On 1 October 1922, Federated Shan States was formed by British, then the colonial power, with 34 northern and southern Shan states, excluding the Wa state.Again, on 10 October 1922, the Karenni (Kayah) state was placed under the administration of the Federated Shan States.After the co-independence, together with the Ministerial Burma/Burma Proper, from the British in 1948, the Federated Shan States reverted back to Shan State.

The point here is to emphasize that the Tai (Shan) states were ruled by their respective Saohpas, while in the same vein, the Palaung, Danu, Pa-O and even Wa, although not in the Federated Shan States at that time, were administered by their own kind. Except that they have to pay tax to their colonial master, all these ethnic territories were left alone to govern themselves on their own. A far cry from the Bamar military regimes’ military occupation, suppression and exploitation of the ethnic homelands, even when one compare it to the British colonial power.

So when a question is asked, what the Bamar could do with the Dawei and Beik tribes, the answer is the Bamar state could decentralize its administration like the Federated Shan States. It is quite simple.

It is entirely up to the Bamar to decentralize its administration units the way it sees fit. But not giving, upgrading or empowering the new administrative unit to the level of Division or Region in par with the 7 ethnic states.

Well informed ethnic leaders argued but fallen on deaf ears, that if the Bamar could diversified their single territory into 7 Divisions/Regions, the Shan could as well upgrade the 33 Federated Shan States of the colonial days into 33 Divisions or Regions also, each having a say or vote in the national assembly or parliament.

What the Bamar military and political class are advocating and thrusting down the ethnic nationalities’ throat now is: “Since we have the population majority, we will upgrade our Burma Proper into 7 Divisions/Regions that will have the level as the 7 ethnic states. You all have to live with it, whether you like it or not.”

The case in point is fairness in a national state-based federalism. The Bamar cannot have 7 constituent units as one of the ethnic nationalities, even they like to be aloof of the identity label and insert domination on other ethnic groups, while the others only have one unit each..

Of course, the Bamar could now argue that the federal union should be territory-based than national state-based, for it will be fairer for sub-ethnic groups within each of the states and divisions.

As all have already agreed that it should be according to our unique historical background and appropriate system in forming a genuine federal union, we only need to go back on our historical treaty and documents and base our deliberation in overcoming the constitutional crisis, that has existed since Independence.

These historical treaty and documents are none other than the 1947 Panglong Agreement, 1948 Union of Burma Constitution, and 1961 Shan Federal Proposal that was endorsed by all ethnic nationalities in Taunggyi, Shan State.

It is time to revisit these historical documents and facts, if informed and fair formation of a federal system of governance is to earnestly pursued.