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
·昂山素姬为何坚信登盛总统诚意改革
·昂山素姬民盟胜了不骄傲也不辱人
·少食+多菜少荤+快乐+早睡早起 =长寿
·未来吃什么?
·腦退化症
·缅甸国内外形势说变就变?
·缅甸掸族领袖如何看昂山素姬和登盛政府
·独裁者守望台对“新缅甸”的评价
·赛万赛对缅甸局势是否太乐观?
·掸公主 Sao Noan Oo 对英国有话说
·佤邦联合军保家卫邦不怕空袭
·匈牙利布达佩斯一日游
·捷克布拉格一日游
·缅军与克钦军交火不断 中国参与斡旋
·赠神州红尘众生的锵锵劝世良言
·忆10年前云南8日游
·最美教师张丽莉与日日向善的中国人民
·最美司机48岁吴斌
·普世價值的中國先知——方励之
·谈白岩松与昂山素姬为民请命
·悼六四硬汉李旺阳被“自杀”
·温教授貌强谈若开宗教种族暴乱
·谈缅甸古今大小民族主义
·1962年缅甸学生七七惨案
·缅甸前国防总长谈罗兴迦人来龙去脉
·赛万赛谈登盛政府一年多政绩
·温教授点评大缅族主义/缅甸军队
·嚴家其谈中国民主法治轉型
·掸邦众族民主联盟昆吞武讲话
·缅甸众少数民族点评停战和谈
·罗兴迦悲剧迴光返照众生相
·给8888学生领袖哥哥基的公开信
·赛万赛盛赞登盛总统最近言行
·缅甸民主同盟DAB对和解停战声明
·掸邦进步党成立41周年纪念
·缅甸2012年五大民主服务奖章得主
·缅甸联邦众土族在泰缅边境开会
·缅甸联邦众土族开会声明
·掸邦众族民主联盟主席昆吞武赴美领奖
·美国之音访问掸邦民主联盟主席昆吞武
·缅甸有了选举就成真正民主国家吗?
·赛万赛点评昂山素姬与吴登盛总统
·温教授点评昂山素姬与吴登盛总统
·廉萨空博士回缅甸参加研讨会
·赛万赛谈缅族缅邦一分为七
·鲍彤吁温总出面澄清家族财富
·缅甸若开邦又爆发新暴力冲突
·温教授痛斥大缅族主义祸国殃民
·从外援谈到非缅族众原住民的权益
·转基因与新瘟疫SARS
·中国缅甸油气管道
·美国逼中国在其中国近海包围圈开战
·缅甸南传佛教禅修法
· 中华民族复兴的四大步骤
·昂山素姬面对“中國問題”严厉考验
·未来20年两大权力转移
·马英九与昂山素姬关心刘晓波
·莫言的自述与诺贝尔委员会的评价
·襄助缅甸,中国能比美国做得更多
·神州边防武警见义勇为,海外炎黄子孙惊喜交集
·缅甸非政府众组织反对中缅油气管道与深水港
·震惊大陆法庭的法轮功辩护词
·諾貝獎得主134人聯名要求釋放劉曉波
·勿忘邓小平上世纪末10点警告
·缺维生素B2易患痔疮溃疡肿瘤癌症
·让戒定慧佛光普照缅甸大地
·热烈欢呼粟秀玉老师荣获缅甸佛学奖!
·2013年初谈缅甸缅甸人中国中国人
·缅甸中国必须互利双赢
·缅甸卑谬世界文化遗产一日游
·骠族老同学谈眼皮下缅甸红尘
·骠族老同学谈眼皮下缅甸红尘!
·缅甸政府与众少数民族半世纪内战复燃
·中缅边境军民要以正视听
·缅甸蒲甘世界文化遗产一日游(1)
·缅甸中国边民有话说
·缅甸蒲甘世界文化遗产一日游(续1)
·绝密档案 招标中标 鸡的屁
·少吃长寿送煤气炉
·缅甸海归谈缅甸中国关系
·昂山素姬弃美投华?
·铜矿村民愤概昂山素姬调查报告
·缅甸斗士海归责怪昂山素姬
·独裁观察家点评昂山素姬
·缅甸评论家奉劝昂山素姬
·于建嵘与柴静的中国梦
·美国反式脂肪与中国粮油食品奶粉
·缅甸会成卢旺达第二吗?
·中国贪官与美国梦
·诺奖得主的健康长寿秘诀
·古人的劳逸养生与食疗
·中国摩登僧尼与时俱进
·中华五千年文明遗产馆
·吴内昂谈缅甸2008年宪法与人权
·与中国渐行渐远的缅甸
·为老外所描述的中国人而痛哭
·科学地话说杨桃
·中国人为何多会早死
·奥巴马应赦免斯诺登
·推荐斯诺登为诺贝尔和平奖候选人!
·习近平贺马英九当选国民党主席
[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