DOCSLIB.ORG

Lessons Learned from MPSI's Work Supporting the Peace Process In

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Lessons Learned from MPSI’s work supporting the peace process in Myanmar March 2012 to March 2014 The Myanmar Peace Support Initiative Yangon, Myanmar March 2014 “... This should be a true ceasefire, and if so we will be pleased. If the ceasefire breaks down, the situation could be worse than before, and meaningless for me to continue to live.” villager from Poe Thaw Su, Kyauk Kyi Village Tract, Eastern Bago. October 2013. ii LIST OF ACRONYMS AHRN Asian Harm Reduction Network ALP Arakan Liberation Party AusAID Australian Agency for International Development CBO Community-based organisation CIDKP Committee for Internally Displaced Karen People CNF Chin National Front CPCS Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies DKBA Democratic Karen Benevolent/Buddhist Army EAG Ethnic Armed Group EBO Euro-Burma Office EPRP Ethnic Peace Resources Project FSPs Fragile State Principles IDPs Internally displaced persons ILO International Labour Organisation INGO International non-governmental organisation JPNA Joint Peacebuilding Needs Assessment KCBNG Karen Community Based Network Group KIO Kachin Independence Organisation KKO Klo-Htoo Baw Organization KNLA Karen National Liberation Army KNPP Karenni National Progressive Party KNU Karen National Union KORD Karen Organisation for Relief and Development MNEC Mon National Education Committee MNLA Mon National Liberation Army MPC Myanmar Peace Centre MPSI Myanmar Peace Support Initiative MWO Mon Women’s Organisation NGO Non-governmental organisation NIS Nordic International Support Foundation NMSP New Mon State Party NPA Norwegian People’s Aid NRC Norwegian Refugee Council PDSG Peace Donor Support Group PNLO Pa-oh National Liberation Organisation RCSS Restoration Council Shan State SSA-S Shan State Army South SSPP Shan State Progressive Party UN United Nations UNFC United Nationalities Federal Council WGEC Working Group for Ethnic Coordination iii Table of Contents Executive Summary – The Myanmar Peace Support Initiative......................................................v Summary Tables: Challenges and Achievements; Projects; Lessons Learned and Reflections ......ix Introduction ................................................................................................................................1 1 Background............................................................................................................................2 1.1 Historical Overview – Peace and Armed Conflict in Myanmar ........................................................................ 2 1.2 The Myanmar Peace Support Initiative...................................................................................................................... 3 2 Lessons and Reflections .........................................................................................................7 2.1 The Range of Challenges Faced...................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Achievements ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Key Areas of Learning..................................................................................................................................................... 14 2.4 Lessons learned from the Ethnic Peace Resources Project ............................................................................ 25 2.5 Reflections on the MPSI Approach ............................................................................................................................ 27 3 Applying the New Deal Framework to the Myanmar Context...............................................28 3.1 Why is the New Deal Framework Relevant to Myanmar?............................................................................... 28 3.2 MPSI Lessons and Recommendations Related to the New Deal................................................................... 29 3.3 MPSI Lessons and Recommendations Derived From the Fragile States Principles............................. 32 Annex 1: Overview of MPSI-supported projects............................................................................i Annex 2: Considerations When Planning and Implementing Projects in Conflict-affected Areas ............................................................................................................................................... xxix Annex 3: Interview responses from MPSI’s listening project .................................................. xxxii Annex 4: Independent Review of MPSI – Executive Summary.................................................. xliii Table of Boxes Box 1: Key stakeholders in the Myanmar peace process..................................................................................3 Box 2: MPSI associated projects key facts.........................................................................................................6 Box 3: CASE STUDY - Observations on direct communications and reconciliation.........................................12 Box 4: MPSI listening project ..........................................................................................................................15 Box 5: Communities' trust in the peace process.............................................................................................17 Box 6: NRC ID card programme.......................................................................................................................18 Box 7: Mon education projects .......................................................................................................................20 Box 8: Building trust through local negotiations of security and access to justice .........................................22 Box 9: Fragile States Principles........................................................................................................................28 Box 10: The ten Fragile State Principles ..........................................................................................................31 Box 11: Overview of Conflict sensitivity / Do No Harm.................................................................................xxix Box 12: Practical tools to help secure accountability in conflict-affected areas...........................................xxxi iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY – THE MYANMAR PEACE SUPPORT INITIATIVE The Myanmar Peace Support Initiative (MPSI) • The MPSI was launched in March 2012, following a request from the Government of Myanmar to the Government of Norway to lead international support to the peace process. MPSI was never intended to be a mediation initiative, but rather designed to come in just behind the political momentum of the peace process, helping to support ceasefire agreements reached by the Government and Ethnic Armed Groups. Enabling this role to be played by an international actor was a first for Myanmar, reflecting the new opportunity for peace between national actors. It was also quite a unique arrangement in comparison to other peace-making processes internationally. • This report brings together research conducted in the last year, including an MPSI ‘Reflections’ report produced in early 2013, an independent review of MPSI undertaken in 2014, and is informed by field trips, discussions with peace process stakeholders, the insights of MPSI staff, meetings and workshops with Government and Ethnic Armed Groups, community meetings and project reporting. The report seeks to reflect on those two years of support, and suggest ways to frame and improve international support to the peace process and aid into conflict-affected areas. • In the last two years MPSI has facilitated projects that built trust and confidence in - and tested - the ceasefires, disseminated lessons learned from these experiences, and sought to strengthen the local and international coordination of assistance to the peace process. In doing so MPSI engaged with the Government, Myanmar Army, Ethnic Armed Groups, political parties, civil society actors and communities, as well as international partners, to provide concrete support to the ceasefires and emerging peace process. • MPSI associated projects have been undertaken across five ethnic States (Chin, Shan, Mon, Karen and Kayah) and two Regions (Bago and Tanintharyi). Projects have been delivered in partnership with seven Ethnic Armed Groups, thirteen local partners (four of which are consortia), and nine international partners. Flexible and responsive funding was received from Norway, Finland, The Netherlands, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, the European Union and Australia. • From the outset, the intention had been for the MPSI to provide temporary support to the emergence and consolidation of peace, in the absence of appropriate, longer-term structures and while more sustainable international peace support responses were mobilised. In line with its stated purpose of being a temporary structure, MPSI aspired for its work to be continued by local actors, national and international Non-governmental organisations and other entities including sector donor funding instruments, such as the Peace Donor Support Group (PDSG). • There have been many contextual, political and structural challenges for MPSI in carrying out its role. These have included tensions in the peace process itself, especially delays in starting necessary political dialogue; managing the expectations
Recommended publications
  • Frontier Capitalism and Politics of Dispossession in Myanmar: the Case of the Mwetaung (Gullu Mual) Nickel Mine in Chin State Einzenberger, Rainer

    Frontier Capitalism and Politics of Dispossession in Myanmar: the Case of the Mwetaung (Gullu Mual) Nickel Mine in Chin State Einzenberger, Rainer

    www.ssoar.info Frontier Capitalism and Politics of Dispossession in Myanmar: the Case of the Mwetaung (Gullu Mual) Nickel Mine in Chin State Einzenberger, Rainer Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Einzenberger, R. (2018). Frontier Capitalism and Politics of Dispossession in Myanmar: the Case of the Mwetaung (Gullu Mual) Nickel Mine in Chin State. ASEAS - Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 11(1), 13-34. https:// doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-2018.1-2 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de Aktuelle Südostasienforschung Current Research on Southeast Asia Frontier Capitalism and Politics of Dispossession in Myanmar: The Case of the Mwetaung (Gullu Mual) Nickel Mine in Chin State Rainer Einzenberger ► Einzenberger, R. (2018). Frontier capitalism and politics of dispossession in Myanmar: The case of the Mwetaung (Gullu Mual) nickel mine in Chin State. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 11(1), 13-34. Since 2010, Myanmar has experienced unprecedented political and economic changes described in the literature as democratic transition or metamorphosis. The aim of this paper is to analyze the strategy of accumulation by dispossession in the frontier areas as a precondition and persistent element of Myanmar’s transition.
  • Militarized Conflicts in Northern Shan State

    Militarized Conflicts in Northern Shan State

    A Return to War: Militarized Conflicts in Northern Shan State ASIA PAPER May 2018 EUROPEAN UNION A Return to War: Militarized Conflicts in Northern Shan State © Institute for Security and Development Policy V. Finnbodavägen 2, Stockholm-Nacka, Sweden www.isdp.eu “A Return to War: Militarized Conflicts in Northern Shan State” is an Asia Paper published by the published by the Institute for Security and Development Policy. The Asia Paper Series is the Occasional Paper series of the Institute’s Asia Program, and addresses topical and timely subjects. The Institute is based in Stockholm, Sweden, and cooperates closely with research centers worldwide. The Institute serves a large and diverse community of analysts, scholars, policy-watchers, business leaders, and journalists. It is at the forefront of research on issues of conflict, security, and development. Through its applied research, publications, research cooperation, public lectures, and seminars, it functions as a focal point for academic, policy, and public discussion. This publication has been produced with funding by the European Union. The content of this publication does not reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in the paper lies entirely with the authors. No third-party textual or artistic material is included in the publication without the copyright holder’s prior consent to further dissemination by other third parties. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. © European Union and ISDP, 2018 Printed in Lithuania ISBN: 978-91-88551-11-5 Cover photo: Patrick Brown patrickbrownphoto.com Distributed in Europe by: Institute for Security and Development Policy Västra Finnbodavägen 2, 131 30 Stockholm-Nacka, Sweden Tel.
  • Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team

    Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team

    Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team Seventeen Ethnic Armed Organizations held a conference in Laiza, the headquarters of KIO/KIA on 30 Oct – 2 Nov 2013. At the end of the conference, ethnic leaders established Nationwide Ceasefire Coordination Team (NCCT) on Nov 2, 2013. The NCCT will represent to member ethnic armed organizations when negotiating with government peace negotiation team, UPWC. NCCT Leader: • Vice-Chairman : Nai Hong Sar, New Mon State Party • Deputy Leader 1 : General Secretary – Padoh Kwe Htoo Win (Karen National Union) • Deputy Leader 2 : Deputy Commander-in-Chief – Maj. Gen. Gun Maw (KIA) Member • Lt. Col. Kyaw Han, Arakan Army • Central Committee Member Ms. Mra Raza Lin, Arakan Liberation Party • General Secretary Twan Zaw, Arakan National Council • Presidium Dr. Lian Sakhong, Chin National Front • Col. Saw Lont Lon, Democratic Karen Benevolent Army • Secretary-2 Shwe Myo Thant, Karenni National Progressive Party • Gen. Dr. Timothy, Foreign Affairs, KNU/KNLA Peace Council • Col. Hkun Okker, Patron, Pa-Oh National Liberation Organization • Central Committee member Sai Ba Tun, Shan State Progress Party • Secretary-General Ta Aik Nyunt, Wa National Organization NCCT member Organizations: 1. Arakan Liberation Party 2. Arakan National Council 3. Arakan Army 4. Chin National Front 5. Democratic Karen Benevolent Army 6. Karenni National Progressive Party 7. Chairman, Karen National Union 8. KNU/KNLA Peace Council 9. Lahu Democratic Union 10. Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army 11. New Mon State Party 12. Pa-Oh National Liberation Organization 13. Palaung State Liberation Front 14. Shan State Progress Party 15. Wa National Organiztion 16. Kachin Independence Organization Note: Representatives of Restoration Council of Shan State attended the ethnic armed organizations conference held in Laiza, the headquarters of KIO.
  • Myanmar's Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement

    Myanmar's Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement

    Myanmar’s Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement BACKGROUNDER - October 20151 1 Photo: Allyson Neville-Morgan/CC SUMMARY examples over the last 25 years were the 1989 agree- The Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement ment with the United Wa State Army (UWSA), (NCA) seeks to achieve a negotiated the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) in settlement between the government of 1994 (albeit which broke down in 2011), and the Myanmar and non-state ethnic armed New Mon State Party (NMSP) in 1995. Upon organizations (EAOs) that paves the way coming to office as president in August 2011, U for peace-building and national dia- Thein Sein initiated an effort to end fighting on logue. Consisting of seven chapters, the a nation-wide scale and invited a large number of “draft” text of the NCA agreed on March EAOs for peace talks, with negotiations initially 31, 2015, stipulates the terms of cease- seeking to secure a series of bilateral accords. Upon fires, their implementation and monitoring, and concluding many of these, the government agreed the roadmap for political dialogue and peace in February 2013 to multilateral negotiations over ahead. As such, the NCA, if signed by all parties, a single-document national ceasefire agreement would represent the first major step in a longer that encompasses the majority of EAOs. Signifi- nationwide peace process. While the government cantly, this was the first time that the government in particular hopes to conclude the NCA before had agreed to negotiate a multilateral ceasefire.2 national elections take place on November 8, de- mands for amendments in the final text, ongoing 2.
  • Yearbook Peace Processes.Pdf

    Yearbook Peace Processes.Pdf

    School for a Culture of Peace 2010 Yearbook of Peace Processes Vicenç Fisas Icaria editorial 1 Publication: Icaria editorial / Escola de Cultura de Pau, UAB Printing: Romanyà Valls, SA Design: Lucas J. Wainer ISBN: Legal registry: This yearbook was written by Vicenç Fisas, Director of the UAB’s School for a Culture of Peace, in conjunction with several members of the School’s research team, including Patricia García, Josep María Royo, Núria Tomás, Jordi Urgell, Ana Villellas and María Villellas. Vicenç Fisas also holds the UNESCO Chair in Peace and Human Rights at the UAB. He holds a doctorate in Peace Studies from the University of Bradford, won the National Human Rights Award in 1988, and is the author of over thirty books on conflicts, disarmament and research into peace. Some of the works published are "Procesos de paz y negociación en conflictos armados” (“Peace Processes and Negotiation in Armed Conflicts”), “La paz es posible” (“Peace is Possible”) and “Cultura de paz y gestión de conflictos” (“Peace Culture and Conflict Management”). 2 CONTENTS Introduction: Definitions and typologies 5 Main Conclusions of the year 7 Peace processes in 2009 9 Main reasons for crises in the year’s negotiations 11 The peace temperature in 2009 12 Conflicts and peace processes in recent years 13 Common phases in negotiation processes 15 Special topic: Peace processes and the Human Development Index 16 Analyses by countries 21 Africa a) South and West Africa Mali (Tuaregs) 23 Niger (MNJ) 27 Nigeria (Niger Delta) 32 b) Horn of Africa Ethiopia-Eritrea 37 Ethiopia (Ogaden and Oromiya) 42 Somalia 46 Sudan (Darfur) 54 c) Great Lakes and Central Africa Burundi (FNL) 62 Chad 67 R.
  • Kayah State Myanmar South East Operation - UNHCR Hpa-An 31 March 2016

    Kayah State Myanmar South East Operation - UNHCR Hpa-An 31 March 2016

    Return Assessments - Kayah State Myanmar South East Operation - UNHCR Hpa-An 31 March 2016 Background information Since June 2013, UNHCR has been piloting a system to assess spontaneous returns in the Southeast of Myanmar, a process that may start in the absence of an organized Voluntary Repatriation operation. Total Assessments 128 A verified return village, therefore, is a village where UNHCR field staff have confirmed there are refugees and/or IDPs who have returned since January 2012 with the intention of remaining Verified Return Villages permanently. During the assessments, communities are also asked whether their village is a refugee 44 village of origin, by definition a village that is home to people residing in a refugee camp in Thailand. A village where UNHCR completes an assessment can be both a verified return village and a refugee Refugee Villages of Origin 94 village of origin, as the two are not mutually exclusive. Using a “do no harm” approach based around community level discussion, the return assessment collect information about the patterns and needs of returnees in the Southeast. The project does not, however, attempt to represent the total number of returnees in a state, or the region as a whole. The returnee monitoring project has been underway in Kayah State, Mon State and Tanintharyi Region since June 2013, and expanded to Kayin State in December 2013. Verified Return Villages by Township ^^ ± Demoso 8 26 ^^^ ^^^^^ Hpasawng 11 ^ ^_^ ^ 5 ^ Loikaw 6 29 ^ ^_ Shadaw 19 ^ ^_ ^ 14 Shan (South) ^ ^_ ^ Bawlakhe 5 ^_Loikaw 2 ^ ^ ^_ Hpruso 7 29 ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_ Shadaw Mese 9 ^ ^_^_ ^ 2 ^^ ^_ ^_Demoso^^ ^_ Assessments Verified Return Villages ^^^ ^_^_ ^ ^ ^_ ^ ^_ ^^_^ ^^^ ^_ No.
  • 7 Publicversion Myanmar Janv2018

    7 Publicversion Myanmar Janv2018

    The Strategy and Tactics of Myanmar COIN Strategy since 2010 note OBSERVATOIRE ASIE DU SUD-EST 2017/2018 OBSERVATOIRE Note d’actualité n°7/8 de l’Observatoire de l’Asie du Sud-Est, cycle 2017-2018 Janvier 2018 Along with the recent democratization, the ongoing peace process has transformed the Counter Insurgency (COIN) strategy and tactics of the Myanmar military (Tatmadaw). Political reforms after 2010 created the new dynamic of civil-military relation, shifting paradigm in the COIN activities. Taking off from the old strategy of four-cut policy, COIN tactics vary, depend ing on the regions. From the conventional tactics with peace process as leverage in Kachin state, use of militia with the four-cut policy is also active in Shan States. Although militias still remain the backbone of the COIN operations, as the result of the Standard Army reform process, their role has soon to change. Maison de la Recherche de l’Inalco 2 rue de Lille 75007 Paris - France Tél. : +33 1 75 43 63 20 Fax. : +33 1 75 43 63 23 ww.centreasia.eu [email protected] siret 484236641.00037 List of the acronyms & abbreviations Introduction 1. Militias – Backbone of the COIN Introduction 2. COIN Operations in the Kachin State Insurgency and independence are two sides of the same Background of the conflict coin. Since 2010, the Myanmar military (Tatmadaw) Tatmadaw’s Tactics in Kachin State has adopted numbers of Counter Insurgency (COIN) Tatmadaw’s types of operations in Kachin strategies and tactics to expand the government State control area and reduce the contested areas controlled Resources by non-state actors: the ethnic and communist insurgents.
  • Burma Coup Watch

    Burma Coup Watch

    This publication is produced in cooperation with Burma Human Rights Network (BHRN), Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Progressive Voice (PV), US Campaign for Burma (USCB), and Women Peace Network (WPN). BN 2021/2031: 1 Mar 2021 BURMA COUP WATCH: URGENT ACTION REQUIRED TO PREVENT DESTABILIZING VIOLENCE A month after its 1 February 2021 coup, the military junta’s escalation of disproportionate violence and terror tactics, backed by deployment of notorious military units to repress peaceful demonstrations, underlines the urgent need for substantive international action to prevent massive, destabilizing violence. The junta’s refusal to receive UN diplomatic and CONTENTS human rights missions indicates a refusal to consider a peaceful resolution to the crisis and 2 Movement calls for action confrontation sparked by the coup. 2 Coup timeline 3 Illegal even under the 2008 In order to avert worse violence and create the Constitution space for dialogue and negotiations, the 4 Information warfare movement in Burma and their allies urge that: 5 Min Aung Hlaing’s promises o International Financial Institutions (IFIs) 6 Nationwide opposition immediately freeze existing loans, recall prior 6 CDM loans and reassess the post-coup situation; 7 CRPH o Foreign states and bodies enact targeted 7 Junta’s violent crackdown sanctions on the military (Tatmadaw), 8 Brutal LIDs deployed Tatmadaw-affiliated companies and partners, 9 Ongoing armed conflict including a global arms embargo; and 10 New laws, amendments threaten human rights o The UN Security Council immediately send a 11 International condemnation delegation to prevent further violence and 12 Economy destabilized ensure the situation is peacefully resolved.
  • Myanmar : Administration and UNHCR Offices (2017)

    Myanmar : Administration and UNHCR Offices (2017)

    Myanmar : Administration and UNHCR Offices (2017) Nawngmun Puta-O Machanbaw Khaunglanhpu Nanyun Sumprabum Lahe Tanai INDIA Tsawlaw Hkamti Kachin Chipwi Injangyang Hpakan Myitkyina Lay Shi Myitkyina CHINA Mogaung Waingmaw Homalin Mohnyin Banmauk Bhamo Paungbyin Bhamo Tamu Indaw Shwegu Momauk Pinlebu Katha Sagaing Mansi Muse Wuntho Konkyan Kawlin Tigyaing Namhkan Tonzang Mawlaik Laukkaing Mabein Kutkai Hopang Tedim Kyunhla Hseni Manton Kunlong Kale Kalewa Kanbalu Mongmit Namtu Taze Mogoke Namhsan Lashio Mongmao Falam Mingin Thabeikkyin Ye-U Khin-U Shan (North) ThantlangHakha Tabayin Hsipaw Namphan ShweboSingu Kyaukme Tangyan Kani Budalin Mongyai Wetlet Nawnghkio Ayadaw Gangaw Madaya Pangsang Chin Yinmabin Monywa Pyinoolwin Salingyi Matman Pale MyinmuNgazunSagaing Kyethi Monghsu Chaung-U Mongyang MYANMAR Myaung Tada-U Mongkhet Tilin Yesagyo Matupi Myaing Sintgaing Kyaukse Mongkaung VIET NAM Mongla Pauk MyingyanNatogyi Myittha Mindat Pakokku Mongping Paletwa Taungtha Shan (South) Laihka Kunhing Kengtung Kanpetlet Nyaung-U Saw Ywangan Lawksawk Mongyawng MahlaingWundwin Buthidaung Mandalay Seikphyu Pindaya Loilen Shan (East) Buthidaung Kyauktaw Chauk Kyaukpadaung MeiktilaThazi Taunggyi Hopong Nansang Monghpyak Maungdaw Kalaw Nyaungshwe Mrauk-U Salin Pyawbwe Maungdaw Mongnai Monghsat Sidoktaya Yamethin Tachileik Minbya Pwintbyu Magway Langkho Mongpan Mongton Natmauk Mawkmai Sittwe Magway Myothit Tatkon Pinlaung Hsihseng Ngape Minbu Taungdwingyi Rakhine Minhla Nay Pyi Taw Sittwe Ann Loikaw Sinbaungwe Pyinma!^na Nay Pyi Taw City Loikaw LAOS Lewe
  • EBO Background Paper NO. 4 / 2015 AUGUST 2015 EBO MYANMAR

    EBO Background Paper NO. 4 / 2015 AUGUST 2015 EBO MYANMAR

    EBO Background Paper NO. 4 / 2015 AUGUST 2015 EBO MYANMAR AUTHOR | Paul Keenan ALL-INCLUSIVENESS IN AN ETHNIC CONTEXT After what had been recognised as successful ostensibly an agreement not to militarily engage talks in July that brought the Nationwide Ceasefire the government’s armed forces. Agreement (NCA) closer to fruition only three While two of the three main points, signatories and points remained to be addressed before a binding witnesses to the agreement, were satisfactorily agreement could be signed. Perhaps crucially the settled at a meeting between the Union Peace- most important for all concerned parties were making Work Committee (UPWC) and Ethnic Armed which groups are to be included in the signing of Organizations-Senior Delegation (SD), from 6 to 7 the NCA. This has become a particularly difficult August 2015, at the Myanmar Peace Centre, the point to address as the Government and the main one, all-inclusiveness, or more correctly who armed ethnic group leaders have differing views gets to sign the ceasefire agreement, continues as to the validity of those groups that can be a part to be unresolved and without compromise could of the process at the initial ceasefire stage. see the peace process delayed until well after There are six groups that are a major concern May 2016, as the 8 November election and the during these talks, each groups has a different installation of a new government is finalised. background, a different goal, and different claims Consequently, there remains little time left for an as to why they deserve to participate in what is agreement to be made.
  • ACLED – Myanmar Conflict Update – Table 1

    ACLED – Myanmar Conflict Update – Table 1

    Actor Name Ideology Status Areas of Operation Affiliations Modus Operandi & Adversaries - Armed wing of ULA: United - Chin State League of Arakan - Battles and Remote violence against Active - Kachin State - Member of FPNCC Myanmar Security Forces Arakan Ethnic combatant; not - Rakhine State (Northern Alliance) - Battles against Bangladeshi Security AA: Arakan Army Nationalism party to 2015 - Shan State - NCCT, , , Forces ceasefire - Myanmar-Bangladesh - Allied with KIA - Battles against ALA Border - Formerly allied with ABSDF (pre-ceasefire) - Myanmar-Thailand ABSDF: All Burma Liberal Party to 2015 Border - Battled against Myanmar Security - Allied with KIA, AA, KNLA Students’ Democratic Front democracy ceasefire - Myanmar-India Border Forces - Myanmar-China Border Active AA: Arakan Army (Kayin): Arakan Ethnic combatant; not - Member of NCCT, ANC - Kayin State - Battles against Myanmar Security Forces Arakan State Army Nationalism party to 2015 - Allied with DKBA-5 ceasefire - Armed wing of the ALP: ALA: Arakan Liberation Arakan Liberation Party - Battled against Myanmar Security Army Arakan Ethnic Party to 2015 - Rakhine State - Member of NCCT, ANC Forces Nationalism ceasefire - Kayin State - Allied with AA: Arakan (Also known as RSLP: Rakhine - Battled against AA State Liberation Party) Army (Kayin), KNLA, SSA-S WWW.ACLEDDATA.COM | Conflict Update – Myanmar – Table 1 Rohingya Ethnic Active ARSA: Arakan Rohingya - Rakhine State Nationalism; combatant; not Salvation Army - Myanmar-Bangladesh UNKNOWN - Battles against Myanmar Security
  • Kayah State Profile Updated: June 20141

    Kayah State Profile Updated: June 20141

    UNHCR SOUTH-EAST MYANMAR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT UNIT KAYAH STATE PROFILE UPDATED: JUNE 20141 State Kayah Flag Previous Name Karenni State Capital Loikaw NumBer of Districts 2 NumBer of Townships 7 Ward and VillaGe 105 Tracts Total population (2012 360,379 Est.) IDPs 34,600 Refugees 11,662 Area 4,510 sq. miles / 11,670 sq. kms North: Shan State East: Mae HonG Son province, Border Thailand West and South: Kayin state o o Latitude 18 30'N and 19 55'N Longitude 94o 40'E and 97o 93'E Map: Myanmar Information Management Unit Kayah, Kayin, Kayan, Kayaw, Bamar, Ethnicities Shan, Pa-O, Background Located in eastern Myanmar, Kayah State is bounded by Shan State to the north, Kayin State to the south and west, and Thailand’s Mae Hon SonG to the East. Previously Known as Karenni State, the territory is inhaBited primarily by the Karenni ethnic Group, also Known as the Red Karen. As a sub-group of the Karen people, the Karenni have maintained a close historical relationship with Kayin State. Low intensity conflict has recurred in Kayah State since the 1947 Constitution established an independent Burma, which included then-Karenni State within the Union of Burma, despite assertions from Karenni representatives that their nation souGht self- determination as independent and sovereiGn. Much of the current displacement from Kayah State dates BacK to the mid-1990s, and the armed clashes before and after the failed 1995 ceasefire Between the Tatmadaw and the Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP). Counter-insurGency strateGies employed to varying deGrees by both sides have historically exacerbated the forced displacement resultinG from direct armed conflict Between the Government and the non-state actors 1 Disclaimer: These state profiles were printed in June 2014, and will be updated periodically by the UNHCR South-East Myanmar Information Management Unit to reflect new developments, additions and corrections.