Burma
at the Crossroads: Prospect for a political change
By
Dr. Thaung Htun
Representative for UN Affairs, NCGUB
International
Strategy Meeting for Burma
Bangkok,
Thailand
March 17-19
Good
morning friends,
It's
a pleasure to meet all of you at this crucial moment of the Burmese
democracy movement. The recent news about talks between Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi and the SPDC, which was revealed to the media after the visit
of the UN Special Envoy at the beginning of the year, has presented
us with a great puzzle. The news has filled our minds with questions.
What are the substance and direction of these talks?
Is
this a real breakthrough that will lead to a democratic transition in
Burma? How should we respond to this political development and what
should be the strategy of our movement? This conference provides us
the opportunity to brainstorm about various issues and I hope that we
will be able to develop a consensus vision and strategy by the end of
the meeting.
We
have seen the regime moving from a position at the beginning of the
year 2000 of trying to crush the NLD to an approach at the end of the
year of actually talking with the NLD. This movement indicates that
the regime has decided it cannot crush the NLD and must therefore find
another way to deal with the problems it is facing.
As
far as we know, talks in Rangoon up to now are serious and consistent.
General Khin Nyunt, with the agreement of the entire SPDC leadership,
is leading the talk with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. His aides from the Office
of Strategic Studies are holding regular meetings with Daw Suu. Daw
Suu has access to the NLD central executive committee through U Lwin,
who is meeting with her twice a week. The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue,
led by a former ICRC official based in Rangoon, has been facilitating
the process. The UN Special Envoy has regular contact with the SPDC
Foreign Ministry and has kept the international key players informed
about the development of the talks. We have also observed that some
foreign dignitaries and diplomats have been allowed to meet Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi.
We
have witnessed the regime exhibit some positive gestures since the start
of the talks. On Jan 25, U Tin Oo, Vice-Chairman of the NLD, was released
from detention after four months in the Ye Mon interrogation Centre.
Nineteen NLD Youth members who were arrested along with U Tin Oo were
also released on that day. Other NLD Youth members, who were arrested
at the Rangoon Central Railway Station when Daw Suu was obstructed from
traveling to Mandalay, were also released. During the second week of
January, military authorities instructed their controlled media to end
attacks against the NLD leadership. During these days, we have observed
that the regime has provided some space for reorganization of the NLD.
Party signboards that were previously pulled down by the USDA and local
SPDC authorities have been reestablished. Township level organizing
committee have been reorganized. Moreover, the Youth Wing of the NLD
has been reorganized in many townships.
Although
the NCGUB perceives these developments to be positive, we also believe
that we need to be cautious. This is not the first time the Burmese
military has entered into dialogue with its political opponents. In
1962, the Revolutionary Council, which was the first generation of the
current military regime, entered into dialogue with all of the country's
armed resistance groups. In 1994, Gen. Than Shwe and Gen Khin Nyunt
met Daw Aung San Suu Kyi while she was under house arrest. Most of us
are well aware of the failure of previous peace negotiations.
In
conjunction with its provision of partial gestures, we should be careful
not to miss the fact that the military wooed the international community
into lifting sanctions that had been imposed on Burma and warned that
any international pressure could undermine the dialogue process. Gen.
Khin Nyunt, Secretary (2) of the SPDC, claimed that although the military
is committed to democracy , the Western style of democracy doesn't fit
with Burma. The military refuses to yield its philosophy of "disciplined
democracy," or, in other words, "the supremacy of military
over the civilian". Therefore, we feel it necessary to caution
the international community that:
- No
one knows the substance of the talks in Rangoon.
-
No official announcement regarding the talks has been made in the
Burmese media.
-
The talks are limited - only Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is involved. This
is a cause for concern.
-
No substantive political agreements have been reached.
-
No laws have been repealed to ensure that those recently released
will not be rearrested.
-
No laws have been enacted to ensure democracy and human rights.
-
Forced labor and forced relocations, with attendant human rights
abuses, continue unabated.
-
More than one thousand political prisoners, including elected MPs,
continue to languish in jail.
-
The military offensive against ethnic peoples is continuing.
-
Given
these considerations, the international community must be careful
not to prematurely relax the existing pressure mechanisms before
talks have reached the stage where they become irreversible and
have developed into a process of genuine dialogue. The talks cannot
be deemed a "dialogue" until the following conditions
are fulfilled:
-
The
parties are able to talk in freedom as equals;
-
The parties can select their own representatives at the same level;
-
The talks deal with political issues and are not one-sided;
-
There is a facilitator or mediator (ASEAN, UN or otherwise) involved;
and
-
The parties make joint statements/declarations.
Given the strengths and weaknesses of key players in Burma, we envisage
the following scenarios.
I.
A
deepening dialogue process and a negotiated political settlement:
This is possible if both the military regime and the NLD agree to
start substantive negotiations to end the crisis in Burma. The underlying
economic and social crisis further erodes the foundation of the
regime, and NLD's call for substantive and meaningful dialogue could
win support from some sections of the armed forces. The prevailing
conditions in Burma seem to point in this direction, and the NCGUB
looks forward to seeing some official announcement from both sides
to formalize the talks.
II.
Collapse
of talks and return to protracted status quo: Conditions surrounding
the current talks are fragile, and the possibility of the military
retreating to the status quo is very real. This could happen if
the military believes that they can recover from the current economic
decline if some donors prematurely decide to resume development
aid and the generals regain enough confidence to institutionalize
military rule.
III.
Peoples'
uprising and chaotic violence: This is possible if the SPDC fails
to provide basic needs for the people, especially the urban population.
Urban rioting will provoke massive suppression by the military.
Violent chaos could follow such uprisings and, in turn, bring about
international condemnation of the SPDC. At this point, the general
public may wait for the progress of dialogue between the NLD and
military authorities, and the breakdown of talks could ignite a
public backlash.
Given
these possible scenarios, the NCGUB believes that strengthening
the current talks is the only desirable scenario for the future
of Burma. It is indeed the only feasible way to advance democratization
in Burma.
In
order to attain the goal of enhancing the dialogue process in Burma,
we need to strengthen our diplomatic engagement with key international
players and ensure that existing pressure mechanisms are maintained.
No international actor should take unilateral initiative without
consultation with the Burmese democracy movement. The international
community's strategy should be to support the dialogue process by
ensuring that no one 'gives carrots' without prior consultation.
The timing of when to give a carrot is critical. The international
community should take further steps to advance and broaden the talks.
SPDC's adherence to the terms of the consecutive UN resolutions,
which were adopted by consensus, and its compliance with ILO requirements
regarding the use of forced labor should be the benchmarks in measuring
the progress of dialogue.
We
also need to promote public visibility, recognition, and support
of the dialogue process in Burma by launching common international
campaigns. These are the Nobel Laureates Solidarity Campaign; the
MP Solidarity Campaign; the Political Party Solidarity Campaign;
and the ILO Campaign. Coordination is the key word for the success
of our efforts. It can be maximized by common international campaigns
as well as by supporting and linking national and regional efforts.
We also hope that our support base in the international arena can
be expanded through these campaigns and build up a ground for rapid
response capability to an emergency crisis situation, if such should
happen inside Burma.
Before
I conclude, let me express my appreciation and gratitude to all
Burma support groups throughout the world for their relentless and
selfless efforts over the past 12 years for the restoration of democracy
and human rights in Burma. I am sure that your sacrifices and contributions
will bear fruit in the near future. Let's prepare for the worst,
but hope for the best.
Thank
you.