CDES

Briefing on deadlock over the non-secession clause at UPC

The 2nd Union Peace Conference–21st Century Panglong, that was organized May 24-29, 2017 under the current government in Nay Pyi Taw, was concluded with the concrete outcome of progress: 37 basic points of agreement in four thematic sectors – politics (federalism), economics, social, land and environment – got ratified and signed into a segment of the formal Pyidaungsu (Union) Accord. This is the first time for the actual Union Peace Conference to have made such important agreements, which is unprecedented. Process-wise, the agreement and ratification of these basic principles can be considered as significant steps taken towards advancing the cause of federalism in the Union of Myanmar. The ratification of principles did not include the security sector as there is no mandate for the conference to make formal agreements, contrary to the other four sectors. Though no decision was made, at least there was a meaningful exchange of perspectives over national security and defence taking place among the representatives of the government, Parliament, Tatmadaw (Myanmar Armed Forces), ethnic armed organizations, and political parties.
Since the beginning of ceasefire negotiations, there are many unexpected issues becoming stumbling blocks in the Myanmar peace process, and the issue of a non-secession clause is one of them, which almost led the recent conference to a total collapse. From the time President Thein Sein undertook the peace process in August 2011, this issue of secession right has been off the table. The government is open to negotiation for any issue except for matters that can affect the territorial integrity of the Union. In fact, the ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) have already agreed to the three national causes: non-disintegration of the Union, non-disintegration of national solidarity, and perpetuation of sovereignty. A direct interpretation of this non-disintegration of the Union is the pledge to non-secession from the Union. Without this promise to the non-secession commitment, the government of Myanmar would never have negotiated with ethnic armed organizations, and that there would not have been peace process as such. Strictly speaking, Myanmar does have this ongoing peace process because all ethnic armed organizations have agreed to consolidate the territorial integration of the Union of Myanmar. Despite this non-disintegration of the Union commitment by all stakeholders including EAOs, why did this phrase of non-secession clause suddenly became a hotly contested issue to the extent that the whole conference almost hit a deadlock?

read more