Document Actions
Will the Burmese junta yield to UN envoy’s pragmatic gesture?
The latest interview of U.N. envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari reported in Reuters needs emphasising, given quite a number of activists and journalist have not been enthusiastic, or even ready to write him off, with his shuttle diplomacy, which have been going on for a few years now.
By: Sai Wansai. 29 February 2008
The catchword of Gambari has lately been "credible and inclusive", topping it with "necessary steps to create the right atmosphere to promote a free and fair outcome". High on his suggested agenda is to free detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and political prisoners, which he insists would enjoy support both internally and externally.
By emphasising that there are many ways in which credibility and inclusiveness could be achieved, he might have in mind to urge the junta to lift all restrictions on all political parties and call for a nation-wide cease-fire with all armed resistance groups, in addition to freedom of all political prisoners.
Gambari further said that he doesn't think at this stage people are asking for rewriting the constitution, but they are merely looking at some of the provisions that will really make participation more inclusive and the outcome of the referendum much more credible.
This kind of statement might not go down well with a lot of junta's die-hard opponents, but in terms of realpolitik or pragmatic approach, it does make sense. One could well interpret and think aloud as if Gambari is saying, " Folks, this is the only game in town, which the junta is willing to play. I’ll see to it that it agrees to modify the game plan to make it more acceptable and inclusive, so that we all could participate in a fair, open and constructive manner."
In practical terms, it would boil down to how far concessions could be made between contenders on the following crucial points.
In short, the notion of “people’s desire is paramount” should be accepted by all contenders and the inclusion and emphasising of gradual phasing out of military’s dominance from political decision-making power must be ingrained in the transitional draft constitution.
It is all the more important, so that Burma would not have to go through the Indonesian experience, which the junta is so keen to copy, even if it had proven to be a disaster for the Indonesian.
The hegemonic party system, embodied by Golkar, or Golongan Karya (Functional Group) was the "state party" during the Suharto era (1966-98), in Indonesia lasted for about 27 years (1971-98) until it was eventually replaced by a multi-party system.
If the said four crucial or major points could be discussed in a give-and-take manner between contenders, facilitated by UN envoy’s good office, there is no reason that the forth-coming constitutional referendum and 2010 nation-wide, multi-party election couldn't be held as foreseen by the junta.
In case, the junta wouldn’t tone down its rhetoric and refuse to come to sense that political accommodation is the only option left to make the democratisation process credible and durable, but decided to proceed alone, the people would be left with no other choice than to heighten their confrontational mode. Definitely, no one would favour another blood shed or mass uprising like last September.
The positive break-through is within reach and there is still time for the junta to facilitate a new beginning and better future for the people of Burma. It only needs to muster enough political will to make it happen.
The author is the General Secretary of the exiled Shan Democratic Union - Editor
This is the opinion and analysis forum for our readers. Opinions expressed here are those of the authors. To contributors, please attach a short account of yourselves at the end of your articles. SHAN will respect the authors right to use pseudonyms.
The catchword of Gambari has lately been "credible and inclusive", topping it with "necessary steps to create the right atmosphere to promote a free and fair outcome". High on his suggested agenda is to free detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and political prisoners, which he insists would enjoy support both internally and externally.
By emphasising that there are many ways in which credibility and inclusiveness could be achieved, he might have in mind to urge the junta to lift all restrictions on all political parties and call for a nation-wide cease-fire with all armed resistance groups, in addition to freedom of all political prisoners.
Gambari further said that he doesn't think at this stage people are asking for rewriting the constitution, but they are merely looking at some of the provisions that will really make participation more inclusive and the outcome of the referendum much more credible.
This kind of statement might not go down well with a lot of junta's die-hard opponents, but in terms of realpolitik or pragmatic approach, it does make sense. One could well interpret and think aloud as if Gambari is saying, " Folks, this is the only game in town, which the junta is willing to play. I’ll see to it that it agrees to modify the game plan to make it more acceptable and inclusive, so that we all could participate in a fair, open and constructive manner."
In practical terms, it would boil down to how far concessions could be made between contenders on the following crucial points.
- Discussion and revision of Guiding Principle No.6 - the issue of military’s leading role in Burma’s politics;
- Emphasising and empowering the need for check-and-balance through separation of legislative, executive and judicial branches;
- Modifying Constitutional Amendment Chapter to be in tune with the people's aspiration of needs and value system so that adjustment could be made accordingly; and
- Establishing credible international, independent observing commissions to monitor the referendum and election process.
In short, the notion of “people’s desire is paramount” should be accepted by all contenders and the inclusion and emphasising of gradual phasing out of military’s dominance from political decision-making power must be ingrained in the transitional draft constitution.
It is all the more important, so that Burma would not have to go through the Indonesian experience, which the junta is so keen to copy, even if it had proven to be a disaster for the Indonesian.
The hegemonic party system, embodied by Golkar, or Golongan Karya (Functional Group) was the "state party" during the Suharto era (1966-98), in Indonesia lasted for about 27 years (1971-98) until it was eventually replaced by a multi-party system.
If the said four crucial or major points could be discussed in a give-and-take manner between contenders, facilitated by UN envoy’s good office, there is no reason that the forth-coming constitutional referendum and 2010 nation-wide, multi-party election couldn't be held as foreseen by the junta.
In case, the junta wouldn’t tone down its rhetoric and refuse to come to sense that political accommodation is the only option left to make the democratisation process credible and durable, but decided to proceed alone, the people would be left with no other choice than to heighten their confrontational mode. Definitely, no one would favour another blood shed or mass uprising like last September.
The positive break-through is within reach and there is still time for the junta to facilitate a new beginning and better future for the people of Burma. It only needs to muster enough political will to make it happen.
The author is the General Secretary of the exiled Shan Democratic Union - Editor
This is the opinion and analysis forum for our readers. Opinions expressed here are those of the authors. To contributors, please attach a short account of yourselves at the end of your articles. SHAN will respect the authors right to use pseudonyms.
Villagers tortured for "not seeing" the rebels