Q: Do you have anything to talk about State base Policy in ENC?

Ans: We haven’t reach to the agreement among ethnic groups regarding ENC policy base on the state. Then, some involved in the coalition but some are not. There, NDF is already the coalition of ethnics. We base on the nationality there. Then, some have the views that we don’t need ENC yet. On the other hand, the formation of ENC is limited with the state population. For instance, there are diverse sub-groups among the Shan and then there should be enough time to negotiate among these groups. I think ENC should be formed broadly and need to take some time to organise the same views among diverse ethnic groups. For example, if we send a Palaung delegate after the common agreement of all Palaung rather than proposing himself/herself as a delegate, the ENC will be stronger on the base and the formation will be stronger as well. It can’t be complete just with a representative name but we still need to build the unity. Particularly, in Shan state, they couldn’t build strong unity yet because of the weak mutual respect and cooperation and as a result of the enemy’s infiltration. The cause for fighting each other created by the enemy is the big problem. Therefore, we still need to have negotiation and cooperation among diverse ethnic nationalities all the time. There, Palaung and Shan haven’t participated in ENC from Shan state. As I mentioned before, we need to analyse the ENC policy as diverse views are created regarding ethnic issues. If we look at the Wa state, Wa state has been existed historically and they have the basic rights in order to establish their own state. Then, when the state constitution for Wa state is drafting, a Wa delegate hasn’t participate in ENC from Shan state. When Palaung hasn’t reach that status, we can just do it on the agreement that we all can coordinate. If ENC is functioning systematically, then it can be a strong formation for ethnics. One more thing, the formation is becoming stronger in NCUB. If we form more sub-groups, we will need to coordinate again and if the policy doesn’t agree the measures, it would be waste of time and money. We will have different forces and workloads. Then, we can’t reach the common programme and common strategy exactly when we are working separately rather than working together. When we are working in own programme for own course then the effect is broader. We can’t reach the target as much as we want. I just want to say that the expected measures can’t be complete in the targeted time.

 

Q: What is your compliment as a member of Secretaries in NCUB?

Ans: I would like to suggest that there should be clear programmes, projects and strategies after adoption of clear patterns and courses we want. Then, we need to perform along with the adopted strategy in unity. We need to emphasize on the mass participation and performance. We need to utilize the financial sources and human resources systemically in order to be efficient. That’s why NCUB measures can perform well not only inside the country but also abroad. One more thing, it is not enough with NCUB’s actions and then other organisations and groups who are not in NCUB should be working together with us. All the local forces need to step up their actions in balance. I don’t like the idea that “working together in same things and working separately in different things”. It should not take place. I wish we should work together in same things and we will coordinate for the balance of indifferences in order to work together. We will be parted away if we follow the system of “working together in same things and working separately in different things”. It will be effective more if we work together in same things in unity and try to balance the indifferences.

The END.

Read part 1, part 2