The only thing that matters is that those who are taking diverse actions do not forget that each is working toward a common goal. Or else they may become embroiled in internecine feuds rather than their common struggle.

So far, the two sides:

• The UNFC, the alliance of 11 groups, dubbed by the media as “hardliners” and
• The non-UNFC groups, principally the Karen National Union (KNU) and the Restoration Council of Shan State (RCSS), dubbed as “soft liners” or more derogatorily as “appeasers” seem to be behaving themselves correctly.

As soon as the UNFC had announced that it would be holding an “Ethnic Conference for Peace and National Reconciliation,” the non-UNFCs that remain in the truncated Working Group for Ethnic Coordination (WGEC) notified that it would postpone its “Second Ethnic Nationalities Conference,” a continuation of the “(First) Ethnic Nationalities Conference” held in Chiangmai in September 2012. They even intimated that they would be happy to move the venue inside the country with the government’s approval.

On the UNFC side, apart from making clear by the title of the conference, its agenda according to Dr Lian Hmung Sakhong, had nothing to do with last year’s Chiangmai conference:

• No reference to the resolutions passed there
• No report on progress made since then

The only links alluded to the 2012 Chiangmai conference were the “6 point Road Map” and the “Framework for Political Dialogue” which emerged in its aftermath. “(Both) will be put to use in the political negotiations,” read its draft resolution.

Moreover, both “hardliners” or “appeasers” have rejected Naypyitaw’s proposal that a Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement’ that contains no reference to upcoming nationwide political dialogue be signed by them.

Most of all, both are for the emergence a Genuine Federal Union though each adopts a different approach.

Thus, if they are considering a reunion, these are the basis on which they could rebuild it. After all, charity, as it should be, begins on the home front.