[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

2/2) PROF.SILVERSTEIN'S PAPER ON FE



Subject: 2/2) PROF.SILVERSTEIN'S PAPER ON FEDERALISM(1995)

/* posted 30 Jun 6:00am 1997 by drunoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx in igc:reg.burma */
/* -------------" Prof.Silverstein's paper (2/2) "--------------- */

Following is paper by Professor Silverstein published by Australian
National University, Dept. of Political and Social Change. For those
who interested to have Dr Silverstein's papers (include this article)
can order a copy at the cost of Aust$7.0 (plus postage for Overseas
subscribers), e-mail your order to "bevley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" -- U Ne Oo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERALISM AS A SOLUTION TO THE ETHNIC PROBLEM IN BURMA  -- Part 2.
*******************************************************************
There is an alternative set of principles for the organization of the state
and society developed by the Democratic Alliance of Burma (DAB), an
enlarged coalition of the National Democratic Front -- an organization of
the minorities -- students, monks and other individuals. Drawn up by a
small committee of the DAB, the authors began their work by studying
various federal systems. 'They mixed borrowed ideas with their own to
produce a constitutional solution for Burma's longstanding problem of
national unity. The committee produced three drafts under its original
Kachin chairman and a final draft after the Kachins withdrew from the NDF
and DAB. 'The third draft was reviewed and discussed at a seminar of
international experts and the final draft, reflecting the criticisms and
comments made at the meeting, was adopted by the 1st Congress of the DAB in
July 1993.

The object of the study/drafting committee was to find a way to end a state
of warfare and disunity in Burma and to create a federal system where all
parties could preserve and protect their cultures and traditions.
Anticipating the day when representatives, freely chosen by the people,
would be able to sit together, exchange ideas and arrive at common
acceptable solutions, the committee hoped to prepare its future
representatives so that they could articulate the interests of their groups
and contribute to erecting a lasting political structure all could accept
and defend.

At the heart of the DAB proposals is the idea that the source of power
resides in the people. The people must be free and equal, and enjoy the
right of self-determination. They must have rights and freedoms as set
forth in the constitution and the political process must be democratic. The
society must be organized as a federal union in which the constituent units
are based on the principles of equality and self-determination. The
territory of Burma will be divided into National States and Nationalities
States. Under conditions set forth in the proposed constitution, the states
will be subdivided further into National Autonomous Regions and Special
National Territories. National States will be based on the existence of a
large national group, representing two thirds of the population and
recognized as a historical group, with a common territory, language,
customs, culture and viable economy. Nationalities States will be composed
of two or more ethnic groups, none of which has tow thirds of the
population, a common territory and a viable economy.

National Autonomous Regions will be formed inside states among
nationalities making up one quarter of the state population and living on
historic lands, each having a separate language, literature and culture.
Special National Territories will be formed in areas where a nationality
has a majority in the territory, and a separate language, culture and
customs.

Recognizing that the military in the past abrogated the constitution,
changed political configuration and usurped the power of the people, the
DAB proposals set forth the idea of civilian supremacy with the military
subordinate to the elected government and not an independent actor. It will
never interfere in political matters and it will have no place in the
national legislature or administration and no role in the subunits of
government. The armed forces are to be commanded by the Minister of Defence
and no active members of the defence forces will be appointed as minister.
Defence policy will be set by the Defence minister and the federal cabinet.
The armed forces will be formed from troops drawn proportionately from the
member states. Each state will send a proportionate number of candidates to
the military academies for training as officers. The president will
appoint, upon the recommendation of the prime minister, the
commander-in-chief; the office shall be rotated among the military
commanders from each state who together will form a board of commanders.
The constitutional draft of the DAB would restrict members of the armed
forces, at anytime, from interfering in political matters, involving
themselves in business and from declaring a state of emergency, a military
administration or martial law.

A careful reading of the DAB constitutional proposals makes clear how
differently its authors view the problems and solutions of Burma's disunity
and civil war. By the solutions the minorities offer, in the way of a new
basic law, the problems are seen as stemming from an absence of human
rights and the existence of a true federal union. The most important denial
has been the right of the people to rule themselves; this was taken from
them by the military coup of 1962 and was not returned under the 1974
constitution; and it is not granted in the National Convention proposals.
In the past the national army misused its arms against the people and
usurped what little power they had. Because the minority-written
constitution starts from assumptions the other will not acknowledge and
offer solutions the other has not even considered, there seems to be no way
to resolve the problem of disunity and there is a strong probability that
there will be a renewal of warfare in the future.

With the two sides so far apart and with the military determined to impose
its solution, an outside voice to offer a third way may be the answer.

At the 1994 UN General Assembly meeting, the Assembly adopted a Burma
resolution which included a request to the secretary general to help the
government of Burma achieve national reconciliation. During 1995, his
deputies made efforts to speak to the members of SLORC and to the
minorities -- both those in revolt and in ceasefire agreements with the
armed forces. While reports of his efforts are not available, the fact that
the world body asked the secretary general to offer assistance in solving
the problem of national unity reflected the belief in the General Assembly
that a third party was necessary to move the issue forward in a positive
way. It remains to be seen if SLORC will depart from its previous position,
that the issue is an internal matter and not the concern of the world body,
and allow the secretary general to contribute to a lasting solution.

If SLORC acknowledges the request in the General Assembly resolution, the
secretary general will find the DAB constitutional proposals a good
starting point. With their emphasis upon human rights, popular rule, and
federalism, they offer the outlines for the only solution likely to
succeed. It should be clear to the secretary general that SLORC's proposals
for a unitary state cloaked in federal dress was intended to disguise the
real outcome of the National Convention principles and will not provide a
lasting solution. The secretary general should know from the talks his
deputies had with the minorities that the people do not want a 'Potemkin
Village'; they want a real federal union. The secretary general also should
know that if SLORC is to surrender its power to popular rule peacefully,
the military must be offered some kind of role in government. Here the
creativity and wisdom of the secretary general will prove invaluable. There
is a useful model for this problem in Chile.

Finally, the secretary general knows that, after five decades of struggle,
the minorities have been willing to sacrifice life and property to achieve
what they were promised in 1947 and there is little likelihood that they
will accept anything less now or in the foreseeable future. A careful
reading of Burma history will show that long before the British arrived the
minorities lived under their own leaders, spoke their own languages, and
developed and passed on their culture and traditions. Only in 1947 did the
minorities voluntarily accept the Burman invitation to join in forming an
independent union. It was the promise of that union the minorities sought
to achieve and still desire. They stand ready today to form a union with
the Burmans provided that it is based on the principles they fought for and
enunciated in the several DAB constitutional proposals. They are ready to
discuss their proposals alongside those offered from other quarters. They
will accept refinement and further elaboration when they are discussed in a
future constitutional assembly and will leave it to the elected
representatives of the people to decide.

Today, SLORC has the power to solve the problem and end the threat of war
and disunity forever. With the help of the secretary general, SLORC may be
convinced that a peaceful federal union under democratic civilian rule is
better than a permanently hostile population and the threat of renewed
internal war.

/* Endreport */