The Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD), one of Myanmar’s oldest and strongest political parties, was notably absent on October 9 when the country’s coup regime made a bid to restart a peace process that has been put on hold since it seized power in February. As one of 40 parties invited to a meeting organized by the junta’s National Solidarity and Peace Negotiation Committee, the SNLD opted—along with 22 others—not to attend.
A day after the meeting, however, the party’s general secretary, Sai Leik, sat down with Myanmar Now to discuss the peace process and a number of other subjects related to the regime’s efforts to reshape Myanmar’s politics.
Myanmar Now: Why didn’t the SNLD take part in the military council’s meeting on the peace process?
Sai Leik: They did invite us. However, it was not as part of the “peace process executive team,” but under the “political parties” category. We held an internal party meeting and came to the decision that we weren’t ready to attend.
MN: What do you think of the military’s decision to hold a meeting on the peace process under the current circumstances?
SL: As I’ve said before, the country is in a very unstable state these days. This isn’t the time [to restart] the peace process.
This meeting organized by the military council was not as inclusive as previous peace talks. In my opinion, it is very unlikely they will be able to come up with a viable plan to achieve “peace” with everything that is going on right now.
MN: The regime is also keen to implement changes to the electoral system, including a shift to proportional representation (PR). What is your position on this?
SL: The first thing I would like to say is that, even though it is technically true that the [junta’s] election committee has authority over the electoral system, it was not chosen by the people, and therefore any path it lays out will not be in accordance with the will of the people. It’s debatable whether they are in a position to hold another election. And if they do, you have to wonder if anyone will be willing to take part in it.
We need to consider why they want to use the PR system. If it is to make elections more inclusive, so that every party has a chance to get a seat in parliament, and not just those that win more than half the votes for each seat, then we can accept it.
On the other hand, if it allows any party that contests in Shan State to claim seats in the state based on their total share of votes [nationwide], that would cost our state in terms of representation. And that would also be true for other states.
It would be okay, however, if only votes by people living in Shan State are used to decide how many seats the parties get in the state. Otherwise, if they base it on the nationwide vote count, ethnic Bamar people will get the majority and they will continue to dominate parliament.
MN: What impact do you think the PR system would have on the country and on voters?
SL: They can fiddle around with the electoral system as much as they like, it won’t make any difference unless they fix the 2008 Constitution, which reserves 25% of seats for one institution [the military]. Only parties on good terms with that institution will be able to form a government, which means that we will never be able to achieve the federal democratic union that the entire population has been asking for. Because there is no chance that this system will ensure equal and just elections, the people are going to continue to suffer.
MN: Why do you think the military council wants to adopt the PR system?
SL: The shortest answer would be that the military simply doesn’t want to give up its place in the country’s politics.
MN: There has been some criticism of SNLD representatives who are not taking part in the Spring Revolution against the dictatorship. Has the party restricted elected representatives from taking part in the revolution?
SL: No, we haven’t. We have already stated officially that we regard our elected MPs as the people’s elected representatives. As such, they have the right to act in accordance with the wishes of the people. In other words, they are free to carry out any action that would give the people what they want.
Whether or not they take part in the revolution would depend a lot on how we define the revolution itself, in my opinion. There’s armed revolution and then there are other ways of revolution that do not involve armed resistance.
I think the problem we are facing today stems a lot from the attitudes and mindsets that we failed to change in the past 20 years. We used to think that anyone that did not support the [National League for Democracy] was a [Union Solidarity and Development Party]/military supporter. I think some still think the same way.
If we continue to decide whether or not a person is taking part in the revolution by just checking if they are taking up arms, we can never achieve the true meaning of the revolution. Those of us in the hilly regions of the country were taking part in the revolution long before the people from the lowlands even started thinking about it.
Therefore, I am sure that every one of us is taking part in the revolution in one way or another. We can’t just regard everyone who does not share our own points of view as our enemy. It depends on the person who’s making the judgement, and not on the one who’s being judged.
MN: Have the SNLD’s representatives signed the junta’s pledge not to associate with the Committee Representing the People’s Hluttaw (CRPH), the National Unity Government (NUG), or the People’s Defence Force (PDF)?
SL: They asked us to sign that agreement, but very few of us did. The majority of us didn’t. The military council itself has invalidated the results of the election, so there’s no sense asking MPs to not associate with the NUG, the CRPH, or the PDF. According to the regime, they’re not even MPs anymore. It’s very inconsistent of them, I must say.
MN: The SNLD won the second-largest number of seats in the 1990 elections, but the results were never recognized by the regime that held power. We have now returned to the same situation. As the leader of a political party, what would you like to say about this?
SL: There’s a lot more political awareness among the people of Myanmar now. In the past, the Bamar majority used to think of federalism as some sort of a bogeyman, but now, the majority of those calling for federalism on the front lines are Burmese.
The military is not going to get anyone’s support just by implementing a puppet democracy system. If that’s what they are still thinking of doing, their minds are trapped in the past.
We can’t say when the next election will be, but if all it delivers is a puppet democracy, there’s no doubt that it will be a failure.
While the next election is still far away, we can safely speculate that it will only be accepted by the people if it is fair and just for all political parties, based on the principles of equality.
This interview is edited for clarity and brevity.
