SPEAKING
FREELY Democracy still in the generals'
grasp By Nehginpao Kipgen
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
On April 1, 2012,
Burma (Myanmar) had its second election in less
than two years. Numerically, the by-election
result was substantially less significant than the
general election conducted on November 7, 2010.
The by-election was held in 45 parliamentary
constituencies, vacated by members of parliament
who assumed different ministerial positions in the
government.
The National League for
Democracy (NLD) secured an overwhelming victory,
winning 43 out of the 44 parliamentary seats it
contested, which is over 95% of the total 45
available seats. Although in a lesser number of
constituencies, the NLD performed better than the
1990 general election, in which it won over 80%.
The military-backed Union Solidarity and
Development Party
(USDP) secured only one
seat in a constituency where the NLD candidate was
disqualified.
There have been high hopes
about the progress of democratization. The
by-election was significant for several reasons.
Firstly, the NLD, which boycotted the 2010 general
election, participated in the electoral process.
Secondly, the election itself was one important
benchmark for the Western nations to review their
sanctions policies. Thirdly, the Burmese
government wanted to improve its legitimacy and
credibility.
If one looks at the poll
result, it is undoubtedly an absolute victory for
the NLD party. Does that mean a political defeat
for USDP and the military? What does the USDP-led
government gain from the election? The more
interesting question is understanding which
direction the Burmese politics is headed.
In recent years, the Burmese government's
political objective has been to convince the
international community to believe in its
seven-step roadmap toward democracy. The
government's goal was to achieve its objective
without sacrificing the dominant role of military
in politics.
While the Western sanctions
played important role in pressurizing the Burmese
government toward democratic reforms, the
authoritarian regime came under immense pressure
by the wave of Arab spring, especially in Egypt
and Libya in 2011, where mass uprising
successfully forced the demise of two powerful
dictatorial regimes.
The top leadership in
the Burmese military hierarchy was also gravely
concerned about the possibility of instituting an
international commission of inquiry into suspected
war crimes and crimes against humanity, which was
recommended by the United Nations Special
Rapporteur on human rights in Burma, Tomแs Ojea
Quintana, in 2010, and supported by the United
States and 15 other nations.
The
government's desire to chair the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was one other
important reason why the military leadership
forced itself to improve in the areas of human
rights and other democratic reforms. All these
political developments happened after the 2008
constitution was ratified in a referendum, which
entrenched the military as the ultimate
powerhouse.
It is important to understand
that the by-election result is also the success of
the military's carefully orchestrated political
strategy. The NLD participation in by-election
means that the party has officially abandoned its
long-time fundamental demand for the recognition
of the 1990 general election result. By
participating in the election, the NLD has also
boosted the military's attempts to legitimize its
power. Some may call this as a political
compromise.
With just over 6% of
parliamentary seats, the NLD falls far short of
making a significant impact on balance of power in
the parliament. However, the NLD can utilize its
presence in the parliament as a foundation to
prepare for the next general election. Currently,
both the parliament and the government are
indirectly controlled by the military through the
country's constitution, which automatically
reserves 25% of parliamentary seats for the
military without any election.
Moreover,
any constitutional amendment requires approval of
more than 75% of parliamentary votes. One major
challenge to democratic values is the provision
that empowers the military to assume power at
times of national emergency. It is unclear as to
whether the military would abuse its
constitutionally guaranteed power to suppress the
voice of the opposition.
With the NLD
overwhelming electoral victory, the Western
nations would feel obligated to review sanctions.
In light of ongoing developments, governments will
gradually ease and eventually lift sanctions,
provided the current pattern of reforms continues.
Foreign policy change has begun with the United
States, one of Burma's long-time fiercest critics.
Washington has announced the easing of some
restrictions on investments and the nomination of
Derek J Mitchell, Special Representative and
Policy Coordinator for Burma, as its new
ambassador.
A major political debate will
evolve in the parliament on several key issues,
including the principles of the 2008 constitution.
The NLD and other like-minded parties will be
vocal about the necessity to amend some basic
principles of the constitution. However, many in
the USDP and the military leadership will be
hesitant to compromise on the subject, at least in
the near future. The pace of democratization
process still largely remains in the hands of the
military. Currently, one biggest lingering concern
for the former military generals is their own
security. There is a chance of political
reconciliation in the coming years if the military
is convinced that a civilian government would not
initiate punitive actions to revenge the past
actions of successive military regimes.
More importantly, the success of the
ongoing democratic reforms would greatly depend on
the progress of government's peace initiatives
with the country's ethnic minorities. Ceasefire
agreements with armed groups by itself are
inconclusive. Some sort of political autonomy is
essential to establish mutual trust between the
central government and ethnic minority groups. The
provisions of such political arrangement must be
guaranteed in the constitution, by identifying
state and union subjects.
While restoring
ties with the Burmese government, the
international community must understand the root
of Burma's decades-old conflicts. It is neither
the confrontation between the military and the
NLD, nor a power struggle between retired General
Than Shwe and NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi. It is
because of lack of mutual trust and denial of
equality of rights to all citizens.
Both
the government and the opposition must continue to
take steps to address the root cause of the
country's myriad problems. Simultaneously, the
ethnic minorities must demonstrate sincerity and
seriousness to the process, while not surrendering
its core demand for autonomy and equality of
rights.
Democratization without
reconciliation with ethnic minorities will not
bring lasting peace and stability.
Nehginpao Kipgen is a researcher
on the rise of political conflicts in modern
Burma/Myanmar and general secretary of the
US.-based Kuki International Forum
(www.kukiforum.com). He has written
numerous academic (peer-reviewed) and non-academic
analytical articles on the politics of Burma and
Asia that have been widely published in five
continents - Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe, and
North America.
Speaking Freely is
an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest
writers to have their say.Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing. Articles submitted for this section
allow our readers to express their opinions and do
not necessarily meet the same editorial standards
of Asia Times Online's regular contributors.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road,
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
