During the Union Peace Conference #1, a number of non-Shans had submitted proposals for separate statehoods: Palaung (Ta-ang), PaO and Wa. (A branch of the Shans, Shanni aka Red Shans, had also demanded a state of their own, combining areas from Kachin and Sagaing, where they are the dominant majority.)
This isn’t the first time non-Shans have tried to secede from the Shan State (formerly known as the Federated Shan States, with a pronounced “s” a postfix).
Just after World War II, Kokang sub-state demanded secession from Hsenwi, citing failure of the ruling prince to go to its aid when it was being attacked by the Japanese forces, despite the fact that it had paid annual tributes to the state.
On 25 August 1947, the two sides met in Rangoon, where it reached a mutually happy agreement to part ways, but the latter (Kokang) would still remain in the federation.
Another was the proposal by the Mongpai/Moebye state, where the Kayans are dominant, to merge with the Karenni/Kayah state.
The 1947 constitution had recognized the fact by inserting Article 182:
- The territory heretofore known as Mongpai State in the Federated Shan States shall be acceded to the Kayah State if the majority of the people of the territory so desire.
- The procedure for ascertaining the desire of the majority shall be such as may be prescribed by law.
Only somehow, the “procedure for ascertaining the(ir) desire” so far has eluded them.
Here it must be remembered that the 34 states of the Federated Shan States that was formed in 1922 comprised the following number of principalities:
Shan 21 states
Danu 7 states
PaO 2 states
(Wa, Palaung/Ta-ang, Kokang and Kayan) 1 state each
Until 1947, it was headed by the British Commissioner. But that year, the princes and their people rose up to form their own federal council headed by the popular Palaung prince Sao Hkun Pan Sing. The new council also took the historic (some say fateful) decision to join hands with Burma, Chin and Kachin for joint independence from the British.
The country has come a long way since. The Shan State, once considered a major power to contend with, is a “dying nation”, even according to some Shans. “That’s why the wolves are coming,” wrote one. “They know there are no more tigers for them to fear. They think it’s time for them to take whatever it’s worth.”
Right or wrong, the founding of new states at the expense of old ones, is not a new question. One finds it even in the 1947 constitution, the 2008 constitution, and also in the draft federal constitution endorsed up by 90 dissident organizations in 2008.
| 1947 constitution | 2008 constitution (military) | 2008 draft constitution (FCDCC) |
| Article 199. The Parliament may by an Act admit to the Union a new State upon such terms and conditions including the extent of representation of the State in the Parliament as may be specified in the Act.
Article 200. The Parliament may by an Act, with the consent of the Council of every State whose boundaries are affected thereby –
(a) establish a new unit; (b) increase the area of any unit; (c) diminish the area of any unit; (d) alter the boundaries of any unit;
And may, with the like consent, make such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions as Parliament may deem necessary or proper. | Article 53. (a) If there arises a cause to re-delineate the territorial boundary of a Region or a State, the prior consent of the electorate residing within the township concerned shall be obtained. (b) In obtaining consent, re-delineation of the territorial boundary shall not be executed at all in the absence of assenting votes of more than half of the total number of the electorate residing within the township concerned. (c) If more than half of the total number of eligible voters residing within the township concerned cast assenting vote for re-delineation of the territorial boundary, the consent of the Hluttaw representatives of the Region or State involved in the territorial boundary concerned shall be obtained. (d) The President shall re-delineate the territorial boundary of the Region or State concerned with the consent of the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw, after obtaining the assenting votes of three-fourths and above of the total number of representatives from the Region or the State concerned. (e) The resolution of the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw shall be obtained if a Region Hluttaw or a State Hluttaw concerned decided against re-delineation of the territorial boundary. (f) The President shall, as necessary, re-delineate the territorial boundary of a Region or a State if three-fourths and above of the total number of representative in the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw assent to the re-delineation of the territorial boundary. | Article 55. Right to From New State New State of the Federal Union may be formed from a continuous land area within an existing State or by the combination of continuous regions of two or more adjacent States.
Article 56. Provisions for Formation of New States Formation of new Member States of the Federal Union shall be in accordance with the following provisions.
(A). With the support of 30 percent of the population of an area desiring to form a new Member State of the Federal Union, on the basis of having their own distinct geographical area and history, the proposal for forming a new state shall be submitted to the legislatures of the respective State or States. (B). The proposal to form a new state shall be submitted to the Federal Chamber of Nationalities with the approval of over half the members of the respective State Assembly or Assemblies. (C). The Federal Chamber of Nationalities, in accordance with Article (56) (B) shall form an Inquiry Commission for New State Formation composed of representatives from The Federal Chamber of Nationalities and representatives from The Federal Chamber of Nationalities and representatives from State Assembly or Assemblies. (D). In accordance with the recommendation of the Inquiry Commission for New State Formation, a referendum shall be held in the area which has submitted a proposal to form a new state. (E). If in the referendum, 60 percent of the people living in the area vote in favor, the formation of a new state becomes valid under this Constitution. (F). If in accordance with the Article 56 (E), approval has been obtained for the establishment of a new State, the Chamber of Nationalities shall further forward the bill to the Assembly of the Federal Union, and the Assembly of the Federal Union shall pass the bill into a law. (G).The Federal President must sign and promulgate it. (H). The law must next be sent to the respective State Assemblies for further necessary action.
Article 57. Legislation Concerning New States
The Assembly of the Federal Union shall enact laws relating to above-mentioned Article 55 and Article 56, for the new State or States. |
For Shans and Burmans alike, it may be a bitter pill to swallow (right now there are leaders, both Shan and Burman alike, who are trying to pass the buck to each other). But it is a question one cannot avoid when one is out to restore peace to this country.
Other countries have dealt with it amiably either by allowing systematic, internal secession or creating systemic local governments. It is time not to fret, but to coolly explore solutions. After all, where there’s a will there’s a way.
By SAI KHUENSAI / Director of Pyidaungsu Institute and Founder of Shan Herald Agency for News (S.H.A.N)
All views expressed are the author’s own
Leave a Comments