An interview with Padoh Mahn Mahn, Former Secretary-2 of the KNU
16 August 2021
The KIC interviewed Padoh Mahn Mahn, former Secretary-2 of the Karen National Union (KNU) about the views on the formation of the caretaker government by the military council led by the coup leader, international and local affairs and the EAOs’ stand.
Q: What is the main purpose of transforming the military council into the caretaker government of the Union of Myanmar?
A: In fact, the formation of a caretaker government is not a strange thing. It is assumed that the military council wants to formulate a government mechanism. It can be said that the military council’s attempt to get recognition in the upcoming UN General Assembly and of the international community and the ASEAN.
Q: Is the transformation of the military council into the caretaker government done under the 2008 Constitution?
A: We can say it based on the military council’s attempts. The military council will not abolish the 2008 Constitution. The formation of the caretaker government is said to be done under the 2008 Constitution as the military council has announced that it would hold onto power till 2023 under the 2008 Constitution since before the announcement of it.
Q: What is the difference between the caretaker government formed by Military Chief Min Aung Hlaing and the caretaker government formed in 1958?
A: The restoration of the military regime and the military rule in the successive history is not a strange thing. Whether it is the caretaker government from 1958 to 1962 or the military coup from 1988 to 1990, the army will carry out violence, oppression and threats with the use of arms in order to hold onto power. There is no significant difference. It needs to separately review that the people and international situations in 1962 are different from those in 1990. It can be said that the military regime is using the old methods.
Q: What are the local and foreign impacts on the formation of a caretaker government?
A: It can be exactly said that the people oppose whether it is the State Administration Council (SAC) or the caretaker government or the interim government. The second point is to seriously consider whether or not it would get international recognition. On the other hand, the National Unity Government (NUG) has elected candidates. It can be said that there is an administration conflict as our country has two governments. It is difficult to review which is the parallel government or which is the shadow government. The government which won the public’s support shall be our major government. The Tatmadaw operated in the form of a government institution in the time of the NLD-led government which emerged from the 2015 General Elections held under the 2008 Constitution. At the same time, the country was governed by the elected government. The 2008 Constitution itself has created a form of two governments. It can be said that two governments were in parallel during the coup period.
Q: May I know your view on the fact that in his speech on August 1st, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing said he would hold the election after holding onto the power till August, 2023?
A: As I mentioned earlier, Military Chief Senior General Min Aung Hlaing formed the caretaker government under the 2008 Constitution. He referred to the constitution about holding onto the power till August 2023. The public have no trust in his promise to hold the election. The army seized power citing vote fraud. The UEC reformed all institutions. In addition, elected candidates from the winning National League for Democracy (NLD) were arrested and imprisoned under various charges. It is exactly the same as the cancellation of the 1990 election results. The people have already got the lessons from it. If the public has no trust in whether the election is held or it holds onto power, it can be said whether the coup government or the caretaker government shall not exist in the long run.
Q: At the same time, Military Chief Min Aung Hlaing called on ethnics to cooperate in nation building endeavours and extend an olive branch to the EAOs. May I know your view on his stand?
A: There are three positions of the EAOs in the current political landscape. The first position is the EAOs support the NUG and have connections with the military council. This is their basic thought that they shall have to deal with both sides as the military council finally controls the country’s power whether it is 1962 or 1990 landscape. Another position is overthrowing the military dictatorship is the biggest opportunity during this period. They will have to cooperate in uprooting the military dictatorship with organizations like the NUG and the Committee Representing Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH). Third position is that the candidates from the NLD-led government are included mostly in the NUG and the CRPH. At that time, they did not make any significant political reforms for ethics. Having no trust in the NLD-led government was witnessed as the NLD-led government made an approach to national reconciliation with the army. The NLD-led government was unable to amend the charter and make local peace. The EAOs are monitoring the NLD-led government’s close relation with the army. Ethnic groups will extend their sovereignty and ethnic terrotity without association with them as it is sure that the military council will not give ethnic rights. Based on these three positions, I don’t want to say which groups take which position. But I can guess it.
Especially, most of the NCA signatories, like the PPST, have taken the position-1. They have maintained the channel in order to connect with the military council without the cancellation of the NCA. Some groups have pointed out that the NCA is void. The NCA is signed by the government, parliaments, the army and the EAOs. Some critics say the NCA is void as there is no government. Under this circumstance, the military council formed the caretaker government to create the chance for political dialogue based on the NCA path with the tripartite group–the army, the caretaker government and the EAOs. Anyway, take a look at the NCA path since 2015, we cannot go beyond the 2008 Constitution. Holding the political dialogue with the caretaker government and the army under the NCA path in a traditional way will not bring about any result. It can be exactly said that the past situations bear witness to the fact that we will not achieve our peace and political designation we long for.
Q: How should ethnic groups take a cautious approach to demand and offers made by the chair of the military council?
A: The army will seek every possible reason to hold onto power. The army staged a coup citing vote fraud. No need to say how the army will give various reasons to hold onto power. Especially, nothing can be expected from the amry’s continued efforts to hold onto power under the 2008 Constitution.
Q: Do you have anything to add?
A: The elected government and the military council are contenders.Finally, it is a political opportunity for the EAOs to create self-determination and autonomy in the ethnic-controlled areas during this period.
Sent by the KIC.