The Role of Ethnic Political Parties in Shaping the Future of Myanmar Peace Dialogues
This policy brief aims to promote peace in Myanmar by addressing the ongoing conflicts between the military, known as the Tatmadaw, and ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) now referred as ethnic resistance organizations (EROs). The emphasis of this policy brief is to give voice to the ethnic political parties and its potential role in the peace process. As a multi-ethnic nation, Myanmar has a long history of violent confrontations involving the Tatmadaw and various EROs. Despite numerous peace processes and negotiations, the most notable initiative has been the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA). However, during the NCA negotiations, ethnic political parties were largely excluded from meaningful participation. Given the crucial role of ethnic political parties in fostering a comprehensive and lasting peace, this policy brief emphasizes the need for their active involvement in future peace dialogues. Inclusive participation of these parties is essential for addressing the diverse perspectives and grievances within the country, thereby enhancing the legitimacy and effectiveness of the peace process. By integrating ethnic political parties into the peace dialogue platforms, Myanmar can work towards a more inclusive and sustainable resolution to its long-standing conflicts.
Myanmar, a multi-ethnic nation, has experienced persistent violent confrontations between its military, known as the Tatmadaw, and various ethnic armed organizations (EAOs), now referred to as ethnic resistance organizations (EROs). Despite significant peace initiatives, such as the Panglong Agreement and the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) of 2011 and 2015, lasting peace has remained elusive (Nyein, 2017). The NCA, intended to resolve conflicts, has not succeeded in addressing the deep-seated issues and tensions between the military and the EROs (Transnational Institute, 2023).
This policy brief addresses the ongoing conflict by emphasizing the need for a more inclusive dialogue process that tackles the root causes of discord and involves civil society in peacebuilding efforts. This policy brief seeks to gather extensive data and insights on the failure of the NCA peace dialogue through interviews with leaders of ethnic political parties. By uncovering the ‘behind the scenes’ factors contributing to the breakdown of the peace process, this policy brief aims to highlight the critical role ethnic political parties can play in fostering a more inclusive and representative peace dialogue. Involving ethnic political parties can enhance the legitimacy and sustainability of the peace process, ensuring that it addresses the diverse needs and grievances of Myanmar’s ethnic communities and paves the way for a more enduring resolution to the country’s long-standing conflicts.
Findings and Analysis
Why was the NCA agreement unsuccessful in fostering peace dialogue in Myanmar?
The Myanmar peace process dialogue has been met with significant criticism for it exclusionary practices and lack of inclusivity, particularly concerning ethnic political parties. Based on the interviews with four ethnic political parties, in which they are mentioned that ensuring the participation of these groups is crucial for fostering a sustainable and equitable peace process in Myanmar.
The interviews conducted highlighted several critical factors contributing to the failure of fostering peace dialogue, primarily revolving around procedural and structural challenges. political party A expressed dissatisfaction with the NCA, criticizing its complex and dysfunctional procedures that impeded effective dialogue and perpetuated power imbalances, particularly favouring military dominance. They argued that these procedural hurdles hindered the ability to address substantive issues crucial for sustainable peace. political party B echoed similar concerns, emphasizing the NCA’s military-focused framework and procedural inefficiencies as major obstacles to achieving meaningful agreements and fostering genuine dialogue among stakeholders. These issues, according to their observations, prevented comprehensive and inclusive deliberations necessary for building consensus and trust.
Meanwhile, political party C identified time constraints and a lack of procedural transparency as significant barriers that hampered the effectiveness of the peace process. They pointed out that rushed deliberations and unclear procedural guidelines undermined efforts to reach durable agreements and foster genuine reconciliation. In contrast, political party D highlighted fundamental flaws in the initial approach to the NCA, advocating for a more inclusive and participatory process that addresses the diverse concerns and aspirations of all stakeholders involved. They argued that a revamped strategy, incorporating broader engagement and transparent procedural frameworks, would be essential for revitalizing the peace process and achieving lasting peace in Myanmar.
Another significant issue highlighted was the exclusion of ethnic political parties. Political parties A emphasized that the nationwide ceasefire agreement lacked participation from ethnic political parties, contributing to feelings of distrust and marginalization within these communities. This exclusion, according to their perspective, undermined the agreement’s legitimacy and its ability to address the diverse concerns of Myanmar’s ethnic groups. Similarly, political party B underscored the frequent exclusion of key stakeholders, including ethnic political parties, from the dialogue process. They argued that such exclusions led to inefficiencies and a lack of authentic engagement, thereby hindering the establishment of sustainable peace initiatives.
Additionally, political party C noted the inadequate representation of non-armed ethnic groups, which they believed intensified distrust and posed challenges in achieving consensus on critical issues. They pointed out that without adequate representation, the peace process struggled to address the root causes of ethnic conflicts effectively. Furthermore, political party D emphasized the marginalization of ethnic political parties in decision-making processes. This exclusion, they argued, not only exacerbated existing conflicts but also deepened distrust in the peace process’s ability to deliver equitable outcomes for all stakeholders involved.
These findings collectively underscored the pressing need for inclusivity and comprehensive representation of ethnic diversity within Myanmar’s peace dialogue framework to foster genuine reconciliation and sustainable peace.
Several critical observations were made regarding the challenges surrounding the NCA and its implementation. Political party A drew attention to the military’s reluctance to relinquish control and their use of intimidation tactics, which they argued had a detrimental impact on the peace process and exacerbated power struggles. This behaviour, according to their assessment, undermined trust and hindered genuine efforts towards conflict resolution. Similarly, political party B pointed out instances of military manipulation within NCA discussions, highlighting how dominant parties’ influence stifled inclusive dialogue and prevented equitable resolutions to longstanding conflicts. They emphasized the need for fair representation and transparency to mitigate these issues effectively.
Additionally, political party C identified historical grievances and polarized public opinion as significant obstacles to the NCA’s legitimacy and effectiveness. These factors, they argued, contributed to widespread scepticism and reluctance among various ethnic and political groups to fully engage in the peace process. Furthermore, political party D characterized the NCA as outdated and ineffective, citing its perceived biases and failures in addressing underlying grievances and inequalities. They highlighted how these shortcomings have fostered disillusionment, particularly among minority groups who feel marginalized and disenfranchised by the current peace framework. These insights underscored the complex interplay of historical, political, and institutional factors shaping Myanmar’s peace process, necessitating comprehensive reforms and inclusive approaches to build sustainable peace and reconciliation.
Recommendation
How can inclusivity in the Myanmar Peace Process be enhanced to promote sustainable peace?
Achieving sustainable peace in Myanmar demands a transformative approach that prioritizes inclusivity, transparency, and equitable participation in the peace process. This policy brief outlines key strategies and recommendations to enhance the inclusivity of ethnic political parties in Myanmar’s peace dialogue.
Establishing diverse dialogue platform:
Creating inclusive dialogue platforms is imperative for fostering a holistic representation of ethnic and political diversity, encompassing even unregistered entities. These platforms serve as pivotal arenas for virtual discussions and community-driven consultations, facilitating extensive engagement and the incorporation of varied viewpoints in the formulation of policies. By promoting open dialogue and inclusivity, policymakers can harness the collective wisdom and experiences of all stakeholders, thereby ensuring that decisions reflect the multifaceted needs and aspirations of the entire populace, particularly marginalized groups. Such initiatives not only enhance democratic practices but also fortify social cohesion and legitimacy within governance frameworks.
Developing transparent negotiation frameworks:
Implementing transparent negotiation frameworks with clearly defined timelines and accessible records is essential for promoting accountability and trust among stakeholders. These frameworks establish a structured approach to negotiations, ensuring that all parties have equal access to information and opportunities to contribute. By setting out clear timelines, stakeholders are empowered to monitor progress and hold decision-makers accountable for meeting agreed-upon milestones. Accessible records further enhance transparency, providing a documented trail of discussions and decisions that fosters public trust and confidence in the process. Together, these elements uphold the principles of inclusivity and fairness, fostering a collaborative environment where diverse perspectives can effectively shape meaningful outcomes.
Addressing military dominance:
Addressing military dominance in the peace process is crucial to achieving sustainable and inclusive outcomes. International oversight and mediation play pivotal roles in mitigating power imbalances, ensuring that military interests do not overshadow the voices and concerns of ethnic political parties and civilian stakeholders. Establishing joint committees with inclusive representation from both military and ethnic political parties fosters consensus-building and facilitates constructive dialogue between these sectors. By promoting transparency and cooperation, such initiatives strengthen trust and accountability within the peace negotiation framework, paving the way for equitable agreements that reflect the interests of all involved parties.
Advocate for policy reforms:
Advocating for policy reforms is paramount to addressing historical grievances and dismantling systemic biases that perpetuate ethnic marginalization. This involves not only revising discriminatory laws but also institutionalizing robust accountability mechanisms within governance frameworks. By reforming policies to promote equality and inclusivity, governments can rectify past injustices and create pathways for marginalized ethnic communities to participate fully in socio-political processes. These reforms should be accompanied by proactive measures to educate and empower communities, ensuring they are informed and engaged in shaping their own futures. Ultimately, advocating for comprehensive policy reforms is essential for fostering a more just and equitable society where all individuals have equal opportunities and rights.
Build Trust and Reconciliation:
Implementing confidence-building measures, such as joint community projects and public commitments to peace, plays a vital role in building trust and fostering reconciliation among Myanmar’s diverse ethnic groups. These initiatives create opportunities for communities to collaborate on shared goals, promoting understanding and solidarity across cultural and historical divides. Public commitments to peace demonstrate a commitment to dialogue and peaceful coexistence, reinforcing the belief in a collective future free from conflict. By investing in these initiatives, stakeholders can lay a foundation for sustainable peace and development, where mutual respect and cooperation prevail over past grievances.
Designing a new political system:
Designing a new political system that embraces federalism or decentralized governance is crucial for accommodating ethnic aspirations and ensuring inclusive representation. This approach empowers local communities by granting them greater autonomy and authority in decision-making processes that directly affect their lives. By decentralizing governance, diverse ethnic groups gain a platform to articulate their unique needs and perspectives, fostering a participatory democracy where all voices are heard and respected. Such a system not only promotes equitable distribution of resources and opportunities but also strengthens social cohesion and national unity by acknowledging and celebrating cultural diversity. Ultimately, designing this new political framework is essential for building a resilient and harmonious society where every community feels valued and empowered.
Summary
Achieving inclusive peace in Myanmar demands concerted efforts to rectify exclusionary practices, empower marginalized groups, and reform governance structures. By implementing stakeholder mapping, engaging ethnic political parties and civil society through workshops, and fostering continuous dialogue, Myanmar can lay the groundwork for sustainable peace. International support in capacity-building and mediation will bolster institutional frameworks and negotiation capabilities crucial for progress. A robust monitoring and evaluation framework, complemented by regular progress reports and independent oversight, ensures transparency and accountability throughout the peace process. Embracing these strategies and securing international backing, Myanmar can chart a path towards a lasting and inclusive peace that benefits all its citizens. This comprehensive approach not only aims to resolve immediate conflicts but also seeks to establish a foundation for long-term stability, social cohesion, and economic prosperity across the nation.
References
- Addisu Gelaneh, G. (2020). Ethnic-based political parties: challenges and prospects for national unity of ethiopia in the post 1991, 8(4). https://doi.org/https://eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Ethnic-Based-Political-Parties.pdf
- Aditya, A., & D.Bhatta, C. (2016, May). The role of political parties in deepening Democray in Nepal. https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/nepal/14816.pdf
- Autesserre, S. (2017). International Peacebuilding and Local Success: Assumptions and Effectiveness. https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/26407939
- Cottle, D., & Thapa, S. (2017, October). (PDF) the role of political parties in Nepal’s peace building process. the role of political parties in Nepal’s peace building process. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320356100_THE_ROLE_OF_POLITICAL_PARTIES_IN_NEPAL’S_PEACE_BUILDING_PROCESS
- Cuhadar, E. (2020, March). Understanding resistance to inclusive peace processes. Understanding resistance to Inclusive Peace Processes. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/2020-03/pw_159-understanding_resistance_to_inclusive_peace_processes-pw.pdf
- Hartwell, L. (2019, October 15). Conflict resolution: Lessons from the dayton peace process – hartwell – 2019 – negotiation journal – wiley online library. Conflict Resolution: Lessons from the Dayton Peace Process. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/nejo.12300
- Nilsso, D. (2012). Anchoring the peace: Civil society actors in Peace Accords and durable peace: International interactions: Vol 38, no 2. anchoring the Peace: civil Society actors in Peace accords and Durable Peace. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03050629.2012.659139
- Nyein, N. (2017, August 10). Analysis: The peace process and an unattainable plan – Myanmar. ReliefWeb. https://reliefweb.int/report/myanmar/analysis-peace-process-and-unattainable-plan
- Transnational Institute. (2023, April). The nationwide ceasefire agreement in Myanmar. The Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement in Myanmar. https://www.tni.org/files/2023-04/TNI_CeasefireMyanmar_web_1.pdf