Thursday, 24 January 2008

Museum für Völkerkunde - Seminarraum DG39

A-1010  WIEN, Neue Hofburg

Topic: "Myanmar: Setting an Agenda for National Reconciliation"

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Positions available

Government of Myanmar

People’s Republic of China

India

United Nations Special Envoy

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

European Union

United States of America

Thailand (as Facilitator)

Background and hypothetical scenario

This time, the Forum for International Negotiations simulates a negotiation that has not yet taken place.

Following the crackdown of the protest led by monks on the streets of Rangun in September 2007, the international community increased its pressure on the military regime of Myanmar, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) to democratise the country and to re-launch the national reconciliation process. Many western countries, having already imposed various bilateral sanctions on the regime for the violation of fundamental human rights, called for more effective measures in order to motivate the junta to end the suppression of oppositions and promote good governance. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) issued a declaration condemning the violence used but failed to undertake unified and substantive action. China and India, competing for influence in the country, prevented large scale sanction due to geopolitical interest. Especially China was successful in preventing a resolution on Burma. Instead, the UN Security Council issued a non-binding presidential statement on 11 October 2007. Meanwhile, the UN Secretary General appointed H.E. Ibrahim Gambari as the UN envoy to Myanmar to explore possibilities of national reconciliation.

The efforts by the international community have not yet produced any tangible results. The UN Special Envoy has started ‘shuttle diplomacy’ between the parties in the country, especially between the SPDC and the leader of the opposition, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and the neighbouring countries. Despite the lack of results, many observers believe that some changes and a slow progress towards the gradual retreat of the regime have taken place due to the international pressure. Some, however, believe that no progress has been made at all.

The problem in Myanmar is not only the military regime and the violation of human rights. The country’s economy is one of the poorest in the world. Decades of ethnic suppression and military dictatorship and the subsequent domestic ethnic conflicts between non-Burmese groups and the regime have resulted in a large number of internally displaced persons and lots of refugees seeking shelter in neighbouring countries. The military regime staunchly pursues the aim of creating a unitary state, whereas the opposition, supported by a vast majority in the election of 1988, promises to solve the problem through decentralization of the state. The national reconciliation is therefore not only about the reconciliation between the regime and the opposition but also between different ethnic groups.

The negotiation is a simulation of a proposal by the government of Thailand. The proposal called for multilateral talks, similar to the Six-Party Talks on North Korea, and will include the UN, China, India and ASEAN, as well as Myanmar. Thailand’s proposal took into account that the SPDC regards the participation of sanctioning western countries as colonialist involvement. However, in the simulation, we decided to include the US and the EU in order to have more controversy in the discussion.

The negotiation is aimed to setting an agenda for subsequent national reconciliation talks. The following issues should be addressed:

-          Who should be participants at the talks?

-          What is the overall objective of the talks?

-          Whether or not and how to reconcile between opposition and government?

-          How to solve ethnic conflicts? How should the state be organized? Centralized or decentralized?

-          Whether or not and how basic human and civil rights can be included in the talks?

-          Which concession can be granted to or demanded from the regime?

Participants can also exchange concessions from other negotiation partners.

Brief description of the positions of the negotiators

Government of Myanmar (SPDC): Maintaining the status quo is the central aim of the government. It rejects any foreign intervention, and dismisses all accusations concerning human rights violations. China and India are useful partners.. Myanmar is of very high value in terms of economic resources and geopolitics for all of its neighbours.

People’s Republic of China (PRC): Myanmar is the door to the Indian Ocean. The PRC has continuously supported the regime economically, militarily and politically. The PRC is most interested in a peaceful and stable neighbourhood, and still considers the regime as a guarantee for stability and a useful tool that prevents unity in ASEAN.

India: The country attempts to increase its influence in Myanmar, while it is also interested in stability along its eastern border. India is very much aware of Myanmar’s economic importance as supplier of natural gas and gate to Southeast Asia.

United Nations Special Envoy: The special envoy is preoccupied with human rights, refugee and development issues. He also strives for a genuine and serious negotiation between the opposition, the government and different ethnic groups. The lifting of the restrictions on Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners are very important aims.

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): Myanmar is the most troublesome member of ASEAN. Failing to find a common stance due to different interest, ASEAN has to carefully balance its principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs, demands of some of its neighbours, and the security concern due to Chinese influence in Myanmar.

European Union: The goal of the EU is a legitimate civilian government, which respects human rights and effectively pursues Millenium Development Goals (MDGs). The sanctions imposed by the EU include an arms embargo, the suspension of defence cooperation and development aid, a visa ban and the freezing of assets.

United States of America: Like the EU, the US has also imposed sanctions. Myanmar is important for the US not only because of the struggle for democracy but also due to its geopolitical value. Like the EU, the US continuously calls for an immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi and political progress.

Thailand: Facilitator and initiator of the meeting, Thailand expects from the negotiation progress a reconciliation with ethnic groups that live along the 2,400 km long borderline, which has been a source of instability mainly because it constitutes a major drug and human trafficking route. Moreover, several Thai businesses invest in Myanmar, and Thailand is a customer of natural gas from the country.