Another well aimed, forerunner election campaign move in the form of National League for Democracy (NLD) 30th anniversary founding statement was doled out, last month on 27 September, at its headquarters in Shwegondiang, Yangon.
The NLD which was established on 27 September 1988, won a landslide 1990 general elections but the winning candidates were not allowed to take their seats in the legislature. The party boycotted the 2010 election but fielded candidates in the 2012 by-elections and won 43 out of the 45 available seats. In the 2015 general elections, the party won a landslide victory, replacing the military junta that has been in power for over half a century.
U Nyan Win, central executive committee secretariat member of the NLD, according to the Global New Light of Myanmar, remarked, “We need to evaluate the current situation of the country with dignity and poise and come together with collective strength in finding ways to practically implement fundamental changes and transitions. We have leadership capability as seen in the processes and experiences that we’ve gone through bravely. All of the challenges should be met with responsibility than fear. The value of greatness is responsibility.”
U Thein Oo central committee member of the NLD also read out the closing part of six-point statement which explicitly stressed: “Now reflecting upon NLD’s 30 years of pearl anniversary, (we) vowed to strive for absolute victory until it is achieved, together with the people’s collective strength, to establish the new democratic federal union, even though facing hardship, trouble and challenge, without deviation from (our) political principles.”
The NLD statement on the anniversary mentioned that it is born out of the 1988 democratic movement; its historical duty to move the country to a new progressive level of society; its commitment to establish a democratic government; lay democratic foundation; fend off dictatorship; and cooperate with all domestic and international democratic elements for world peace and democratization, among others.
NLD 2015 manifesto
The main thrust of the “time for change” NLD 2015 manifesto, which is also identical to the latest statement of 27 September, vowed to change the lives of the people, where the NLD will strive for ethnic affairs and internal peace with the following actions:
- Work towards a peaceful, prosperous and durable Union, through solidarity with all ethnic groups.
- Hold political dialogue based on the Panglong spirit in order to address the roots of internal armed conflict and enable people to live in security and tranquility.
- Strive for the establishment of a genuine federal democratic union based on the principles of freedom, equal rights and self -determination.
- Lay down transparent projects for the balanced development of all the States and Regions.
- Work to ensure a fair distribution across the country of the profits from natural resource extraction, in accordance with the principles of a federal union.
- Resolve problems between ethnic groups through dialogue based on mutual respect.
Change or no changes?
The general opinion from all walks of life is that after two and a half years in office, the promised change has not taken place.
To be precised, the NLD has not really touched on the issue of constitutional amendment, ducking the issue by saying that peace has to be installed first in order to make amendment at a later stage. But all of a sudden, as the 2020 election draws closer, the NLD is again picking up its “time to change” slogan with a new face, dubbing it “together with the people” and actively propagating the issues of constitutional amendment and establishment of federalism, albeit without accompanying actions, to woo the electorate in Bamar-dominated areas and as well, the ethnic states.
While it is still likely that the NLD will win in Bamar-dominated areas, perhaps with lesser votes, as the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) could gather more votes than the last 2015 elections, due to its staunchly anti-Rohingya policy that the majority of the Bamar sympathized with, the ethnic states’ election outcome could now be a different scenario. This could be due to the grievances and dissatisfaction over the NLD’s ethnic policy, which have been abundant, from the part of the ethnic nationalities, armed and unarmed.
First, the NLD in forming its national reconciliation government after its election victory favored only the military and completely neglect the ethnic nationalities, from the Ethnic Political Parties (EPPs) point of view. For example, the Arakan National Party (ANP), which won the most vote in Rakhine State and the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD), which was the second strongest party in Shan State, were not given the Chief Minister positions. Instead, the NLD appointed its own party people to the spots.
True, the President has the power to appoint anyone he likes to such positions, according to the 2008 constitution, but before when the NLD was not in power it had maintained that this was not a fair practice and said to be willing to alter it to be more in tune with federalism, when it comes to power.
It is also true that the State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi has appointed several ethnic leaders individually to important post within its administration, but again this is not an act of cooperation with the EPPs and not a coalition partner-like relationship. This has been taken as effectively sidelining the EPPs. Furthermore, the frequent meetings between the EPPs and the NLD before the latter came to power also never happened again during its two and a half years in office.
Secondly, the NLD-headed peace process sided with the Tatmadaw in relation to the blocking of state-level political dialogue in Shan and Rakhine States, which the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) signatory Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) find it very irresponsible, which has negatively impacted on the peace negotiation process.
Finally, the inaction and indifferent position of the NLD on the military offensives in ethnic states propelled the ethnic nationalities to conclude that it is refusing to live up to its commitment of fostering peace and reconciliation, as the armed conflict goes on unabated.
However, the main dissatisfaction on the NLD position is the argument of 1947 Panglong Agreement and Panglong Spirit. The State Counselor and NLD emphasized the Panglong Spirit, which only means unity in trying to achieve independence from the British, while the ethnic nationalities see that the Panglong Agreement is a treaty between the Bamar and ethnic nationalities and the only legal bond that is treasured as a genesis of the founding of the Union of Burma in 1948. Until today, the NLD has not taken up a clear-cut position on this and seek to downplay the importance of Panglong Agreement.
Perspective
As such, the latest NLD statement of achieving democratic federalism is vaguely understood and if the constitutional amendment could be pulled through remains very much doubtful.
Besides, the EPPs in all ethnic states are either merging together or in the process of fusion to counter the NLD in the forthcoming 2020 election. In short, the clear message is not to give the NLD a blank check or tactical voting edge again like in 2015.
The usual slogan of time for change wouldn’t be much attractive for the ethnic population given the inability of the NLD to deliver and thus, reaping ethnic votes could become much harder, this time around. And on top of this, the possibility of the USDP garnering more votes cannot also be ruled out, as many hard-liners from anti-Muslim quarters could vote for it, rather than the NLD.
Thus, if the NLD would like to woo the electorate again like it has done in 2015 elections, it may have to come up with some practical and noticeable implementation during its remaining two and a half year legislature period, by really making head-ways on constitutional amendment and more decentralization, in form of allowing the ethnic states to elect their own Chief Ministers and resources-sharing in a convincible manner. Otherwise, the NLD will have to be prepared with achieving lesser votes in 2020 election and an accommodation of a coalition-building, either with the EPPs or the USDP, or with both in a three way coalition, has to be considered.
