Current political consideration on parallel government

… 

_ By Dr Tint Swe

There are a dozen governments in exile listed in encyclopedias and that includes 17-year old National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB). The fundamental purpose of government that is the maintenance of basic security and public order cannot be virtually possible for a parallel government. But it is one of the hard-hitting means to challenge the ruling authorities. That was why the NCGUB was formed on 18-12-1990. 

As years have passed, it seems many observers forget the relevance of why and how the NCGUB came into existence. Knowledge of history is mandatory component to carry out political affairs. There were at least three legitimate rationales for the newly elected Hluttaw Representatives of 1990 election to decide creating a government parallel to the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) of that time. 

The first was political obligation. On the eve of Gandhi Hall Conference of the National League for Democracy (NLD), the SLORC issued the notification number 1/90 that prevented convening the parliament and forming the government of the 1990 election. NLD leadership whose top leaders were taken hostage was not going to form the government. But there was tremendous public pressure on the elected members. The only means to satisfy voters, monks and students was what SLORC prevented us to do. We did and we paid the price since many parliamentarians sentenced to 25 years each inside and two of us murdered outside the country. The point is that NCGUB is the self-sacrifice government rather than a self-style lobby team. 

The second fact was that the hard decision was made by members of parliament from the NLD and the mandate came out of a series of secret meetings. We also consulted non-NLD parties which accordingly endorsed our judgment. 

The third important reality was the authorized support extended by the ethnic and pro-democratic forces which controlled some square miles of liberated areas along Thai-Burma border. After fall of Manerplaw, NCGUB practically became the government in exile. All three reasons are still valid as of early 2008. 

New deliberations

After 2007 dramatic events it is relevant to explore new and better form of challenges against the incumbent military regime. Deliberations are underway about the national unity government or somewhat like that. Being in exile the meetings are not as secret as those of 1990. Methodical study has been done. NCGUB welcomes finding ways and means that could be more effective to make a good change for Burma. One of the questions is who should decide to form a government in this complex situation. Our decision of late 1990 was made by elected representatives coupled with consultation with selected party executives of Central and State/Division levels from NLD. 

Unfortunately now the environment does not favor for all-inclusive consultation. Nevertheless the proposal for serious consideration should be consensus among all of us inside and outside Burma. I don’t mean 100% agreement which has never been possible. I also don’t mean ‘number decides practice’ either. There have been bad decisions made by majority votes. That is paradox of democratic practice. However there must be transparency. 

Realistically a government needs a backing country like India for Central Tibetan Administration of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Do we have? We should have a better headquarters than NSCN (K) which has a government near Mount Saramati on the Naga Hills and it is extremely difficult to reach out to even all Naga areas. 

The members of NLD are not as free to exercise the administrative and the legislative obligations as others. They contested the election with party election manifesto. Nonviolence is the theme of NLD. Out of frustration after 2007 brutal onslaught some may incline to harsh approach. But Gandhi was neither father nor soldier of Subbas Chandra Bose’s Indian National Army (INA).

If we have all related ministries in the government, not all existing donors will be able to assist. Here I also don’t mean that because of donor/NGO factor we should not make the important political decisions. But we must have alternative means to raise funds to function. The Departments of Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) raise revenue among all Tibetans to fulfill mission of keeping Tibetan identity alive. Would all or most of our Burmese expatriates be the source for the government in particular and the movement in general? 

Political consideration

The significant message sent out by the movement leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi of 9-11-07 emphasized ‘national unity’ and ‘democratic solidarity’. That is the guideline for further activities for 2008 and onward. All our considerations and efforts must be in line with her instruction. Before we could accomplish those two objectives, at least we must avoid not hampering understanding, solidarity and unity among all of us.

It is exactly correct to exert more pressure on the military regime. But I am not convinced that a jumbo cabinet of a parallel government will hurt the generals. Everybody including the generals’ friends knows that SPDC is incapable to govern the country and to manage the economy. As long as we were not in Naypyiday, we are not in the position to demonstrate that we are more capable and better than the generals. 

We also have to analyze what the senior generals have been doing for the last 19 years and what they have achieved and what the haven’t. Look back to the time when they seized the power. To pacify the people and to justify the coup SLORC’s the first announcement included the promise for multiparty democracy and holding a free and fair election. The only promise the military junta so far kept was holding the election on 27-5-1990.

Since then against everybody’s opinion, SLORC/SPDC has been doing whatever they wanted to. Mostly they have achieved but with heavy price. Basically they care neither sanctions nor resolutions. They don’t mind either UN or ASEAN. They cracked down, arrested and killed the students. They cracked down, arrested and killed the elected MPs. Finally they cracked down, arrested and killed the monks. However what they can’t kill is the 1990 election results. 

The 1/90 notification meant to arrest and detain the 1990 election result. 4-5 years later their newspapers wrote the election results were no longer valid. There were elements here and there that followed that assertion. But SLORC/SPDC invited the elected members to their national convention. Another 4-5 years later they portrayed the opposition was unable to rule the country. There are peoples and governments who tag along that allegation. The Committee Representing the Peoples’ Parliament (CRPP) released a comprehensive report that outlined the best possible policies of all areas. At personal level government bureaucrats and military officials show dissension and sympathy to democratic bloc. 

Interestingly after the 2007 uprising, the neighboring nations are expressing new concern of Burmese way to Balkanization if regime change happened. It is more than SPDC’s contention that if army is not in supremacy the Union will disintegrate. As a politician I try to think positive. We must look at that way that neighbors are thinking of ‘Burma beyond military rule’. So one of the things we have got to do is to clear out the concerns of the neighbors. All stake holders are responsible for legitimate counter argument to convince the neighbors. All loose alliances of the past are not the sufficient answer. The support statement of 12 ethnic political parties to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s announcement was one of the best. SPDC was so nervous because of that. The ceasefire plot was masterpiece from the other side. Now it becomes not cohesive as before but still intact. Will ceasefire groups become more daring?

The conventional wisdom is the peoples of Burma have to rely on their own. So the domestic political developments are more important than our exile activities. The monks and ’88 generation students have shown the way. So our new activities need backing or approval from the inside counterparts. 

Although 2007 uprising could change world view SPDC is still adhering to their unpopular roadmap. Why world view change cannot force down SPDC to compromise their roadmap? I come to the point. The 1/90 was to detain the election results and the roadmap is to kill it. Therefore the military oligarchy has been desperate to kill the 1990 election results. Please take this way election result is our strength and therefore we must not dilute it but use it.

We may or may not be forming a new government at this point of time. The fresh efforts in 2008 and beyond must be in support of democratic solidarity and national unity not to be dividing among ourselves. It must also be enhanced implementation of 1990 election result and should make sure that that will be more effective than the existing government. If we are convinced NCGUB will be delighted to work for it. In the meantime all of us have a lot of works to do as per Daw Suu’s instruction. 

Tint Swe
Member of Parliament (NLD)
NCGUB