政党社团之声
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    缅甸风云
[主页]->[政党社团之声]->[缅甸风云]->[Shan-EU: Time for ASEAN and UN to act in tandem]
BURMA-缅甸风云
·速开缅甸三方会议
·缅甸将军们与众土族奇谋对奇阵
·缅甸十月29日的奇谋奇阵棋盘
·缅甸将军们这么快立地成佛
·赛万赛谈山姆叔叔访问缅甸
·由丹瑞大将斯里兰卡取经说起
·蘑菇——植物肉!上帝食品!
·脂肪肝如何自疗自养?
·缅甸布朗族革命47周年声明
·缅甸民族民主阵线NDF呼吁军政府士兵起义
·温教授针砭缅甸高等教育
·缅甸军政府管辖区鸦片种植激增
·由缅甸布朗毒品报告谈起
·祝贺缅甸克伦族革命61周年
·缅甸众土族要民主联邦制
·缅甸NDF谴责军政府的军事胁迫恫吓
·缅甸军政府与众土族谈谈打打
·缅甸反对派2010年选战观
·杨奎松谈新中国的贫富与等级制度
·由阿利教谈到缅甸中国佛教
·缅甸局势与NDF七中大会
·仰光爆炸案的背后阴谋
·姚色克在掸邦反抗日讲话
·悠游土耳其12日
·斯德哥尔摩古城一日游
·中外史前巨石阵
·瑞典古城与郭沫若
·和瑞典学者谈社会主义
·清帝顺治与缅王丹瑞
·千万勿忘第一敌人!!!
·昂山素姬讲话一石激千浪
·掸邦欢迎昂山素姬的21世纪彬龙会议
·缅甸众土族欢庆昂山素姬获释公告
·昂山素姬对新闻工作者讲话
·昂山素姬答伊江编辑问
·昂山素姬获释近况略记
·缅甸民主同盟2010-1号战果报告
·昂山素姬答缅甸民主之声问
·中缅边境缅甸三特区风紧
·缅甸好汉的小国群英宴
·缅甸拟大打内战与滥印万元钞票
·缅甸正渡黎明前的黑夜
·三高外,提防类胱氨酸过高!
·缅甸三大力量摆开攻守阵势
·昂山素姬前途充满黑色13日
·中缅边区毒品业娱乐业及边贸
·中药虫草
·改革的鐘聲正在響起
·好人好事好国度永远值得热恋
·澳洲坚果(夏威夷果)Macadamia
·KNU对缅甸内比都炸弹爆炸之声明
·又一亲密战友去向马克思哭诉
·又一亲密战友去向马克思哭诉
·柏林的马克思坐着恩克斯站着
·缅甸国防军的种族奸杀灭绝政策
·缅甸国防军的种族奸杀灭绝政策
·昂山素姬呼吁尽快停火和谈的公开信
·缅甸联邦缅族与非缅族历史恩怨宿仇
·掸邦掸族断臂将军召吞英
·缅甸种族冲突能政治解决吗?
·缅甸是世界数二数三贪腐穷困国
·缅甸是世界数二数三贪腐穷困国
·缅甸的和平曙光
·93岁缅甸作家达贡达雅呼吁国内和平
·何谓和平?何谓停火?如何和谈?
·昂山素姬 Reith 第一讲:自由
·昂山素姬道高一尺,将军们魔高一丈
·昂山素姬边妥协边缓进
·缅甸三方对话才能全面和解
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第三讲
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 自由第四讲
·缅甸众族并肩共和蓝图
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第五讲
·缅族需改唯我独尊心态
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第六讲
·抛弃彬龙协议将激发缅甸各族自决
·联邦众族团结委员会覆函缅甸联邦政府
·缅甸宗教自由吗?
·昂山素姬对中国缅甸伊江建坝的意见书
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第七讲
·缅甸掸邦众族关心狱中68岁领袖昆吞武
·缅甸要片面或全盘和解?
·昂山素姬BBC Reith 第八讲
·缅甸新政府似无意改革或和解
·缅甸乱世出英雄?
·安息吧!赛森尊好战友!好兄弟!
·缅甸要真正联邦制或大缅族独裁制?
·缅甸克钦邦克钦族反对中国支持缅甸政府
·缅甸释放政治犯才能加速民主进程
·近代中国缅甸恩怨
·缅甸政府对昂山素姬与非缅族众原住民的策略
·勿忘缅甸半世纪内战难民与狱中仟捌政治犯
·昂山素姬与丹麦师生谈领袖谈民主运动
·钦族老革命谈昂山素姬与缅甸政府
·国际缅甸民族院奠基会反对民盟参加政府补选
·对昂山素姬与民盟参加政府补选面面观
·非缅族众原住民委员会ENC欢迎民盟NLD重新注册
·缅甸民主力量FDB对民盟注册与补选发表声明
·昂山素姬允诺兼顾民主与各族平等
·旅加缅甸9团体支持民盟注册与补选
·缅甸改革风吹草低见牛羊?
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
Shan-EU: Time for ASEAN and UN to act in tandem

   ( S.H.A.N & Burma's News Published by Burma's Chinese 貌强 )

   Tuesday, 13 December 2005

   Positive development seldom comes about, particularly in the case of Burma, the ASEAN's problem child. But this might be changing for the inward-looking Burmese military junta is having a second thought and even agreeing to open its door to ASEAN-led initiative to assess its so-called democratisation process. Hopefully, the junta would earnestly comply to its promise and not back down again for fear of real democratisation in all-inclusive term, as called for by the UN and well-meaning, concerned international and regional players.

   Encouraging news, that make many think that the positive change might be in the offing are, first, the US-led UNSC informal briefing; second, the ASEAN's insistence that Burma needs speedy change in its democratisation process; third, Burma's PM Soe Win's agreement or positive response that ASEAN-led team would be allowed to assess the real situation in Burma; fourth, the recent Kuala Lumpur Declaration on the Establishment of the ASEAN Charter, emphasizing the promotion of democracy, human rights and obligations; and fifth, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s commendation of the ASEAN for its call on Myanmar to “expedite” both its political reform efforts and its release of political detainees and the positive response of Burma's decision to accept the envoy.

   While ASEAN's good will intervention is a welcomed move, it should not forget that the core of the problem in Burma is two folds. One is the constitutional crisis or proper arrangement to reflect the desire and aspiration of the people, which stem from conceptual differences between the Burman dominated military regime and non-Burman ethnic nationalities, and the other, the immediate humanitarian crisis, which is threatening to explode into regional and international ramification.

   The woes of Burma today are deeply rooted in the inadequate constitutional drafting of 1947. The Union Constitution was rushed through to completion without reflecting the spirit of Panglong. The ethnic homelands were recognized as constituent states but all power was concentrated in the central government or the government of the Burma Mother state.

   Almost all the non-Burmans and Burman democratic opposition groups are in agreement that the ethnic conflict and reform of social, political and economics cannot be separated from one another. And the only solution and answer is to amend the 1947 Constitution according to Panglong Agreement, where equality, voluntary participation and self-determination, of the constituent states, formed the basis for the Republic of the Union of Burma.

   The successive military dominated regimes, including the ruling SPDC, see Burma as an existing unified nation since the reign of Anawratha thousands of years ago. As such, all other non-Burmans – Shan, Kachin, Chin, Arakanese, Mon, Karen and Karenni - are seen as minorities, which must be controlled and suppressed, lest they break up the country.

   On the other hand, the non-Burmans maintain that the Union of Burma is a newly developed territorial entity, founded by a treaty, the Panglong Agreement, where independent territories merged together on equal basis.

   Given such conceptual differences, the Burmese military goes about with its implementation of protecting “national sovereignty” and “national unity” at all cost. This, in turn, gives way to open conflict resulting in more suppression and gross human rights violations. The intolerance of the military and its inspiration to “racial supremacy”, political domination and control has no limit and could be seen by its refusal to hand over power to the winners of 1990 nation-wide election, the NLD, SNLD and other ethnic-based political parties. The genuine federalism platform, which the NLD and ethnic nationalities embrace, is a threat to its racist mind-set and obsession of domination and control.

   Within Burma political arena there are roughly only two types of conflict. One is the ethnic conflict, which has a vertical nature in contrast to horizontal one, and the other, the ideological conflict played out between entrenched military dictatorship and the democratic aspiration of the people, which has a horizontal effect, covering the whole political spectrum within Burma.

   The ethnic conflict is seen as vertical for the oppression of the non-Burman nationality groups comes only from the dominant, ruling Burmese military clique and not horizontally spread out racial-instigated hatred like one people killing another, such as in Sudan or Rwanda.

   In contrast, the conflict between military dictatorship and democratic aspiration of the people is horizontal, for the desire of democratisation or a change to civilian rule is widespread and among the peoples of Burma.

Humanitarian Intervention

   While humanitarian aids to the needy population must be tackle fast and as comprehensive as possible, it is problematic to fundamentally implement it in a nation-wide scale. To be able to address it at such level, political settlement and peaceful atmosphere must be in place first and there is no other alternative. But this is not to say that piecemeal humanitarian help should be neglected. In contrast, the already existing projects should be expanded to cover more grounds, while conflict resolution or political settlement must go in tandem or hand-in-hand, so that the two processes could complement each other.

   For example, the contested border areas along Burma-Thai border could be a case in point. The Shan, Karenni, Karen and Mon areas along the Thai-Burma border, where around half a million or more refugees and internally displaced persons (IDP) are residing, should be a project where ASEAN and the UN could alleviate the sufferings of the population from hunger, disease, shortage of food and accommodation. Thailand being a signatory of the recent ASEAN Charter shouldn't have problem to let the international humanitarian aids agencies implement the project. Burma, which also recognises the humanitarian need shouldn't object such intervention by claiming the notion of "non-intervention". If it is not in a position to help, it might as well agree formally to it and the ongoing process will evolve automatically, i.e., developing trust and understanding through cooperation with the international agencies, the battered population and last but not least, the resistance armies of the Shan, Karenni, Karen and Mon. In turn, with the healing process and time, peaceful co-existence could be worked out in the long run, with the peoples who are at war with the Burman dominated Burma Army for decades.

   Though the military junta have been sending mixed signals by indicating that it is willing to "dig-in", if pressured too much, the recent acceptance of the ASEAN overture is a welcomed start and all parties concerned should take this hint and "strike while the iron is red". So that a long waited positive outcome might be given a chance to start.

   In concrete terms, UN and ASEAN could take this opportunity to push for more opening of the political arena, leading to reconciliation, restoration of democracy and equality.

   In this respect, the forth-coming UNSC informal briefing should happen soon before the end of the year and if possible, personally conducted or briefed by the UN General Secretary to show the seriousness and commitment for a real positive change in Burma.

   ASEAN's immediate follow-up should take place, sooner than later, to loosen the political tension by first securing the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, Hkun Htun Oo and all political prisoners, followed by nation-wide ceasefire and gradual implementation of all-inclusive national convention, with the promise that the military regime would be an integral part of the transitional process and guarantee of blanket amnesty for its human rights violations.

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场