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
·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
·旅美华人谈美国生活和房价
·经济动物在英国皇家音乐厅表演
·中缅天然气管道开始向中国通气了!
·建滇缅公路为中印经济走廊
·赛万赛谈和平奋斗建真正缅甸联邦
·江山易改?本性难移?
·赛万赛谈缅甸宪法危机
·奥巴马力挺缅甸金宫寺
·赛万赛谈2013年缅甸和解进程
·温教授谈1947年彬龙协议
·公说公有理,婆说婆有理
·公说公有理,婆说婆有理(续1)
·南中精神照耀伊江莱茵河
·危害健康的加工食品与铝锅
·中国缅甸瑞苗胞波
·缅甸该学中国哪些?
·给参加2000论坛的昂山素姬一封信
·赛万赛谈缅甸全国内战停火
·携手平等合作,互利双赢共富共荣
·江西省四日游
·慟神州老少抢位打架
·从奥巴马竖毛泽东铜像谈起
·小乘、大乘、密教、喇嘛、达赖
·惊喜祖籍国与时俱进
·台湾民主基金会颁奖给缅甸克伦族人权小组
·天朝土豪游客天上来
·丑陋的 Chinese 败类
·天朝富豪精英傲翔天上
·缅甸中国健康饮食须知
·掸复委掸邦军姚色克说要退位
·中国人质素比上不足比下有余
·美国不像东南亚种族歧视与偏见
·从中国古今13尊大佛说起
·2014年初缅甸纵横谈
·缅甸内战为何停停打打?
·亡国奴与龙的传人
·纵浪大化中,乘流沧海浮
·中国农民工是贱民
[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