18.02.2007
Editorial: Federalism or Unitary Government?
_ By Taisamyone
Since independence in 1948, the successive governments of Burma, whether civilian or military, have insisted that a unitary centrally controlled government is the only viable means of bringing unity to Burma. What they have failed to realise is that the dis-unity and insurrection within Burma are a direct result of imposing a unitary form of government on a country that will only achieve peace and unity with a federal form of government. Why is this? Is it because they hold on to their delusions come hell or high water, or just the magnet of power? Centrally controlled economic experiments in the 20th century have failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of unitary government. Not only does it dis-enfranchise every ethnic group other that the Burman, it contradicts the essence of the Panglong Agreement on which the independence of Burma rests. Successive governments have sought to re-write history and deny basic human rights to the people of Burma by distorting the facts of Burma’s history to justify their position. So what is it that makes them so paranoid, that is so dangerous that the SPDC call any who support Federalism by an array of absurd misnomers, and calling on the people to “Crush all internal and external destructive elements as the common enemy”, which I assume is a reference to those who support Federalism?
As western academic Burma expert Josef Silverstein wrote for ‘Legal Issues on Burma’ in 2002, “Today, the basic problem is the same as the one the nation's founding fathers faced fifty years ago: how to construct a political system wherein diverse peoples feel free and equal, able to govern themselves in their own areas, protect and preserve their languages, cultures and traditions, while at the same time give their political loyalty to the nation-state.” Five years on, we are still at the same point. The junta’s National Convention ignores the diverse political, social and cultural needs of all ethnic groups in Burma, including Burmans, in subjugation to military power. Than Shwe’s Union Day speech talks about western powers seeking to continue colonial rule and subjugating the people of Burma, when what he is doing is holding Burma by force and subjugating the people to his military rule. The only armed insurrections that have directly threatened the Union were those that started in the 1940s, when Burman communists and socialists fought one another to dominate central government – Shan, Karen, Chin, and Kachin Rifles fought to save U Nu’s government and the Union from ideological self-destruction. As Harn Yawnghwe put it, “If Burma does finally fragment (which is not likely though) blame will rest squarely on the shoulders of the generals and their juntas.”
Centrally planned economies like those imposed by Stalinist or Maoist ideology failed miserably in the 20th century. The Soviet Union collapsed and is now rebuilding itself as a federal union. China’s Maoist experiment was responsible for tens of millions of deaths by starvation of China’s people. Their solution to prevent disintegration is to enable an open market economic model and to at least recognise the diverse nature of China and allow a degree of autonomy, at least in name if not in political power. These great nations have seen that change in political structure is paramount to peace and stability and economic prosperity, not centrally planned unitary government.
The term federalism is used to describe a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units (like states or provinces), Federalism is the system in which the power to govern is shared between the national & state governments. Examples of Federalist countries are the USA, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Australia and the newly emerging Russian Federation. Far from being a ‘dis-integration of the Union’, Federalism brings semi-autonomous states closer together. Before federation, the states of the USA had their own governments and constitutions, and their own currencies – they fought a bitter civil war to resolve some of their differences over creating a ‘Union’, and the individual states still enjoy their own government with ability to collect local taxes and enact local laws. Federal issues are enacted in Washington – all levels of government being elected democratically, as far as is possible. Europe moves towards a larger European Union slowly, many nation member states wishing to retain their traditional constitutions despite the growing impact of legislation emanating from directives agreed upon in Brussels. Federation does not divest central government of power, it shares power in an equitable and enabling manner. Representatives for both State and central government are elected by the same people. The difference between central and State government is that the State government understands and responds to the wishes of a groups that could be marginalised by a dominant group within central government – exactly the situation that ash developed in Burma since 1948.
For Burma, many political groups have been pressing for a Federal structure since 1947. Under the National Reconciliation programme and the members of the Ethnic Nationalities Council, there has been a concerted effort to produce State constitutions for Shan, Chin and other states. These accept the fact of a federal structure in which central government looks after defence, transport, federal judiciary, coinage, post, etc., with finance begin managed equitably; the semi-autonomous states then decide what their State education is, govern all of those aspects of life that impact the well being, culture and livelihood – all of those aspects of government that effect our daily lives; security and foreign policy being largely left to central government.
Why Federalism? Wikipedia states it quite concisely: ‘The Federalist’, published in 1788, dealing with the US constitution, “argued that federalism helps enshrine the principle of due process, limiting arbitrary action by the state. First, federalism can limit government power to infringe rights, since it creates the possibility that a legislature wishing to restrict liberties will lack the constitutional power, while the level of government that possesses the power lacks the desire. Second, the legalistic decision-making processes of federal systems limit the speed with which governments can act.
The argument that federalism helps to secure democracy and human rights has been influenced by the contemporary public choice theory. It has been argued that in smaller political units, individuals can participate more directly than in a monolithic unitary government. Moreover, individuals dissatisfied with conditions in one State have the option of moving to another. Of course, this argument assumes that a freedom of movement between States is necessarily secured by a federal system.”
Does Burma want a constitution that places limits on what either central or State government can implement? Well, from the evidence of the work of Burmese and all ethnic groups both inside and outside Burma over the last 60 years, I say it does. That way, central government cannot act in a way that adversely affects any one State, and the State government is likely to be more responsive to the demands and aspirations of the people of the State, and without having sufficient power to do anything that has a disadvantageous impact on their lives. The only stumbling block, the only force that is against a truly democratic federalist constitution and government, the only group that is against bowing to the will of the people of Burma, the only group that is causing the dis-integration of the Union is Than Shwe and the SPDC.
For Further Information
¨ Federalism as a Solution to the Ethnic Problem in Burma
¨ Burma's Ethnic Problem is Constitutional
¨ The 1961 Shan Federal Proposal
¨ Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC)
.
Your Comments here_ please do not use symbols "(:/\<>!|{]@~#$)"
Request: If you can kindly volunteer to translate BURMA DIGEST English articles into Burmese, please let us know burmadigest@tayzathuria.org.uk .
Last week's English article
