Question: Please explain the situation of the ongoing peace process and ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) and the signing of the NCA by the NMSP, which is a member of the UNFC (United Nationalities Federal Council).

Answer: There are over 20 EAOs in our country. Among them, ten EAOs have signed the NCA with the government and over half of them still remain outside. The ethnic people had to take up arms unavoidably when they couldn’t demand the rights they deserve, i.e. their inborn rights, through democratic means.

The Northern Alliance has very forceful armed groups. They have powerful weapons. From the geographical point of view, [these EAOs] are in mountainous areas. It’s not easy for the government to crush them. That’s why our country will never be at peace if we leave them outside the peace process.

Since the beginning, the UNFC has the intention to solve the political issue peacefully on the table since we have been invited by President U Thein Sein in 2011. We have formed groups to discuss peace, but we weren’t able to discuss in that year. We started meeting informally at the end of 2012. Then, we discussed as the UNFC in 2013. There were 12 groups when the UNFC was first formed. After the two Kachin groups merged, it became 11 groups. Later, some members resigned from the UNFC. It turned out like this because both the government and the Tatmadaw have used various ways and means to dismantle [the UNFC]. Now, the UNFC only has five groups left.

The basic position of the UNFC’s five groups is that we believe our country can only resolve this political issue through a peaceful dialogue on the table. As a main force, the UNFC invited other groups to hold discussions for the emergence of the NCA (nationwide ceasefire agreement).

Among the existing five groups, the NMSP and the LDU (Lahu Democratic Union) have signed the NCA. The remaining three groups (KNPP, SSPP, ANC) haven’t signed it yet. There are both NCA signatories and non-NCA signatories in the UNFC, but there’s no problem. Why? Our objective is to resolve political issue on the table. Everyone couldn’t sign [the NCA] at the same time due to lack of uniformity between the situation and the way it is being handled by the government. The non-NCA signatories will continue to negotiate and they will sign [the NCA] when everything goes well.

The NMSP’s basic position is not different from the UNFC’s basic stance. Military means has been used for 70 years to solve our country’s problem. Although the government has used the ‘four-cut’ strategy, it hasn’t been able to eliminate any organizations. The Mon, the Rakhine, and the Pa-Os surrendered their arms after they were invited for political dialogue in 1958. But, they took up arms again when they didn’t attain the rights their people deserve. The arms from the PSLF/TNLA were seized in the 1990s but the TNLA rose up again when their people didn’t obtain their rights.

What I want to say is that ethnic people will strive using any methods if they don’t get the rights they deserve. The government also hasn’t given equal rights to the ethnic people. For example, the entire country is only allowed to teach Burmese literature. They don’t have right to teach ethnic literature. Ethnic language is not allowed to be used as an official language. The ethnic people couldn’t be patient while their literature, language, culture, traditions and customs, and historical artifacts are being destroyed in various ways.

Since the very beginning, we, the NMSP, has viewed that these issues will not be solved by military means and they need to be solved by political means. This is how the UNFC has been standing. We were the one who negotiated the NCA in the beginning. All of us would have signed the NCA if all 16 members of the NCCT (Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team) had been accepted. During that time, we believed it was dishonest to leave out some groups so we left. In this situation, it won’t end if military means is used to solve the issues. Political means must be used to solve them. But, we can’t lay down our arms while the military is relying on military power to block ethnic rights. We can’t let our armies be seized. Every ethnic [armed] group has a stance.

Question: The NMSP has faced unexpected obstacles after signing the NCA. What are the hindrances?

Answer: During the negotiations before the signing of the NCA, the government told us that we can meet freely with the public and consult with them to negotiate political issues. After we signed the NCA, we discussed at the UPDJC. We told them that we need to explain to the public after we signed the NCA. We are doing the resistance on behalf of the public. I was also a normal citizen before I joined the resistance. There are many people who support our resistance. If the public doesn’t understand why we have signed the NCA, new groups may rise to stage another resistance. So, the NMSP plans to inform the public about our activities due to this situation.

During the UPDJC meeting, the government has already told us that we can meet freely in the areas where our military bases are located. We have also made another demand during the PDJC meeting to allow us to hold public meetings in Paung, Chaungzon, Mawlamyine, Mudon, and Thanbyuzayat townships. The government and the Tatmadaw representatives didn’t allow this [demand]. But, we were allowed to do as we like in the areas under our military control so we will strive as much as we can. When we were preparing to hold the public meetings in our military-controlled areas, the Tatmadaw told us not to have more then 20-30 people in each meeting. Having only 20-30 people is similar to hold a petty cockfight. There are many people. How would it be enough? This [restriction] wasn’t said to us during the UPDJC meeting. The limit was only placed when we actually started preparing for [the public meetings]. We were dissatisfied over this restriction.

This didn’t happen to us, the Mon, alone. It was the same for the RCSS (Restoration Council of Shan State) in the Shan State. The Tatmadaw restricted the areas that were already allowed by the government. Some areas were blocked. We see this as dishonesty. This issue happened because of the Burmese Tatmadaw.

Q: We heard that things are not going well with the JMC-S issues. Why?

A: We have already received a position in the union-level JMC-U, but we are still unable to establish JMC-S in the state/regional levels. We have demanded our inclusion in the JMC-S in three areas - Mon, Karen, and Tanintharyi. We were told that we will only be given a position in the Mon State JMC-S. Many of our troops are active in the Karen State and the Tanintharyi Region. So, we haven’t been able to establish [the JMC-S] in any places. The Karen group, which signed the NCA earlier, has established JMC-S in four areas – Karen, Mon, Tanintharyi, and Bago.

In my opinion, the Tatmadaw is the one which is making the main objection. It’s not honest. Many opportunities were provided to the forces which joined in the beginning. Lesser opportunities have been given to the forces that joined later.

Ceasefire deals were signed in the SLORC era in the 1990s. ‘Wa’ and Kokant groups that signed the ceasefire in the early days were given many opportunities. In 1996, armed groups that wanted to sign the ceasefire were told to surrender their arms. We see that they have no integrity or they want to divide ethnic forces and crush them using a dishonest strategy. It will still take us a long time to gain peace if they continue to use dishonest method.

Q: What’s your opinion on the framework for political dialogue, which is currently being drafted by the UPDJC?

A: According to what Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has said, this framework for political dialogue has been drafted to make it easy to amend. Now it’s still going like this. In my opinion, political framework is crucial in solving the issue. We were doing a tripartite dialogue when we were discussing as the NCCT. Now, it’s not tripartite, but it is like a five-party [dialogue].

Another point is that I have told this when I met with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. All groups need to be involved in the negotiation for the framework. Negotiation needs to be made after all ethnic armed organizations have been included. It’s important for them to accept this framework. I advised [the government] to invite non-NCA signatories to join us. Other groups won’t come if they disagree with the framework, which has been carried out with approval and decision from only eight groups (NCA signatories). We can’t keep on if it continues like this. We can’t continue the implementation of our country’s peace process.

In my opinion, it’s important for all ethnic armed groups’ participation if one wishes peace in our country. If you look at how South Africa built its peace, they didn’t select whether a group is big or small. They gathered all groups to make it inclusive and negotiated [with them].

Q: Why is the Union Peace Conference not making progress?

A: It has been set down in the framework to hold the Union Peace Conference (UPC) – 21st Century Panglong twice a year, every six months. We don’t want to accept such kind of time restriction. It seems as if they are trying to push it to make it happen. Everyone needs to have their misunderstandings cleared up when the UPC is held. Some EAOs that have already signed the NCA didn’t have time to consult with their own people in the previous session of the [21st Century] Panglong. Their misunderstandings weren’t cleared up. Now, the Rakhine and the Shan people haven’t been able to meet with their own people. The Karen group was allowed to meet freely with the public at first, but they are not allowed anymore. If they are not allowed to consult with the public, how will they make the decision? In order to make a decision on a political issue, they should be allowed to consult with the public since they are representing the public. Instead of doing this, they hold the UPC 21st Century Panglong when it is time to hold the conference and set down decisions. As far as I’ve heard, there were misunderstandings during the previous second session of the 21st Century Panglong. Both the political parties and the EAOs weren’t satisfied. I believe they shouldn’t have pushed hard for the decisions as they like. Will they be able to change the decisions if the groups that join later disagree with them? It will be difficult to change them but if they (the groups) won’t accept the decision, this problem will continue to last long.

Q: As the chair of the UNFC, what suggestions do you want to give to make Myanmar’s peace process successful?

A: The eight-point agreement between the UNFC and the government includes the point where we will continue to strive for all-inclusiveness of the EAOs. We will continue to strive for this. The Tatmadaw has often talked about its refusal to accept the Rakhine AA (Arakan Army), the Palaung TNLA (Ta’ang National Liberation Army), and the Kokkant MNDAA (Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army). I believe this shouldn’t happen. Our country will never have peace if they continue to enforce these restrictions. I want to say that it’s not difficult if they build peace with honesty and candid goodwill. Invite everyone to participate. Negotiate the framework after including everyone. Then, try to clear up the misunderstandings step by step in line with the negotiated framework. We understand the goodwill of the rest of the EAOs. We have been working together with them for many years. They also want to solve political issue through political means. However, the Tatmadaw and the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) have faith in the 2008 Constitution as federal bill and it doesn’t need to be amended. It’s difficult due to their stance.

The ethnic people have feelings. They have been oppressed under military command for all the time. As a result, they can’t lay down their arms at present. They still don’t trust [the government and the Tatmadaw]. In the situation where they still can’t trust [the government and the Tatmadaw], the democratic system still hasn’t settled yet. You need to give them understanding in this situation where the democratic system is still weak.

The Tatmadaw leader has said ‘rather than demanding the impossible things by relying on the arms in the democracy era’. Actually, they (the Tatmadaw) can speak like this because they have never experienced the feelings of the ethnic people’s miseries. What can they (the EAOs) do under the 2008 Constitution if they have to lay down their arms like this? What can the elected government do? If we continue to stand like this, our country will continue to remain at the bottom. Hatred will rise between ethnic people if there is more oppression. It will be difficult to control them. It will be more difficult to build peace and unity.

That’s why, I want to say that our country will certainly have peace and become developed if we can be honest and forgive the past and build the country with confidence.