(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
“Today is a historic and important day for Myanmar. The road to future peace is now open. ”With such words, Myanmar's President Thein Sein recently opened his speech in the capital Nay Pyi Taw, attended by hundreds of government members, politicians, ethnic representatives and diplomats from more than 45 countries. "There's no way back," he determined. The president did not refer to the country's crucial parliamentary elections held on 8. November, which has otherwise attracted the attention of the outside world, but instead to the peace process he has initiated with the country's armed ethnic groups. The signing of a joint ceasefire agreement with eight of the armed groups in October is the preliminary culmination of that process. "This is a huge step at a crucial time for Myanmar," confirms analyst Richard Horsey of the international think tank International Crisis Group. "The agreement paves the way for a more comprehensive political solution after the election."
Myanmar officially has more than 100 peoples, and about 35 percent of the population is of a different ethnic origin than the majority of Burmese. Country's pt. For more than 21 years, 60 armed ethnic groups have fought for partial autonomy and ethnic rights. The military took power in the country in a coup in 1962 due to disagreements over how much power the ethnic groups that had not previously been subject to the central government should have. That problem remains unsolved.
Far from everyone is convinced that the joint ceasefire agreement is the way forward, especially because it has created a rift between the armed groups that have signed and those that have not. "These conflicts are now risking deepening while international actors seem to support this," said Seng Raw Lahpai, a leading civil society actor. She emphasizes: “The ceasefire agreement is like the parliamentary election. The big questions remain unresolved: What happens after the agreement is signed? " So far, armed fighting has continued, especially in the northern part of the country where more than 6000 people have been forced to flee in recent weeks. In addition, 120 continue to live in internally displaced persons in Kachin State on the border with China – and only a few of the more than one hundred thousand refugees in Thailand have yet returned home.
Democracy no guarantee. But is a relatively free parliamentary election the way forward for peace and democracy for the country's minorities? Two-thirds of the 92 parties running for the November election were ethnic parties, almost all of whom wanted a federal state at the top of the electoral program. At the same time, the election was canceled in more than 600 village areas – all in ethnic areas.
Only a few see the election as an automatic solution to the country's ethnic problems.
"Our goal is peace, democracy and development," said party leader Dr. Tu Ja of the Kachin State Democracy Party at his home in Myitkyina, Kachin State. He is a former top leader of the major ethnic organization and Army Kachin Independence Organization / Army (KIO / KIA), which did not sign the Joint Ceasefire Agreement. In 2009, Dr. Tu Ja withdrew from the KIO / KIA, formed his own party and applied for the 2010 parliamentary elections, but the authorities excluded him and his party from the election without justification. This time, however, his party has been allowed to line up and he is cautiously optimistic. "Finally, political parties have gained a place in the peace process," he says, citing meetings between government peace negotiators, ethnic rebel leaders and political parties as part of the ceasefire negotiations. But he also emphasizes that it is a long road to peace and democracy for Myanmar's ethnic minorities. "People want democracy, but they have no idea what that means. This is only the beginning. The leaders do not know about democracy, so we want the people to understand the essence of democracy. … But freedom is not enough, we also want justice for our people. ”
Human rights violations are widespread in Myanmar's ethnic areas – primarily as a result of the military's brutal methods, and many ethnic civil society activists want to hold the military accountable. However, a court settlement is not just around the corner. Just finding common proposals among the ethnic parties and groups is a major challenge in the first place. Thus, in Kachin State, there are more than eight ethnic parties besides the National League for Democracy (the major opposition party led by Aung San Suu Kyi), the current government backed by the military and a number of other parties. Also, the armed groups are divided by eight who have signed the joint ceasefire agreement and thirteen who have not. However, the vast majority of groups have existing bilateral ceasefires with the government.
Separate processes. So far, however, the peace process and the parliamentary elections have been very separate processes. The ethnic armed groups have not taken part in the elections and Aung San Suu Kyi has not participated in the ceasefire negotiations. Only a few see the election as an automatic solution to the country's ethnic problems. Aung San Suu Kyi has publicly supported the ethnic groups' wishes for a federal state, but has not made electoral alliances with any of the ethnic parties involved in the election, despite their requests for it. Many are also suspicious about the extent to which she wants to prioritize ethnic rights, since she herself is from the Burmese majority and daughter of the founder of the country's military Aung San. She herself recently stressed during a visit to the Kachin state that «NLD has announced that we are for peace. We will continue to implement that policy. ”
However, peace and democracy processes do not necessarily go hand in hand, points out Professor Mary Callahan, who for decades has studied Myanmar's military and the country's political development. The two processes can undermine each other, she warns. On the one hand, parliamentary elections by nature "are about contradictions and polarizing – the winners take it all and the loser goes home," Callahan said. Political parties will therefore seek out contradictions to gain support and undermine opponents. On the other hand, peace processes are about the exact opposite – "building bridges, being inclusive, moving away from 'zero sum politics' and trying to develop respect for alternative visions and desires". She emphasizes that these opposing forces are likely to undermine each other in Myanmar – and that the country's political and peace processes will "take years, not months."
The act of the military, not the election result, is the decisive factor in the peace process, points out analyst Richard Horsey. The ceasefire agreement provides for commissions to begin a political dialogue within 90 days of signing. Both the government, parliament, military, political parties and ethnic leaders will be part of this dialogue. "Whether the process will be a success or a failure in the future depends largely on the military – and it is the only institution that will see no change in its leadership as a result of the election," Horsey said.
The military and its supporters have major strategic and economic interests in the border areas of Myanmar, where the minorities prefer to live. The areas are rich in natural resources. The international organization Global Witness has just documented that just the trade in jade
stones from the jade mines of Kachin State amount to about $ 31 billion annually. The staggering amount is equal to half the country's gross domestic product. The deal takes place partly in secret, and is dominated by companies owned by the military and individuals of the current elite. "Very few resources benefit the people of Kachin State and the country as a whole," the report emphasizes. «Military families and companies have much to lose by a just peace treaty. They have the financial motivation, and probably the political influence to continue the conflict. "
Kempel is a freelance journalist.
suannekempel@gmail.com.
