When Myanmar’s National League for Democracy leads a new government into office in coming months, it will inherit a peace process in which the outgoing government last month signed a cease-fire with eight of the 17 ethnic armed groups that have been part of the country’s 60-plus years of civil warfare. The October cease-fire was a limited advance in peacemaking that may bring greater stability to the Thai border area. But as mediators work to consolidate and broaden that cease-fire accord, they face uncertainties from the political transition—and more fundamentally, from the apparent determination of the national armed forces to fight minority ethnic groups for control of the rich economic resources in the northern state of Kachin.

20151119-MYANMAR_POLITICS_ASSESS_2-TOB.jpg
Photo courtesy of The New York Times/Adam Dean

On October 15, the Myanmar government signed a “Nationwide Cease-Fire Agreement” with eight of the armed groups with which they had been negotiating collectively for some 23 months. Government negotiators hoped to keep the negotiations moving forward during the long post-election transition, so that they could form the starting point in the peace process for the next government.

Facilitators in the peace talks are determined to keep all parties—both signatories and non-signatories—in continuing dialogue as implementation of the cease-fire proceeds, said Ja Nan Lahtaw, a Kachin peace activist who is co-facilitator of the talks. She discussed the signing ceremony and plans for continuation of the peace process in a recent visit to the U.S. Institute of Peace.

"The elections have created a new political reality in Myanmar, not only for the government, but for the peace process itself." ​

Lahtaw pointed out that the progress to date in the peace talks had been historic for the country in two major respects. First, it was the only time the government had approached in earnest a political settlement with ethnic minorities. And second, it was the first time that all the ethnic armed organizations had formed a united front to develop a common position vis a vis the government. It was essential, therefore, to continue building on these achievements and, in particular, not to squander the unity of the ethnic armed organizations.

Several developments since October 15, however, have put that government strategy in question. 

Ethnic Disunity

The first was a meeting on November 1-3 by the non-signatory groups, hosted by leaders of the Wa ethnic minority in their capital, Panghsang. The Wa, who previously had refused to join the collective ceasefire, proposed to create an alternative track for the peace process by forming a new coalition to prepare for meaningful political dialogue with the next government after the elections. In other words, the Wa wanted to take the process directly into political dialogue, circumventing the elusive national cease-fire.

The Wa proposal recognized that the cease-fire accord, as it now stood, could bring peace only to limited areas of the country along the Thai border, because a significant number of the groups that had not signed the agreement were still at war with the state armed forces (known in Myanmar as the Tatmadaw) along the border with China. Furthermore, the groups that had not signed the agreement represented far larger forces than those that had signed.

Military Hesitation

The second issue is the military’s continuing reluctance to commit to a cease-fire with some of the largest ethnic armed groups, most especially the Kachin. Of the non-signatories, the Kachin are key to a sustainable peace agreement. Because Kachin State holds a large concentration of the country’s most valuable natural resources, particularly minerals, forests and hydropower, many observers believe the continuing conflict in this area is largely motivated by a struggle to control these resources.

The Kachin want an equitable arrangement with the government, giving them fair access to their own resources. While the cease-fire accord’s general terms for resource sharing promise eventually to deliver this result, the Tatmadaw appears to be deliberately creating barriers for the Kachin Independence Army to join the agreement. These include the military’s continued pressure and military attacks on Kachin forces to gain control of more territory in Kachin State and its refusal to negotiate with armed Kokang and Palaung groups in the adjacent Shan State, where there is a large Kachin population. Until these groups can be included in the cease-fire accord, it will be impossible to develop effective cease-fire arrangements for Kachin communities in this area.

In a July BBC interview, the Tatmadaw’s commander-in-chief, Min Aung Hlaing, said the military would be willing to reduce its role in the parliament and executive branch when peace had been achieved with the ethnic minorities. However, the Tatmadaw’s continuing assaults on the Kachin and its refusal to include the Kokang and Palaung in the Nationwide Cease-Fire Accord suggest that it is not ready to cede any of its political power or to engage in serious negotiation for sharing economic resources. 

A recent study by Global Witness may provide important clues for understanding the conundrum behind the faltering peace process. Citing government, business, and other sources directly involved, it details the dimensions of the jade industry in Kachin State and the degree to which it underpins the large conglomerates of the country’s military and crony class, which continue to dominate its political and economic structures. Until these groups are prepared to share this and other sources of their wealth equitably with the national and state governments, the road to peace and internal stability will be difficult.           

Elections’ Impact

Finally, the elections have created a new political reality in Myanmar, not only for the government, but for the peace process itself. Even if the outgoing government could move into some form of political dialogue before a new government is seated, the new NLD government—with its huge political mandate—may well choose to reorient the peace process substantially. Depending on negotiations with the army and the armed ethnic groups, for example, the NLD might prefer to bring political and civil society entities from the ethnic minorities into the peace process immediately to produce an inclusive political dialogue. This would place less emphasis on further negotiation of a national cease-fire as the necessary precursor to political dialogue and open the way for the larger ethnic armed groups to join the dialogue.

It becomes more and more unlikely therefore that the peace process will progress much beyond its current stage before an NLD government takes office.

Priscilla Clapp is a senior advisor to the U.S. Institute of Peace. She served as chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Myanmar in 1999-2002.

Related Publications

Southeast Asian Nations Convene amid Myanmar Crisis, South China Sea Tensions

Southeast Asian Nations Convene amid Myanmar Crisis, South China Sea Tensions

Thursday, October 10, 2024

Leaders from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are in Vientiane, Laos this week for the bloc’s annual summit and the concurrent East Asia Summit, which brings ASEAN together with other important regional players like the U.S., Japan, South Korea, Russia and China. Typically, the East Asia Summit is not a venue for major policy discussions, but the gathering offers opportunities for a bevy of side meetings between various countries. At both summits, Southeast Asian leaders will lament progress on Myanmar and the South China Sea — where China’s maritime claims and aggressive actions lead to tensions with regional countries — and the state of the world in general.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

The Myanmar Military’s Institutional Resilience

The Myanmar Military’s Institutional Resilience

Wednesday, October 2, 2024

The Myanmar military has endured historic losses over the past three years, leaving it in the weakest state in its history. While there are few paths to recovery — and mounting challenges to its stranglehold on power — the military has managed to stay afloat so far in the face of an expanding revolution against its rule. What are the factors threatening its viability? And what is holding it together? While there is no single explanation, a critical factor is its culture of internal loyalty cultivated over decades of military rule.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Myanmar Scam Hubs Revive Fast After China Eases Pressure on Junta

Myanmar Scam Hubs Revive Fast After China Eases Pressure on Junta

Thursday, September 26, 2024

Transnational crime groups in Southeast Asia, hit with intense scrutiny and law enforcement action earlier this year, are moving into new areas and adapting their operations as they revive and expand global scam operations. In Myanmar — a key center of this internet-based criminal activity — extreme political instability combined with the connivance of the country’s military and its militias continue to provide fertile ground for crime groups, albeit in new configurations. At the same time, a sudden shift in China’s posture toward Myanmar’s military regime has eased pressure on the scam industry, allowing criminal networks to further scale up their malign activities.

Type: Analysis

EconomicsGlobal PolicyHuman Rights

Out of the Spotlight, Myanmar’s Rohingya Face Worst Violence in 7 Years

Out of the Spotlight, Myanmar’s Rohingya Face Worst Violence in 7 Years

Wednesday, September 25, 2024

Since early 2024, fighting in northern Rakhine state has led to the worst attacks on the Rohingya population since 2017, when Myanmar’s military drove more than 750,000 across the border into Bangladesh. The new attacks are a stark reminder of the Rohingyas’ vulnerability. The world has known about their plight for decades, and in 2024, only 636,000 Rohingya — or 23 percent of the 2.8 million Rohingya around the world — still live in their homeland, Myanmar.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & PreventionGlobal PolicyHuman Rights

View All Publications