Myanmar�s emerging political landscape

Myanmar�s process of achieving the required reforms within the political domain and emerging out of the international pariah landscape has been a bumpy and uneven ride

We have all been watching the gradual evolution of democracy (or quasi-democracy as some have termed it) in Myanmar. Many of us were also taken aback with the anger shown by Nobel Peace Prize laureate (awarded in 1991) Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the majority political party- the National League for Democracy (NLD) – and her subsequent comment towards a BBC Muslim presenter- Mishal Husain- for the questions addressed to the Myanmar leader regarding the possible future Myanmar treatment of its Rohingya Muslim minority community. Suu Kyi’s comment that “no one told me I was going to be interviewed by a Muslim” went viral in the social media, because it was so unexpected in terms of its discriminatory aspect.
 It is however a great stride forward that Myanmar has crossed a historic milestone and sworn in its first elected civilian President on 30 March, 2016 after a gap of more than 50 years. Htin Kyaw from the National League for Democracy (NLD) has taken over from Thein Sein (who became president of a quasi-civilian government in 2011 and was instrumental in promoting the path of wide-ranging reforms during his past five years in power).
It would be important to recall here that in the general elections conducted by the Myanmar Election Commission in November, 2015, the National League for Democracy (NLD) ended up with the largest number of seats in the Parliament- both in the Upper (135) as well as the Lower House (255). The USDP backed by the entrenched interests of the past five decades secured 11 seats in the Upper House and 30 in the Lower House. The Armed Forces secured 56 seats in the Upper House and 110 in the Lower House. Other Parties secured 22 seats in the Upper House and 38 in the Lower House. It may also be noted here that the Election Commission cancelled elections for 7 other seats. The elections were viewed as having been free and fair by the international community as well as Observers within Myanmar. There was however the stigma that no one from the Rohingya community could exercise their right to vote as they were not considered as citizens of Myanmar in the recently conducted census by the then government.
It may however be noted here that though the NLD emerged as victorious, with a clear majority, the military will still play a significant role. Besides retaining control of key security Ministries, it also has a guaranteed 25% of parliamentary seats in the Lower House - thus retaining the power to veto any changes to the Constitution, as that would require more than 75% of votes.
Myanmar’s process of achieving the required reforms within the political domain and emerging out of the international pariah landscape has been a bumpy and uneven ride. The elections reiterated that the NLD was the most desired Party in the country but other remaining elements continued to create challenges.
The NLD in the beginning, after the election, felt that coming out victorious in nearly 80% of the contested seats had sufficiently conveyed the message to the Army that the people had not only voted for change but also for Suu Kyi to lead. This dynamics was however not interpreted that way despite three meetings after the election between Suu Kyi (assumed by most analysts at her request) and Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing. Suu Kyi was exploring the possibility of a grand deal to circumvent discriminatory Clause 59 F of the Myanmar Constitution that disqualifies anyone whose spouse, children, and even spouses of children, have foreign passports. Suu Kyi's two children by Oxford academic Michael Aris, possessing British passports, most unfortunately has been the insurmountable hurdle. It is understood that the NLD leader sought the approval of the Army to enable Parliament to temporarily suspend the part of the constitution that bars her from becoming President. This was not to be.
Supporters of this infamous clause have mentioned that such a prescription protects the country's sovereignty. However, most now believe that it was drafted by the military to close the door on Suu Kyi. Others have claimed that this clause has been deliberately introduced into the matrix so that efforts to open that door would require further concessions (in terms of governance) for the Myanmarese Army, including the possible right by them to choose the Chief Ministers of several States/Provinces in Myanmar. It's not clear why the grand deal didn't happen. Some have asserted that the Army just couldn't stomach the idea. Others have claimed that Suu Kyi might have refused to concede enough. For whatever reason, the talks broke down.
Being barred from the post of President, Suu Kyi ended up proposing her close aide and friend Htin Kyaw as her Party’s candidate for the post of President of Myanmar. Educated in Britain, he is also known for his reputation for honesty and loyalty, and for maintaining a low profile. Htin Kyaw won the presidential vote in Parliament in March, 2016 with 360 of the 652 votes cast. His victory was seen as re-assertion of Suu Kyi’s popularity.  In second place was Myint Swe, a hardliner and close ally of former junta leader Than Shwe, nominated by the military. He received 213 votes. He was followed by Htin Kyaw's running mate and ethnic Chin candidate Henry Van Thio, who got 79 votes. Both these persons will serve as First Vice-President and Second Vice-President respectively.
 There have been reports in the media that the NLD will soon complete the process of naming its Ministers in the new government. It has also been mentioned that in all likelihood, Ms Suu Kyi will exercise her sociometric overlay with the new President by being in charge of the important portfolios of Foreign Affairs and the President's office. It is expected that the rest of the government will be a mix of NLD officials and technocrats. In the meantime it has also been revealed that a draft Bill is being prepared for creation of a new post, to be known as “Advisor to the State”. It will be submitted to the Parliament in the next few weeks. It is anticipated that this post will be filled up by Suu Kyi and will give her the power to work on all the key issues of government and meet whoever she wants. The new post will be similar to a Prime Minister in terms of governance. It is being interpreted that this would protect her from allegations that she is acting unconstitutionally by taking on additional power.
It has also been mentioned that the military will try and retain the control of three key Ministries - Defence, Home Affairs and the sensitive Border Affairs. This, apparently, has stemmed from the concept of them being in charge of national security. This will also be consistent with existing constitutional provisions that states that the key security ministries (Home, Defence and Border Affairs) are appointed not by the President but by the Army Commander-in-Chief.  It also reflects  the feature that the Army still controls key security Ministries and also has the power to veto any changes to the Constitution (as that would require more than 75% of parliamentary votes).
In the immediate aftermath of the election, Suu Kyi had spoken of being inclusive and creating a government of national unity. That appears to have flown out of the window after the Army rejected her overtures.
Nevertheless, this anticlimactic outcome has strengthened Suu Kyi politically and diminished the military in the eyes of the Burmese people. The inflexibility of the Army, in the face of a huge popular mandate, has also set the tone for what looks likely to be a period of confrontation in the new political landscape between them and the newly elected democrats.
It is true that Suu Kyi’s authority will be unchallenged within her Party and that she will also have the most important say both within the Presidency and the Parliament. It will also be correct to assume that one of her priorities, in all likelihood, will be to renew her bid to change the Constitution and reduce the Army's power. The international media has reported that the unelected army representatives have already started sampling the new order. In this context, Suu Kyi's MPs are demanding that deals made by the Army and the former government be re-examined. This has led to some drama with all the men in green uniform standing up in the Parliament to protest such a move.
It is clear that the 2008 Constitution of Myanmar will be the main limit on Suu Kyi's power. Drafted by the generals, and approved through a questionable referendum, it ensures, even today, that the military retains its political role. Much has changed in Myanmar, but the Burmese army has not budged one inch from the red lines it introduced into the Constitution. Consequently, it is feared that the democratic experiment, economic reforms and the emboldened Suu Kyi will continue to remain in a controlled space that the military has designed and now seem intent on preserving.
One hopes however that the intentions made public by its new President after being sworn in will come through. He has mentioned on 30th March that the NLD would continue its efforts to amend the Constitution to “bring it up to democratic standards”.
Nevertheless, the changes in Myanmar appear to have ushered in symbolical signs of hope, particularly for the different ethnic minorities including the Rohingya population in Myanmar. We have already seen the surprise move taken on 29 March by the outgoing President Thein Sein when he announced the removal of emergency order, which had been in place since unrest left scores dead and tens of thousands of Rohingya Muslims from the Rakhine State confined in miserable displacement camps. The decision by the outgoing President has been a movement forward.
In the meantime the UNHCR has also stated that according to their investigation, “many less people (migrants including Rohingyas) came out of Myanmar last year.”  Optimism has also been created according to the United Nations among different ethnic communities after NLD’s assumption of power and the return to civilian governance. This, according to them, has already persuaded more than 25,000 Rohingyas interned in camps, to return to their original villages and re-build their destroyed homes.
Myanmar today has a historic opportunity. The civilian population as well as the their armed forces should work together not only for economic development, removing the narcotics problem, creation of better infrastructure and addressing the frequent power outages but also for the securing of personal freedom Many challenges still remain for Myanmar but it can, as indicated by the European Union- “become an inclusive, pluralistic and peaceful democracy”. This will enable the region to attain their goals and foster social engagement in a meaningful manner.

 Muhammad Zamir, a former ambassador, is an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance. He can be reached at [email protected]

 

Myanmar�s emerging political landscape

Myanmar�s process of achieving the required reforms within the political domain and emerging out of the international pariah landscape has been a bumpy and uneven ride

We have all been watching the gradual evolution of democracy (or quasi-democracy as some have termed it) in Myanmar. Many of us were also taken aback with the anger shown by Nobel Peace Prize laureate (awarded in 1991) Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the majority political party- the National League for Democracy (NLD) and her subsequent comment towards a BBC Muslim presenter- Mishal Husain- for the questions addressed to the Myanmar leader regarding the possible future Myanmar treatment of its Rohingya Muslim minority community. Suu Kyis comment that no one told me I was going to be interviewed by a Muslim went viral in the social media, because it was so unexpected in terms of its discriminatory aspect. It is however a great stride forward that Myanmar has crossed a historic milestone and sworn in its first elected civilian President on 30 March, 2016 after a gap of more than 50 years. Htin Kyaw from the National League for Democracy (NLD) has taken over from Thein Sein (who became president of a quasi-civilian government in 2011 and was instrumental in promoting the path of wide-ranging reforms during his past five years in power). It would be important to recall here that in the general elections conducted by the Myanmar Election Commission in November, 2015, the National League for Democracy (NLD) ended up with the largest number of seats in the Parliament- both in the Upper (135) as well as the Lower House (255). The USDP backed by the entrenched interests of the past five decades secured 11 seats in the Upper House and 30 in the Lower House. The Armed Forces secured 56 seats in the Upper House and 110 in the Lower House. Other Parties secured 22 seats in the Upper House and 38 in the Lower House. It may also be noted here that the Election Commission cancelled elections for 7 other seats. The elections were viewed as having been free and fair by the international community as well as Observers within Myanmar. There was however the stigma that no one from the Rohingya community could exercise their right to vote as they were not considered as citizens of Myanmar in the recently conducted census by the then government. It may however be noted here that though the NLD emerged as victorious, with a clear majority, the military will still play a significant role. Besides retaining control of key security Ministries, it also has a guaranteed 25% of parliamentary seats in the Lower House - thus retaining the power to veto any changes to the Constitution, as that would require more than 75% of votes. Myanmars process of achieving the required reforms within the political domain and emerging out of the international pariah landscape has been a bumpy and uneven ride. The elections reiterated that the NLD was the most desired Party in the country but other remaining elements continued to create challenges. The NLD in the beginning, after the election, felt that coming out victorious in nearly 80% of the contested seats had sufficiently conveyed the message to the Army that the people had not only voted for change but also for Suu Kyi to lead. This dynamics was however not interpreted that way despite three meetings after the election between Suu Kyi (assumed by most analysts at her request) and Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing. Suu Kyi was exploring the possibility of a grand deal to circumvent discriminatory Clause 59 F of the Myanmar Constitution that disqualifies anyone whose spouse, children, and even spouses of children, have foreign passports. Suu Kyis two children by Oxford academic Michael Aris, possessing British passports, most unfortunately has been the insurmountable hurdle. It is understood that the NLD leader sought the approval of the Army to enable Parliament to temporarily suspend the part of the constitution that bars her from becoming President. This was not to be. Supporters of this infamous clause have mentioned that such a prescription protects the countrys sovereignty. However, most now believe that it was drafted by the military to close the door on Suu Kyi. Others have claimed that this clause has been deliberately introduced into the matrix so that efforts to open that door would require further concessions (in terms of governance) for the Myanmarese Army, including the possible right by them to choose the Chief Ministers of several States/Provinces in Myanmar. Its not clear why the grand deal didnt happen. Some have asserted that the Army just couldnt stomach the idea. Others have claimed that Suu Kyi might have refused to concede enough. For whatever reason, the talks broke down. Being barred from the post of President, Suu Kyi ended up proposing her close aide and friend Htin Kyaw as her Partys candidate for the post of President of Myanmar. Educated in Britain, he is also known for his reputation for honesty and loyalty, and for maintaining a low profile. Htin Kyaw won the presidential vote in Parliament in March, 2016 with 360 of the 652 votes cast. His victory was seen as re-assertion of Suu Kyis popularity. In second place was Myint Swe, a hardliner and close ally of former junta leader Than Shwe, nominated by the military. He received 213 votes. He was followed by Htin Kyaws running mate and ethnic Chin candidate Henry Van Thio, who got 79 votes. Both these persons will serve as First Vice-President and Second Vice-President respectively. There have been reports in the media that the NLD will soon complete the process of naming its Ministers in the new government. It has also been mentioned that in all likelihood, Ms Suu Kyi will exercise her sociometric overlay with the new President by being in charge of the important portfolios of Foreign Affairs and the Presidents office. It is expected that the rest of the government will be a mix of NLD officials and technocrats. In the meantime it has also been revealed that a draft Bill is being prepared for creation of a new post, to be known as Advisor to the State. It will be submitted to the Parliament in the next few weeks. It is anticipated that this post will be filled up by Suu Kyi and will give her the power to work on all the key issues of government and meet whoever she wants. The new post will be similar to a Prime Minister in terms of governance. It is being interpreted that this would protect her from allegations that she is acting unconstitutionally by taking on additional power. It has also been mentioned that the military will try and retain the control of three key Ministries - Defence, Home Affairs and the sensitive Border Affairs. This, apparently, has stemmed from the concept of them being in charge of national security. This will also be consistent with existing constitutional provisions that states that the key security ministries (Home, Defence and Border Affairs) are appointed not by the President but by the Army Commander-in-Chief. It also reflects the feature that the Army still controls key security Ministries and also has the power to veto any changes to the Constitution (as that would require more than 75% of parliamentary votes). In the immediate aftermath of the election, Suu Kyi had spoken of being inclusive and creating a government of national unity. That appears to have flown out of the window after the Army rejected her overtures. Nevertheless, this anticlimactic outcome has strengthened Suu Kyi politically and diminished the military in the eyes of the Burmese people. The inflexibility of the Army, in the face of a huge popular mandate, has also set the tone for what looks likely to be a period of confrontation in the new political landscape between them and the newly elected democrats. It is true that Suu Kyis authority will be unchallenged within her Party and that she will also have the most important say both within the Presidency and the Parliament. It will also be correct to assume that one of her priorities, in all likelihood, will be to renew her bid to change the Constitution and reduce the Armys power. The international media has reported that the unelected army representatives have already started sampling the new order. In this context, Suu Kyis MPs are demanding that deals made by the Army and the former government be re-examined. This has led to some drama with all the men in green uniform standing up in the Parliament to protest such a move. It is clear that the 2008 Constitution of Myanmar will be the main limit on Suu Kyis power. Drafted by the generals, and approved through a questionable referendum, it ensures, even today, that the military retains its political role. Much has changed in Myanmar, but the Burmese army has not budged one inch from the red lines it introduced into the Constitution. Consequently, it is feared that the democratic experiment, economic reforms and the emboldened Suu Kyi will continue to remain in a controlled space that the military has designed and now seem intent on preserving. One hopes however that the intentions made public by its new President after being sworn in will come through. He has mentioned on 30th March that the NLD would continue its efforts to amend the Constitution to bring it up to democratic standards. Nevertheless, the changes in Myanmar appear to have ushered in symbolical signs of hope, particularly for the different ethnic minorities including the Rohingya population in Myanmar. We have already seen the surprise move taken on 29 March by the outgoing President Thein Sein when he announced the removal of emergency order, which had been in place since unrest left scores dead and tens of thousands of Rohingya Muslims from the Rakhine State confined in miserable displacement camps. The decision by the outgoing President has been a movement forward. In the meantime the UNHCR has also stated that according to their investigation, many less people (migrants including Rohingyas) came out of Myanmar last year. Optimism has also been created according to the United Nations among different ethnic communities after NLDs assumption of power and the return to civilian governance. This, according to them, has already persuaded more than 25,000 Rohingyas interned in camps, to return to their original villages and re-build their destroyed homes. Myanmar today has a historic opportunity. The civilian population as well as the their armed forces should work together not only for economic development, removing the narcotics problem, creation of better infrastructure and addressing the frequent power outages but also for the securing of personal freedom Many challenges still remain for Myanmar but it can, as indicated by the European Union- become an inclusive, pluralistic and peaceful democracy. This will enable the region to attain their goals and foster social engagement in a meaningful manner. Muhammad Zamir, a former ambassador, is an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance. He can be reached at [email protected]