An interview with Ma Zu Padonma, member of the KSCC
The Burma News International (BNI) – Myanmar Peace Monitor (MPM) wrote a research paper in order to give the nearest answer to the question on “whether the army uses peace talks for the prolonged existence of military dictatorship”.
This paper also questions “who leads the peace talks?” and the highest aspirations for talks and the wills of the persons who play a leading role in peace talks. The following are the excerpts from an exclusive interview with Ma Zu Padonma, member of the Karenni State Consultative Council (KSCC). On December 30, 2022, the BNI-Myanmar Peace Monitor published the research paper titled “the army uses peace talks for the prolonged existence of military dictatorship”
Q: Can the army-led peace talks really bring about peace in Myanmar? Why?
A: I think the army-led peace talks cannot bring about peace in Myanmar. The reason is according to the current situations, those who are committing violence are from the army. The army’s acts veer from the democratic path. At the same time, the army is committing violence by turning a blind eye to peace talks. So, the army-led peace talks would not really bring about peace in Myanmar.
Q: What are the military’s norms and approaches to local peace-making in the successive eras? For instance are bilateral talks and the NCA equitable? How?
A: The army’s approach to the local peace is it usually makes an offer only after it has made necessary preparations. For instance, before the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) process and peace talks, the army said it would hold election and peace dialogues in accordance with the long-drafted 2008 constitution. The army offers to hold peace talks only after making necessary preparations. The army makes an approach by creating a divide-and-rule strategy and disunity between the groups. For instance, it holds separate talks with the Kachin group, the Karenni group and the Chin group. The army exercises the give-and-take principle. The army refused to accept the tripartite meeting for the common goal of all ethnics. So the army’s approach has no validity. It is also found that the army wants to give peace rights to a certain degree.
Q: Do you see the army has a genuine political desire for peace? How is it?
A: I think this question may relate to the answers to two previous questions. I think the army doesn’t have a political will for genuine peace. The army wants to be the country’s ownership and adheres to the principle that only the army is the parent. By looking at that point, the army has no genuine political will. Under the 2008 Constitution, the army is dragging on the legislative sector before and after the coup. I think the army has no genuine political will as it wants to have a role in all sectors.
Q: Does the army use peace talks for the prolonged existence of military dictatorship? For instance, could you explain it with evidence?
A: It can be said that it is true. Especially, I think the army uses peace talks for the prolonged existence of the military dictatorship. For instance, before the coup, the NCA was a result of peace talks which was under the 2008 Constitution. The army’s peace talks are under the 2008 Constitution. For instance, as I mentioned earlier, the 2008 Constitution was drafted by the army at will. Under the constitution, the peace talks shall be held. The NCA will be ratified in the parliament. The army has reserved a quarter of seats in the legislative sector under the 2008 Constitution. In my view, the army uses peace talks for the prolonged existence of military dictatorship as the army wants to hold peace talks only with the guarantee for its inclusion in all sectors ranging from political, legislative, executive and military sector to judiciary sector. Now the army seized the country’s power. However, the NCA has not been void yet. The army continues to adhere to the NCA. The army is likely to show the international community that it wants peace and pays attention to peace. On the other hand, the military is committing violence. In my view, the military’s attempt is to use peace talks to retain its power.
Q: Can the army be excluded from the peace process? Why?
A: We need to classify many sectors in politics. In short, I think we cannot exclude the army from peace talks. The reason is the army is a main actor. The army is an institution who mainly hampers the peace-making process. The army is working by turning a blind eye to the public’s desire for peace. For peace, the army must stop all forms of armed violence. So, we need to make a compromise with the army at a certain point. We must hold a talk with the army. We need to hold talks with the army in order that the army abides by its code of conduct in accordance with the role of the army in the federal union. So, it is impossible for us to make peace by excluding the army.
Q: Do you think that the peace talks being made during the coup period will work?
A: I think it will not work. The reason is the current Spring Revolution which emerged following the 2021 coup is slightly different from the 8888 Uprising and the revolution in the past. The 8888 Uprising is the result of the demonetization of bank notes. The army said it had to seize power as the people took to the streets due to the loss of students rights. Now, the people took to the streets due to the 2021 coup. The pattern is different. Another point is the public is still revolutionizing the army by different means and forms. The army is not in a position to establish its administrative mechanism in the whole country until now.
Except for China and Russia, the international community has not officially recognized the army as a legitimate government yet. So, the army cannot build its mechanism during two years of coup. Another point is for the perpetuation of its power, the army is holding separate talks with the Ethnic Revolutionary Organizations (EROs) to show the international community that it is working on peace. However, we have yet to see any improvement and implementation. So, the current peace talks go against the desires of the public. I think I would not bring about any results.
It is found that most of the EROs have shown opposition to it. However, some EROs hold talks with the army. However, I think the talks will not be effective to a certain extent and will not bring about peace.
Q: It is found that some EROs continue to participate in the army-led peace talks. Why?
A: The EROs have their own interests. Some groups view that the NCA is a State-level peace accord and an official contract. Despite the coup, this contract has not been voided yet. Some EROs said they would walk on the NCA path to build the federal union and restore democracy by opposing the coup. At the same time, some EROs held talks with the army. Most EROs which held talks with the army have their own interests. The efforts made by the EROs may be an attempt to reach an agreement and avoid clashes in their territories. I don’t know what the hidden agenda is and the interests of most EROs and the interests of other countries. We have read the news in the media only. However, I think holding peace talks with the army and cooperation with the terrorist army will not produce any good results. So, I think the groups which hold talks with the army don’t face the public and see their interest alone. I don’t think it is a political game change.
(Remark-The Kantarawaddy Times conducted this exclusive interview for the research paper)
By BNI-MPM
