempting to claw back what the international community donated.
JPF inception director Elizabeth Armstrong takes such concerns on board. She says that since the

new fund was first conceived nine months ago it has gone through a long process of consultation
with the NLD leader, political parties and ethnic armed groups. The latter includes the group of
eight that signed the nationwide ceasefire agreement last October and the dozen or so that did not
join.
She has been consulted. She is on board, Ms Armstrong said of the NLD leader. We are very
respectful of the transition to the new government. There is a shift, she added.
We are not driving the process This is their [Myanmars] process. The government can choose
to use the JPF if it wants. There is money if you wish to draw on it, Ms Armstrong said. The NLD
is still formulating its peace process policy, she added.
Asked about the high salaries in place for the senior officials to run the fund, the EU which has
played a coordinating role and has earmarked 44 million euros (US$49.13 million) for the JPF
said operating costs would not exceed 30 percent of total funding over its lifetime.
More than 70pc of funds will be spent on projects and dispersed in accordance with international
best practice for multi-donor funds and transition financing, the EU said.
Aims of the Joint Peace Fund:
The Joint Peace Fund is being established to support a nationally-led peace process on an
inclusive and non-discriminatory basis. The Fund has three aims:
1. Providing technical and financial support to peace institutions, instruments, actors and processes.
2. Supporting peace initiatives that increase trust, confidence and participation in the peace process
and enhance safety and security at the community level.
3. Supporting applied research and innovation for national solutions.
The JPF says salaries are yet to be determined although, according to the Danish government which
is also a donor, the JPF trust director is budgeted to earn $19,082 a month or about $916,000 over
four years, while the grant portfolio manager and head of program support unit will each take
$13,120 monthly.
The JPF says the EU and five governments Australia, Denmark, Finland, the UK and the US
have together committed $101 million so far. Three governments Norway, Switzerland and Italy
have pledged $13 million.
The US has put in just $1 million, the minimum required to get a seat on the JPFs governing
bodies. Some observers see the move as a desire to be part of the game rather than a real
commitment to the concept.
Japan and China, both large donors to Myanmar, are not involved, preferring direct bilateral
arrangements.
Still in its inception phase, the JPF is working out the composition of its governing High Level
Committee board which is proposed to include the Myanmar government, donors, ethnic armed
groups, the UN and the World Bank. Ms Armstrong said it was still to be decided whether the
armed groups would be chosen from those in or out of the ceasefire agreement.
Myanmar critics of the JPF base their concerns on the experience of the foreign-funded peace
process over the past five years which culminated in the controversial nationwide ceasefire pact.
Conflict has escalated since last Octobers ceasefire signing ceremony, which Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi boycotted but the international community celebrated.
Even Denmark, in its appraisal of the JPF, warns as medium risk the danger that the divisions
caused by the ceasefire pact will deepen divisions between armed groups, leading to the JPF as
being perceived as not impartial and favouring those that signed the agreement.
Seng Raw Lahpai, a Kachin activist and founder of Metta Development Foundation, says that a lot

of pressure to sign the ceasefire was coming from the international community, but not enough
importance was attached to the governments insistence on shutting out certain groups from the
pact.
One way of considering the value of the international participation in the process under the former
government, however, is to look at the outcome. At present the situation is worse than it has been
for a long time. The so-called nationwide ceasefire agreement has proven to be just the contrary: a
spark to set off new armed conflicts that are now flaring up between signatories and nonsignatories, she said.
Citing the experience of the Philippines, Seng Raw Lahpai says Myanmar should be very cautious
about including international actors in the actual process, except possibly as observers and
monitors.
She says she would prefer to see more funds used to support the inclusion of more sectors of
society in the actual peace process laying open the root causes of the on-going war, dialogue,
trust-building, defining goals.
Analyst U Khin Zaw Win says there needs to be greater accountability.
Ever since the emergence of new democracies from the collapse of the Soviet bloc in the early
1990s, many people including myself have been concerned about the avalanche of assorted experts,
consultants and their organisations dispensing advice to the new nations and fattening their bank
accounts in the process, he said.
What we should do now is to lobby for greater public accountability, including that of salaries and
how they could be justified. Otherwise it will be a re-run of the Myanmar Peace Center, he added.
All right, the donors and their extensions could say, Its our money and we can do as we please:
To this we should respond, OK in that case, kindly take it elsewhere. Myanmar is running a lifeand-death peace process, not a free-for-all for venal foreign experts, he said.
http://www.mmtimes.com/index.php/national-news/19664-the-price-of-peace-western-governments-pledge-millions.html

DATELINE

Bertil Lintner: Its High Time the MPC Be Investigated for Corruption
By AUNG ZAW / THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, March 29, 2016 |

The Irrawaddys founding editor Aung Zaw (right) speaks with author and journalist Bertil Lintner
in March 2016. (Photo: The Irrawaddy)
Bertil Lintner, a Swedish-born journalist and author, has written many articles and several books
on Burma over the course of his career. He is a former correspondent with the Far Eastern
Economic Review and currently contributes to various news outlets, including The Irrawaddy. In
this interview with The Irrawaddys founding editor Aung Zaw, Lintner discusses what an Aung
San Suu Kyi-led government might mean for Burma and the prospects for peace regarding the
countrys engagement with foreign donors and peacemakers.
Welcome to The Irrawaddy, Bertil. Today, wed like to discuss the incoming government, led
by the National League for Democracy [NLD]. The Parliament has been approved, with U
Htin Kyaw as the president, and theyve chosen two vice presidents. For the first time in
decades, were going to have a civilian government. People have very high expectations. Its
too early to make any judgments or speculations, but generally, people welcome this new
political order in Burma. They want this military-led regimeone of the most oppressive,
corrupt governmentsto go away. In spite of initial problems weve heard about in the
cabinetfake diplomas and all thatpeople still generally welcome these changes. I want to
hear your assessment, your opinion on this.
Its only natural that expectations are very high. This will be the first civilian president in half a
century, a government where most of the ministers dont have a military background. Expectations
are high, but I will say theyre unrealistically high. It will be very hard for this new government to
live up to peoples expectations because theres still the 2008 Constitution, which preserves
fundamental powers within the military. So were going to have a very popular civilian government
with very limited powers. And we have to wait a year or twomaybe even less than thatto see
what they can actually do, because the Minister of Defense is under the military, [the Minister of]
Border Affairs, and most importantly, the Home Ministry [are also under the military], which

means the department administration is above all the local governments, really, when it comes to
day-to-day affairs, and they also control the police. So whats left for the elected government is not
that much really.
So what youre saying is that no matter who comes into power, power lies in the armys
hands, the army still calls the shots? According to the 2008 Constitution, all the key ministries
are still controlled by the armed forces. And in the Parliament, 25 percent is reserved for the
military; they have absolute veto power.
Definitely. If you want to change the Constitution, or even amend it somehow, according to one of
the protocols in the Constitution, more than 75 percent of all the MPs have to vote in favor of the
suggested change. Thats not even the end of it. After that, according to the Constitution, that
proposal to change the Constitution has to go to a national referendum. Its a very cumbersome
process. So in effect, its impossible to change the Constitution unless the military decides, OK,
now well go ahead and change it.
And because of the Constitution, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi cannot become President. Shes now
taken four minister positions, which will give her a seat on the National Defense Security
Council, the most powerful executive councilan 11-member council that decides national
security issues. But shes also taken on another three portfolios as minister. It seems to kind of
suggest that shes a super minister. But at the same time, Ive heard that there werent
enough qualified people or people had to drop out at the last minute, and she had to take over
these portfolios. What is your reading on that?
Im not quite sure that was the case. Lets look at the [ministries] chosen: foreign affairs, energy,
presidents office and education. These are very important ministries. She will become, really,
above the president, as she said. If you look at energy, for instance, that will have to do with
relations with China. And China, as you know, is one of the owners of the biggest power stations in
the country, which is very controversial. And that, combined with her foreign minister portfolio,
gives her a kind of international profile, which is above the president. And then, of course, she is a
minister in the Presidents Office as well. The question is: Can she really do all of these things at
the same time? Its going to be very difficult, and still, she has to deal with the military, and if the
military says no, its no, no matter what she [Aung San Suu Kyi] wants to do.
Some are saying that because of the cabinet minister list, the fake diploma, a lot of unknown
peopleincluding the vice presidents, one [of whom] was chosen by the military, whos very
corrupt, General Myint Swe, and also very loyal to the former dictator, General Than Shwe;
the other one is a totally unknown person, an ethnic China lot of heavyweights are being
left out in the cold. So the honeymoon period may be shorter, because the press is getting
aggressive, even the international media are getting aggressivesuch as [the story] about
Aung San Suu Kyis driver becoming Presidentso I think [there is] a lot of misleadingas
well as more aggressive and criticalreporting on the incoming government already. So I
think the honeymoon period will be quite short. So what is the to-do list for Aung San Suu Kyi
and the NLD-led government?
Well, I think first we have to dismiss this nonsense that this government is not, you know,
competent enough compared to whatever. Lets face it: Compare this cabinet with its predecessor
and its predecessor before that. Were they any more competent? No.
They were absolutely very corrupt people, and they served an oppressive machine.
And the only experience most of them had was military, not running ministries. So I dont think this
government is going to be less competent than the previous one. And also the foreign media
jumping on this thing about Aung San Suu Kyis driver. Maybe he drives her car, I dont know, I
drive a car, too, but I dont want to be called a driver based in Thailand. Im a writer. He [Htin
Kyaw] is a decent person, hes a good choice, and I can understand why people are enthusiastic
about him.

Do you think that a lot of foreign investment will be coming in because an Aung San Suu Kyiled government takes power, or that the country will become more aid-driven?
More aid, definitely. A lot of foreign governments have pledged to give more aid. But investment,
well, I think that will take time, because no one suggests jumping in and saying, OK, now Burmas
become democratic, lets go invest. I dont think people think that way, thats not their mindset.
Their mindset is more wait and see, lets see how this government performs.
But youre talking about a to-do list. Yes, you have the economywhich is in shambles
educationit definitely has to improveand then the old question of the civil war and peace in the
country. So if youre talking about a to-do list, those three [things] should be at the top of that list.
Talking about peace, we had a very well-known organization established under Thein Seins
government called the Myanmar Peace Center, MPC, led by outgoing minister U Aung Min
and other peacemakers and other foreign peace experts, who came flocking to Burma to try to
achieve peace between several ethnic groups. But also the NCAthe Nationwide Ceasefire
Agreementsigned by President Thein Seins government, was a kind of half-baked success.
Under Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, this process will continue, but it will be very much different.
The MPC will become some sort of NGO, and theres a rumor going around that Aung San
Suu Kyi will lead the MPC. What are your expectations?
Well, first of all, you have to look at the MPC: What did they actually achieve? How many years
have they been [in Burma], almost four or five years, and all they can show for the record is a socalled nationwide ceasefire agreement signed in Naypyidaw in October of last year with eight
groups. But look at those eight groupsfive of them have no armies, some of them just exist on
paper. Its only three groups, really. The RCSSthe Shan group, the KNUthe Karenand the
DKBAthe other Karen faction. Three groups, which are mostly based on the Thai border, which
were forced into signing this agreement under heavy Thai pressure, theres no doubt about that. All
the major groups are left out, like the Wa, the Kachin, the Shan-North and so on. So its obvious
they need an entirely new approach for this problem, this issue. Exactly what that will be remains to
be seen. I havent seen any statement from them.
The new government will be the only one to tackle the old issue of the ethnic civil war, which Aung
San Suu Kyi herself said after she came out of house arrest in 2010, that the ethnic issue, the civil
war, is the most important issue the country has to solve in order to move forward. So one should
expect that the new government will try to tackle this problem in a different way. But the problem
here is that its also become an industry. I dont know how many foreign peacemakers come in here
[] and say they want to make peace. But these people understand nothing about the roots of the
ethnic conflict in Burma.
Before we go in-depth about peacebuilding, I want to take it back to trust-building and
confidence-building. When an Aung San Suu Kyi-led government comes to power, do you see
there being any progress with those heavyweight groups that were left out, because Aung San
Suu Kyi is different from the previous government?
I think theyre willing to give the new government a chance. Thats my impression from talking to
people from non-Burman ethnic groups, but its too early to say. But if you look at this new cabinet,
there are not that many non-Burman ministers there. And there are no women, apart from Aung San
Suu Kyi [] Burma has a tradition of politically active women that predates Aung San Suu Kyi.
Like in the 1950s, Burma had a lot of female MPs, they had female administrators. Women played a
very important role in society at that time. [There were less women later] because the military is, by
definition, a male-dominated institution, which they [the NLD] have yet to correct. I think an
argument that can be used against this new government, which it will have to face, is why its not
more equal when it comes to ethnicity and gender.
So [how] will the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi get these remaining ethnic groups to come to
the table?
The problem is that this approach [signing the ceasefire agreement] has been tried since 1963 when

the first peace talks were held in Rangoon, and its not working. Theres not a civil war in the
country because people like to fight; theres a civil war because there are many ethnic groups who
would like to see a return to an improved version of a federalist system that Burma had before 1962.
Unless they start talking about this issue now, theyre not going to be able to move forward. None
of these groups is going to agree to be disarmed unless there are serious political concessions made
by the government.
I think resource-sharing is also one of the biggest issues. Particularly under the previous
regime, theres been plundering of these resources. Does the NLD comprehend the magnitude
of these problems? Do they have enough information to make decisions or to make a more
realistic approach to this conflict?
Well have to wait and see, but so far I see no signs of that at all. Look at Kachin State. The jade
mining business is a multi-billion dollar business, and it could feed the whole country. But wheres
the money going? Its going to China, its going to foreign interests, its going to a number of local
businessmen connected to the generals. Nothing, really, ends up in the hands of or benefits the local
population up there. Theyre still dirt poor.
And the country remains poor. Bertil, the last issue I want to ask you about is the future of the
MPC. There were news reports that donor communitieslike the EUcompletely fell in love
with the MPC in the last Parliament are going to end their funding at the end of March. But
this peace-building process will continue. [There is a lot of] embezzlement and corruption and
deep scandals that are still unwritten in a lot of international media. These donors, mostly
from the West, are the ones who talk about transparency and accountability. But do they have
any idea whats going on?
I dont think they do. When the Myanmar Peace Center was around, you had the European Union
and Norway and Switzerland and Japanese organizations just pouring money into this thing,
millions and millions of dollars and euros. It became a big business. And where does all this money
go? I havent seen any proper counting of it, and its time now for these donors to sit down and say,
Wait a minute, lets see, where did all this money go and how has it been used and how can we
avoid something similar in the future? I cant prove anything because I havent seen the facts or
figures, but I think its high time the MPC be investigated for corruption.
On what grounds?
To see where the moneys going and how the moneys been used and whos been doing what.
Thank you so much, Bertil.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/dateline-irrawaddy/bertil-lintner-its-high-time-the-mpc-be-investigated-for-corruption.html

BURMA

Where Has Burmas Peace Money Gone?

By SAW YAN NAING / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, April 1, 2016 |

Burmas chief peace negotiator Aung Minformer head of the Myanmar Peace Centeris pictured in Thailand after
meeting with ethnic armed group leaders in February. (Photo: Nyein Nyein / The Irrawaddy)
Under former President Thein Seins government, over US$100 million poured into Burmas peace programs by
foreign governments and institutions.
As the military-backed administration has given way to a National League for Democracy (NLD)-led government,
questions linger about the transparency and influence of international funds on the peace processcritics argue that this
aid has thus provided war-affected ethnic communities with little to no benefit.
In 2013, the European Union (EU) officially committed a total of nearly US$35 million to Burmas peace processthis
cycle of funding ended on March 31. Japanese NGOs announced in 2014 a plan to spend a staggering US$96 million on
development projects in Burmas ethnic areas over the next five years. Yet the community-based ethnic Karen Peace
Support Network responded by calling for a moratorium on such large-scale development until a peace agreement could
be reached.
From these figures alone, the total sum of money known to have been spent on peace stands at around US$130 million.
How were these funds spent?
The money was designated to support the peace-related projects, organizations and start-ups that mushroomed under
Thein Seins quasi-civilian government. One of the biggest recipients of aid was the Myanmar Peace Center (MPC), an
advocacy body affiliated with the government which was founded in 2012.
The Myanmar Times reported that before the end of his tenure, ex-President Thein Sein dissolved the MPC and ordered
its properties to be transferred to two new non-governmental organizations (NGOs): the Myanmar Peace Building
Dialogue Center and the Peace and Development Foundation. Both are affiliated with former MPC staff; the latter will
be led by Aung Min, who acted as MPCs head.
Hla Maung Shwe, an MPC senior advisor, told The Irrawaddy that the role of senior officials like Aung Min had
concluded and that they were free to establish new initiatives, as long as their registration was approved.

[Aung Min] can form his organization like many others do. He is independent now. He is not a government official.
He cant be sued for forming an organization with the word peace, Hla Maung Shwe said.
Dividing the Spoils
Hla Maung Shwe maintains that the MPC has no property to distribute, and that anything on the organizations premises
belongs to the former government.
The MPC doesnt own anything, he said, denying allegations that senior MPC officials are reportedly splitting up the
organizations assets among themselves, including office space, a meeting hall, and facilities such as vehicles,
computers and other equipment.
Critics say it will be inappropriate if the MPCs assets end up in NGOs founded by the ex-MPC officials, since the
property was paid for by international donors.
It would be completely wrong for U Aung Min to use MPC assets, funded by international aid, to set up his own think
tank. He has no mandate, and was rejected by voters in the election last year, said Mark Farmaner, director of Burma
Campaign UK, a London-based advocacy organization. The money should not go to the ex-government either, as they
are just one side in the negotiations, he added.
However, Valerie Zirl, a public diplomacy adviser for the European Union Delegation to Burma, told The Irrawaddy
that representatives the MPC and the NLD had assured the EU that the internationally-sponsored assets of the MPC
will be managed by the government as state property and remain available for the MPC or any successor institution.
But the MPC should not have received EU funding in the first place, Farmaner argues, highlighting the organizations
lack of neutrality due to its ties to the military-backed government. The MPC was established by President Thein Sein
to pursue his political agenda of persuading the international community to lift sanctions and give more aid, Farmaner
said.
By backing the MPC with millions of euros, [the EU] was seen by many ethnic people to have taken the government
side, said Farmaner.
Nai Hong Sar, the vice-chairman of the United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC), an umbrella organization of nine
ethnic armed groups, also said that it would be inappropriate if the MPCs assets were transferred to the NGOs founded
by the MPC senior officials.
I think the MPCs property should be continuously used by the incoming government and peace advocacy
organizations for peace-related works and activities, he told The Irrawaddy.
Where The Money Went
Beyond the MPC, international funding also went to more than a dozen peace-related organizations, including the
Brussels-based Euro-Burma Office, Norway-funded Myanmar Peace Support Initiative (MPSI), British charity Intermediate, Japan Platform, The Nippon Foundation, and other start-ups, NGOs and ethnic armed organizations.
Some of these beneficiaries allocated international peace funding to the building of schools, clinics, and the delivery of
food and supplies to vulnerable populations.
Yet analysts believe that the bulk of the international monies has been spent on meetings for peace talks, overseas trips
by peace program stakeholders, hotel stays, employee salaries and fees for international consultants.
On the donors dime, stakeholders including Burmese army officials, ethnic armed group leaders and peace negotiators
travelled to Europe as well as to post-conflict nations such as Colombia, Indonesia, Philippines and Cambodia to study
the countries respective political transitions and systems of government.
MPC officials were regularly pictured in Thailand, Naypyidaw and Rangoon alongside privately hired airplanes, it is
assumed, for travel to meetings.
Bertil Lintner, a veteran Burma expert and journalist said, I wonder where that money went and is going. Peacemaking
has become a lucrative business in Burma, with little or no regard for the suffering of ordinary people in the countrys
war zones.
Lintner pointed out that many individuals working for organizations like the MPC earn in a month what an ordinary
Burmese citizen might make in five years or more. According to several sources from Western NGOs, it is believed that
senior officials in the peace process can earn up to US$10,000 per month.
The Future of Peace Funds
Burma Campaign UKs Farmaner said that a lack of transparency surrounding aid to the peace process indicates that it
is time for international donors to rethink their approach, and strive for more inclusivity.
This was echoed by Audun Aagre, director of the NGO Norwegian Burma Committee, who told The Irrawaddy that
unbalanced support by international donors is the most pressing issue regarding current peace funding.

I have been terrified by the lack of understanding by some international decision makers on huge international peace
funds, he said. Many [of them] mix up militia groups driven by economic interests with ethnic armed organizations
mainly driven by political interests.
Zirl, of the EU, maintains that European funds for peace activities are dispersed ethically, across various regions, groups
and populations in Burma. She said that the EU supported the MPC through a project worth US$4.2 million, which
represents a fraction of Europes total budget for peace.
The EU stands ready to continue its support depending on the wishes of the incoming government and in line with
their priorities, said Zirl.
But international financial support, Aagre said, should also be invested in an ethnic peace administration, contrary to
what has been seen in previous years, with peace funds largely distributed through government channels.
Under Burmas the military regime, education and health systems worked far better in areas controlled by the ethnic
armed groups than they did in areas under Burmese government control, Aagre points out, comprising what he called a
ready-made federal structure.
In stead of strengthening these systems, with a long term goal of merging the different structures into a federal union,
the international community cut support, and channeled these funds through Naypyidaw with MPC as a gatekeeper, he
said.
The Irrawaddy reporter Lawi Weng also contributed into this article.

Related Posts:

In Israel and Elsewhere, Burma Army Sees Fruits of Reform

Tony Blair Queried, Again, Over Nature of Burma Dealings
USDP Lawmaker Calls for Hard Line on Boat People
Shan Delegation Tours Switzerland to Study Federal System
China Says Still Trying to Resolve Stalled Myitsone Dam Scheme

10 Responses to Where Has Burmas Peace Money Gone?

1.

Harn Yawnghwe Friday, April 1, 2016 - 10:38 pm

First, please note that as of 2012, we are based in Yangon. We are no longer Brussels-based.
Second, if your readers want to know where funding to us went, please visit our website (www.euroburma.eu). Go to Activities and then to Research & Policy where our 2015 and 2013 Annual Reports, and
our 1997-2009 Report is posted. Our 2014 Annual Report will be posted soon.
Third, we did not receive millions in peace funds from the EU. In 2013, we received 518,000 Euros. Nothing
was received from the EU in 2014 or 2015.
Fourth, our main funders are Finland, Sweden and Norway. Sweden and Norway have funded us for many
years to promote democracy in Myanmar, not just the peace process. Our total expenditure was 2.1 million
Euro in 2013, 3.4 million Euro in 2014, and 3.6 million Euro in 2015.
Fifth, 29% of our expenses in 2015 went to support Decision-makers. This means building the capacity of
political parties and parliamentarians. Some went towards facilitating meetings between stakeholders. 27%
went to the ethnic armed organizations, mainly to support their Liaison Offices (to keep the peace) and
facilitating their negotiations with the Government and the Tatmadaw. 26% went to building the capacity of
civil society actors and facilitating their participation in the peace process. 11% went to advocacy work and the
rest covered our costs in Yangon, Brussels, and Chiang Mai.
Reply

Maung Kyaw Nu,BRAT Sunday, April 3, 2016 - 11:51 pm

The statement of Harn Yawnghwe is very clear and applauded.
Reply

MyanmarExpatriate Monday, April 4, 2016 - 1:03 am

I used to be one of the many lurkers in most of the Burmese forums/discussion boards due to some
constraints of my own. In the past month or so, I started to spend more time on some of them, and am
very disheartened with the posts in quite a few of them. I am glad to say, most people seemed to have
genuine opinions..
Having said that, I would like to clarify some points made here. I have utmost respect on Burmese
Expats who spend their valuable time/resources to (and for) the people back there, regardless of the
underlying reason/s.
1. EBO is just one of the handful of organizations contributed/participated at MPC. This article was on
MPC as a whole, and its alleged misuse of funds received from all these donors.
2. I believe there is a fine line between EU as a whole and its member nations. Two of EBOs
contributors, Finland and Sweden, are EU members, and Norway, though is not a member, is closely
associated to EU through EEA. In many of the laymans mind, including myself, it should fall into
EU. Please feel free to correct if I am mistaken.
3. EBO, and many of these donors, may have good intentions but as we all know Burmese
government and its quasi-government organizations tend to misuse the funds. 29.36% of EBO
expenditure in 2015 is on Decision Makers, which makes me wonder how much if it, directly and
indirectly (with or without EBOs knowledge) ended up somewhere else. Sure, I do not have a single
shred of proof, as I have no visibility or intimate knowledge. Just my suspicion based on the way
things happened in Burma in general.
Reply

2.

Shwe Joe Phyu Friday, April 1, 2016 - 10:48 pm

Oh my goodness! It is like the USDP seized all the buildings and properties built or bought with the state
funds. Actually, USDP must redturn all their properties to the government. MPC also is one of the relics of
military regime which is as corrupt as its daddy.
Reply

3.

Ohn Saturday, April 2, 2016 - 12:51 am

A bit harsh.
This joint was very, very useful. Apart from showing the true colour of the players involved, the EU, The
Norway,The So Many Ex-Exiles And Government Representative although they represented only money
takers- staffing this make believe edifice, there were uncountable TV appearances, shoulder-dislocating hand
shakes, numerous articles all useful for the corporate brochures and AGMs to vouch for the Prevailing
Peace where addition of Air Force used to kill was a New Feature.
On, and that entrenchment of already existing division among the people of the country and discovering newer
ways to divide them up more.
Surely there will be some or other form to carry on with this stellar work.
Reply

4.

Moe Saturday, April 2, 2016 - 5:04 am

Culture of corruption? Where the Nyo Ohn Myint now? I just wondering where he is and what he doing?
Reply

5.

Tom Tun Saturday, April 2, 2016 - 8:47 pm

Mr. Harn Yawnghwe,
Isnt it ashame after spending millions of Euro and still no peace in Burma? I want to said that you peace
enterprice people know how to milk old cow such as Burma war. Real people of Burma do not want war for
one more minute, but on the other hand the people who are profiting from war such as Burmese military, peace
maker such as you and your organization continue to fuel war instead of peace and trust building. What a
failure you people are. Signing just one paper without really stopping fighting, what do you call that? Please
tell me, what does causes Burma civil war? Who are the contributor of war? If I dig deep, you and your
organization will become war contributor than peace maker. Shame, Shame, Shame!!!!
Reply

6.

Nyunt Shwe Sunday, April 3, 2016 - 9:43 am

One thing is sure that peace is a step closer after Gang of Aung Min was kicked out by the new government.
They wont stop to make fortune for themselves over the ashes and bones of the conflicting parties. I never
believe the sincerity of MPC, even a second in the past. My suspicion will go with their newly found NGOs,
too.
Reply

7.

Norman Hla Monday, April 4, 2016 - 12:35 am

Instead of Burma peace money go to all ethnics, it goes to the Bama military and some opportunistic ethnics.
Therefore, bama puppet thein sein in hurry to sign the faked rubbish ceasefire agreement with Karen and other
ethnics without military power. Karen is forced by Thai military one said. Does Child soldier ming aung hlaing
has portion for peace money? So, he needs to kill more ethnics. So, the other side, puppet thein sein needs to
shout loudly to get cease fire. It is so called water in one side and fire in other side to get more peace money
portion to both of them ( ming aung hlaing and thein sein). If bama aremy does not and did not invaded all
ethnics areas, there will be easily to get peace among them so bama military and opportunistic ethnics will
have no chance to manipulate or steal the big sum of money. Now MPC will leave the rubbish and empty
money box to DASSK for continuing the peace process. DASSK should ask MPC where the peace money has
gone before taking the action for peace process. If DASSK needs independent and effective enquires, UN will
be eager to find the independent experts to investigate this matter seriously. Or there is no more foreign aid to
Burma any more. The debate regarding to this matter should be opened to the public via the TV station. Force
the concerned persons and bama military to attend this TV debate to let the public know that how the Burma is
the most corrupted country in the world.
Reply

8.

thang za dal Monday, April 4, 2016 - 5:38 am

The MPCs inglorious end was already clearly foreseeable from its very inception. Only those who were
illusioned or who saw a great chance of financial benefits for themselves made great fanfare about it. Actually,
Burma did not and does not need at all fundings from outside and the self-styled peace experts from either
inside or outside of the country. If the Bamar military and political elites were truly and sincerely willing to
make peace with non-Bamar armed forces, they would only need to sit down together in a shabby hut and there
would be peace country-wide. They wouldnt need to jet around in chartered jets and stay in five-star hotels in.
Its a great shame that two-digit billions of dollar are hidden abroad, but begging around in the international
community for a couple of millions for the expense of the peace process.
Reply

http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/where-has-burmas-peace-money-gone.html

COMMENTARY

Embattled Ethnic Armed Groups Cast Doubt on Suu Kyis Peace Drive
By LAWI WENG / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, May 25, 2016 |

Burma Army Commander-in-chief Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing looks at pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi
during talks at the Presidential palace at Naypyidaw on April 10, 2015. (Photo: Soe Zeya Tun / Reuters)
The varying approaches of State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi and commander-in-chief Snr-Gen Min Aung
Hlaing towards the peace process do not inspire confidence in its speedy resolution. But equally worrisome is the
growing doubt over Suu Kyis mooted 21st Century Panglong Conference displayed by key ethnic armed groups
that have come under considerable attack from the Burma Army in the last six months.
Suu Kyi has signaled her desire to include all of Burmas ethnic armed groups in the looming peace talks, but
troops serving under Min Aung Hlaing have conducted intensifying campaigns against ethnic armed groups that
refused to signor were excluded from signingthe Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) in October last
year.

Lawi Weng is a Senior Reporter for The Irrawaddy English edition.

The NCA was signed by eight ethnic armed organizations, who represent only a minority of such groups in
Burma, and do not include many of the most well-armed and influential.
One such non-signatory is the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), the second largest ethnic armed group in
Burma, operating from Kachin State near the Chinese border. The KIA has publicly expressed doubt over Suu
Kyis planned 21st Century Panglong Conference.
The political wing of the KIA is the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), which engaged in sporadic

bilateral talks with the government after a 17-year ceasefire broke down in 2011. These talks eventually
floundered, providing no relief to the 100,000-plus people displaced by the conflict between the KIA and the
Burma Army in Kachin and northern Shan states.
The 21st Century Panglong Conference seeks to draw all of Burmas ethnic armed groupsboth those inside
and outside of the NCAinto a political deal to resolve half a century of armed insurgency fueled by ethnic
minority grievances. It is so named in reference to the 1947 Panglong Agreement signed between Suu Kyis father
Aung San and leaders representing some of Burmas ethnic minorities, prior to Burmas independence from
Britain in 1948.
Daung Khar, who heads the KIOs Technical Advisory Team based in the Kachin State capital of Myitkyina, told
The Irrawaddy: We have lost trust with the government and the army and we doubt their motives. He noted that
the National League for Democracy (NLD)-led government had kept quiet after the Burma Armys recent assaults
on the KIA in northern Burma.
We did not gain our ethnic rights from the first Panglong agreement. We have doubts whether we would gain
them from this second Panglong, Daung Khar said.
Daung Khar contended that Burma is effectively still ruled by the military, which he said had successfully
retained its influence and power despite the transition of executive power. As long as this lasts, the prospects of
obtaining our political goals [of federalism and self-determination for the Kachin people within the Union of
Burma] remain dim.
Recent clashes between the Burma Army and the KIA have made for a very difficult working environment, in
terms of building the trust necessary to resolving the conflict, Daung Khar continued.
Whoever formally leads this countryDaw Suu [Aung San Suu Kyi] or any other personwe are no longer
interested. Politics in Burma cannot move forward..
The Shan State Army-North (SSA-N), whose political wing is the Shan State Progress Party (SSPP), has also
publicly expressed doubts over Suu Kyis 21st Century Panglong Conference. The Burma Army has waged a
prolonged offensive campaign against the SSA-Ns core positions since the NCA signing last year, which the
SSA-N refused to take part in.
Last week, the SSA-N lost a temporary base in Noung Ma village, in northern Shan States Hsipaw Township,
after clashes with the Burma Army.
We have suspicions that the Burma Army is trying to destroy the second Panglong conference, the SSPP/SSAN said in a statement issued last week.
This is the time for trust-building between ethnic armed groups and the Burma Army, but the recent activity of the
Burma Armylaunching strong military offensives against Kachin, Palaung (Taang) and Shan armed groups,
after the NLD assumed formal control of the governmentsuggest that Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing is intent on
destroying the necessary conditions for trust.
On a May 19 meeting in Naypyidaw, Min Aung Hlaing told a Chinese special envoy that all ethnic armed groups
must abide by the peace principles of the Tatmadaw (as the Burma Army is known), and stick to their
designated areas to avoid clashes, so that peace can be achieved through the current political system,
according to a post on the army commander-in-chiefs Facebook page from the same day.
Min Aung Hlaings words suggest no softening on his core position: that peace should be achieved on the Burma
Armys terms.
He has also reiterated that three ethnic armed groups engaged in current or recent conflict with the Burma Army,
and who were excluded from signing the NCAthe Taang National Liberation Army, the Myanmar
Nationalities Democratic Alliance Army and the Arakan Armyshould disarm before joining formal peace talks
with the government.
This is a condition that these three armed groupswho are closely allied, and whose participation in the peace
process is crucial to quelling ongoing fighting in the west and north-east of the countryare unlikely to ever
accept.
[Min Aung Hlaings] words just fuel civil war in the country and we condemn him for it, said a statement
released jointly by the three groups.

22 Responses to Embattled Ethnic Armed Groups Cast Doubt on Suu Kyis Peace Drive

1.

hopeful Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - 11:27 pm

Heres what the generals wrote (quoted verbatim) in the New Light of Myanmar some years ago:
If one considers that there is no other way but to use official forums, one will notice that the motto
Second Panglong conference is quite nonsensical. For activists, many of the mottos are no longer
consistent with prevailing conditions due to recent achievements.
Therefore, they try an unrealistic agenda Second Panglong Conference. Politics must be exercised in
accordance at hluttaws in peak condition. So, any types of mottos that do not comply with that point are
inappropriate and impracticable. In fact, a political motto must reflect feasibility and comply to objective
conditions. Today, lip service and high-flown language do not work at all, so things must be viewed
objectively without stereotyped beliefs. In the term of power, that is paradigm transformation from
monopoly of power to the sharing of power
Reply

2.

David Smith Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 11:29 am

21st century Panglong is just a fantasy. In any case, it is in direct conflict with the Constitution. Mrs.
Suu Aris does as she pleases as the Constitution says nothing about her being State Counsellor,
whatever it means, although it sounds very grand. On the side of the Constitution, the military stick to
their gun not meant to be a pun.
Somehow both are abiding by the Constitution although in the case of Mrs. Suu Aris, she is being
perverse.
Reply

Phone Thamain Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 10:07 pm

Daw Suu Kyi has sold the NLD party to the Military as a trade off.
Reply

3.

thang za dal Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 3:51 pm

The concept of the 21st Century Panglong Conference is and will remain just a pipe dream of the
NLD and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. The very simple reason is that every sign until now shows that the new
government cannot bring the military under its complete control yet and that the military still keeps on
trying to achieve a peace of its own version by pursuing its own strategy. You will never be able to
successfully hold such a fafeful conference that could and would seal the destiny of the entire PEOPLES
of Burma forever with two conflicting strategies!
Reply

4.

Sai Wansai Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 10:31 pm

In other words, the 21st Century Panglong Convention is roughly confronted with the militarys notion of
national unity, which is embedded in negotiated surrender, total annihilation of the ethnic resistance
armies,coupled with continued Bamar supremacy tendency on one hand; and on the other, Suu Kyis hazy
federalism promises, which no one knows what she really has in store, for she and her party, the NLD,
until now have failed to spell out clearly how the envisioned federal union should look like.
But her treatment of the ethnic nationalities armed and unarmed being not so important or insignificant
was not taken lightly.
This dissatisfaction is compounded by the 8 States versus 14 States and Divisions/Regions controversy, as
the NLDs top leadership have shown, on several occasions, that they were on the same page with the
USDP-Military clique. This in turn lead to the suspicion of Suu Kyi and the NLD being on the same boat
with the military, where pursuing Bamar ethnocentrism and denying national equality of the ethnic
nationalities are concerned.

As such, it is not a wonder that the ethnic nationalities rank and file are so reluctant and even pessimistic
of the Suu Kyi initiated Panglong-like convention that is supposed to take place in a month or two.
Given such a backdrop, only a bold initiative of Suu Kyi would be able to dispel such distrust. That would
be her declaration of NLD position on federal union, which is in line with the 1947 Panglong Agreement,
1947 Union of Burma Constitution and Ethnic Federal Proposal of 1961. Of course with necessary
innovation to be in tune with the present political reality.
In addition to this a unilateral ceasefire declaration of the government is the only way to create a level
playing field, where non-signatory ethnic armed groups could participate, in an all-inclusive manner.
But whether the military will cooperate or come on board in its implementation is totally dependent on
how Suu Kyi would negotiate and handle the situation, as half-measure undertakings like those of the
former Thein Sein regime would bring the country nowhere, but continued warfare and heightened ethnic
tension.
Reply

5.

Kaw Thaw Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 11:00 pm

I personally believe that the key here is the military. Its time for the army to reform itself to a modern
one instead of continues to operate as bully and thugs. The military needs to change its mindset that
ethnic people are its enemy. Its time to change dangerous attitude to a positive one.
Reply

6.

Norman Hla Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 11:15 pm

On a May 19 meeting in Naypyidaw, Min Aung Hlaing told a Chinese special envoy that all ethnic armed
groups must abide by the peace principles of the Tatmadaw (as the Burma Army is known), and stick
to their designated areas to avoid clashes, so that peace can be achieved through the current political
system, according to a post on the army commander-in-chiefs Facebook page from the same day.
My opinion:
Child soldier ming aung hlaing boasts his military power to the Chinese special envoy. In fact, bama
private army should be in the designated areas ( army barrack ) and should not invade all ethnics areas.
All ethnics never invade Rangoon, Mandalay and Maulamine now and then and history. So, why dose
bama army invade all ethnics areas? The answer is for robbing and raping and stealing all ethnics natural
resources to sell greedy rich China for the sake of their own interest. So, Ming aung haling proudly
announces that he can continue to sell the all ethnics natural resources to rich and greedy China anytime
and any reason with help of his guns, appointed by his fox than shwe Nargic 2008 constitution. China will
reply that they will not interfere other country internal affair as long as China get all ethnics natural
resources in cheaper prices.
Reply

Wai Yan Sunday, May 29, 2016 - 9:36 pm

Hey Norman Hla,
You are narrow minded and I believe that you are brainwashed by your elders since you were
born.
You are still in 1940s and all your comment is negative.
You are like a fish in a small pond.
To be straight , your outlook and view is so mean.
And you do not know about Tatmataw and how Tatmataw is moving towards where.
Min Aung Hlaing is not Bamar. He is one of the national races Dawai and Tatmataw led by
Min Aung Hlaing is going towards democratization and building Standardized Army only one
Armed Forces of the Country of Myanmar.
Another point is that States and Regions are not owned by one nationality.
In Shan State , there are many nationalities and ethnics groups such as Shan, Palaung, In Thar, Pa
Oo, Wa, Burmese and etc.
So also in Kachin State, there are Kachin , Li Zu, Ya Wun, Rakhine, Bamar and etc.

In Rakhine, there are Rakhine, Myo,Thet ,Bamar, Chin and etc.

Similarly, in Kayin and Mon States as well as Yangon Region, there are
Bamar,Kayin,Chin,Rakhin ,Mon , Shan and etc.
That is why , all nationalities belong to all States and Regions.
Therefore whoever rule the country, it is the duty of Tatmataw only one Armed Forces to
protect and safeguard the life of people / nationalities and the country.
In response to your comment , let me ask one question Who support arms and ammunition to
these Ethnic Armed Group and How do they get Money ?
The simple evidence is KIA and TNLA
So also they dig and cut all valuable natural resources of the country and sell it to China with
cheapest prices. So also they do drug business and distribute the rest of world through borders.
They also rob money from People and take away the young kids by force to do as Child soliders
and do all sabotage activities in villages and towns.
Where are the money they rob from people and earn by means of illegal business ?
All are in the pockets of leaders of KIA /TNLA.
Now they have no place to go because international community knows about them well and they
can not lie to people no longer.
Thus they are shouting rights loudly and blaming Government and Tatmataw led by National
Leader Daw Aung San Su Kyi giving panic reasons.
See the truth with clear right view.
Reply

Norman Hla Tuesday, May 31, 2016 - 6:27 pm

hey Wai Yan
The questions are for you to answer before you take proud of your bama thamadaw.
1-Do your beloved bama thamadaw honor Panglong agreement? If not, all ethnics have
right to fight against bama thamadaw or whatever it is.
You told me that some ethnics are selling natural resources in cheaper price to China. So
what. They sell their own natural resources to anybody and anywhere because they need
small guns to protect from the bama thamadaws raping, looting, killing-ethnic cleansing
and stealing their natural resources.
The root cause of the above all or some ethnics behaviour is due to your bama
thamadaw being not honored panglong agreement. Asking their right written in the
panglong treaty is not the meaning of disintegration of union of Burma. Or no ethnics
will sign with G-Aung San in this Panglong treaty. If you request your girlfriend to get
married, you must agree with your girl friends demands and her rights before marriage.
After marriage, you must honor pre-marriage agreement. You can not even rape your
wife if she does not agree for sex on your demand. It is the democracy and human right
your beloved bama thamadaw does not have.
You can not say the pre-marriage agreement-autonomy or federalism is the disintegration
of the union of Burma. Then, you can not keep raping your wife from your own unfair
interpretation of Panglong treaty which is written in English. If your beloved bama
thamadaw can not read in English, ask China (very good in English now) and Russian to
translate your Panglong treaty to you.
If your parents are not good enough to eat well nutritious foods (not honor panglong
treaty) due to poor, your parents will give birth to you like low IO or low analytical skill
or narrow minded.
So i will not blame you or i can not blame those all ethnics behavior now and then. Why
do you blame all ethnics behavior for their survival and for their selling their own
natural resources they own it generation and generation before or after panglong treaty?
The same you can sell your owned house and the worst you can sell your children to be
slave for your survival but your beloved bama thamadaw can not gain dollars (6 billions
dollars worth-as China claimed and China said they have given their part to your beloved
parents) from China for allowing to build hydropower stations in selling Kachin land.
Your beloved bama thamadaw can not sell Kachin jade and Kachin timber to China.

Kachin can sell their land and their natural resources to any body in any price.
You can sell your bama thanaka-beauty paste to rich China.
Please, educate your parents-ming aung haling and thein sein. Let NLD to appoint G-Tin
Oo to be commander in chief of staff in military instead of your parents (in retired age)
who might have their names or relative names or their men name in Panama scandal.
Enough is enough.
NLD or DASSK knows what is thamadaw, what is democracy, what is the correct
direction or moving of thamadaw to the reputable/ respectable standard army. I repeat
you again that do not worry about foreign invasion. In history, Chinese nationalist army
conquers Japanese invasion in Burma. So, China will protect foreign invasion in
neighbor Burma again. Only Chinese King needed to agree to give Hong Kong and
Macau to UK and Portuguese respectively in the opium war deliberately created by UK
and EU for their gain and invasion. Now EU and UK are invaded by Muslim refugees so
they are busy to be unable to invade Burma and China any more. US is now superpower
so Hilary Clinton will protect Burma if there is any foreign invasion in Burma. So,
Burma does not need army. If Donald/dumb so trump/trick become president of US, it
might be another story in Burma. Dumb trick cheats his own people from his trump
university, divorced 3 times, look down woman-including DASSK, extremist like ISIS
or Ma ba tha-known as American IS. He is so dumb-not know the meaning of nuclear
triads in his presidential debate.
Reply

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - 12:19 am

Continue:
He (Dumb trick) is not sincere but arrogant, like child soldier ming aung haling
and psy wirathu. So, he will not or does not or can not show his tax return to his
own people as required or have done by all presidential candidates in US.
In short, the root cause of children with low IQ or low analytical skill or narrow
mind in you is due to poor nutrition in your both parents (fox, child soldier and
puppet) because they are too poor to eat well nutritious foods or being low class
or low education or unethical or immoral.
All or some ethnics behavior (consequences) are now for that they need to
survive from the raping and robbing of their natural resources from your beloved
bama thamadaw due to lack of honoring panglong treaty.
2-Do you agree that your beloved bama thamdaw divides Karen into Christian
and Buddhist Karen for easy ruling and making complication in all ethnics,
particularly Shan/Kachin/Arakanese/Rohyingya?
In history, Karen are living peacefully whatever religious it is. The same, Shan
are not divided by Shan itself and all kinds of Shan minorities are peaceful
living together from their own recognised ruler-SawPawer. Please view the
recent movie how your beloved Ne win from the leader of bama thamadaw
killed Shan SawPawer for power consolidating or avoiding to honor panglong
treaty. Shan SawPawer was mining engineer, graduated in US. Paranoid Ne win
was only holder of matriculation education level of Burma. Those above are the
evidences why you are born with narrow minded. Your bama thamdaw leans
from British colony (bad behavior) how to divide and rule the ethnics. Your own
bama killed G-Aung san who was going to honor Panglong treaty for your
intention of complicating the treaty under the name of your beloved bama
thamadaw slogan -forward direction.
3-Now,Fox than shwe men such as child soldier ming aung hlaing and puppet
thein sein gain the millions of dollar from European/Japan peace process moneyhuge one. So your men need to manipulate in keep killing ethnics and shouting
your lips servicing to prolong the peace process. Or I might ask your beloved
parents where are those peace process and hydropower-huge dollars-in panama
bank/lawyer or Singapore banks.
Swiss journalist makes this accusation so your beloved ming aung hlaing and
thein sein need to hold this peace process to cover their gaining huge for the
exchange of one European country and japan in the businesses of Burmese
telecommunication and Thelawa project respectively (however, Japan does not
count the debt from Bama military Ne win government but Ne wins name
might be in panama scandal for keeping his stolen dollars) .

Your beloved bama thamadaw had eaten tasty foods (huge dollars in
hydropower and ethnics peace process) so they want to continue to eat more. In
this regards, they need to continue to killing all ethnics with the slogan of
thamadaw is moving forwards to continue to kill all ethnics, Thamadaw is
shouting discipline democracy-raping and invasion of all ethnics land for
protection of bama Rangoon, Mandalay and Maulamain) although they do not
know how to spell in democracy in English and how to gaining standard bama
army although they are learning and teaching from Ma Ba tha-woman breast
interested religious party.
Burma does not need army or military. Or all ethnics armies or freedom fighters
are not under the bama army or bama thamadaw. Retired aged Ming aung haling
should be replaced with G-Tin Oo from the reason of land slide presidential
victory in NLD/DASSK if thamadaw has discipline democracy.
Reply

7.

Moe Aung Thursday, May 26, 2016 - 11:19 pm

The military ploughs its own furrow in a field where ASSK is off limits.
The only way the military can be brought to heel is to incite mutiny in the ranks and grab control of the
army.
The fires of conflict are nursed by the generals to keep the troops occupied and united against an enemy
determined to break the union but in reality to stay in power by other means. They need the civil war
like no one else.
Time the stranglehold of the military elite was smashed once and for all. The question is if the Lady has
got what it takes. This will be the real test for a liberal dove who failed to learn the lessons of 1988.
Perhaps she is more than happy to just make her mark in history pursuing a neoliberal agenda that her
international supporters and more importantly her military straitjacket allows her to do. Than Shwe will
die happy.
Reply

8.

Sai Wansai Friday, May 27, 2016 - 7:00 am

The commentary hit the nail on the head.
The now much talk about 21st Century Panglong Convention, initiated by Aung San Suu Kyi, is literally
confronted with the militarys notion of national reconciliation, which is embedded in negotiated
surrender and/or total annihilation of the ethnic resistance armies, coupled with continued Bamar
supremacy tendency on one hand; and the hazy federalism promises of the NLD, which no one knows
what it really has in store, for failing to spell out clearly on how the party envisioned federal union should
look like, on the other hand.
But her treatment of the ethnic nationalities armed and unarmed as not being so important or insignificant
was viewed as betrayal to the common cause and not taken lightly. Suu Kyi has only negotiated
intensively with the military regarding national reconciliation, but not with ethnic nationalities so far,
even it has all along been agreed that the three most important stakeholders the military, NLD and the
ethnic groups should interact with each other.
This dissatisfaction is compounded by the 8 States versus 14 States and Divisions/Regions controversy, as
the NLDs top leadership have shown, on several occasions, that they were on the same page with the
USDP-Military clique. This in turn lead to the suspicion of Suu Kyi and the NLD being on the same boat
with the military, where policies related to the pursuing of Bamar ethnocentrism and denial of national
equality for the ethnic nationalities are concerned.
As such, it is not a wonder that the ethnic nationalities rank and file are so reluctant and even pessimistic
of the Suu Kyi initiated Panglong-like convention that is supposed to take place in a month or two.
Given such a backdrop, only a bold initiative of Suu Kyi would be able to dispel such distrust.
Firstly, it should make a declaration of NLD position on federal union, which is in line with the 1947
Panglong Agreement, 1947 Union of Burma Constitution and Ethnic Federal Proposal of 1961. Of course
with necessary innovation to be in tune with the present political reality.

Secondly, a unilateral ceasefire declaration of the government should follow, as it is the only way to
create a level playing field, where non-signatory ethnic armed groups could participate, in an all-inclusive
manner.
But whether the military will cooperate or come on board for such decisive bold action will be totally
dependent on how Suu Kyi would negotiate and handle the situation, as half-measure undertakings like
those of the former Thein Sein regime would bring the country nowhere, but only continued warfare and
heightened ethnic tension.
The now much talk about 21st Century Panglong Convention, initiated by Aung San Suu Kyi, is literally
confronted with the militarys notion of national reconciliation, which is embedded in negotiated
surrender and/or total annihilation of the ethnic resistance armies, coupled with continued Bamar
supremacy tendency on one hand; and the hazy federalism promises of the NLD, which no one knows
what it really has in store, for failing to spell out clearly on how the party envisioned federal union should
look like, on the other hand.
But her treatment of the ethnic nationalities armed and unarmed as not being so important or insignificant
was viewed as betrayal to the common cause and not taken lightly. Suu Kyi has only negotiated
intensively with the military regarding national reconciliation, but not with ethnic nationalities so far,
even it has all along been agreed that the three most important stakeholders the military, NLD and the
ethnic groups should interact with each other.
This dissatisfaction is compounded by the 8 States versus 14 States and Divisions/Regions controversy, as
the NLDs top leadership have shown, on several occasions, that they were on the same page with the
USDP-Military clique. This in turn lead to the suspicion of Suu Kyi and the NLD being on the same boat
with the military, where policies rel
Reply

9.

Oo Maung Gyi Friday, May 27, 2016 - 7:56 pm

It is fvery difficult to success 2nd Pinlon Conference without trust building as first stage. There was no
question of demanding federalism at the time of un divided AFPFL government which was very strong
and powerful regime in Burma ever exist. No Arakan State and Mon State at that time. No body dare to
demand. Why? The answer that AFPFL government treated well all ethnic groups and have ethnic high
officials in Burma Army. and many other things. After the split of AFPFL party the ethnic groups
demands were started, so slowly many of the ethnic high officials were reduced from the Burma Army
and to day it is hard to find within Burma army.
Nowadays NLD is in power not fully, but 60:40. So Daw Aung San Suu Kyi without political advisors
heading towards the democratic parth and put a slogan of 2nd Pinlon Conference which is very good in
hearing but very hard to success due to un equal status of ethnic groups fighting with Burma Army
( Tatmadaw ) including of so call AA ( Arakan Army ) created by KIA to favour Chnia for energy policy.
How could this type of formation abruptly making fighting with Tatmadaw?
Does AA declared clearly its policy towards creation of Militant group? May be AA would like to
establish Neo-Kingdom of Arakan without the will of Arakanese majority.
Tatmadaw standing point shall have to consider deeply. What is our past? What is our present? and what
is our future? Without inclusive of Tatmadaw at 2nd Pinlon Conference it can be accomplished and can
not reach the goal. The country future is depend on Tatmadaw, peoples and present administration, not
ethnic groups alone.
Reply

10.

Myanmar Citizen Saturday, May 28, 2016 - 5:33 pm

Since Independence to U Ne Win Period, objective of some ethnic armed groups is politics.
But after 1988, their motive is changed to economic and personal interest.
People knows very well that Who is doing drug business and illegal extraction of natural resources and
earning billion of dollar profit for themselves.
World Nations also know that all these business are operated by Ethnic Armed Groups areas especially
in Kachin and Shan State.
That is why Myanmar is known as 2nd Largest Poppy Cultivation and Production Country in the world.
To hide their real motive and not to give up their personal interests, they are shouting Ethnic Rights

loudly.
To go to the point, the main reason of why some armed ethnic did not take part in NCA is mainly due to
economic and personal interest mentioned above.
That is why they do not want to give up arms and are blaming successive governments giving different
reasons.
They never tell how they make many troubles to local people : collecting money ; recruiting child
solders by force ; doing sabotage in towns and so on.
If they all wish to get PEACE, they would have sit and talked in the PEACE Table and given up their up
arms already.
They are actually playing political and personal games.
They are now sincere and honest.
Reply

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - 4:31 pm

Everybody (particularly all ethnics) in Burma can do or is eligible to do politics, not only for
paranoid U ne win and fox than shwe. If bama army doing drug and illegal extraction of natural
resource in all ethnics regions ,everybody ( particularly all ethnics) can do the same. So what?
Reply

11.

soe maung u Sunday, May 29, 2016 - 12:51 pm

Openly speaking; demanding ethnic rights is just an excuse.

Why ?
Even in ethnic armed group control area; rights of local people living in that areas re breached by ethnic
armed groups themselves by means of collecting money from poor community people in the name of tax;
taking away kids by ethnic armed groups in the name of recruitment and so on.
Even now they are doing all kinds of sabotage in villages and towns such as firing villages and killing
civilians.
They all are doing illegle business such as cultivation /production / distribution of drugs ; extraction of all
valuable natural resources and etc. By doing so ; they
get triilion of USD . So they do not want to lose this preveliges and personal.interest.
People of Myanmar and world nations know that some are drug lords only and who is doing what and
who is supporting them to prolong armed conflicts with Tatmataw so that they can take advantage of it.
If all ethnic armed groups are sincere and honest; we can get eternal Peace within a short time.
Do not point your fingers and blame to Tatmataw and government led by Daw Aung San Su Kyi because
those who commented below also know very well that
Who is masterminding ethnic armed groups and
playing political games to get their interest by using them.
Daw Aung San Su Kyi and SeniorGeneral Min.Ag Hlaing are trying their best to get Peace.
I strongly support and appreciated their efforts
Wish Myanmar enjoy Eternal Peace.
Reply

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - 4:37 pm

Child soldier ming aung hlaing and fox private army has child solders and they has illegal drug
business and fox than shwe declares that bama soldiers raping the all ethnics is the rewards for
more killing and all ethnics cleansing.
If bama army sincere and honest to give the military power to DASSK, we can get eternal Peace
within a short time. Senior General ming aung hlaing needs to explain that where the peace
process millions dollars and money (provided by EU and Japan) keeping in which banks-

Singapore or panama bank/Lawyer? Or Ming aung hlaing and puppet thein sein ( fox than shwes
men) need to continue to kill all ethnics to prolong the peace process to cover up his sin and
stealing dollars.
Reply

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - 4:56 pm

Bama nationalism and unity (prevention of disintegration of union of Burma) are all of
the excuse. Selling the Kachin land for hydropwer projects, Kachin jade and timber to
China in cheaper price for the dollar gain of U Pie ( fox than shwe private business
company) are the main reasons for creating faked Peace process in continuing cheating
all ethnics.
Reply

12.

.min gyi tar Sunday, May 29, 2016 - 3:36 pm

TNLA and AA is just puppet of KIA abd supported by KIA / MNDAA / Black Hands.
They are no more than drug dealers and opportiunists only.
They trade drugs to the world whereas they are shouting ethnic issues.
Presently TLNA and MNDAA is destroying the stability and doing terrorist activities in Shan State with
the support of Black Hands whereas AA is also doinging terrorist activities in Arakean.
As the saying same feather flock together goes; these 3 terrorist groups combined together to do drug
business.
Not only Tatmataw but also people of myanmar do not recognize these 3 terrorist drug dealers.
Reply

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - 4:44 pm

As the saying same feather flock together goes, child soldier ming aung hlaing is still holding
the military power with his adopted father-fox than shwe with same feather flock together now
and then. Ming aung hlaing does not accept that he should step down from the landslide victory
of DASSK in presidential election. He should be replaced with NLD G-Tin Oo. Because he has a
same feather from fox than shwe to flick and flock together in order to continue to rule Burma
although his USDP lost heavily and ugly in presidential election.
Reply

13.

Truth and Reality Sunday, May 29, 2016 - 10:05 pm

Hi all ,
Do not waste your time to putting your wrong comments and point your blind fingers to Government and
Tatmadaw which are opening up PEACE Door warmly.
PEACE is within an inch if Wolf instructs all its adopted sons to surrender / give up arms and take part in
NCA and nation building tasks.
I believe that they all are waiting for guidelines from their God Father Wolf.
No one can not deny this Truth and Reality.
Reply

14.

Norman Hla Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - 4:49 pm

Bama Tatmadaw are opening up PEACE Door warmly but sorry, ming aung haling needs to continue to
kill all ethnics because all ethnics does not lay down their small arms on condition before all kinds of
peace of talk with bama Tatmadaw. Bama Tatmadaw does not want to mention about Panglong treaty
becasue G-Aung san is naive to create this Panglong treaty which is the potential danger for disintegration
of union of Burma. So, all ethnics should be in naked to go into the PEACE Door warmly welcomed by

bama Tatmadaw.
Reply
15.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/commentary/embattled-ethnic-armed-groups-cast-doubt-suu-kyis-peace-drive.html

INTERVIEW

KIO Vice Chairman Gen Gun Maw: We Hope to Gain an Equal Status in the
Political Dialogue
By NYEIN NYEIN / THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, June 7, 2016 |

General Gun Maw (left) shaking hands with Dr. Tin Myo Win after a meeting last Friday. (Photo:
Nyein Nyein / The Irrawaddy)
In early June, the National League for Democracy (NLD) governments new peace negotiator Dr. Tin Myo Win met
with the United Nationalities Federal Councils (UNFC) Delegation for Political Negotiation (DPN), which comprises
nine members drawn from various non-state ethnic armed groups who opted out of signing 2015s nationwide ceasefire
agreement (NCA). The meeting is said to have delivered positive results.
General Gun Maw, vice chairperson of the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) and one of the leaders of the
DPN, recently talked to The Irrawaddys reporter Nyein Nyein about his views on upcoming peace talks and the role
that the international community should play. The general was previously deputy chief of staff of the Kachin
Independence Army (KIA), the armed wing of the KIO, and in February was promoted to vice chairman of the KIO.
Will the UNFC members participate in the political dialogue framework meeting before the Panglong-style
peace conference?
We were invited to attend the framework meeting, but the DPN members have to thoroughly discuss this and follow the
decision made by the UNFC.
We expect that by participating in the meeting, we will be able to make necessary amendments and additions [to the
framework]. Then, we hope there are opportunities for a certain degree of participation and inclusion in preparation for
the peace conference. We view the governments invitation as a positive sign.

The government has invited you to participate in the framework meeting, which is key preparation for the peace
conference. Does this make you think that the new government is willing to treat NCA non-signatories as equals?
We have yet to see. They have only invited us to the dialogue framework meeting and not yet to the peace conference.
Whether we sign the NCA first or go straight to the peace conference [without signing the NCA] will depend on the
governments response to our demands and follow-up negotiations. We havent gotten to that discussion yet.
What is the UNFCs stance on joining the peace conference?
We are not clear yet if the peace conference means the previous ongoing [peace] process or what is being called the new
21st-century Panglong conference. We have to review this matter before putting together a prosposal for further
discussion with the government. We will know after that.
Aung San Suu Kyi has said that the peace conference will be based on the inclusive spirit of the first Panglong
conference convened by her father Gen Aung San in 1947, and urged ethnic groups to think about what they can
concede rather than what they can gain. What do you think of her statement?
This matter was included in our questions to Dr. Tin Myo Win on June 3rd. We told him that we are not very clear
about what the statement means. This has to be discussed seriously; we cannot just give an answer to it. When speaking
of Panglong, many topics for discussion come to mind. Whether we refer to Panglongs spirit, agreement or pledge, we
have to discuss it inclusively.
What was the UNFCs decision regarding the request of two of your membersthe Taang National Liberation
Army [TNLA] and the MNDAA [Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army]to leave the alliance?
The UNFC has not decided yet. It was taken off of the agenda until the next UNFC conference. We dont think this
issue of resignation should be discussed for the time being.
The two groups are represented in the DPN, but they did not attend the meeting on June 3rd. Why not?
Some of the leaders failed to be present at the meeting, but that does not mean that their groups have resigned. It was
just an absence. DPN leader Khu Oo Reh could not attend the meeting because of his health, but leaders of other groups
that were not represented in the DPN were present at the meeting. We are all UNFC members.
Has the UNFC ever invited the Arakan Army (AA) to participate in negotiations with the new government?
Yes, we have. We have also asked the governments peace negotiators to request, on our behalf, that state leadership
and the army chief not leave behind the MNDAA, AA and TNLA. We will think of as many approaches as possible to
share with the government peace negotiators.
We call for not leaving them behind. We have asked the government peace negotiators to seriously put forward our
request to the president, concerned authorities, state counselor and the commander-in-chief.
As a leader within the KIO, what do you expect from the meeting and upcoming negotiations?
We hope to gain an equal status in the political dialogue. The NLD government was elected by the people and has
repeatedly talked about its commitment to [national] reconciliation. So, we hope to see a genuine dialogue and
inclusivity.
What do you think of the governments plan to manage all the peace process expenditures?
We have not discussed it yet, but it is difficult for us to accept the governments control over everything. We will have
nothing to say if the government is helpful and cooperative.
Western and European countries are assisting the peace process in different ways. Asian countries, like Japan
and neighboring China, are also providing assistance. How do you see the role of China in the upcoming peace
conference?
It is difficult to say because it is not under our management. My understanding is that China is a superpower as well as
our neighbor, so we just cant ignore its role.
China may have its hands in the peace process and the Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC), but the intervention of the
international community should come in the form of help rather than control.
If the government becomes too reliant on China, will it affect the peace process?
It is dangerous for any government to rely on the support of one particular country, whether its China or America.

2 Responses to KIO Vice Chairman Gen Gun Maw: We Hope to Gain an Equal Status in the Political Dialogue

1.

thang za dal Wednesday, June 8, 2016 - 2:39 pm

Aung San Suu Kyi has said that the peace conference will be based on the inclusive spirit of the first
Panglong conference convened by her father Gen Aung San in 1947, and urged ethnic groups to think about
what they can concede rather than what they can gain.
I think Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has borrowed the last few words and urged ethnic groups to think about
what they can concede rather than what they can gain. from one of President John F. Keneddys presidential
campaign speeches. I noticed that she has used such similarly sounding words at least a couple of times
already.
Actually, these words are not appropriate at all in the present context. The simple reason is that the non-Bamar
PEOPLES have nothing to concede. What they have been demanding and fighting for for 70 years is to regain
their birthrights within their own legal territories. Countless innocent people have been tortured and murdered,
countless women have been raped and mutilated and countless properties have been robbed by the so-called
Union Armed Forces or Bamar Tatmadaw during these decades! So, if the elite Bamar politicians and highranking militarymen would sit down together and decide to give these PEOPLES their birthrights back in full,
the conference which is now under preparation would not even need to take place. THAT WOULD BE THE
REAL PANGLONG SPIRIT!
She and the leading members of her party should read the following few lines from REPORT OF THE
FRONTIER AREAS COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY, 1947
CHAPTER I
2. Terms of Reference
The terms of reference of the Committee were those quoted above. They have, of course, to be considered in
the light of the statement of the agreed objective of His Majestys Government and the Government of Burma
with which paragraph 8 of the Conclusions opens:- To achieve the early unification of the Frontier Areas and
Ministerial Burma with the free consent of the inhabitants of those areas. (p. 1)
CHAPTER II
PART III.
5. Right of Secession
The majority of the witnesses who favoured a federation of Burma asked for the right of secession by the states
at any time. Few federal constitutions contain provision for the secession of states. It seems to us that, if any
such right is to be contained in the federal constitution for Burma, it will have to be carefully limited and
regulated. (p. 20)
Reply

2.

Sai Wansai Wednesday, June 8, 2016 - 4:20 pm

Gun Maws take on 21st Century Panglong Convention/Conference is the heart of the problem, surrounding
the ethnic conflict probematic.
He said:This matter was included in our questions to Dr. Tin Myo Win on June 3rd. We told him that we are
not very clear about what the statement means. This has to be discussed seriously; we cannot just give an
answer to it. When speaking of Panglong, many topics for discussion come to mind. Whether we refer to
Panglongs spirit, agreement or pledge, we have to discuss it inclusively.
Now let us go a little bit deeper into the three issues of Panglong Agreement, Promises or Pledge and Spirit.
While Panglong Agreement is full autonomy in internal affairs and full financial autonomy for Federated Shan
States, Kachin and Chin Hills, Panglong Promises are explained by Khuensai Jaiyen, Director of Pyidaungsu
Institute, as follows:
The right to secede if and when we choose
Equal status
Joint responsibility for common subjects such as foreign affairs, defence and coinage and currency
Gen Aung San reportedly had accepted all in principle but requested that they be included in the Union
Constitution to be a drafted by the upcoming Constituent Assembly instead. His solemn word of honour thus
became known as the promises of Panglong.
As for the Panglong Spirit:
The NCA, both in the text and its attachment, which contains 36 resolutions passed in the 9 formal meetings,
doesnt have anything to say about what the word means.
However, judging by what the Burmese leaders have repeatedly said, the much-vaunted Three National

Causes (Non-disintegration of the Union, Non-disintegration of National Solidarity, and the Perpetuation of
National Sovereignty) appears to be their interpretation. To the non-Burmans, this summing-up means they
have to live under Burmese domination as second class citizens whether they like it or not.
Their own interpretation: Equal status, sense of joint ownership and sense of joint responsibility, has not been
sought out, let alone agreed.
As long as this ambiguity continues, it is doubtful a genuine union will be realized. It will therefore be the job
of the Union Peace Conference which began on 12-16 January and is being planned three times a year for at
least 3-5 years to clear up the enigma, if the Union is meant to be everlasting.
(Source: Panglong Agreement, Panglong Promises and the Panglong Spirit SHAN Feb 12, 2016
http://panglongenglish.blogspot.de/2016/06/aung-san-suu-kyi-initiated-ray-of-hope.html)
Having said that, Suu Kyis position of putting more importance on Panglong Spirit than Panglong Promises
wont go down well with the ethnic nationalities in general. Suu Kyi needs to clarify if she really honours the
Panglong Agreement, which is the cornerstone of genuine federal union anchored in equality, rights of selfdetermination, human rights and democracy.
For by voicing the Panglong Spirit as paramount and downplaying the Panglong Promises amount to saying
that she is only ready to agree on a sort of power devolution based on unitary system, the idea which the
military also preferred, and not fully fledged federalism that the EAOs and ethnic nationalities as a whole is
striving for.
In a nutshell, the Suu Kyi initiated Panglong-like conventions success will largely depend on fulfilling the
1947 Panglong Agreement and Promises, combined with its Spirit. It is as simple as that.
Reply
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/kio-vice-chairman-gen-gun-maw-we-hope-to-gain-an-equal-status-in-the-politicaldialogue.html

BURMA

Aung Kyi to Head Govt-Linked Peace Think Tank

By KYAW KHA/ THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, July 15, 2016 |
1

Aung Kyi, a former army officer who served as information minister under the previous government of President Thein
Sein. (Photo: J Paing/The Irrawaddy)
RANGOON Aung Kyi, an information minister under the previous Thein Sein government, has been appointed head
of a new three-member think tank adjoined to the governments re-branded peace secretariat, which includes various
peace process veterans from the previous government.
The new think tank is an adjunct to a six-member peace commission created on July 11 under the National
Reconciliation and Peace Center (NRPC), a peace secretariatnow chaired by State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi
known under the previous government as the Myanmar Peace Center (MPC), which facilitated peace talks with
Burmas various non-state ethnic armed groups.
The think tank also includes Min Zaw Oo, formerly the director of ceasefire negotiation and implementation under
the MPC, and Hla Maung Shwe, another MPC veteran who is currently secretary of the 21st Century Panglong peace
conference. It is charged with advising the peace commission in furthering Burmas peace process, and aiding in the
design of NRPC policy.
The peace commission is chaired by Tin Myo Win, with Thein Zaw as his deputy, who was vice-chair of the Union
Peace-Making Work Committee, the key peace negotiation body under the previous government. Ex Army Lt-Gen
Khin Zaw Oo is the secretary of the commission. Professor Aung Tun Thet, an economic advisor to the Thein Sein
government, Naing Ngan Linn, Rangoon Division social affairs minister, and Lower House lawmaker Aung Soe are
also members.
Aung Kyi has served in the military and government administration for more than 50 years. He graduated among the
40th intake at the Officers Training School, and rose to the rank of major general in the Burma Army before being
transferred to the Ministry of Immigration and Population, where he served as deputy minister from May 2006 under
the military junta.
He was appointed as deputy labor minister in November 2006, during a time of increased pressure from the
International Labor Organization, and was made labor minister the following year.

In October 2007, Aung Kyi was charged with conducting negotiations with pro-democracy opposition leader Aung San
Suu Kyi, while she was under house arrest. He was the highest-ranking official in 19 years to have been given this brief,
and met with Suu Kyi nine times up until January 2010.
Under the reformist Thein Sein administration, Aung Kyi concurrently served as minister of labor and of social welfare,
before he was appointed information minister in 2012. He was replaced by his deputy Ye Htut in July 2014; according
to a statement from the government, Aung Kyi was allowed to resign of his own volitiona phrase commonly used
by the former military regime on sacking high-ranking officials.
Aung Kyi has published books on state building, politics and conflict resolution under the penname Min Ba Htoo.
Translated from Burmese by Thet Ko Ko

Related Posts:

Ethnic Leaders Call on Thein Sein to Recontest Presidency

Wa to Host Ethnic Summit for Non-Signatory Ceasefire Groups

NCA Signatories, Abstainers Welcome New Leadership

KNU, RCSS Meet to Ready for Second Panglong Summit

Govt Invites UWSA, MNDAA to the Peace Table

2 Responses to Aung Kyi to Head Govt-Linked Peace Think Tank

1.

thang za dal Saturday, July 16, 2016 - 3:04 am

Actually, what the country badly needs is not new think-tanks, but courageous, sincere, honest and visionary

leaders on the ethnic Bamar part. There are already more than enough qualified people who have got excellent
ideas and concepts for the restoration of peace, righteousness, equality, etc. Even the average ordinary man on
the street has got enough good ideas for such purposes.
And Im wondering what kind of new and good ideas could come out of those who have been leading members
of the political and militaray establishments of the country for so long.
Reply

2.

Terry Evans Saturday, July 16, 2016 - 4:56 am

The moment there is suspicion about a persons motives, everything he does becomes tainted.
Reply

3.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/photo-week-july-15-2016.html

CONTRIBUTORS

Burmas Peace Process and the Swiss Bank Account

By THUTA / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, August 3, 2016 |
3

Burmas former chief peace negotiator Aung Min at a meeting with ethnic leaders in Chiang Mai, Thailand, in
February. (Photo: Nyein Nyein / The Irrawaddy)
Burmas peace negotiators must be able to open a Swiss bank account if they want to achieve their goals in the peace
process.
Such first-rate advice was the legacy of Aung Min, the former governments chief negotiator at the Myanmar Peace
Center, which has been rebranded as the National Reconciliation and Peace Center (NRPC) under the leadership of
State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.
You may ask: How is Burmas peace process related to Swiss banking?
In a recent publication, Peace Process and the Analyses of Those Involved, Aung Min wrote a 12-page reflection on
how he had led peace talks with the ethnic armed organizations through shuttle diplomacy, a tactic used throughout his
leadership. In the article, he explained the term shuttle democracy by telling the Swiss Bank Account story.
The story goes: Once upon a time, there was a rich man who had a very beautiful daughter. There was also a broker
who wanted to arrange a marriage between the daughter and a poor boy in town. He asked the rich man to allow his
daughter to marry the poor boy, but the rich man refused because of the boys poverty. The broker said the boy had a
Swiss bank account. Thinking that a person with a Swiss account must be wealthy, the rich man agreed to the nuptial.
Then, the broker went to the daughter and urged her to marry the boy, but she refused. The broker explained that her
father had approved the match. She was then afraid of losing the rights to her fathers wealth and agreed to marry the
boy. The broker again went to the boy and urged him to marry the daughter of the rich man. The boy said she would not
marry him because he was poor. When the broker said that she already agreed to marry him, the boy agreed as well.
Finally, the broker went to a Swiss bank and asked them to open an account for the boy. The bank refused. The broker
told the bank that the boy was going to be the son-in-law of a billionaire. Knowing that, the Swiss bank agreed to open
an account for the boy.
U Aung Min wanted readers to understand that he had played the role of the broker in the story and was able to open a
Swiss bank account to achieve his goal. Transposed to the peace process, he was able to achieve the Nationwide

Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) between the government and several ethnic armed organizations by using his brand of
shuttle diplomacy.
The story could also be understood through the well known Machiavellian principal, the ends justify the means,
implying that any means necessary are acceptable in achieving ones goals.
But, if Aung Min actually led the peace talks with the ethnic armed organizations over the past four years with the
Swiss bank account story as a template, it was nothing but deception, no matter how noble the results were.
What is worse is that he wrongly interpreted shuttle diplomacy. The term was first coined when Henry Kissinger
shuttled between countries while acting as the US governments negotiator in a peace process between Israel, Egypt and
Syria following the Yom Kippur War in 1973.
The term shuttle diplomacy is used when a peace negotiator has to deal with multiple parties; shuttle between the parties
numerous times to seek a consensus; understand that all goals will not be met initially and that flexibility must be
encouraged; and be able to shift from negotiator to counselor in order to persuade concerned parties in instances of
deadlock.
Most importantly, from what we know about Kissingers Israel-Arab negotiations, he did not employ the underhanded
tactics described in Aung Mins Swiss bank account story to persuade concerned parties into agreement.
It is telling that seven ethnic armed organizations did not sign the NCA even though they participated fully in
negotiations and had agreed in principle to the pact. It could be that there were additional reasons behind their
abstention, other than the exclusion of the Arakan Army, the Taang National Liberation Army and the Myanmar
National Democratic Alliance Army.
With the publication arriving at a critical period, while the government is preparing for the 21st Century Panglong
Conference, it was assumed that it would contain profound ideas and invaluable tips for the new NRPC leadership, in
their efforts to resume peace talks.
However, Aung Mins advice differs sharply from the political philosophy of Aung San Suu Kyi, who now chairs the
NRPC. Since 1988, she has always believed that the means justify the ends, indicating that if the means were morally
acceptable, the end would preserve the political integrity she values so highly.
Thuta is the pen name of an independent Burmese writer and observer of politics in the country.
This article has been slightly amended to correct the number of ethnic armed organizations that did not sign the NCA
though they participated fully in negotiations and had agreed in principle to the pact.

Related Posts:

The Lady, Surrounded by the Generals and Their Families

Military Slams Proposal for States to Choose Chief Ministers
UNFC Makes Plans To Hold Peace Talks With New Govt
Ethnic Armed Groups to Meet Before Panglong
Govt Invites UWSA, MNDAA to the Peace Table

12 Responses to Burmas Peace Process and the Swiss Bank Account

1.

thang za dal Wednesday, August 3, 2016 - 9:12 pm

What a beautiful story the right story at the right time at the right place under the right circumstances for the
right people! Reading the story, one is tempted to speculate that the creative marriage broker is also allowed to
open a (numbered?) bank account at the Swiss bank in question and deposit his own commissions from both
the billionaire and the Swiss bank. The beauty of the story is richly further enhanced by the fact that
Switzerland itself also happens in real life to be one of the most generous supporters financially and morallly
of the arranged marriage.
Reply

2.

Yehbaw Thoneyout Wednesday, August 3, 2016 - 11:11 pm

Dear Myanmar patriots, dear compatriots, dear ex-patriots, dear friends of Burma,
Burma is in great danger because of our devious woman Daw Suu. By unfair electoral system first-past-thepost, her NLD have won majority of civilian seats in parliament. She had formed a government with incapable

and slavish Members of Parliament. Two of her ministers have bogus degrees.
We have made a big big mistake in supporting her.
Many Burmese people are struggling in floods. Daw Suu, who had created a most powerful and interferring job
as State Counsellor said that it is not important to help the people in water. It is a national emergency. In
other countries a national emergency would have been declared and the people would unite to help those in
need. Daw Suu is betraying our people.
We are very sorry to have supported her.
Instead of dealing with the national emergency, she is trying to balkanise Burma with her so-called 21st
century Panglong. It is known as Pin Lone in Burmese.
We are sorry we never understood that it was forced on our natioanal leader General Aung San who fought for
our independence from England. Daw Suu marrried an Englishman.
General Aung San was assassinated by the English in July 1947.
We are very sorry that we have been ignorant. Panglong was the design of British Prime Minister to leave
behind a broken Burma.
It said that 10 years after independence the s0-called ethnic states could break away.
We all thought that that would be good for Burma. We were so ignorant and stupid. Ignorance and stupidity are
like chicken and egg.
We never realised that we dont have to accept the dictate of the departed colonist. Why should we? it is
against the concept of independence and sovereignty. But we all swallow it as it was signed by General Aung
San. A terrible mistake. He never thought that the break-up would ever happened. If he lived it would never
happen. That is why he was assassinated. We thought that a Burmese man called U Saw was the assassin. No.
When we googled who really killed Aung San we discovered the truth.
Now Daw Suu is trying to fulfil the wishes of Clement Attlee to break up, disintegrate Burma, saying that her
21st century Panglong ( Pin Lone) is more important than saving thousands of Burmese people from drowning.
WE COULD NOT BELIEVE WHAT WE ARE HEARING.
Now were are convinced of her real loyalties to neo-colonist English establishment, not to Burma.
After all, we now realise that because she was married to an Englishman, English media, American and stupid
exile Burmse media promoted her to the sky.
We are in big trouble. Daw Suu is breaking up Burma. civil wars will follow. We now need the Burmese
military called Tatmataw to come back. in Burmese Tatmataw means Royal Burmese Fighting Force.
We are very contradictory. Using Royal, Taw (pronounced Daw, not to be confused with female honorific title
Daw) whilst calling Burma Republic of Union of Burma. We are in a great mess because we do not understand
political concepts.
Daw Suu does not understand either.
She is pushing Burma on the road to ruination, on the wagon of Federalism.
We have studied how Federal Republic Yugoslavia broke up and how Czhechoslovakia broke up in
DEMOCRACY.
Daw Suu is not learning anything from history or from the experiences of other countries.
We are very sad.
Reply

3.

kyikyitun Wednesday, August 3, 2016 - 11:35 pm

I am not commenting on this story. I want to know if this person is related to the military chief of the same
name, or what his credentials are. What ethnic origins does he have? His appearance seems to be Chinese.
Reply

4.

hopeful Thursday, August 4, 2016 - 7:58 am

Just leave all that Swiss Bank account stuff to Najib in Malaysia- not a good route to go down!
Reply

5.

Shwe Yoe Thursday, August 4, 2016 - 10:09 am

Building peace on lies and cheats? That is not just Aung Mins way but Military dictatorss way. Shame on
him and shame on USDP/Military.
Reply

6.

PB Publico Thursday, August 4, 2016 - 10:43 am

Well, well, well!
At long last the fox (or, the lion?) opens its mouth to speak the truth.
No wonder the justified end was not achieved, because the means were corrupt, the crooked way of deception.
I am ashamed of these military degenerates. It was much ado about nothing, or every thing devoid of a noble

purpose.
Reply

7.

Zung Ring Thursday, August 4, 2016 - 10:59 am

The analogy is interesting! But I fully agree that it is nothing more than DECEPTION!
It is a stupidity of the Rich Man who agreed to allow his daughter with the Poor Man without checking the
proof of bank account first! If the Broker goes to Swiss Bank first, the Bank should require the proof of agreed
marriage arrangement before opening the bank account; if not, it would also be a stupidity of the bank.
In this analogy, the groups who agreed to sign NCA are stupid ones as they failed to demand proof from the
government that there will be no military offensive against others and adhere to the principle of inclusiveness.
The groups who refused to sign were the smart ones!!! Agree?
Reply

8.

U Ngw e Win Thursday, August 4, 2016 - 2:45 pm

How can you compare between. the two DASSK and Aung Min?We remembered Aung Min for his public
indiscretion when he mentioned his fear of China.Compare what the NLD -led Govt. did regarding Cinas
hegemonic stance on South China Sea!!!. A simple statemement of position for international jprevalence of of
justine and peace..The previous head o of peace process did not leave behind neither a secret hint nor tip for
success, only ajoke. Story .We wish DASSK uccess!!
Reply

9.

Max Thursday, August 4, 2016 - 7:49 pm

Thuta, you probably do not know Kissinger enough. Your young mind see cheating as black and white, single
sided. Politics do not have right or wrong, moral is conditional and situational, reaching the goal is the
ultimate. If everyone reached a common goal, its the ultimate democracy. And what is your goal(s)? I wish
something more constructive than noises.
Reply

10.

maung maung Friday, August 5, 2016 - 11:58 am

He probably have real Swiss bank account a long with leaders of ethnic signature group. Where is 7 million
dollar from European Union and 7 million dollar from Japan? 14 million dollar for fate agreement with those
who really do not have army or guns.
Reply

11.

Terry Evans Monday, August 8, 2016 - 6:07 pm

Many parts of Burma are narco fiefdoms; big, big problem.

Reply

12.

Norman Hla Friday, August 12, 2016 - 5:05 pm

Min Aung is under fox than shwe military government (Buddhist killer) so whatever strategies or technique
Min Aung used or use, all ethnics lack of trust on killer ming aung hlaing ( ethnics killer or fire ) and puppet
thein sien ( faked water or local Muslim killer). So, dont use the outdated stories to tell that all ethnics are
money or Swiss bank hunger. All bama military are also money and Swiss bank hunger. Finally, brokers get
the service money if it is fail or success in this peace process.
If DKSSK is sincere in one principle to keep the promise of her late father G-Aung san word, DASSK will be
successful in peace process. The late G-Aung said that if bama gets one kyat, each ethnic will get one kyat
But all ethnics leaders must be elected by his or her own people democratically in later years or future in their
own regions for ruling their own lands or regions (i.e federalism). All current ethnics leaders must let others to
govern their lands or region from democratically election in future to avoid monopoly and dictatorship ruling.
Bama should not interfere all ethnics democratic election. Bama must do the same to elect their country
president democratically.
Military personals should stay away from all politics. If military one want to do politics, resign his or her post
for 2-5 years before engaging politics. Notorious DSA and OTS should be delete and change to the name for
Burma union defense academy. DASSK should wear all ethnics address from time to time to show the respect
or appreciation or equality on all ethnics and their culture in case of long suppression from bama U nu and

bama armies. Bama U Nu and bama armies should apology the all ethnics suffering and suppression for more
than 60 years or any compensation.
Reply
13.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/contributor/burmas-peace-process-and-the-swiss-bank-account.html

COMMENTARY

Who Is The Head Of The Country?

By LAWI WENG / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, August 12, 2016 |

State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi meets army chief Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing at the Presidents
Office in Naypyidaw on August 8, 2016. (Photo: Myanmar State Counsellor Office)
One country run by two persons: this is Burma. On the one hand, there is State Counselor Aung San
Suu Kyi; on the other, there is army chief Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing. If one were to ask who is
ultimately in charge, they might find no clear answer.
Suu Kyi is Burmas de-facto political leader, with her power coming from the people who elected
her partythe National League for Democracy (NLD)in the countrys 2015 general election. But
among the checks on her authority is the capacity to make decisions relating to the Burmese army.
Only Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing has that privilege.
The senior general has shown support for almost every action taken by Suu Kyi since the NLD took
office earlier this year. Yet, in his own arena, it seems that Min Aung Hlaing has taken little
initiative to rein in his military: fighting has recently broken out against the Kachin Independence
Army (KIA) in Kachin State and against the Taang National Liberation Army (TNLA) in northern
Shan State.

Lawi Weng is a Senior Reporter for The Irrawaddy English edition.

Additionally, Min Aung Hlaing will not allow three of the countrys non-state armed groupsthe
Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), the Arakan Army (AA) and the TNLA
to join Burmas upcoming Union Peace Conference starting on August 31. These groups are
currently under pressure over demands to disarm, which they so far have continued to resist.
As can be expected in a country arguably run by two people with different visions, there is a divide.
Suu Kyis earlier stated plan was to invite all ethnic armed groups to join her 21st century
Panglong conference, modeled after one held in 1947 by her father, independence leader Aung
San. With that aim not shared by the Burma Army, what will Suu Kyi will do next, given that she
has said she wants an all-inclusive event?
In the latest attempt to bring all of the stakeholders together, the NLD governments National
Reconciliation and Peace Centers (NRPC) delegation met twice with the three armed groups in the
region of Mongla, in June and again in August.
During the first meeting in June with the AA, MNDAA and the TNLA, there was reportedly high
tension when the NRPCs Khin Zaw Oo, a former Burma Army general, allegedly pointed his
finger at the leaders of the armed groups, saying, you guys have to disarm. He asked the groups to
issue an initial statement to the effect that they intended to give up their weapons.
In an informal conversation with an Irrawaddy reporter, Tar Bong Kyaw, the TNLAs general
secretary, recalled his annoyance at Khin Zaw Oo in the meeting. He disrespected our chairman by
pointing his finger at him. His action was not appropriate, he said.
Dr. Tin Myo Win, the head of the NRPC delegation, did not attend the most recent meeting with the
three armed groups. Instead he sent Aung Kyia former army general like Khin Zaw Oo. Again,
no agreement was reached.
At an ethnic armed group summit in Mai Ja Yang, Kachin State in late July, organizations who
opted out of signing the 2015 nationwide ceasefire agreement (NCA)and are members of the
ethnic armed alliance, the United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC)said that they remain
unsure about whether to participate in the upcoming Union Peace Conference.
No concrete decision about their attendance emerged from that gathering. No decisions emerged
about any future signing of the NCA, either.
Nai Hong Sar, vice chairman of UNFC, went as far as telling reporters at a press conference on July
29 that if it were made clear that the groups did not have to sign the NCA in order to participate in
the conference, they would happily attend.
The conference is a step preferable to the NCA, he said.
Which brings us back to how we began: who is in charge here? And is it not time for the Burma
Army to give fresh thought to the issue, namely who is the head of the country, Aung San Suu Kyi,
or Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing?
Suu Kyi may know some things about how to bring peace to this country, based perhaps partly on
the ideas of her father Gen Aung San. But those ideas and plans could fail again, if she is not
permitted to put them into action.

Related Posts:

Love of the Union or Love of the Party? The USDP Must Decide
Suu Kyi and Public Patience
Military Chief Warns of Division Amid Army-Shwe Mann Row
Embattled Ethnic Armed Groups Cast Doubt on Suu Kyis Peace Drive
The Lady, Surrounded by the Generals and Their Families

5 Responses to Who Is The Head Of The Country?

1.

Mohamad Sayed Friday, August 12, 2016 - 9:24 pm

Ultimately in charge in Burma . Senior General Min Aung Hlaing.
Reply

2.

Roland Watson Friday, August 12, 2016 - 9:31 pm

Really? Than Shwe is in charge! His opinion about anything important in Burma, certainly
for peace, is the only one that counts. The fact that we dont see him doesnt mean that he
isnt there!
Reply

3.

Oo Maung Gyi Saturday, August 13, 2016 - 10:08 am

If Bama Tatmadaw not accept any proposal regarding Peace Plan without disarming, how
can implement National Peace within the Union of Burma ( Myanmar ). General Aung San
successed in Pinlon is just because of Hill Track ethnic groups such as Kachin, Chin and
Shan accepted for the Union on condition.
Reply

4.

thang za dal Monday, August 15, 2016 - 3:32 pm

Both are the heads of the country!
Reply

5.

Norman Hla Monday, August 15, 2016 - 5:49 pm

NRCP Khin Zaw Oo (KZO) is the rubbish with pointing fingers to all ethnics leaders.
Because KZO thinks bama army should or can only hold the gun in protecting their bama.
KZO does not know panglong treaty due to his low born, low education and may be
notorious DSA or OTS graduate. All ethnics have a right to hold their guns to protect their
people and their lands in common sense or according to panglong treaty. KZO should go
back to KG to learn Burmese history and about G-aung san. Or he is the most low born,
ugly, ogre from fox than shwes men. If KZO does not recognise panglong treaty, all ethnics
should discuss with China to sign the another Panglong agreement with China.
Reply

http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/who-is-the-head-of-the-country.html

INTERVIEW

Ye Htut: Policymakers Need to Be More in Touch With International Norms

By KYAW HSU MON / THE IRRAWADDY| Wednesday, September 7, 2016 |
1

U Ye Htut at his house in Rangoon. (Photo: Hein Htet / The Irrawaddy)

RANGOON Five months after the transfer of power to the new government in April, former Minister of Information
(2014-16) U Ye Htut became a senior visiting fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. While in
Burma conducting research for a book to be published later this year, he spoke to The Irrawaddy about his past
experiences in government and views on the current administration.
What is your book about?
Mainly, it will be about the reforms initiated by former President U Thein Sein over the past five years. It does not boast
about the success of those reforms, but discusses the reasons behind them, the difficulties faced and the lessons learned.
What have you realized about the previous government since you began to study outside of the country?
Since I entered an environment in which scholars consider everything impartially, I can think without strings attached. I
could not do that before because I was representing the government for which I worked. I am more liberated and my
perspective has changed.
The previous government was weak in regard to studying abroad. Since you are now looking in from the outside,
what does the government need to improve on?
When I was assigned to the Ministry of Information, I had the chance to speak to visiting scholars. I found that when
my superiors made decisions, they based them on personal experience. But foreign scholars presented theories based on
international norms. There are huge differences. If people can leave the country, they will get a more balanced view.

The previous government had shortfalls because of this gap.

The previous government took actions based on prior experience?
The previous government worked based on its own experience but it failed to follow international norms and procedures
because there was a closed-door policy for a long time. It was also partly because of its distrust in people. The
international community and the people inside the country were at odds with the government. But policymakers need to
be more in touch with international norms.
Now, the opposition partythe Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP)has a new leadership. Could
this be interpreted as real change?
The party made the change with the intention of bringing in new blood but it needs to change its mindset and methods.
We will wait and see how much the new people change the old methods.
Both the former and current government worked by basing decisions on previous experience. The current government
organized the 21st Century Panglong Conference in the same way meetings were organized under the Burma Socialist
Programme Party, the State Law and Order Restoration Council, and the previous government. Songs are broadcast,
singposts are erected and public rallies are held. The USDP needs to change and think outside of the box.
There were some problems with the United Wa State Army (UWSA) at the Panglong conference. Do you think
the conference could lead to peace? What needs to be done?
This first conference was just a gathering of people sharing their thoughts. They were not finding answers. Later,
national-level negotiations need to be held. But, if non-signatories of the nationwide ceasefire agreement (NCA) are not
allowed to join, negotiations will go nowhere.
Stakeholders need to accept that things are different from 1947 (when the first Panglong Conference was held).
We need to oppose racial prejudice at the national level as well as at the state level. For example, Shan nationals have
demanded greater power as their influence has increased. I accept that. But there are other ethnicities living in Shan
State. When the Shan demand greater power they should also be ready to give that opportunity to smaller ethnic groups
in their state.
Currently, some ethnicities attack Burman racial superiority, but they need to assess whether they are also asserting
racial superiority in their regions.
Regarding the unresolved crisis in Arakan State, the former government formed a local investigation
commission. The committee formed by the new government includes international representatives. What
difference do you think the new commission will make?
It needs to be pragmatic. We tried to solve the Arakan issue locally but the commission could not find a solution that
appeased all parties, and international recognition was weak.
I think Daw Aung San Suu Kyi included Kofi Annan to garner international recognition. But that is a double-edged
sword that the government can benefit from if they make use of it.
For that to happen, Arakan nationals need to provide the commission with information. If they do not, they will not get
the result that they want.
People concerned with this issue need to know that citizen rights and ethnic rights are different. People who identify as
Rohingya cannot currently be granted citizenship. But, if there is a systematic citizenship verification system, we should
be ready to accept them as citizens.
The government needs to find out what the self-identifying Rohingya want. Do they want citizenship, freedom of
movement, or are they stuck on terminology?
The longer this problem remains unsolved, the more the state and country will be damamged.
How would you compare the previous government with the new government, in its first five months in office?
People have very high expectations of Daw Aung San Suu Kyis government so there is more pressure now.
In the former administration, no one had trust in us when we took office. People did not expect change so we did not
feel much pressure.
Another difference is ministerial performance. Although the new government has articulated its economic policy, it is
very broad. Also, the current ministries are not effective in implementing their policies, perhaps because they are
hesitant. They are weak in that regard.
Regarding peace, clashes broke out with the Kachin Independence Army just after the former government assumed
power. The new government has the NCA in place and the influence of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and they are doing
better in regards to the peace process.
Did you make any decisions that you regret during your time as information minister?

I knew that media censorship needed to be lifted, even back in 2008. It would have been better if it had happened
gradually but when censorship was suddenly abolished in 2012, neither side was ready and problems were unavoidable.
We failed to coordinate sufficiently while an interim press council was formed, so journalist cooperation with the
council was weak.
We also could not get people to understand the idea of public service media and as a result MRTV [Myanma Radio and
Television] and some newspapers are still state-owned.
This was due to the weakness of our ministry and the fact that I was hesitant at times. If I had been more bold, media
relations would be better.

4 Responses to Ye Htut: Policymakers Need to Be More in Touch With International Norms

1.

Shwe Yoe Wednesday, September 7, 2016 - 10:48 am

He did a really good job at least in this interview. I wish he lived up on his words in his past. But wasted time
never returns.
Reply

2.

thang za dal Wednesday, September 7, 2016 - 6:38 pm

Its really encouraging for the country to know that such a former bureaucrat could become an enlightened
being. His candidness and newly gained perspectives truly deserve respect and admiration. Actually, I was
rather often disappointed by his performances as the information minister even though I could understand them
to some extent which one could only expect from someone from his surroundings. But the big question which
arises now from this interview is: How could thousands of bureaucrats in the country in key positions be made
as enlightened as he himself?
Reply

3.

David Steinberg Wednesday, September 7, 2016 - 10:19 pm

U Ye Htut was always willing to spend time to discuss issues with outsiders, and was well versed in
international norms of governance. He was, and remains, a person of integrity and ideas, and a broad
understanding of international affairs. I believe he did what he could to move Myanmar forward, and he did so
under difficult circumstances. I think Myanmar was lucky to have such a person in a position of influence.
Reply

4.

Daw Onmar Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 3:10 am

How to train thousands of bureacrats used to the old system?
1) remove the army influence from the civilian administration
2) send more people abroad for further training including the heads of departments.
3) educate the children to independent thinking and to honoring the truth not what the boss wants, but what
are the facts.
Reply

http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/ye-htut-policymakers-need-to-be-more-in-touch-with-international-norms.html

BURMA
Armed Forces Chief to Kofi Annan: Solutions Must Win Arakanese Approval
By KYAW PHYO THA / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, September 9, 2016 |

Arakan State Advisory Commission chairman Kofi Annan meets with Burmas Commander-in-Chief Snr-Gen Min
Aung Hlaing on Thursday in Naypyidaw. (Photo: Senior General Min Aung Hlaing / Facebook)
RANGOON Burmas armed forces chief Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing warned the Kofi Annan-led Arakan State
Advisory Commission that proposed solutions to the communal conflict in the state must win the approval of the
Buddhist Arakanese community.
Ascribing the Buddhist-Muslim conflict in large part to labor migration during the colonial era, and illegal migration
thereafter, the senior general conveyed a hard line on the issueconsistent with previous governmentsreiterating that
Bengalis, as the Rohingya are routinely termed, do not belong to Burma, falling outside of the 135 recognized
ethnicities.
At the meeting on Thursday in Naypyidaw, he said, the wishes of ethnic people are pivotal, under a definition that
excludes the Rohingya. We have to consider ethnic unity and democracy [] not only citizenship, he saida likely
reference to the widespread rejection among the Burmese public of the Rohingyas claim to being rightful citizens of
the country.
He also recommended that the commission take into account the historical context and background of the communal
conflict in Arakan State.
The senior general went on at length about agricultural labor migration from Bengal in India to the Arakan coast from
the late 1880swhen Burma was merged with India under the colonial British administrationand violent
confrontation between Buddhist and Muslim communities dating back to 1942 during World War II, as well as the
Burmese governments failure to control migration in the 1970s while cracking down on communists in the north-east
of the country.
We have 135 ethnicities, including eight national races, in the country. But there is no Bengali ethnicity, said Snr-Gen

Min Aung Hlaing.

The senior general stated that the Rohingyathe large majority of whom remain statelesswould be assessed for
citizenship under the 1982 law. The law places considerable barriers to citizenship for those, like the Rohingya, whose
ethnicity is not officially recognized, and establishes different tiers of citizenship with diminishing rights.
If they consider themselves [fit for the citizenship], they should feel free to be verified, he said, in reference to a
continued citizenship verification drive in Arakan State.
The senior general also claimed that the Arakan State conflict was not based on religion, instead being attributable to
people instigating riots using religion as a pretext.
He claimed that Burma scored well on religious freedom, having accepted Muslim communities in Burma for a long
time, and that Muslims currently occupy senior levels in the civil service.
Kofi Annanthe Ghanaian former UN secretary-general and peace envoy appointed by State Counselor Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi to lead the new advisory commissionstressed during the meeting that the commission would only make
recommendations to the government, and would take a holistic approach, not only on citizenship but also regional
development.
The former UN secretary-general arrived in Burma on Sunday. First meeting with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in Rangoon,
he traveled to Arakan State earlier this week with the new commission, meeting with Buddhist and Muslim community
representativesand facing protests from several hundred Buddhist Arakanese on their arrival and departurebefore
meeting with President U Htin Kyaw and Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing in Naypyidaw.
The formation of the advisory commission was announced by the State Counselors Office in late August. The
commission is comprised of three international members, including the chairman Kofi Annan, and six from Burma
two Buddhist Arakanese, two Muslims (from Rangoon) and three representing the government.
According to the state counselor, the commission will investigate the root causes of the conflict in Arakan State and
develop a reconciliation process between the two religious communities in the region.
Communal violence, mostly directed against the Rohingya, took place across Arakan State in 2012 and 2013, displacing
up to 140,000 people, the vast majority Muslim. Buddhist and Muslim communities remain segregated across most
parts of the state, with restrictions placed on displaced Muslims movements and access to public services.
The advisory commission drew criticism soon after its formation. The Arakan National Party and the Union Solidarity
and Development Party (USDP) objected to the inclusion of the international members, because it would interfere with
Burmas sovereignty. Their fears chiefly revolve around the likelihood of the international members siding with the
Rohingya. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has attempted to allay concerns, stating that no one can interfere with our
sovereigntysovereignty is owned by all people, not only by the government.
This week, a heated debate took place in the Lower House of Parliament, with 148 lawmakersincluding military
representatives and members of ethnic parties and the USDPcalling for international members of the commission to
be replaced with local academics. However, 250 lawmakers from the ruling National League for Democracy defeated
the proposal.
After the eruption of violence in 2012, former President U Thein Sein formed the 27-member Arakan Investigation
Commission. Given the continued displacement and religious segregation across Arakan State, the panels mission of
conflict resolution and reconciliation between the two groups could not be said to have made much headway over
four years.
Zaganar, a former member of the investigation commission, told The Irrawaddy that the previous government failed to
act on the commissions findings.
I think less than 20 percent of our [recommendations] were carried out. I dont know why they failed to do so, he
said.
The former political prisoner said he is hopeful for the new Kofi Annan-led commission, believing that the inclusion of
the international members would help the international community understand the root causes of the conflict.
It would be good if the government could properly implement their recommendations, provided they are beneficial for
the country. But its too early to say [] we still dont know what the recommendations will be, he said.

Related Posts:

US Ambassador Meets ANP and Muslim Community in Sittwe

Burmese Official Accuses China of Meddling in Peace Talks

Burma Army Attacks HQ of Shan Armed Group SSA-N

Ethnic Armed Groups Look to Bring Peace Talks to Their Turf

Burma Army Deputy Commander Gives Donations to Victims Families

8 Responses to Armed Forces Chief to Kofi Annan: Solutions Must Win Arakanese Approval

1.

Bamar Friday, September 9, 2016 - 6:38 pm

The main issue is that these settlers have different culture and religion which makes the local afraid of (Even
internationally now).
They can keep four wives (and replaceable) at one time which contribute to their fast population growth.
Contraception or family planing is barred by Koran. Allah gives children and they must produce as much as
they can (which they cant feed enough, poor and recruting ground for jihadist).
Spouses and all children must convert to Muslim religion. If they leave this religion is punishable.
Their religion Sharia is a law which is not compatable with democracy.
Democracy is based on majority rule.
Add those all and in hundred years ahead you will get democratically elected Sharia abiding Muslim majority
ruler in Arakan. They can vote to pose sharia law on us if they want to.
Where will be UN at that time if still exist. You cant solve this issue from humanitarian point of view alone.
Look back over hundred years and look ahead more than hundred years.
We have to find solution how to live peacefully side by side at least hundred years ahead and beyond. Not ten
years ahead.
Arakan belongs to Arakanese which is part of Federal Myanmar.

Reply

2.

TA Friday, September 9, 2016 - 7:52 pm

Bravo, Army chief. What you said was absolutely correct. We, Arakanese never forget and trust those so-called
Rohingyas based on what happened to us in 1942.
The so-called Rohingyas, servants of foreign countries are instigating since many years ago. Some are history
major from Rangoon University. U OO Hla Saw is correct to be assertive to ask Is it necessary to write our
history to be accepted by international body? when he was viewed by somebody mentioning that our
historians were unable to convince international body that ASSK had to make such a commission. What the
hell need to prove them? We are proud off to get defeated(125 Vs 254) by a one party dominating democracy.
It was first mentioned that the objective of the commission was to investigate the root cause of violence.
However, Mr. Annan said they were there not to investigate but to write impartial report. No wonder the world
is in mess. We are fed-up with those shameless played words and NLD lost trust of Arakanese people more and
more. Not all 100% people in Myanmar are idiot to believe and accept by recommending somebody as
international figure.
It has been clearly stated that those who accept as Bengali would be considered as citizenship provided
fulfilling the international standard. Those who do not accept must be defined as foreigners and they must also
comply with international standard. If they start to fight the local , they must be defined as criminal. These
instigators are testing the patience of rulers of their mother land. Instigators wants to implement and support
the idea of caliph ting whole regions stretching from Turkey to South East Asia. The government must know
their motive
Reply

3.

thang za dal Saturday, September 10, 2016 - 12:09 am

Lets be bluntly honest and frank! All of those whove got at least some knowledge on the background history
and the present situation of the Arakan/Muslim/Rohingya/Bengali issue know very well that theres really no
solution to this extremely sensitive problem in the near
or long distant future. One of the main and simple reasons is that there are quite a number of powerful circles
both inside and outside of the country that are tremendously profiting from this conflict. That means even if
there were some excellent solutions, those powerful circles would try to sabotage them at all costs. As simple
as that! These circles are only pretending not to know about this reality. Theres a popular Burmese proverb:
Its easier to wake somebody up who is really sleeping than someone who pretends to be sleeping.
Reply

4.

Tabinshwehti Saturday, September 10, 2016 - 6:56 am

Excellant points made by the Myanmas Commander In Chief, General Min Aung Hlaing for his precise and
crystal clear message on this issue to Kofi Annan and the world especially to OIC and its surrogates and
stooges including the UN and the middle east oil and other businesses dependent US and EU. US is also
hopelessly depending and relying on Saudis joint antiterrorism cooperation and efforts.
This is the only time I and I am sure the majority of the people of Myanmar wholeheartedly agreeing and
supporting the Myanmar Army on its stance on this complex issue instigated by the OIC with its various
methods of distorted,twisted, fabricated world wide media propaganda spreading around the world.
Unfortunately for them, the rest of the world are beginning to see the clearer picture more and more now.
Also very good to hear the official statement of Indias PM, Mr Modi recently told the visiting Myanmar
President that Indias 1.25 billions people will all stand by your people and your country And we ,the people
of Myanmar exactly know what he meant by his such statement and what he is alluding to knowing the recent
situation in Arakan State and Myanmar.
China is also watching the situation closely so is Russia because China has its own terrorism problems in
Xinjiang Uyghur Region there and Russia with it own Chechen minority there. Both China, Russia as well as
India will not allow in their own backyard region like Myanmar to become another islamic state infested with
terrorism spreading like cancer viruses to the whole region which the OIC are plotting and planning now with
the helps of UN and US intereferences and involvements there What happening or happened to Syria , Libya or
Bosnia will never again be allowed to happen especially in a geopolitically and stategically important place
like Myanmar beginning with Arakan State there. Period !
Reply

5.

Richard A Myint Saturday, September 10, 2016 - 9:11 am

This is an internal Arakan/Myanmar issue. The majority Buddhist in Arakan must have a voice in any future

process. In this case, I fully support the position taken by Myanmars military chief.
Reply

6.

PB Publico Saturday, September 10, 2016 - 9:55 am

The population explosion of the Bangalis in the State of Rakhine took place in between the years 1983 and
2014, i.e during the times of the military regimes, in which their population jumped by 122% (from around
584,518 to 1,300,0000), representing 40 % of the total population of Rakhine. The rate of population growth of
the Bangalis during that 31 year period was 3.95% (simple ratios), compared with Rakhine ethnics 0.94% .
You can check that out with official census figures published by the government.
Now the C in C is pretending it was not his responsibility (and he cant appease the Arakanese either), and no
accountability is sought. Our military leaders should learn how to be honest, and wise.
Reply

7.

Burmese Citizen. Monday, September 12, 2016 - 4:10 pm

I have got nothing to do with Rohingya problem. The General is still in dream. I surprised to hear that he says
Muslims currently occupy senior levels in Civil Service. There are not a single Muslim MP exits at yr Nay Pyi
Daw parliament. Military is so bias toward the Muslim that they were not even allowed to stand in the
elections. The General is after all same colleagues of Thein Sein the murderer. He wont support NLD thats
why he has warned Mr.Kofi Annan. I cant understand why military is still ruling Burma. Mr. Min Aung
Haling please dont utter lies that Muslim citizens. Please mention about Muslim leaders who has sacrificed
their lives for the independence of Burma. How can you forget U Razak and U Rashid??
Reply

8.

Burmese Voice Monday, September 12, 2016 - 6:54 pm

By this statement Mr.Min A.Hlaing has shown his true colour. The Burmese military has surpressed its own
citizens including the monks with iron fist for 60 years and also killed them. Now this General who said
positive things when NLD won the Elections. Now he is supporting the extremist Arakan leaders. If there is no
peace in the country then democracy is too far.
I cant understand why people are criticizing OIC and Gulf rich countries. We should be happy that still
thousands of poor Burmese are allowed in those countries and are sending money to their families in Burma. I
myself met many Burmese buddisht in Dubai and Kuwait. And why we worried if a Burmese woman marries
another community guy and converts or not. I know many Burmese women married to British and Americans.
Its free World and its their human rights. What does Buddhism , and Islam teaches? Hatred, torture, killing
humans ? No.
Then why not we have negotiations? Solve the problem. Dont forget that thousands of Burmese left their own
country and asked asylum in West when Military including Mr. Min A.Hlaing ruled Burma for 60 years. Why
didnt he think about the welfare of Burmese people then? Ma Ba Tha has become military puppet and have
killed so many innocent Muslims. Monks are involved police are involved then why this General is not
condemning or saying anything? Who says Burma is on the path of democracy? Ethnic minorities Shanot, Chin
and Karen are still raped and killed by Burmese army.
The World has seen how innocent people were burnt alive in Meikthila. Watch the video clip on BBC please.

Reply
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/armed-forces-chief-to-kofi-annan-solutions-must-win-arakanese-approval.html

 iINTERVIEW

There is a New Cold War in Asia: Bertil Lintner

By THE IRRAWADDY| Monday, September 12, 2016 |

Swedish journalist Bertil Lintner is the author of several books on Burma, including Outrage: Burmas Struggle for
Democracy and Burma in Revolt: Opium and Insurgency Since 1948. (Photo: The Irrawaddy)
The Irrawaddy asks Swedish journalist, author and Burma expert Bertil Lintner about the changing US-Burma
relationship, as Burmas State Counselor and Foreign Minister Daw Aung San Suu Kyi visits the US this week.
During Daw Aung San Suu Kyis trip to the US, do you see the US easing sanctions further, or removing them
entirely? Would that be wise?
There are certain sanctions that I believe will not and cannot be lifted, for instance the arms embargo, as long as there is
a civil war, and sanctions against certain individuals, some of the so-called cronies, who have been and still are
involved in the arms trade and outright criminal activities such as drug trafficking.
The Obama administration is interested in engaging the Burmese militaryproviding non-lethal assistance and
education. Members of some ethnic groups have expressed concern and opposition to this. Under the Ne Win
government (1962-88), Burma received arms from the US and some intelligence officers were even trained in the
US. Do you see military-to-military engagement being expanded if Daw Aung San Suu Kyi gives the go ahead?
After all, she is part of the armed forces family, because her father was the founder of the military. She always
insists on having a professional army that is loved by the people. What role do you think she will play?
Under the 2008 Constitution, Burmas armed forces are autonomous, in the sense that it takes orders only from the
commander-in-chief, not the elected governmentso Suu Kyis role in this regard is very limited. It is only in personal
conversations with military officers that she may be able to influence the military. Will they listen to her? That remains
to be seen. As for now, it seems to be the other way round. By asserting that they are behind the elected government, the

military can capitalize on the legitimacy of that government, especially when it comes to stripping ethnic armed
organizations of their claims to legitimacy.
The media has reported that Burmese generals prefer US training and weapons to Chinese variants and are
tired of being dependent on China. But we are also seeing more military engagement between China and Burma.
Burma is strategically too important to China to let it go and become a US ally. Its Chinas outlet to the Indian Ocean,
and oil- and gas-lines have been built from [Arakan] State to Chinas Yunnan province. It is also clear that China has
not given up hope that the Myitsone [dam] project will be resumed. There are also other China-sponsored hydroelectric
power projects in Burma, for instance on the Salween River. Therefore, China has unleashed a charm offensive with
promises to build hospitals and to improve Burmas infrastructure. And, lets face it, Burma cant ignore China, a
powerful neighbor. The US is, after all, far away.
Do you think the USs engagement in Burma has more to do with countering rising Chinese influence than
anything else?
We have to bear in mind that human rights and democracy are not the two most important issues that determine US
foreign policy.
There is a new Cold War in Asia with an increasingly assertive China on one side and a loose alliance of the US, India
and Japan on the other. In May this year, the US announced that it would lift its arms embargo against Vietnam, hardly
a democratic nation that respects human rights, but a very useful ally against China.
In 2011, Burma began to drift away from the close alliance it had had with China since crushing the 1988 prodemocracy uprising, [a move that] was welcomed by the US. In fact, Burma is the only example of the US managing to
expand its influence at the expense of Chinas. But it is a rollback situation that the US has to handle carefully because
democracy and human rights are still important issues to many congressmen, senators and civil lobby groups in
Washington.
What do you think of the conference organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in
Washington DC on Tuesday. Some Burma watchers consider it controversial because some participants were
supporters of the former U Thein Sein government?
I took a look at the names on the panel and was surprised to see how one-sided it was. Not a single independent voice,
only old, pro-Thein Sein people which, by extension, means people who would be more critical of the NLD than of the
military.

7 Responses to There is a New Cold War in Asia: Bertil Lintner

1.

Alberto Monday, September 12, 2016 - 6:42 pm

I dont understand why so many people or countries so afraid of China. They should understand that when
Western Countries abandoned them who came to their assistance. China might be more aggressive recently
after being sleeping for nearly 40 odd years during Maos time, but situation had now change and Chinese are
democratic that US or any Western Countries. China had developed so fast within 30 years after Deng, so why
being so jealous of Chinese rising up. Its the same with Japan in the 60, producing all garbage electronic goods
etc, and Japanese changed to high value and reliable goods. China will have to go thru this process and let
other Asian Countries or Bangladesh and India to produce more labor intensive industries. It is no point every
minute or day pointing your finger at China, we have to live with facts, Western Countries have their turn
already, so let others enjoy some fruits.
Reply

Fred Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - 10:43 am

Theyre afraid because China is too good at building islands in the South China Sea. Just because you
can do something, doesnt mean that you should. China is creating its next generation of adversaries.
Reply

Shwe Yoe Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - 10:55 am

Countries like Philippines, Vietnam and Japan have good reasons to be afraid of China. China is
modern wild dog which swallows meat and bones without chewing. China is about to swallow the
whole South China Sea.
Reply

2.

mt Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - 3:19 am

Fact: Chinas is not a democratically elected government. Their record in allowing their citizens basic
freedoms and human rights is appalling. Other countries fear and hate China because, too often, they use their
size to go rough-shot over internationally recognized laws when they dont agree with it.
Reply

3.

Aung Myo Naing Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - 6:03 pm

China has two kinds of map that it used in relation to its hegemony claims.
One is an old map that it doesnt really publicize officially and use internationally, which includes the whole
southeast-Asian countries, maybe Korea peninsular and even Japan included as being part of China. This is
dear to the Chinese leadership and has been pursuing this historical claims in a new mode. Economic
domination is the name of the game and the new type of colonialism or hegemony that China is now striving to
achieve.
The other map is the contemporary and internationally accepted political map. China gives lip-service of
acceptance, but its actions like South China sea, occupation of Tibet and Xinjiang issues and the likes show its
real intention.
The US, as all know, is also no saint or real promoter of democratic principles. But small nations around China
that are being bullied need an alliance to counter this threat. Like big nations seeking and putting national
interest as their first priority, the small countries also need to navigate the political waters in a way that would
protect their national interest at best.
Of course, on how to achieve this is a matter that each individual country has to ponder by itself.
Reply

Shwe Yoe Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - 10:57 am

Chinese are trying to claim the whole world as CHINA.

4.

Reply

thang za dal Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - 4:19 pm

I fully agree with one of Mr. Aung Mya Naings points that: Like big nations seeking and putting national
interest as their first priority, the small countries also need to navigate the political waters in a way that would
protect their national interest at best. Of course, on how to achieve this is a matter that each individual country
has to ponder by itself. However, in order to be able to protect its national interest, every country big or
small, rich or poor first of all needs internal peace and the minimization of corruption, just to name two basic
crucial essentials. But these two factors are entirely absent in our country. So how could we protect our
national interest?
Reply
http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/there-is-a-new-cold-war-in-asia-bertil-lintner.html#comment-998310

INTERVIEW

US Training of Burmas Military Could Help Democratization: David Steinberg

By THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, September 13, 2016 |

David Steinberg gives a talk at the Myanmar Peace Center in Rangoon in October 2013. (Photo: Kyaw Phyo Tha / The
Irrawaddy)
The Irrawaddy speaks with veteran Burma scholar David Steinberg about burgeoning US-Burma relations, an
anticipated easing of US sanctions, and the prospect of military-to-military engagement between the two countries.
Some say that policy changes by the United States towards Myanmar in recent years were the result of an
expanding Chinese role in the country and the region. What do you think?
I think the Obama engagement with Myanmar did not start because of China. The junta sent signals that they were
interested in change and the Obama administration recognized that the previous [ClintonBush] administrations policy
of regime change through sanctions had essentially failed. So there was a mutuality of interests, but the Obama
administration was constrained from going too far by the Congress. So high-level contacts were started but the
sanctions remained, essentially because of US internal political considerations.
I think China figured into the picture only later but the US recognized that Myanmar must continue to have good
relations with China. Certainly China was worried about too great a role for the US in Myanmar, but I do not think this
will happen, and I think that Myanmar will have a balanced foreign policy with China, the US, the European Union,
India, Japan, and of course Asean. Myanmar needs good relations with China to solve the ethnic issues in the north, but
China needs Myanmar for investments, markets, access to the Indian Ocean, etc.
The whole concept of the pivot or rebalancing of the US in East Asia is nothing new, and came two years after
improvements in Myanmar relations. I have been lecturing and writing for years that the US policy in that region has
been a constant for about 150 years: to prevent the rise of any hegemonic power in the region, e.g. the open-door policy
in China in the 19th century, the Washington Naval Treaty with Japan in the early 1920s, World War II in the Pacific,

the Korean and Vietnam wars, the US foreign aid program, etc. I think the US does not want any one powerChina at
the momentto dominate the region.
There is disagreement over the appropriateness of improved US-Myanmar military relations. What is your
view?
I would like to see better US relations with the Myanmar military and the reintroduction of the International Military
Education & Training (IMET) program for non-lethal training. I think that arms sales should not resume at this
time. But training is important and I believe it is wanted by the Myanmar military. Some human rights groups say that it
should not resume until true democracy is in evidence. But democracy is a goal that has never completely been
achieved (even in the US); and training should be a means to help the process of democratization along. The Myanmar
military must feel comfortable in both its internal political and external relations.
What is the likelihood of any new US administration changing its policies?
I hope any new US administration will continue its positive engagement with Myanmar. One of the few positive
elements of the Obama administrations East Asia policy has been relations with Myanmar. Hillary Clinton would
continue that. Myanmar is not (yet) on Donald Trumps agenda, but he would have little to gain by changing US policy
and engagement. The present US ambassador is a seasoned, careful, and thoughtful representative of the US who is well
aware of the dangers of an inappropriate attempt to be domineering.
Will Daw Aung San Suu Kyis US trip result in the removal of remaining sanctions?
Sanctions could be removed if she said they were no longer appropriate. Some are congressionally mandated and others
imposed by the executive branch. But it seems she wants them as potential leverage against the military, should they
stop the reform process. I think it would be wiser to try to reassure the military that the broad goals of the state are
mutually shared. The National League for Democracy and the Tatmadaw [Burmese military] need to collaborate to be
effective. Mutual trust, including among the ethnic groups, is essential, and is presently lacking.
I have never believed that it is appropriate for US foreign policy toward any country to be effectively determined by a
person in that country, whether that person is the British prime minister, the president of any state, or in the case of
Myanmara Burmese. Yet Aung San Suu Kyi effectively determined US policy toward Myanmar until well into
President Obamas first term. She still, I believe, exerts a strong influence but no longer plays the only dominant role.
But if she told the Congress that sanctions were an impediment both to development and to better governance, they
would likely go along.
There are cronies and others still on the US sanctions list. Should they remain on it?
There is a lot of talk about cronies. The term, in my memory, came about through Philippine President Marcos buddies,
who were ineffective as well as venal. I am sure there are cronies in Myanmar and plenty of illegal activities that
benefited a few with access to power. But let us remember that President Park Chung Hees cronies in South Korea in
the military government period of the 1960s-1970s were the guys who founded Hyundai, Daewoo, LG, etc. I am sure
they were given extra-legal opportunities. I am not justifying their past roles, but simply trying to say that the pejorative
term cronies should be carefully used. In both cases a free press was lacking and civil society censored. That situation
no longer applies to Myanmar.
I think US firms would partner with the cronies of Myanmar with danger, because public opinion both here and there
would complain. That is what a free press is all about. The Myanmar legal system has to come to terms with these
people, and it would be a test of the independence of the judiciary (so obviously lacking for more than half a century) to
begin to deal with these issues. In other words, the media and civil society in Myanmar have essential roles to play to
ensure that justice is done. Foreign intervention in the highly nationalistic environment of Myanmar is both dangerous
and likely to be ineffective, and denigrates the capacity of the people of Myanmar to address their own problems. It
denies the dignity that the people of Myanmar deserve.
David I. Steinberg is Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies Emeritus, Georgetown University. His latest book as
editor is Myanmar: The Dynamics of an Evolving Polity.

Dateline Irrawaddy: The Conference is the Initial Step Toward Peace but There are Still Many Challenges
9 Responses to US Training of Burmas Military Could Help Democratization: David Steinberg

1.

Kieran Brophy Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - 1:12 pm

Oh boy,

not what Myanmar needs, US troops on the ground there, never a good thing.
Kieran
Reply

2.

Professor Emeritus U Kyaw Win Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - 6:21 pm

Please, not again. That path has been travelled before, and what did that result in? I am fully in favor of
training some of Burmas best young military to be trained in US universities for short term programs in how
the US military inter faces with the civilians. Having Burmas future military leaders on American college
campuses rubbing intellectual shoulders with their contemporaries and faculty would do well to civilianize
their thinking. And behaving.
Reply

3.

Thomas Win Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - 8:07 pm

For more than six decades the Burmese military has never fought a single external enemy or send its troops to
the UN. Instead it has been concentrating on its own civil wars. The only military that chose its own defence
minister and rob the people committing gross human rights violations should not be recognized by any
civilized nations who has a civilian Defence Minister. It will tantamount to putting the horn on a horse that can
not only bite and kick but also gore.
Win
Reply

4.

Robert Walsh Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - 12:52 pm

Working out in the field in Kachin State and having to deal with the Tatmadaw on a daily basis, would have to
say its really hard to see what sort of subjects could/would be trained by US forces.
Whats the US foreign policy goal? The US trained many (now long retired) Burmese Army and Air Force
officers under both IMET and other programs from the 1950s all the way up until 1988.
A hint of what the US is thinking might be gleaned from looking at what the African Command is doing in
many countries in Africa, but even thats hard to piece together.
I always thought a nice thing would be for the US to engage the Burmese Navy and provide them with
something like a real coastal defense and patrol capability, -for anti-piracy and fisheries patrol. Engage the Air
Force and train them in support to humanitarian relief in natural disasters. Engage the Army in a realistic way
to focus on de-mining.
Giving the Burmese Army slots at US military schools (e.g. Command & Staff, War College) is not likely to
have any easily discernible impact on the way the Tatmadaw does business in the field any time soon, or
change the way the ordinary citizen experiences encounters with the military.
Reply

5.

Than Nyunt Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - 2:55 pm

Military training have poisoned the minds of the young Myanmar against their own people for the last 50
years. They have taken 25 per cent of the seats in todays parliament without being elected by the people and
have taken over the role of the opposition from the USDP party. Until such time as when they have changed
their stance towards the people of Myanmar, they should not be given the chance to gain knowledge and
experience overseas. They are still holding onto the constitution forcibly created by Than Shwe which is
objected to by the people (minus the military).
Reply

6.

Naphetchun MaungSein Thursday, September 15, 2016 - 3:54 am

All the experts / country specialists / Journalists and Think Tank self-proclaimed Burma scholars must be
reminded that the outcome of Burma Military and U.S. engagements at all levels since 1952 have not been
something to crow about (to put it mildly)especially from the Burmese perspective.
Naphetchun MaungSein
Reply

7.

michael beer Thursday, September 15, 2016 - 10:49 am

Strengthening the Burma military is not the right approach. It has acted like a Mafia for 50+ years and
terrorized the ethnic minorities.
Reply

8.

thang za dal Thursday, September 15, 2016 - 4:21 pm

By reading this interview Ive got the impression that The Irrawaddy has missed either intentionally or
unconsciously to ask Mr. Steinberg, who happens to be one of the most well-known Burma experts, a
crucially important question how he sees the ongoing peacebuilding process or the so-called 21st Cetury
Panglong Conference. What he personally would have to say about it could be very interesting, even though
those who know his academic records could have already rightly imagined what he would say. As to the title of
the interview, I personally do not believe that even the best trainings that the world could offer would change
the militarys present image which is beyond repair until or unless the leadership and the structure of the
Tamadaw are completely reformed.
Reply

9.

thang za dal Saturday, September 17, 2016 - 6:11 pm

Please kindly allow me to add a few more points to my recent comment on the same topic above: Ive rather
quite often been disappointed by the concepts of a number of Burma experts, including Prof. Dr. Steinberg, and
policy makers in the West for the solution of the decades-long human rights violations in Burma. What is
really needed is changing the mindset of the top brass which has apparently been influenced by some hidden
ideology and personal interests. But who is interested in changing their mindset? Nobody really! The simple
logic for both political, military and business comunities from outside of the country is that its easier to deal
directly with such authoritarian personalities in leading positions.
Reply

http://www.irrawaddy.com/interview/us-training-of-burmas-military-could-help-democratization-david-steinberg.html

BURMA

Military Officials, Cronies Released from US

Blacklist
By KYAW PHYO THA / THE IRRAWADDY| Saturday, October 8, 2016 |

A combination of file photos shows, from L-R, former dictator Snr-Gen Than Shwe, General
Maung Aye and Thura Shwe Mann. (Photo: REUTERS/Staff/Archives.)
RANGOON Burmas former dictator Snr-Gen Than Shwe was among individuals removed from the US Treasurys
blacklist following the lifting of Burma sanctions on Friday.
Another 16 senior military officials, including former Vice Snr-Gen Maung Aye, have been removed from the US
Treasurys Office of Foreign Assets Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List.
Apart from senior military officials, military-related businesses removed from the list include Myanmar Economic
Holdings Limited, the Myanmar Economic Corporation, Myawaddy Bank and the Directorate of Defence Industries,
which is Burmas state-owned arms and ordnance manufacturer.
Five top crony business men, along with their family members and businesses, are no longer under sanction; they are U
Tay Za, U Khin Shwe, Yuzana U Htay Myint, U Zaw Zaw and Stephen Law, whose late father was once described by
the US Treasury as one of the worlds key heroin traffickers.
President Barack Obama formally announced the lifting of US sanctions on Burma on Friday by terminating an
emergency order that deemed the policies of the former military government a threat to US national security.
The move followed a meeting between Burmas State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi and Obama in Washington last
month, in which she called for the lifting of economic sanctions against her country.
More than 50 individuals along with their families and their businesses in hotels, agriculture, construction, banking, and
logging were released from sanctions on Friday.
A key figure is LtGen Thein Htay, chief of the Directorate of Defence Industries, who was blacklisted in 2013 for
alleged arms trading with North Korea.
Another three Burmese firms, Soe Min Htike Co. Ltd., Asia Metal Company and Excellence Mineral Manufacturing
Company, sanctioned in 2013 for working with North Korea, have been removed from the SDN list.
Also among the individuals are family members of Thura U Shwe Mann, a former Union Solidarity and Development
Party chairman and Daw Aung San Suu Kyis close ally from the previous U Thein Sein government. He is a former
general and was considered the third most powerful man in the State Peace and Development Council.
His wife Daw Khin Lay Thet and son U Aung Thet Mannwho is the CEO of Ayer Shwe Wah, a subsidiary of Htoo
Trading Company owned by U Tay Zaare also no longer sanctioned.

The lifting of sanctions was welcomed by Burmas business community on Saturday.

U Khin Shwe, the president of Zay Gabar Company who was also removed from the list, said it was a very nice move
by the US government at the right time as Burma now has a civilian government led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.
Any delay in lifting sanctions could lead to backsliding in the countrys democratic transition as Burma is in urgent
need of economic development, he told The Irrawaddy.
We [businesspeople removed from the list] can create jobs for thousands of people when international investment
comes in, he added. U Khin Shwe explained that the sanction lift will encourage other countries, aside from the US
and EU countries, to invest in Burma, such as South Korea.
They will no longer feel reluctant to work with us as there are no sanctions, he said.
The US Treasury Department said the termination of the Burma sanctions program does not impact Burmese
individuals or entities blocked pursuant to other sanctions authorities, such as counter-narcotics and North Korea
sanctions, barring any business dealings with the US.
They include alleged drugs kingpin Wei Hsueh Kang and the United Wa State Army, one of Burmas biggest ethnic
armed groups. They remain on the SDN List, and their property and interests in property remain blocked.

Related Posts:

Student Protesters Charged for Rally Against Military MPs

Concerns Raised over Last Minute Defense Council Bill
Presidential Post Still an Open Question
Petition Campaign Underway Against Private Hospital Project in Rangoon
USDP Sets Sights On 2020 Comeback

5 Responses to Military Officials, Cronies Released from US Blacklist

1.

Yarzarthingyan Sunday, October 9, 2016 - 1:59 am

Such a generous gesture .Hope every one should be happy with prospects of freedom and wealth for all. All
those war fare should come to a halt. No body lives forever and let others live out a natural span.
Reply

2.

thang za dal Sunday, October 9, 2016 - 2:34 am

The US has finally lost its remaining moral authority not only among the Burmese people but even throughout
the whole world by uplifting its sanctions against the corrupt elites of Burma for financial and geostrategical
interests. So far as I could observe the main problem with the US in the past was that it just imposed sanctions,
but did not seem to have any visible far-reaching strategy at all for the achievement of some long-lasting
results for the entire people of Burma. In fact, there could have been some better strategies to achieve what the
US now intends to achieve without sacrificing its moral authority entirely. And another major problem with the
West in the broader sense is that they see Burma just as a small pawn in their regional grand strategy that is,
the Asia Pacific Region. It can be seen by their perfunctorily deploying strategies that are not really in line with
the present and the soon-to-come circumstances in this region. They do not seem to foresee that the Burma
issue could and would sooner or later even become a decisive factor for many reasons in their global grand
strategy. Many politicians and strategists in the West may surely not agree with this point of view, but its the
reality as I personally see it even though it would be too general to blame the whole West for such
shortcomings since every Western country is also deploying its own strategy to secure its national interests in
different sectors in the region in question.
Reply

3.

Yehbaw Thoneyoutelevant Sunday, October 9, 2016 - 8:39 am

Did Suu Kyi call for the lifting of tge sanctiins? Did she not want some sanctions to remain as a leverage to get
rid of the 25% of the parliamentary seats occupied by the military?
Does the lifting of the sanctions improve her image or does it marginalise her?
An honest debate is necessary.

Reply

4.

Thein Mg Sunday, October 9, 2016 - 11:10 am

beautiful fairy tale ending alls well that ends well, now for version ll.
Reply

5.

David Sugiyama Sunday, October 9, 2016 - 1:53 pm

These criminals should have at least the decency to apologize to the people of
Burma for the crimes they had committed, now that they have been whitewashed
by Obama.
Reply

6.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/military-officials-cronies-released-from-us-blacklist.html

COMMENTARY

Burmas Misguided Peace Process Needs a Fresh Start

By BERTIL LINTNER / THE IRRAWADDY| Tuesday, October 11, 2016 |

On Saturday in Rangoon, activists from 27 civil society organizations staged a protest against continued fighting
between the Burma Army and ethnic armed groups. (Photo: Myo Min Soe / The Irrawaddy)
The Burmese governments peace parley, dubbed the 21st Century Panglong, in Naypyidaw at the end of August was
hardly over before the Tatmadaw went on the offensive again.
Fierce fighting has been reported from Kachin State and northern Shan State. In Karen State, clashes have erupted
between different local armed groups and in eastern Shan State, the powerful United Wa State Army (UWSA) has
moved against what was considered a close ally, the National Democratic Alliance Army (Eastern Shan State)
(NDAA[ESS]), also known as the Mongla Group, and took over several of its positions.
It is not a peace process, one observer said. Its a conflict process.
The ultimate irony is that Burma has seen its heaviest fighting in decades, since the Thein Sein government came to
power in March 2011 and launched its so-called peace process. Most of the fighting has occurred in Kachin and
northern Shan states, with sporadic clashes in Arakan and Karen states. Burmas civil war has not been this intense
since the Tatmadaw launched offensives against ethnic Karen and communist forces in the late 1980s.
The conflict never seems to end despite, or perhaps because of, the activities of foreign peacemakers. A popular
practice has been to invite representatives of the Tatmadaw and of ethnic armed groups on study tours to other conflict
areas across the world, including Northern Ireland, Colombia and South Africa. The main player behind those trips is a
UK-based outfit called Intermediate, founded and led by Jonathan Powell, who served as then Prime Minister Tony
Blairs chief of staff from 1997-2007.

State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi delivers a closing address at the 21st Century Panglong peace conference on
Sept 3 this year. (Photo: Pyay Kyaw / The Irrawaddy)
But the value of such trips is being questioned. A foreign analyst based in Burma described an endless parade of
international peace junkets that preoccupy ethnic leaders while the actual negotiations are bogged down. Meanwhile,
addressing ongoing conflict is cast as spoiling progress.
The government of Switzerland has also been active, inviting some ethnic leaders from Burma to study how their model
of federalism works, although it is hard to imagine how the Swiss canton system could possibly be a model for Burma.
Invited were representatives of the Restoration Council of Shan State (RCSS), one of eight groups that signed the socalled Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) with the government on Oct. 15 last year (only three of which actually
have any armed forces, the other five being token armies with only a dozen or so men each).
IHS Janes analyst Anthony Davis wrote in the Bangkok Post on Feb. 7 this year: History does not relate how this allexpenses-paid flight of fancy cost the Swiss taxpayer, though it was doubtless small change in the wider picture of the
tens of millions of dollars being thrown at the peace process by Western governments eager to declare Myanmar
(Burma) finally and officially open for business.
At the same time as RCSS representatives were being entertained in Switzerland, truckloads of its troops were sent to
northern Shan State to fight the Taang National Liberation Army, an ethnic Palaung force that did not sign the NCA.
Peace with the government enabled the RCSS to move its soldiers across Shan State to engage in what Davis termed a
proxy war.
The UWSAs military action against NDAA(ESS) is another divisive consequence of the peace process. The UWSA
reportedly suspected that the NDSS(ESS) leadership was about to close ranks with the groups that signed the NCA. One
of its representatives at the talks in Naypyidaw in August even urged all parties to recognize the 2008 Constitution,
which is widely seen as undemocratic because it gives the military ultimate power over the stateand is certainly not
federal in character, which is what the ethnic armed groups are fighting for.
It is clear that the foreign players in the process need to seriously rethink their strategies, if they need to be involved at
all. According to the Burma-based analyst: Its like a growing conga-line of craven opportunists, who think their
analysis and workshops should be privileged over listening to the people who have suffered for six decades. Its not a
peace process, its a parallel reality peopled by shady foreign actors whose pedigree is largely a litany of failed efforts
in other countries.
A Burmese human-rights worker cynically referred to recent developments as a peace opera. One might add that it is
an opera where too many divas aspire to be the lead performer, and no one wants to sing in the choir.

Demonstrators gathered in the Kachin State capital Myitkyina last week to demand an end to conflict in the state.
(Photo: Nang Lwin Hnin Pwint / The Irrawaddy)
Instead of studying processes in other countries which bear little or no resemblance to Burmas decades-long ethnic
and political conflicts, it would be much more useful to examine Burmas own past experience of peace effortsand
why all those, without exception, have failed to end the war.
In 1958, when Gen. Ne Win took over from the elected government led by U Nu and formed a military-controlled
caretaker government, some communist and ethnic rebels laid down their arms under an unofficial amnesty. No
political concessions were offered. Some became bands of local armed men engaged in trade. When the military
stepped in again on March 2, 1962 and seized absolute power after a short interregnum with a new civilian government
led by U Nu, the new junta promised serious peace talks. These commenced in 1963 and attracted a wide range of
ethnic and political rebels. But, again, the ruling military demanded surrender, offering nothing more than
rehabilitation.
Unsurprisingly, the talks broke down. Some old and new armed bands were converted into home guard units called ka
kwe ye (KKY), but there was not enough money in the central coffers to pay them, so they were allowed to trade in
opium to finance themselves. Both Lo Hsing-han and Zhang Qifu (alias Khun Sa) began their careers as governmentallied home guard commanders and, as a result, became prominent drug traffickers. They were arrested only after they
had established links with armed rebels in Shan State, which they had to do in order to convey their opium convoys
down to the Thai border.
The KKY project was abandoned in Jan. 1973. New local forces called pyi thu sit, or peoples militias, were formed
in their stead. They were smaller than the old KKY units and therefore easier for the government to control.
In 1980, the government announced a general amnesty for rebels and political prisoners. Officially, 1,431 rebels
surrendered. This figure was, most likely, a gross exaggeration, but the amnesty led to the demise of the rightwing
Burman insurgency led by U Nu from the Thai border. At the same time, separate peace talks were held with the
Communist Party of Burma (CPB) and the Kachin Independence Army (KIA). The talks lasted for months, but the
governments offer was again rehabilitation in exchange for surrender. Needless to say, those talks broke down as well.
After the 1988 pro-democracy uprising and the seizure of power by the State Law and Order Restoration Council
(SLORC), thousands of urban dissidents linked up with the Karen National Union (KNU), the KIA and other ethnic
armies. But those groups had only a few guns to spare for the Burman activistsunlike the CPB, which had warehouses
full of weaponry, supplied by China between 1968-78. However, few pro-democracy activists went to the CPBs area.

The situation changed when, in March-April 1989, the hilltribe rank and file of the CPB rose in mutiny against the
partys ageing, predominantly Burman leadership. The CPB subsequently broke up into four ethnic armies: the UWSA,
the NDAA(ESS), the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army based in the Kokang region of northern Shan State,
and the New Democratic Army-Kachin in Kachin State.
Now, the SLORC faced the real danger of a united front. But the Burmese military acted faster and with more
determination than the loose alliances that then existed between ethnic rebels and urban dissidents. The ex-CPB
mutineers were offered ceasefire deals and promised unlimited business opportunities. As a result, all four former CPB
forces made peace with the government.
The threat from the border had been neutralizedbut the consequences for the country were disastrous. Business in
the northeastern border regions means the production of opium and its derivative heroin. As a result, the area under
opium cultivation rose from 103,200 hectares in 1988 to 161,012 hectares in 1991. According to official US figures,
annual heroin production skyrocketed during the same period from 68 tons to 185 tons, of which 181.5 tons were meant
for export.
With the collapse of the CPB and the failure to form new alliances, about two-dozen ethnic armed groups, both large
and small, entered into ceasefire agreements with the government in the late 1980s and early 90s. Several of those
groups became involved in logging. Vast areas of northern Burma were denuded and the timber sold to China.
So, agreeing ceasefires with ethnic armed groups is nothing newits a continuation of the policy of the long-defunct
SLORC. But not all the ceasefire agreements agreed upon at that time have been honored. The KIA, which actually
signed a ceasefire agreement in 1994 (all the previous agreements being verbal), came under fierce attack in 2011 and
the fighting still continues. The Shan State Army, which made peace with the government in 1989, came under attack
shortly afterwards.
The common denominator in all these talks and maneuvers, including those of today, is that the government and the
military have either demanded surrender followed by rehabilitation, or, failing that, attempted to corrupt them by
allowing them to engage in business of any kind. Following the Oct. 15, 2015 ceasefire deal, leaders of the RCSS and
the KNU have benefited from new, lucrative commercial opportunities, including in logging and palm oil plantations.
Sadly, the present government, which came to power with a resounding popular mandate after the Nov. 2015 general
election, has only continued the policies of the previous government. This has included the insistence that everybody
sign the so-called Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement, which is not nationwide and has resulted neither in peace nor in
meaningful talks about which governing system the country should adopt: a federal union or a centralized state
structure. Military spokesmen, meanwhile, have made it clear that all parties to the conflict must accept the 2008
Constitution and lay down their arms, with the option of becoming pyi thu sit forces and benefitting economically.
It is hardly a secret that well-known pyi thu sit commanders, who traffic drugs, were elected to national and regional
assemblies in the 2010 election, usually on Union Solidarity and Development Party tickets. The drug trade today is
controlled by those individuals and groups, not by the UWSA, the MNDAA or the NDAA(ESS), which built their
fortunes on drugs but have since moved into other enterprises such as casinos, cross-border trade in consumer goods,
and the export of tin and rare earth metals to China.
The difference this time from previous failed peace efforts is the number of foreign groups and individuals involved,
bitterly competing with each other for funds and attention. But, as a Rangoon-based foreign analyst said, The
international interlocutors are actually facilitating the Tatmadaws hardline approach by refusing to understand the
grievances of Burmas minority communities, saying its all about business and economic interestsan oft-repeated
clich of Rangoon-based Western diplomats.
Receiving foreign advice and learning from other countries experiences are not entirely wasted exercises, but the shape
and form that foreign input has taken in Burmas so-called peace process has not led us anywhere close to lasting
peace. On the contrary, it has made the situation worse by granting the Tatmadaw an international respectability and
legitimacy that it previously lackedat the expense of armed and non-armed ethnic groups and communities.
It should be evident to anyone that an entirely new approach is needed, if the vicious circle of talks with demands of
unconditional surrender and rehabilitation coupled with business concessions is ever going to be broken. Such an
approach would have to include a genuine political dialogue, not just meetings with dozens of ethnic representatives
sitting in their colorful costumes in a huge hall listening to speeches, as was the case in Naypyidaw in August.
The fighting also has to stop on all fronts. Only then can a meaningful peace process beginnot merely a repeat of
what happened in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. Burmas ethnic conflict is a political problem demanding a political
solution. The present peace opera is only a recipe for further disaster.

Related Posts:
The Lady and the Generals
Who Is The Head Of The Country?

 Is it Time for the US to Lift Sanctions?

8 Responses to Burmas Misguided Peace Process Needs a Fresh Start

1.

Khurtaikornkhaw Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - 1:57 pm

Comprehensive, hard-hitting and short to the point.
The trouble with the powers that be, including the Burmese military class, is that they never have the intention
to climb down from their ethnocentric high horse and sit at the round table with the non-Bamar ethnic groups
on equal basis, to sort out the power and resources sharing problems, based on a genuine federalism.
Like Bertil Lintner has correctly said, a new approach to break the vicious circle of talking and fighting has to
stop, if durable and lasting solution is to be found.
But by the indications unfolding now are a continuation of the old policies of successive military regimes,
where the ethnic resistance forces are concerned. They are surrender, get absorbed into the Bamar controlled
army and be happy with some economic dole out.
And until the Bamar political and military class are committed to the real power and resources sharing,
anchored in a genuine federal union, the ethnic conflict would go on unabated.
Reply

2.

Khun fay Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - 2:02 pm

There. Is. No. Trust. Period. All other analysis are a good thing only for those writing paid for analysis you
can study burma 30+ years like bertil, in the end the core of the conflict is lack of trust. There was no trust
preindependence. There was no trust during ww2. There was no trust after independence. Theres no trust anno
2016. Burma has fallen into failed state over the years. The frontier areas need independence. The country has
to fall apart like Yougoslavia. Radical problems need radical solutions. I am very bitter/realistic and follow
burma closely since early 90.
Reply

3.

Khurtaikornkhaw Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - 2:15 pm

CORRECTION FOR CLARITY OF A PARAGRAPH POSTED EARLIER:
But by the indications unfolding now are the continuation of the old policies of successive military regimes
will be implemented, where the ethnic resistance forces are concerned. They are surrender, get absorbed into
the Bamar controlled army and be happy with some economic dole out.
Reply

4.

Nel Adams Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - 5:36 pm

Bertil Lintner, is a specialist in the study of Burmas present history, but as a foreign journalist he still has to
research deeper into the situation of what is happening in the Shan States so that in writing about it he could be
fairer and free from prejudices against any one group, and realise that what he sees is not what really is. The
Shan States is more complicated and divided that what meets the eye. He claims that Foreign Powers are
making things worse and some journalists do that too
Reply

5.

Terry Evans Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - 9:17 pm

This isnt a peace process this is the start of the reconstruction of a nation after more than 50 years of
neglect. The former military rulers have left a great deal of economic devastation.
Reply

6.

thang za dal Wednesday, October 12, 2016 - 8:21 pm

When I read this article and saw Mr. Jonathan Powells name in it, it reminds me of the following news items.
These news items seem to clearly tell us that its really of no use for us to blame each other for what has been
happening in the country for decades: None of us, even including all the generals and politicians, are in fact
masters of our destiny even in our own country!

[
South China Morning Post Friday, 06 September, 2013,
OBAMAS PLAN TO RESTORE MILITARY TIES WITH MYANMAR TOO SOON FOR SOME US
LAWMAKERS
Obama administration wants to re-establish defence training for Myanmars military, but some Republican
lawmakers say its too early. The Obama administration wants to restart US defence training for Myanmar that
was cut 25 years ago after a bloody crackdown on protesters.
..
BBC NEWS UK FORCES CHIEF IN BURMA TO BUILD TIES WITH MILITARY
General Sir David Richards met political leaders and his military counterpart.
The head of the UKs armed forces, General Sir David Richards, is visiting Burma to try to build ties with the
countrys powerful military.
3 June 2013 Last updated at 09:04 ET

DVB NEWS NORWAY UPS BURMA OIL INVESTMENTS

By FRANCIS WADE
Published: 24 March 2011
Figures released last week by the Norwegian government show that investments in oil and gas companies
operating in Burma stand at close to $US 5 billion, despite heavy opposition from rights groups.

TONY BLAIRS SECRET INVOLVEMENT WITH BURMAS GOVERNMENT

May 15, 2014
Burma Campaign UK is calling on Tony Blair to disclose what his involvement is with President Thein Sein of
Burma.
Tony Blair has visited Burma on around three occasions, and is believed to be providing some kind of advisory
role to the President Burma Campaign UK has written to Tony Blairs office 11 times in the past year,
asking him to clarify what his involvement in Burma is. He has refused to disclose this information.
..
TONY BLAIR QUERIED, AGAIN, OVER NATURE OF BURMA DEALINGS
By SAW YAN NAING / THE IRRAWADDY| Friday, January 22, 2016 |
Former British prime minister Tony Blair was back in Burma earlier this month for at least his fifth visit since
a quasi-civilian government assumed power under President Thein Sein.
.
Daily Telegraph
11 June 2015 9:30pm
REVEALED: THE TRUE SCALE OF TONY BLAIRS GLOBAL BUSINESS EMPIRE
.
The Guardian (UK)
TONY BLAIR UNREPENTANT AS CHILCOT GIVES CRUSHING IRAQ WAR VERDICT
Chilcot report: A devastating critique of Blair and the British government
Wednesday 6 July 2016

The Guardian
MPS DELIVER DAMNING VERDICT ON DAVID CAMERONS LIBYA INTERVENTION
Foreign affairs committee says ex-PM was responsible for failures that helped create failed state on the verge
of civil war
Patrick Wintour and Jessica Elgot
Wednesday 14 September 2016 09.08BST

BBC
CAMERON OFFERS BURMA MORE MILITARY CO-OPERATION
15 July 2013
From the section UK

Daily Telegraph
Blair heads for gold-rush Burma: Former Prime Minister opens new front to his personal empire after the junta
relaxes its grip
Tony Blair has been busy building a fortune of ?20?million
Blair went on a visit in October to boost bilateral ties with Britain
He now has permission to expand his personal influence into Burma
By Simon Walters for The Mail on Sunday
Published: 31 March 2013

.
UK GOVERNMENT TO STRENGTHEN GAS SECTOR IN MYANMAR
By Mizzima
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016
.
The Independent
UK DEFENCE FIRMS EARN $60BN FROM PENTAGON MILITARY CONTRACTS DURING OBAMA
PRESIDENCY
Crofton Black, Ted Jeory
Wednesday 5 October 2016

The Independent
BRITAIN IS NOW THE SECOND BIGGEST ARMS DEALER IN THE WORLD
Exclusive: Two-thirds of UK weapons have been
Reply

7.

hopeful Thursday, October 13, 2016 - 5:11 am

The problem in some foreign governments contributing to the peace process appears to be that they wish to
appear as angels and perhaps, like Norway, hope to gain big commercial contracts later, but utterly fail to
understand Burmas historical ethno-political complexities.
That much was obvious from the UK govts response to my question about their current GBP5 million payout
in 2006 to the joint Peace Fund, and an ongoing GBP4 million per year to the Peace Support Fund.
UKs Dept for Overseas Development stated that Peace processes are always complicated, imperfect and
slower than expected, and hence often elicit criticism from those with unmet high expectations- that was their
humiliating and haughty, colonial-style put-down knee-jerk response to my questioning of their high
motives. Well, sorry I asked!
Reply

8.

hopeful Thursday, October 13, 2016 - 5:14 am

Sorry- 2016 not 2006 GBP 5 million payout.
Reply

9.
http://www.irrawaddy.com/burma/burmas-misguided-peace-process-needs-a-fresh-start.html

In Person

Dateline Irrawaddy: We have seen a certain degree of deadlock in the

peace process.
On this weeks Dateline, Sai Leik, Ko Ye, and Kyaw Zwa Moe discuss how the peace process looks nowand what it
might look like in the future.
By The Irrawaddy 5 November 2016
Kyaw Zwa Moe: Welcome to Dateline Irrawaddy! We have repeatedly heard about peace over the past five or six years
across the country. Daw Aung San Suu Kyis administration believes peace is a top priority for the countrys political
stability and is working to achieve it. But at the same time, there are continued clashes between the Burma Army and
ethnic armed groups near the border areas. Well be discussing where the peace process is nowif it has stalled, or is
moving forward or backwardand whether Daw Aung San Suu Kyis political goals for national reconciliation and
peace over the next four or five years are realistic. U Sai Leik, joint general secretary-1 of the Shan Nationalities
League for Democracy (SNLD) [an ethnic Shan political party], and executive director Ko Ye of the Tagaung Institute
of Political Studies will join me for discussion. Im Irrawaddy English editor Kyaw Zwa Moe.
Speaking of conflict, war and peace, Ko Ye, your institution has studied these topics in depth. We have heard lots of
talk of peace ever since former President U Thein Seins government assumed power in 2011, but the peace process has
failed to make progress in certain aspects as clashes continue. It seems that clashes have even intensified lately. Clashes
should have deescalated after Daw Aung San Suu Kyis 21st Century Panglong Conference, but instead the reverse is
happening. Where is the peace process now? Is the amount of clashes high or low?
Ko Ye: Today, it is generally accepted that we are moving toward peace. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi held the 21st Century
Panglong Conference and is trying to achieve peace through political means. But the reality is that we are still in a circle
of conflict that we cant yet break out of. From last October until this September, there were 304 clashes according to
our statistics. From this January until September, there were 207 clashes and from the power transfer [in April] until
September, there were 110 clashes. This is a pretty high number.
KZM: Do these figures represent only the clashes between the Burma Army and ethnic armed groups or do they also
include clashes between ethnic armed groups?
KY: Only the clashes between the Burma Army and ethnic armed groups. This is a pretty high number given that we
are in the midst of an ongoing peace process. Despite the so-called peace process, we still hear gunfire, smell blood, and
see the troubles displaced persons are facing in the camps. Even a genuine ceasefire has not yet been achieved.
KZM: U Sai Leik, Daw Aung San Suu Kyis government held the 21st Century Panglong Conference at the end of
August. Many ethnic groups attended the conference, which contributed a lot to the governments peace policy. But
there is a question about whether the Burma Army is cooperating. Before the conference, clashes renewed in Kachin
State on Aug.17. The Burma Army reportedly used fighter jets and a two-year-old girl was allegedly killed by artillery
fire. Why are there clashes? Are they deliberate military attacks or is it just lower-level friction on the ground?
Sai Leik: Frankly speaking, there may be a misunderstanding between the government and the military. Daw Aung San
Suu Kyis government held the 21st Century Panglong Conference, which was wrong from the very beginning. The
conference was said to be all-inclusive but not every group was allowed to attend. As far as Im concerned, they could
not attend because of restrictions by the military. I doubt that the governments peace process and the militarys peace
process are the same. The military has its own six peace principles and the government has a seven-point peace policy
and there are conflicts between the two. The question is if the process can progress.
KZM: Despite Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her government preaching and working toward building peace, there are
hundreds of clashes on the ground, which could intentionally or unintentionally undermine the peace process and peace
negotiations. How can these clashes be stopped?
KY: It is incorrect to say the problem is in the lower levels because the military used fighter jets that would not be used
without a decision from top-level management. Looking at the ongoing conflicts, I found two points. One is that the
rhetoric about the decades-long war in our country remains the same. One side says they are fighting a fair war and the
other side says they are fighting for equality. They only think about how to justify the fighting. They still cant solve the
problem through non-violent means. So, the rhetoric itself is a problem.
Another thing is in regards to tactics. They fight with the intention of killing rather than putting pressure on the other
side. So, it is quite difficult to stop these conflicts. There have been calls for peace and national level dialogue but there
have been no equitable developments between the two. It is difficult for the peace process to move forward while
conflicts still cant be solved. If this continues, the peace process will reach a deadlock. We have already seen a certain
degree of deadlock in the peace process. Another problem that contributes to the deadlock is technocratic peace, which
is overly-focused on technicalities without looking at the underlying causes and grievances on the ground. I am

concerned that the peace process will become too technical.

KZM: The former U Thein Sein government had a lot of [peace] advisers. I spoke with them and most of them talked
about technical issues such as what provisions the NCA [Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement] should include. They only
discussed about technical things when they spoke with international peace academics. We should question how much
people are suffering [from wars] and how strong the political will [of leaders] for peace is.
U Sai Leik has also questioned the collaboration between the government and the military. This is a big question. We
cant gauge the depth of the relations between Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the commander-in-chief. The two are of
course always seen smiling together in pictures, but we dont know how good their relationship is in reality. For
example, the government has not said a single word about the militarys attacks in Kachin State. So more than 20,000
locals staged a demonstration in Kachin State. The question is why the government has kept silent.
Are they not in a position to tell Snr-Gen Min Aung Hlaing that the attacks should be stopped? What is your view on
the collaboration between the two sides?
SL: I think it will concern the political interests of each individual and each group. Given their actions, it is obvious that
they are building a political empire. It will lead to bad results as Ko Ye has said because ethnic armed groups, on the
other hand, will also try to protect and promote their own political interests. The suggestion I would like to make is, it is
not enough to just build good relations between Daw Aung San Suu Kyis government and the military. Only when a
tripartite relationship is established [between the government, the military, and ethnic armed groups] can the root-causes
of the problem be found. And while the upper levels are only thinking about their political gains, if the [peace]
academics only give advice from a technical point of view, it will be more difficult to achieve peace. So in a nutshell,
tripartite dialogue is a must to find out how to reconcile relations between civilians and the military, as well as among
civilians, because reconciliation between the government and the military is just not enough.
Another thing is that top leaders meet few other people in our country. The government and ethnic armed groups may
meet, but the new government has hardly met other influential people or association members in ethnic regions. This is
not good. The last thing is, there is no strong opposition [party]. As a result, no one dares to criticize the government.
There is no one who will point out the faults of the government. We need a good opposition. If there is a good
opposition, as well as public cooperation, we can have hopes.
KZM: We have also been talking about national reconciliation and a democratic, federalist union, which is a long-term
process for which peace needs to be built. But if we focus on ongoing conflicts, do you think it is possible to hold
tripartite negotiations? Over the past 20 years, dialogues were called for, but they never happened. There was dialogue
under U Thein Seins government, but it was only nominal. Will the military be willing to accept a dialogue if the
government were to call for one now?
KY: I think that, rather than forcibly putting the existing problems into a technical framework, only genuine political
dialogue will be able to break the existing gridlock.
KZM: What do you mean by genuine political dialogue? What yardstick could you use to measure this?
KY: By genuine political dialogue, I mean dialogue that focuses carefully on how to handle the existing reality. There
are existing conflicts. But they dont discuss those conflicts. Instead, they leaped to the next stage and make calls for
peace with a grand vision for 2020 or 2025. The existing conflicts are the major problems the country is facing. If those
problems cant be solved, it is not genuine political dialogue. Again, there is a saying that if a country has so many
reconciliation events, it shows that that country still does not have reconciliation. We need to be careful that there are
not too many events.
Another thing concerns local and international academics. Peace is not a luxury item for academics. Peace is a real
problem. Rather than making it a technocratic peace [process] for academics, they should focus on solving the real
problems. Our country is ranked 148th out of 188 countries on the human development index, and we are behind Laos
and Cambodia. And we are ranked 199th out of 199 countries on the health care index recently released by the WHO.
Regarding the poverty rate, we are the poorest among Asean members, at 25.6 percent. This highlights the need for our
political leaders to solve existing problems in order to move to the next stage. They should consider these things, take a
pragmatic approach, and make swifts steps to hold negotiations.
KZM: The problem cant be solved if one side does not accept it, even if the other side does. As U Sai Leik said, if they
are just working toward some future mission with some big political aim, it is impossible to engage in people-oriented
peace. Also important is the means for building peace. Leaders, most importantly Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and ethnic
leaders, especially leaders of armed ethnic groups, should find various solutions.
Recently, the government announced a seven-point national reconciliation and peace policy. Besides signing
agreements from peace conferences, the policy includes amending the undemocratic 2008 constitution, based on those
agreements. Only after the constitution is amended will elections be held in accordance with this amended constitution.
This is the sixth point of the policy. Although Daw Aung San Suu Kyi does not disclose the timeframe officially, I
assume shes referring to 2020 [elections]. This is because if the timeframe is too long, peace and conflict will clash and
we will be back to the status quo, unable to move out of this vicious cycle of civil war. The seventh point is to build a
democratic federal union in line with the results of multi-party democratic elections. This may be the ultimate aim. I
would like to question the timeframe. It is only five years from now. What can be done in these five years? What is the

major obstacle, though there are of course many smaller challenges?

SL: There are seven points in the NLDs peace and national reconciliation policy. With point sixth, a new constitution
will be drafted and approved based on agreements reached at the 21st Century Panglong Conference. And a multiparty
general election will be held in accordance with the constitution. This is to counter Section 436, which reserves 25
percent of parliamentary seats for the military. Its a good idea. But is it possible? The most important thing is, how
much is the military willing to cooperate? If the military disagrees, it is difficult to move forward. So the most
important thing to keep in mind is, to what extent can we persuade the military. If all ethnic armed groups, all political
parties, and the government are on one side and the military is on the other, it will surely participate.
KZM: At the Panglong [conference], what Daw Aung San Suu Kyi said was much in line with what ethnic armed
groups like the KIO [Kachin Independence Organization] and KNU [Karen National Union] said in terms of policy.
They said that they support the policies of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Is the military the only group that has different
policy priorities?
KY: In my opinion, the military wants to cling to the 2008 constitution, the current NCA framework, and to the sixpoint peace principles of the military chief. Apart from other groups, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi herself has talked about
amending the constitution, which clearly shows that she has different views from the military. On the anniversary of the
NCA signing, KNU chairman Saw Mutu Say Poe said that he wanted the Burma Army and the government to grant
certain concessions in order to keep the peace process moving. If the military clings to its policies, the peace process
will end up in gridlock. To overcome this, Daw Aung San Suu Kyiwe know that she is a leader who emphasizes
dialogueethnic leaders, and the military should hold parallel dialogues in order to break the existing gridlock.
KZM: Throughout the entire peace process, leaders are of course important, but are there people on peace committees
who are not very serious about achieving peace? Are their actions creating problems for the peace process? Before the
peace conference in August, retired Lt-Gen Khin Zaw Oo gave us an interview about the conference, and some ethnic
groups were not happy with what he said. Have you seen similar actions that have supposedly undermined the peace
negotiation at the lower level?
SL: Yes, we have seen such things on both sides. Among ethnic armed groups, there are NCA signatories and nonsignatories, as well as groups that think they dont need to sign the NCA. One of the leaders of the NCA signatories has
implied that he would move forward according to the NCA timeframe, so the political dialogue will be held in
February, as scheduled, and the groups that still have not signed the NCA by then will be left behind. This is not a
constructive approach. And we have to question the [motives of the] military. Regarding the tensions between Wa and
Mongla groups, we have to question if the military played a part in causing these tensions. Likewise, the military
clashed with the SSPP [Shan State Progressive Party/Shan State Army-North] and the RCSS [Restoration Council of
Shan State/Shan State Army-South], and it is clashing with the KIA [Kachin Independence Army]. Does the military
view those fights as necessary? We need to assess if they are fighting in order to pressure groups into signing the NCA,
or if they are fighting because they dont want them to sign the NCA? So, yes, I would say that there are undesirable
people and attitudes in this circle.
KZM: It is fair to say that this problem has been around since our country gained independence in 1948well over 60
years agoand that people are still suffering from this problemwe still hear gunfire. Many people, including us, have
called on leaders to end this problem, and both of you made some suggestions earlier. What else would you say to
leaders?
KY: First of all, it is important that leaders have political will. There should be the political will to serve the interests of
the people. Likewise, the second-level peace negotiators appointed by themthere are ethics of negotiation and ethics
of peace processesshould observe those ethics carefully so as not to offend the other side and to keep the peace
process moving.
SL: Ethics are critically important. At the same time, not only top leaders but also second-level peace negotiators should
see each other as equals. Leaders belong to different ethnic groups, which differ from one another in size. But it is
critically important that they view each other as equals. Only then will we achieve national reconciliation and internal
peace, things we aspire for. The seven-point peace policy of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is very good. I think it can be
beneficial to both sides. But then, there may also be people who will rock the boat out of self-interest, and we need to be
careful about that.
KZM: Well, well wait and see what happens with the peace process. Every citizen in our country wants peace. But I
dont know what will happen, and neither do the people. It is fair to say that the destiny of our countrys peace will be
determined by a handful of leaders.
Topics: Kachin
http://www.irrawaddy.com/in-person/dateline-irrawaddy-we-have-seen-a-certain-degree-of-deadlock-in-the-peace-process.html
Note: The passages above are marked in red colour by myself. Thang Za Dal. 05.11.2016.