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]->[貌强:Editorial: Shan State and Union of Burma]
BURMA-缅甸风云
·灵魂工程师、未来主人翁、天下大同、天下为公
·7-JULY与母校仰大学运传欧
·缅甸德佑续游瑞列匈土
·赛万赛谈缅甸民地武大会
·赛万赛谈国内和平与中缅友好
·赛万赛谈昂山素姬访华
· 掸民盟昆吞武与中共宋涛面谈
·缅甸彬龙会议风波
·缅甸内战受害者的呼声
·21世纪彬龙会议举步艰难
·彬龙会议的石破天惊言行
·21世纪彬龙会议言论集
·缅甸UNFC柳暗花明又一村
·缅甸UNFC建议开三方会议
·让佛光普照大地
·缅甸不愿常任LDC欠发达国家
·对老怨天尤人者只好避而远之
·温教授呼吁正确认识缅甸
·赛万赛谈缅甸全国全面停战协议
·赛万赛谈缅甸议会补选与政局变化
·缅甸华人
·温教授谈Rohingya罗兴亚人
·温教授由七月七日惨案谈起
·赛万赛忆掸邦学友
·与掸族兄弟夜谈掸族掸国掸史
·游加拿大感概万千(一)
·游加拿大感概万千(二)
·游加拿大感概万千(三)
·游加拿大感概万千(四)
· 游加拿大感概万千
·廉萨空博士的暹粒讲话
·天主教生根缅甸已五百多年
·话说阿那比隆缅皇
·缅甸真的有135原住民吗?
·缅甸联邦第一任总统苏瑞泰
·读“此昂山非彼昂山”有感
·读“中国式思维”感概万千
·缅甸暹罗两大战争史
·话说缅甸佛塔
·暹王缅王储骑象单打独斗?
·缅甸人民跪求国泰民安
·印度缅甸友好史实
·昂山素姬祝贺孟邦民族节71周年
·缅甸合法左派政党史
·缅甸内战与白象王军演
·南洋伯谈骷髅头
·缅甸大部分人极贫困
·由仰光河底达摩悉迪铜钟谈起
·古老落后钦邦钦族在发奋图强
·蒲甘王朝与宋朝崇宁通宝
·蒲甘王朝与宋朝崇宁通宝
·唐朝骠国乐与缅甸王根绍画
·唐朝骠国乐与缅甸王根绍画
·唐朝骠国乐与缅甸王根绍画
·唐朝骠国乐与缅甸王根绍画
·保护儿童天赋权益
·发展与和平是大家共建共享
·愿爱心浩然正气长存人间
·缅甸史请再多读三分钟
·三八妇女节与丁丁笙环球游记
·安得广厦千万间?
·缅甸的以夷制夷 & 以华制华
·世界肾脏日与缅甸公益善举
·平等合作、相敬互助共赢、齐奔大同世界
·风吹草低见牛羊
·谨防伪装荷兰警察的东欧骗子!
·中国土豪大妈被依法罚款
·漫谈泼水节缅甸
·敬请基督教勿用佛教专用名词
·缅甸若开邦穆斯林事件
·从BBC缅语简介马克思谈起
·英国大使微服考察缅甸民情
·缅甸塘虱鱼
·缅甸违规食品(2017年第三季)
·黄曲霉毒素对人体的危害
·美国枪击案与缅甸内战
·嚼槟榔与口腔癌
·BBC转述缅甸儿童落后状况
·在“吴本”桥上谈古说今
·话说曼德勒大学
·谈谈缅甸食品安全性
·缅甸曼德勒省盛产葡萄
·缅甸人道援助义工勇士们
·缅甸雨季风暴比唐诗更悲惨
·缅甸棕榈树前景
·从端午粽谈到缅甸风味小吃
·缅甸传统拳击 Let Hway.
·从缅甸七七学生惨案谈起
·由佛国缅甸看泰国的缅甸人
·13亿中国人竟扶不起一个跌倒的老人
·为一带一路命运共同体服务
·国父昂山与克龙吴素的恩怨成败史
·喜见缅甸蜂蜜出口中国德国
·父辈谈缅甸烈士节
·求佛菩萨救救缅甸耕农与灾民
·喝啤酒谈天说地论英雄
·藏传佛教大师十问十答
·简介克伦尼/克耶邦与其居民
·记得缅甸小姐克伦族花木兰吗?
·缅甸联邦男女平等问题
·缅甸灾民水深火热但不哭泣
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
貌强:Editorial: Shan State and Union of Burma

Message on The 59th Anniversary of Shan National Day

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

   It is interesting to note that the linkage and emergence of the modern Shan State, its national day and the formation of the Union of Burma are so intertwined; it is almost impossible to discuss the making of this historical formation separately.

   The date 7th February 1947 is a defining moment in the record of the Shan history as a modern nation. On that day, Shan princes and the people's representatives of the Shan States demonstrated their newfound unity to declare it a "national day" which were followed by the resolutions of "Shan National Anthem", "Shan National Flag" and the formation of "Shan State Council" on the 11th and 15th of February, 1947 respectively. These had been done without reference to the British colonial overlords, who claimed protectorship over the Federated Shan States since 1886-87 (one year after the fall of the Burman kingdom and the Alaungpaya or Gonbaung dynasty).

   The formation of the Shan State Council by Shan leaders autonomously of the British represents a declaration by the Shan that they are a sovereign, free nation. This bold action constitutes a Shan declaration of independence from foreign rule, and the date, 7th February 1947, marks the entry of the Shan people onto the world's historical stage as a modern nation.

   The people of Shan States and leaders decided in this very year later at Panglong, on the 12th of February, to join with U Aung San and the AFPFL (Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League) and leaders of other nationalities, to live together under one flag as co-independent and equal nations. This marks the birth of a nation-state now known as "Union of Burma".

   It is not an exaggeration to state that without Panglong Agreement or Accord, signifying the intent and willingness of the free peoples and nations of what could be termed British Indochina, there would have not been born the Union of Burma in 1948.

Failed Cohabitation

   As all know, the experiment to live together in harmony within the Union of Burma has been a disaster. In 1962, the Burmese military sized state power in a coup and declared the Union Constitution abolished. In so doing, the Burmese terminated the only existing legal bond between them and the other ethnic nationalities. The declaration of the suspension of the Constitution was in effect a self-denunciation that Burma had overnight become an aggressor-nation instead of partner. Since then, Shan State has been treated as a de facto colony and occupied territory by the Burmese army. Its forced assimilation and Burmanization policies to subdue our national identity have devastated the Shan homeland and make the people homeless and refugees. Looking at the contemporary situation, one could only term the Shan nation as a downtrodden and battered one, reeling under the occupation of the oppressive Burmese military regime. Gross human rights violations, genocide and cultural genocide, population transfer designed to make the Shan a minority in their homestead, and robbing them of their birthright sovereignty and self-determination are glaring injustice, which push the Shan into the category of sub-human or slaves, especially in the eyes of their occupiers.The same situation also applies to the Karenni, Karen, Mon, Arakan, Chin and Kachin States.

   But even under such circumstances and after more than four decades of brutal suppression and occupation, the Shan sense of "national identity" and the aspiration to be the master of their own faith have not diminish but have grown stronger. The Shan Nationalities League for Democracy's (SNLD) victory in 1990 nation-wide election in the whole Shan State; the continued political activities of the Shan State Army North within the limited political space provided by the Burmese military junta; the active armed resistance of the Shan State Army South, together with the bulk of Shan State National Army; and the highly self-conscious Shan civil societies in keeping the national identity alive under intense pressure of the Burmese military junta; are indications of a nation, which refuses to be cowed.

   Given such a backdrop, it is not at all surprising that the majority of the Shan people wants to opt out of the now-defunct union for good. The question also arises as to why the mainstream Shan organizations are endorsing the notion to rebuild a new Federal Union - together with all the other ethnic nationalities, Burman included - instead of an outright total independence and clean sweep secession.

   There are two essential, important factors, which need emphasizing regarding this issue, at least from the mainstream organizations and Shan leadership point of view. One is the ever changing global perspective in relation to the issue of self-determination and the other, the constant transformation of needs and value system or aspiration of a people at a given time and space.

Changing Global Perspective

   In 1945, the United Nations member states count was 41 and by 2002, it has reached 191. Up till 1990, most emerging new states, with a few exceptions like Bangladesh and Singapore, are the product of decolonization program of the United Nations based on the so-called salt-water doctrine. However, the break-up of Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia in the early 90s has added up some 19 more new states, which raises hope that the disintegration of the existing states will continue. But this expectation was short-lived and with the end of the cold war, the pro-status quo stance gained acceptance again and the disintegration of existing states subsided. During the period of 2000 to 2006, only one new state emerged, which was a mixture of decolonization trend as prescribed by the United Nations and liberation movement or disintegration of an existing state from the point of view of the Indonesian government.

   The global trend seems to be moving towards integration than disintegration, as can be seen by the expansion of European Union, now numbering 25 states. At the same time, the international community's wariness of having to deal with failed states, such as Somalia and Democratic Republic of the Congo, have prompted to reject disintegration and push for more integration.

   If one looks around the conflict spectrum in Asia-Pacific region, most opposition movements against the existing states have toned down their secessionist tendency and are now accommodating autonomy solution or federal system arrangement, rather than secession. The Tamil Tiger of Sri Lanka and the GAM of Ache/Indonesia are good examples, which have grasped the changing international mood in relation to their aspiration of self-determination.

   Christian Hillgruber, in his " The Admission of New States to the International Community " writes:The integration of a new state in the international community does not take place automatically, but through co-optation; that is, by individual and collective recognition on the part of the already existing states. By the procedure of recognition, these states exercise their prerogative to determine in advance whether the newcomer, in their judgment, is able and willing to carry out all its obligations as a subject of international law, whether it will be a reliable member of the international community.

   Shan State is situated between China and Thailand and also shares thousands of kilometers borderline with both states and couldn't expect recognition easily, even if the Shan could throw out the Burmese occupation forces, for both countries view the conflict as an internal one. Furthermore, while China has adopted an Anti-Secession Law on 14 March 2005, Thailand is bound by it commitment in ASEAN to view Burma as a sole political entity and fellow member of the bloc, not to mention the principle of non-intervention and territorial integrity, which are cornerstones of the organization.

Transformation of Needs and Value System

   According to the unpublicized survey conducted by the Shan Herald Agency for News (SHAN), the majority of the Shan people would opt for total independence, if given the chance to choose. It is also not surprising that the people would prefer secession, under such immense rights violations and oppression by the Burmese occupation forces. It couldn't be otherwise.

[下一页]

©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