 I just spooked by the all the stuff that says All right good afternoon folks and welcome to this event on Myanmar's military and the 2015 elections We need to start on time because it's very important that we finish on time so you can get away without getting stuck in In traffic the last thing that Carnegie wants is To have 60 people bedding down here for the night I'm Vikram Nehru. I'm a Senior associate and chair in Southeast Asian Studies here at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and I'll be a moderator this afternoon This event is for many of you know is part of the Myanmar votes 2015 project that Carnegie is running and Which is co-sponsored by the Southeast Asia Studies program at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies As well as the Asia Society Policy Institute and we are very grateful for their co-sponsorship, and we're also grateful for The support of the Japan Export Trade Organization which supports the the series Now may I recommend that you visit Carnegie's special website on the Myanmar votes project. There are lots of articles including incidentally one on the military and its role in the democratic transition and I in if you're interested you can also follow my tweets in fact there was one today on Not just today's topic, but also on a recent Statement by Aung San Suu Kyi, which I'm sure will come up in the course of the discussion. So I won't elaborate on it anymore Now I about two months ago we had a session on in the same series Which had an all-woman panel in fact Kelly Curry was on that panel. She's just arrived and She made a point of that. So today I thought we'd give the men a chance So now today we have an old male panel but an outstanding one and Let me introduce them very quickly. We have Professor Weiss who's practitioner in residence and senior associate director of the Asian and Southeast Asian Studies At size and he's a retired Air Force Colonel and as a member of the Myanmar US retired officers military-to-military dialogue We also have Rena Renault Egretto Who's a visiting fellow at the Wilson Center's Asia program and he's a research associate with the Center for International Research in Paris As well as a visiting fellow the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore and we have Uwin Min Who is a visiting senior research fellow the Myanmar Development Resources Institute? Center for economic and social development and a senior research associate the Wahoo Development Institute and a journalist for the voice of America And what we're going to do is I'm going to ask Professor Weiss to start off first and the other two as well We'll follow with Renault. We'll follow with Ubin Min and then Renault. I Have asked them to give some initial remarks of their thoughts on the topic I'll ask them a few questions after they finish and then we'll open it up To all of you for a Q&A session and hopefully we'll finish well before or on 330 Professor Weiss thank you. Thank you, Vikram I think it would be inappropriate for me to thank the sponsors for this or this event since I am one of them But but I can thank you all very much for joining us today It's it is a great delight to see so much interest in this Sometimes thought to be arcane subject Considering the amount of time that's devoted to the military to the Myanmar military in recent years It's surprising that we know remarkably little about this very important institution We know that it's an army-dominated force of about 400,000 persons Its focus is almost exclusively on internal security. It's a light infantry force Engaged primarily in counter-insurgency operations with its very small Air Force and Navy It it has no capability to project military force beyond its borders. In fact, even defending its borders is a challenge As a result of the arms embargo of many years standing the Myanmar armed forces rely heavily on Russia China and to some extent India for military equipment in any case our knowledge of the end Myanmar military is superficial at best Typically the US learns about The armed forces of friendly countries by establishing regular military to military relations These relationships are usually comprised of things like high-level senior officer meetings Combined exercises Expert exchanges foreign military sales and military education and training Arrangements and so forth. We've elected not to do any of this with the Myanmar armed forces in Some circumstances we deploy our intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance resources to Collect information about foreign military But those resources are not only scarce and expensive, but they are now stretched beyond What most of us could comprehend? They also are focused on circumstances where foreign military pose threats To our to the United States to our friends or to our allies in the case of Myanmar. It is none of the above So we don't really know very much about the Myanmar armed forces their leadership how they're organized trained and equipped What their capabilities plans and intentions are? We just don't know very much Some argue we could or should know more That is for another forum What little we do know about the Tatmadao comes from observing the Myanmar armed forces in its non-military role in politics But I say that as an American Is politics really a non-military role for the Tatmadao? I think the answer is not at all From its beginnings the military has played an instrumental role in in Myanmar politics The Tatmadao traces its lineage to the 1930s and claims a central role in the struggle for national independence Since then it has been at the fulcrum of political development in Myanmar with the key objectives of preserving the Union and Of course its own institutional autonomy The thinking behind the three national causes which date from the Neh-Win era non-disintegration of the Union Non-disintegration of national solidarity and perpetuation of national sovereignty Undergird the connection between the Tatmadao and the survival of the state This relationship between Soldier and state is also the basis of the strong corporate identity and the deep social bonds that make the Tatmadao such a powerful and cohesive Organization and supports its own perception of its essentiality Our question today, however, is what the role of the military is in the current election? What is happening now? I Suspect to no one's surprise all sides including the armed forces are positioning for the November 8th vote and for the days beyond Their goals to ensure that their parties are ready to deliver their expected votes and To the extent that it's possible that their opponents are not To reassure supporters opponents and foreign observers that they want a fair and free election and will abide by the results And to prepare for the crucial period after the election when the infighting and horse trading is likely to become intense The campaign as we all know has begun in earnest and politics has broken out in many places some expected and some not This summer we witnessed a power struggle within the US DP that was resolved in favor of President Thane Sain and the armed forces leaders With Shwayman ousted from party leadership though able to retain his parliamentary position The US DP is preparing to campaign as the party that set Myanmar on its democratic course Taking credit for the political and economic reforms put in place since 2011 Naturally, this does not sit well with some of the opposition parties who have literally bled on behalf of Democratic change Nor has the US DP's Supporters suggestions that future reforms can only take place when the security situation in Myanmar improves This recurring theme also is off-putting to many other parties in July again last month and a few days ago the commander-in-chief whom I refer to Out of military habit as the sink Of the armed forces repeated his promise to change the constitutional requirement that 25% of the seats in parliament be reserved for military officers in fact military officers that he appoints It will change accordingly. He said in August when peace stability and tranquility prevail in the country My talks with retired senior officers suggest that this means when a successful nationwide ceasefire is in place and a political resolution of the ethnic minorities and certainties has occurred a Set of events that they surmise Might take as much as five years The sink has also claimed on several occasions that the main concern of the Tatmadaw is for the election to be free and fair With the outcome respected by the people even if the NLD wins a majority He said in August we will approve and support the results announced by the Union election board He reiterated a few days ago was promised that the military would not intervene to change the election results some have given thought to the idea that the Current negotiations for a nationwide ceasefire with the ethnic armed organizations Might be might play to the advantage of the military in the election, but there's another Set of thinking that sees an opposite outcome So I from where I sit and what little I have confessed that I know about the thinking the internal thinking of the armed forces I'm not sure how the military judges the political impact with a likely political impact of a nationwide ceasefire agreement For her part on sound sushi remains reluctant to raise the anxiety level of the military Any higher than it already is The NLD released a lengthy campaign manifesto last week that did little to clarify exactly what her party would do If it wins the parliamentary election, but she did hold out an olive branch to the armed forces Calling the Tatmadaw an essential institution and indicating the Quote shall be dignified forces that shall defend the democratic practices this according to Reuters I have not read the manifesto myself Again Reuters says the manifesto also pledged to make the military strategically efficient I'm not entirely sure what that means Equip it with advanced technology. I do understand that and included in the executive system, which is a ambiguous formulation that is quite interesting to ponder Campanning this weekend Aung San Suu Kyi said we want to wipe out suspicion between the NLD and the military To collaborate with mutual respect for issues of union and democracy as I said earlier, we are all positioning ourselves to be in a circumstance to reduce the anxiety of others about what might happen were fortunate to smile on us and we were Electorally successful So in some in my view neither the Tatmadaw nor the NLD is showing its hand yet We don't know enough about the armed forces to make other than intuitive judgments about their post-election behavior Reading current promises with a caution based on our observation of past practice Aung San Suu Kyi on the other hand seems to be focused on calming the military about the ramifications of an NLD victory At the same time such a victory is unlikely to dislodge the military from its influential position in the political system And thus reduce civil military tensions So there's much more politics to come Thank you Min Min Thank you for organizing this and also having me to speak here So I'll talk about three Issues one is how the military see the current situation before the elections and what were the military do during the election and What will the military do after the elections? so first how To the military does the military see the current situation So for the military like, you know other militaries which initiated the transition from military rule to democracy The bum is no more military also feared that They initiated this transition so that they need to manage it in a way it is stable in their You know security concerns and the military chief general may not lie Just said that last Saturday at one of their military, you know donation ceremony about that In terms of the stability the way the new moment we see is that the transition should go step-by-step Gradually, which means at its own pace Not rushing at all or not going quickly that They believe can create instability In terms of the elections general may or may already repeatedly stated that he will encourage free and fair elections And he will recognize the election result, but he added one thing He also want to see the president who understands the military that means a president Who were not challenged? the military special powers military prerogatives in the constitution until a comprehensive peace is reached in Yama that is main security concern for them in my military To be in politics Like other militaries, you know, which also intervening in politics So in this sense the military father the house speaker who she man went too quickly and too far in moving the US DP the government party which was set up by the military away from the military interest so The military was very uncomfortable with that from the very beginning And the military also believes that we should man check fully Made an alliance with our sense of chi for his personal interest to become The next president. I thought he was here speaking about his presidential ambition as well at the time and the thing is that senior generals in the military They did not they do not trust general shuman after all after they seen the two events that they said one of the seniors Who they said well, it was general shuman who criticized president thing saying for his first meeting with our sense of chi The reason was The preconditions were not met That preconditions were set by general thanshui One of them is to live the sanction before talking that talking to our sense of chi but later after our sense of chi joined the parliament general shuman sided with her and instead of challenging Presidents and the military's interest so you will remember that in 2003 the parliament Actually general shuman let a motion to fire their constitutional tribunal judges so the reason was The the constitutional judges in a rule that Parliament could not insist the minister to come and testify at the parliament because they are not at the same level Parliamentary companies are not at the same level as The government and the ministers so Our sense of chi also supported this move in order to reduce the Judges power and also increase the parliamentary power, but for the military it is Interference of their parliamentary in the judicial system that is making Unbalanced power distribution between the two branches Even though the military see themselves, you know, one of the branches as well Normally military, you know, like other militaries and in transition They see themselves like In a full branch of the government They try to stay away from that Then the military, you know initiated a recall bill that you remember But the bill was not moved at all because general shuman knew that he had to block that But if that bill had, you know being passed It could have been used to and see to general shuman from that very beginning. Anyway after that just, you know last year in july House speaker who shuman also Along the constitutional amendment that could reduce the Military prerogatives power to be debated and voted in the lower house The military leadership was very angry and this they raised that Recall me again So why the military see general shuman in this Move as a betrayal to the military Because there was a belief among the top generals that there was an internal pact among top five general and a general Denshi before 2011 So the pet was that they will not change amend the constitution at least for the first time and once general shuman once a shuman house speaker tried to amend the constitution they see that general shuman broke this promise and Plus, you know when transfer was power from military government to the Uttensin government General Denshi also wished that The usdp the government party will run the country for the next five decades together with the military and The military finally felt that this dream was just trying to find general shuman By dividing a party and the military so that was their end of General shuman influence in the parliament what I'm saying. I'm not saying the military is right, but well how the military see The you know, they are managed a transition and they don't want anyone who are you know in their way to maintain their military interest Of course, you know Ushuman aware of that that he could be removed, you know By the military from his position as a usdp chairman So he also tried to limit the influence of the military in the usdp So what he did was he blocked Many members of the in the military being transferred to the usdp party And also he blocked powerful minister like president of his minister. We saw the in a woman Not to come back to the usdp by limiting their constituency. So that made Not just the military, but also the executive president would they say Angry against him and they joined together to patch him So after the party will see that, you know senior minister who were just retired And Senior military officers, they are like general left on the general level just retired You know took powerful position in the usdp central executive committee So that's a clear sign that military, you know ranked in the usdp leadership So in the beginning the military ambition, you know, did not stop there. They continued to watch Ushuman from the Parliament actually they retried the Recall began But the problem was that as you know military style leadership They kind of command the usdp MPs that usdp MPs don't like Ushuman change, you know, it's kind of like basuit the MPs So these military MPs who are already, you know Impressed with general shuman they cited many of the cited with general shuman even the military interpressure them So that when the bill was voted at the parliament Ushuman won actually so the recall bill was postponed Then the military realized that how much support general shuman still have in the party and then you know, they should change their way to Convincing the basuit in the MPs. So they tried to start a you know saying nicely and Helping them. Okay, we can help, you know, you for your campaign anything you will need and also they turned on the criticism against general shuman One of the senior leaders said well general shuman will continue to loyal for the party So they were worried about the division in the usdp that can you know Lose more votes in the election Nevertheless the military appears to feed the current president retired general who thinks saying so far understands the military interest Much better than any other people and also he can't get like international legitimacy and maintain the stability and peace process so in a way that The military, you know favorite is until today is the current president So what will the military do during the elections? well With 25% of the military seat. They just need only 26% For the USdp to win in elections then they will be the majority they can find they can you know, select the president and They can form the government even for the 26% According to the internal resources, they are even aiming for the USdp to win only 15% Once they win 15% they can also organize other ethnic parties and also political parties like farmers party and DF which is you know against the analogy and Also individual candidates that are sensitive just said don't vote for them. Yeah, so they Have a plan to have this 26% I'm not sure that plan will work or not, but that's the way that they are trying to influence to win 26% for the USdp and especially for you know, they moved actually they wanted to move According to the sources at the USdp party like 1,000 Personals from the military by Ushima insisted that and they in a negotiated down to like 168 round that and then down to finally About like 60 67 or something one-third of the finalist So they wanted to make sure that these people will win by making sure that you know, these people will run in the military dominator area also like border area where they are Very few numbers of people that they consent the military troops troops, you know to turn around there to do Turn around the result, you know for the Favour of the military so plus, you know the election commission is also Not sure what they are, you know Voting list and that commission chairman just to admit that that he can guarantee only 30% Correctness in the voting list that means 70% is not right. I'm not sure Yeah, so there can be a lot of you know a letter of fraud in favor of the military and the USdp and Junior election commission chairman, he tried to you know To his best actually to make free and fair elections and inviting all the International observers and you know are convincing the people that there will be no advanced votes and he said for Imaginary for the military and you know people who are ill and see they'll be taken, you know, like monitoring process So it was very convincing for me, but still, you know, the military may tell him Well, these are the you know area that security is not good then You know, it would be a the chairman of the election commission may have difficult time to resist that Not to hold election in a certain place that military thinks they may not win Okay, so the last thing is that military will also continue to Keep lines or along the Buddhist nationalist movement Mabbata to continue to call, you know against our voting outside city and the NLD that means that They were of usdp body will have more chance to win elections. Okay, so the last question What were the military military do after the elections? So I think it has been very clear the main thing is do it to Influence the election process in a way that they can select the president Doesn't matter. They win a majority. They believe that they may not win the majority this time Our society popularity is so huge in the country that she will win a majority But because of that 26 25 percent military seats they understood they just need 26 percent to win and If you know, they are usdp party win together with the you know other parties the 26 percent then they will choose the president but Even if they don't win that 26 percent They can stay Select the military presidential candidate a point and then that military Presidential candidate, you know, what we one of the three presidential candidates, you know to Run for the presidency then the military can stay influence Certain parties in a certain individual candidates and you know, including ethnic parties by preferring them, you know buying private them by putting them, you know in the government to Choose the military presidential candidate to become the president Okay, so if Finally, they cannot do anything They will still negotiate with the opposition party on Sun Suu Kyi not to Challenge the military interest and to share power if possible. That means there will be kind of like Coalition government If not, they may still allow the energy to run the elections or to do run the government But they may not obey all the president new residents are order. So for example, you know, they may, you know go and check ethnic areas to create instability and They will influence, you know policies, you know through the National Defense and Security Council where they have a dominant position so Some people are worried about a coup but so far general mail and said Just yesterday he met just two days ago that he met press People and he said he will not stage a coup and he will Recognize election result. So I don't feel that there will be a coup right after the election They will wait and see but I won't rule out that they missed a coup when the time comes that That they are also explaining that well, you know Okay, after Satine time then people may, you know lose their hope, you know From our society even though she promised she cannot deliver Then they will think this that will be the good time They can create more stability and they can stage a coup like in Thailand, but general mail has been going to Thailand for many times Yeah, they're all we're gonna amend the constitution and wait for the elections And so he will wait and then for such a time that you know, he can Intervene so to conclude everything of course the military will influence the entire Election process from the beginning to the end in a way to be able to select the president That they want that means to make sure the next government Will not challenge the military projectives But you know we're closely tied to the military and continue to maintain their military interest and military Special powers military projectives in a constitution until a comprehensive piece is reached that is their main Consent which is a civil war that they normally You know Get the reason that these are the main reason for them. Thank you. Thanks a lot to women Renaud thank you the crime. Thank you again for the invitation. So it's a it's a pleasure to be here Good afternoon everyone. I'd like to Continue this broad introduction With a focus on the role of the military in the parliament We're all talking about the upcoming elections, but there are MPs in Myanmar Legislative legislative bodies at the union level as was it as the provincial level that are not elected And that will not be running for office this coming November So I would like to focus on on this particular group of parliamentarians and these particular Aspects of military intervention into policymaking that the the time at all the Burmese army has been increasingly focusing on so as you know the the constitution the 2008 constitutions the laws for the appointment of military delegates in In in parliament at the union level so in both houses of the Pidong Sulu to the union parliament The constitution says not more than 110 MPs military MPs So it's not exactly 25% that the the constitution Stipulates so 110 MPs in the lower house and 56 MPs in the upper house as well as 222 MPs in the 14 state and region Lutos parliaments Unlike their civilian colleagues, so these MPs are can be removed and can be substituted by the the commander-in-chief The elected MPs are elected so for a five-year terms, but not use military MPs We have seen over the past a few sessions a lot of whose MPs being replaced and removed and sent back to their former military units military MPs Usually not always but usually sit together in in certain in assemblies in one of the four Blocks of chairs in in those assemblies so that's really provides because they of course they all sit in uniforms So that really provides a visual expression of the presence of the military of the army inside a state institution All debates are broadcast also And so that really adds to the So these visual expressions so in my latest research have been looking at what these military MPs have been doing in parliaments Especially at the union level which to which I was granted quite regular access. How do they behave? What do they do there? What is their role? Do they perform those basic legislative functions as other civilian elected MPs do? Who are they also? What what is their profile do is their specific profile for those military MPs and Would there be incoming legislatures a pattern of recruitment of these of these MPs? and These to understand more broadly how the military comes true its presence and role in the legislative and lawmaking Institution which is quite an unusual arrangement There are only a few other example of authoritarian or military regimes Arranging for those military representation in parliaments China for instance an example Indonesia before 2004 Thailand also on a regular basis and a few African countries as well But it's relatively rare to see active duty officers sitting in parliament and acting as lawmakers So these military MPs Mostly are assigned three main functions in the current parliament in the union level parliament first and foremost would commit co women Mention that this a bit is the protection of the Constitution This is one specific article of the Constitution and definitely the military MPs are there in the two chambers to Protect to save God as it is written in the Constitution in the spirit The letter of the 2008 Constitution and they we saw that last June. They are ready To use that that veto power whenever needed second is as also co women mentioned is The Selection of one of the three presidential nominee which is really important and we will see that Later on early next year in January in February when the position of The two-speaker ship as well as the three presidential coming that will be Selected and and the the politicking will be really starting and Third function and this is really interesting. This is where we see that Now the Burmese military really seems to be willing and even ready to engage in more subtle in more sophisticated intervention into policymaking into into politics basically and Basically, the army wants to be involved in legislative debates in in lawmaking And There I would differ a bit with co women, but I think that the the military MPs and the army in parliament rather wants to position itself and and that really pops up in every public speeches and public statements or interviews babies with his senior army officers, but the army really wants to position itself as a referee within parliament and not really as an acting active, sorry lawmaking force The army wants to be there in parliament just to check what is going on what is debated But not to produce new legislations to be an active lawmaker Lawmaking is not the core function that the military is assigned to in inside the parliament, especially at the union level parliaments We should remember that the Constitutions has shaped a presidential system. So most Well, the draft draft of bills is Mostly left to the executive to the government ministries Including the three ministries that are left to the authority of the army So the defense ministry the home affairs ministry and Border affairs ministry So when the army wants to pass a law and want to produce a new legislation related to its own interest It first go through those ministries, but not through the military MPs I'm still working on it, but I would assume that between 80 and 90 percent of the new legislations have been passed over the past four years In in Myanmar by the parliaments were first initiated by the government not by the MPs whether elected MPs or military MPs so When you look at the what? Kind of bill the the military MPs have drafted only a few have been actually a few MPs military MPs have been active In the matter, but it was only on matters related to the Myanmar language the use of Myanmar language in local media or Grammar issue, but not definitely not on political issues and even security issues This is really left to the government and the army ministers Within the government. So clearly those military those 25 percent Military MPs have not been high-flying a hyperactive MPs inside the the parliaments contrary to many of their civilian elected colleagues including retired military officers From the US DP But they have rather acted as what we commonly call a backbencher well-profiled backbenches and they might not go beyond that backbencher role in upcoming legislatures unless and This is quite important quite likely these new legislatures become highly fragmented and volatile and I just need to go back to the 1950s to see that this is a strong possibility and unless unless a significant block of MPs elected MPs on the government the forthcoming government after 2015 after 2020 and beyond Start to as Corwin mean said openly and regularly and strongly challenge the the position of the military Preserves of the military inside the parliament and beyond the parliament then the military MPs May start to intervene more directly in parliament and to become more active and to Produce on their own new legislations to counter legislation proposed by Elected MPs or by government that will be more openly hostile to to the the military's Agenda and we all know that this is quite likely after 2015 and beyond and so that that that would indicate that We will certainly continue to to see many new uniform in in the parliament in upcoming legislatures For a for a quite number of years, but I guess that now we can discuss this further on Well, thank you very much and thanks to all three of you for your initial initial remarks actually I want to come back to you Renault just apropos your last Your last statements First of all, you focus a lot on the 25% military presence those in uniform but how many Members of parliament are there who are ex-military in the USDP is that also a very large proportion? Would you do you have any specific numbers from your research? Indeed, and it's it's quite interesting to see that Currently in both chambers of the national parliament of the union parliament Less than 10% of the elected MPs over 75% are have a military background broadly speaking From the army the navy the Air Force can include also the police as well, but it's only where it's less than 60 MPs union level MPs that boost a military background that come from the army Which is relatively few? You find far more retired military officers in the government More than half of the current government is made of retired military officers. You find far more retired army officers in the administration as well but not in the parliament one of the reason also is Many retired army officers were elected in 2010, but many were transferred to the government Were appointed as ministers chief ministers also in one of the 14 Regional governments or the union election Commission, for instance routine a the chair was elected in 2010 But was soon after transferred as the chairman appointed as the chairman of the election Commission, so that Compared to the morning after the 2010 election. They are less MPs elected MPs with a military background, but nonetheless, it's quite interesting to see that you don't find a big contingent of ex-army officers that said most of those retire generals and common laws have managed to secure Most position of authority within the legislatures Speakers both speakers are ex-military people Most of the committee parliamentary committee chairs are ex-military people the secretary also of these chairs the the chair man because it's only man not chair who is not a retired woman officers, but are also president of commission within the parliament so Despite this low number. They have been managed They're in very powerful positions to secure quite a lot of high-profile positions and we can expect this to be observed also after great I have a question for you women about about About the retired military officers who are not in parliament and not in government You know this the country is sort of a shadow, which is lurks in the background How powerful are they? How many are they? How unified are they because is is the military really a unified block? Or are there different interests which may be competing one against the other are there perhaps? different regional interests that Tend to that could potentially sort of break up the unity within the military. Do you have any information about that? It has been very clear, you know, the military is not unique, you know Unified you can see that, you know along the way many top leaders were pushed including, you know troops and below them for example the recent one you can see General Kenyon, the whole military intelligence was sacked before that you know General Tengu, the whole military intelligence was sacked and after what you can also see that Vice president Tianming Wu who was also powerful military general was also sacked that helped Wu things saying to move quickly with this transition And lately we could see General Sriman So they have I mean different attitude toward the transition in terms of the pace of the transition How quickly and how far Even today There are ministers who want to you know go with the you know peace process very quickly But the military is they want to go in a slow pace So you can see that differences, but Always that you know they are Entirely there's a king, but in Myanmar We have like either like Wu Niuwen or Wu Danshui You know who stay behind, but they have a lot of influence to make sure you know they are kind of Working together even though they are not united. So for example right now General Sriman was botched, right, but he did not really rebel against you know And he also you know try to stop bigger split in the USDP. So I think that is a Influence from Terrapin Shea. So he still has Had an influence, but he would not say you know like exactly you do what and you know But you will say oh just you know maintain a unity in mind yourself, and you know make sure the USDP You know will continue to go down well in the history. So that's kind of thing But people interpret it in their own way to do their activities. But why didn't General Sriman's Purge Follow the playbook of previous purges in other words, you know He he was removed from the chairmanship of the USDP, but he stayed in Parliament He remained Speaker of the House He was there then to battle this bill that came to Parliament and he won Why were why didn't the Military remove him altogether from the scene what stopped them from doing that. Oh they wanted to they tried after what? But they could not they realized that there were you know MPs even USDP MPs supporting from Sriman site Actually, these Generals, you know currently retired ideally general lieutenant general right so they are so powerful when we have this kind of level and they you know kind of order Yeah, but the MPs do not listen to them and they vote against their recovery. So they realized they can't do it Yeah So that they stopped there Plus, you know, there are certain people in the government who also see that if they go too far It will be going against the Constitution That you know like one of the It's getting out of the party politics in China party politics. That's fine International may not recover no criticism, but it should go, you know beyond that, you know that Violates the Constitution then They are worried that I mean itself is has been you know cherishing the Constitution right maintaining is our main duty so that they don't want to go Beyond that Bill do you want to comment on that or I was simply going to add that when you look at the Myanmar military in answering that question you have to recognize there is a Political answer that encompasses relationships among the elite or the upper echelons of military leadership around specific interests or issues and there is the broader sociological phenomenon of Internal cohesion in the military that is extraordinary So you can differ on as you clearly said you can differ on some interest or issue oriented problems, but the overall cohesion of the force Created by its ability to socialize officers into a lifetime of Solidarity is quite extraordinary and it isn't it is Not it is so powerful. It is unlikely to be dislodged by a one particular problem Yep, just to add something We should know that we are nonetheless in a different situation right now compared to let's say five years ago It's not a military regime anymore. It's not a clearly Visible chain of command. Shuman is not part of the army. He retired long ago So the purge is a bit more I mean to consider this as a purge from the army is wrong Shuman was purge from the US DP but We used example of the 1990s or 2000s when the military regime was Clearly run by the by the army It was easy to purge itself its own member canyons for instance now It's different because they do not belong to the army anymore. It was retired officers those and the elected MPs The ministers except the three army ministers, so it's a bit more complicated for the army leadership to purge them technically technically and Just to add also on on on bill wise We should note that those purges in Myanmar historically since the late 1940s have always been collected from the top It has always been a top-down thing except so where they win in 1949 and Tanshwe in 1992, but otherwise it's always the top that purges the bad lot and it's not a younger generation of Officers, it's not a rival clam that Attempts to to conduct the purge. It's always from the top But I want to come back to you I really found your initial remarks really interesting, you know the 400,000 strong army and the fact that the other Forces are not particularly strong light infantry in the fact that it's really focused on counter insurgency Now one of the responsibilities of the military during the election is going to be maintaining security on election day and run up to the elections But on election day itself if you read the Carter Center's report on Their current assessment of the state of preparedness for the elections They raise concerns about the military's ability They don't see any plan in place to maintain security during the election process Right, how capable do you think the military is going to be to do that? And do you have any worries that you know when you don't have a military that is That is capable or a police that is capable that they might become heavy-handed This might actually add to a potential circle of violence during the election. What is your assessment? But first I have not read the Carter Center report, so I am at a disadvantage in knowing exactly what difficulties they highlighted, but I Can't imagine What it is that they concluded and it may Perhaps it was not that the military is not widely dispersed Enough to maintain order, but rather that it is the territorial sense of the military is so powerful so strong that It is only the military and the police which As we should bear in mind are under the control of the military at the end of the day That the military and police are too powerful in too many places, especially in conflict areas Or semi-conflict areas, but again, I don't know exactly what it was that they said. I would be in general terms, I would be concerned broadly about the ability of the Forces of law and order to act in a fashion to Safeguard the election, but I have no Specific right knowledge of of something different Eventuating the Carter Center doesn't give any detail. They just make this point And so I was wondering whether there was any further basis. All right, let's open it up to Q&A from the audience I already see a few hands up. Let's have Priscilla clap first Priscilla Wait till you get a mic because this is being videoed and recorded Microphone here, please introduce yourself as well as the organization you represent I'm Priscilla clap with USIP and Asia Society I just want to pick up on that last point you were discussing about election security. Is this on yes There has been a lot of work on this and international organizations have been involved in it I don't know why what the Carter Center said or why they didn't know about it How old is the report that you read? Oh, it's quite recent. Yeah At any rate the the main burden is on the police Not the military the police the border affairs the border forces and The police are adding auxiliary like 40,000 extra police to man the polls The military we when I was there in July and we met with the Minister of Defense and you know very senior leaders They said that they will only be involved in election security if they are called in specifically by local leaders You also have to count on the GAD the Ministry of Home Affairs is the general administration department of the home affairs these people are ex-military They are the staff for the UEC at the local level so they're going to be part of The whole structure, but it's not you're not going to see the military the uniform military out there Securing the elections. It's going to be the police Thanks Just to adjust on that. Let's have Renault first then we come to Kenny over the past six months There have been a lot of meetings between the army the police and the Union Election Commission in Nebido so they are they They might not be a big plan, but they have been discussing about security during the elections for a long time Within the inner circles in in Nebido Yeah, they are worried about the you know security Problems but there will be the expect a more tension than any elections and former them because of our more freedom That people will talk in a more openly. So not just at the time of campaigning, but also at the time of selecting the At the time of announcing the result and at the time of selecting the president. So at least like three areas So now they are planning to Trained civilians like for temporary policing for that in electoral and until the presidential election period and the 40,000 civilians will be trained for two weeks Yes, Kelly. That's exactly what I want to pick up on a lot of the sub my name is Kelly Curry with project 2049 Institute a lot of the civil society people that I work with are very concerned about where these 40,000 Civilians and I'm using little air quotes around that word are going to come from because the military the Tatmada has a long history of relationships with quasi Official paramilitary Organizations that it uses to terrorize the population suppress Descent and all sorts of other nasty things and these include the fire brigades the Red Cross the and the Swan Ocean And I think a lot of people are very concerned that those dark Currents are going to be resuscitated or reinvigorated to form the basis of the security apparatus around the elections and that this will lead not to security but to Intimidation and I think you have a very fine line between security and intimidation actually it's pretty, you know I'm not sure that the line even exists in the mind of the authorities But I think that this is an issue I'd like to hear from the panel on Thank you very much Do you want any of you want to respond to that about the line between intimidation or security and intimidation? It was certainly one of the issues behind underlying my question. I guess people agree with you. So let's let's go. I would just say I Stand by my ignorance Please hi, I'm Megan start with the public international law and policy group One of the key issues on the agenda for Burma is clearly the nationwide ceasefire accord and Right now the ethnic armed organizations are deciding whether or not they want to sign That NCA as it stands or whether they want to negotiate for additional changes One of the questions that they are currently asking in that analysis is whether or not they would be better off signing the current government Or whether they'd be better off waiting for the potential changing government if they would get a better deal But their concern is how the military might respond under an NLD led government if the NLD were to win And so it'd be interesting to hear the analysis from the panel on how the military may respond to an NLD led government potentially trying to renegotiate the NCA or some of the terms I'm not sure that the military really envisioned an NLD led government It's Many are still pretty confident that either the current administration or Someone which is closely associated with the current government can form the next government after January or February so But clearly the the military does not want to let other institutions Negotiate on on its behalf any dealing with the Ethnic armed route. This is this one of the key issue that the military is looking at and does not want anybody else to To to to cope with to deal with Does anybody else want to take that? Yes? I think It is better to sign now than you know waiting for the next government Because There at the moment even though, you know military chief general may online Wanted to fight all the ethnic groups, you know Rather than you're negotiating with them. He somehow listened to the president to setting extent in my observation But if the new government is not from the military and doesn't have that you know like Military, you know all the relations and respect. I'm worried that he may not listen to that president and on Sun Suu Kyi Even though she started, you know Telling the ethnic groups not to sign in a rush Lee, but he changed she changed her tone in the last time I didn't two days ago campaign message, you know from the state media that it is better to sign Then and see it now and the next process discussion about the politics should be, you know When the scent do the hands of the next government, so that's that's that's that's the in a good good sign for I think all site and the government also wanted to make sure that it is signed For the elections, so they are planning to sign it on October 10 and they're going to discuss on October 3 for that and And the thing is they are trying to go to the political framework dialogue Yeah Which is I think you know more significant than you know ceasefire agreement itself You know we had to ceasefire in the past for many times But bro, you know because we don't have that political dialogue at this time You know president who thinks and it's very committed to know to go on to that, you know Political path and you know federalism so that I think it is better to sign now than waiting And I've seen my sensitivity may came to understand that and see is just you know ceasefire not peace settlement That you know this government will get you know legitimacy for the elections now Yeah, so that she may also encourage that and see I think it is better to sign it now so that the process will continue otherwise We have to you have to be worried about that you'll start the whole process all over again for the military I mean the daylight sir, you know like kind of surveillance are often wiping out all the you know at the armies Yeah, so yeah, so women is quite right last night Ong San Suu Kyi gave a televised address to the nation actually is turned out It was on television and and her tone was quite different And she made this very clear that if the NLD were to be elected They would abide by the ceasefire agreement. They would push for the the the political agreement So implicit in those words were that it's you know that she was okay if a ceasefire agreement were to be signed I found that a very interesting talk the other small point is when you talked about Min Ong line It's interesting that when the ethnic armed groups came to the and six of them came to the president just the other day To to try and decide what were the next steps and they've decided in October to meet and hopefully side Sign the agreement that at precisely at that time Min Ong line decides to go to Israel to purchase weapons And that wasn't a good signal coming from the army and I want to you know It was that was that timing just happenstance or was it a meant to be a pre-ordained signal? What do you think? Um, what happened was? The government asked the ethnic parties to come earlier when May only was you know in the country He planned that for two months before So share coincidence was it? Yeah, he did not intentionally do that But he already planned that two months ago, okay, but the ethnic groups came late But the problem is still you know, he can stay postponed and the president should You know insist that he stayed because that will lose a lot of credibility You know in terms of trust building whether the groups got the main thing the ethnic groups were trying to asses Well, you know if these groups certain group cannot sign You know co-count, you know all these three groups, right? So well, you can you guarantee president that if you want to fight, you know all this group President bubbly agree, but may I always just something against, you know something different So I think groups doesn't have you know Faith in the president actually so that the only makes you a male and is you know in that meeting to make sure that promise from him but He wasn't there you want to I did they the trip to Israel is a very important and And in some respects curious development But I don't think it is at all related to counterinsurgency issues primarily because Israel doesn't produce for is for Myanmar the kinds of weapon systems that would be appropriate for them to employ in that situation what Israel does well is the thing the very things that the Topman hours just recently come to grips with they produce weapon systems that can build air and naval capability so When I look at the trip to Israel like this, I it and I see men on lines Comment that his goal is to build a more standard Myanmar military. I take that to mean he is already planning for what frankly what The NLD has proposed that the military become more focused on external and or normal military Excellent point. Thank you. I agree to that point. May only has been talking a lot about their standard army this Prashant Right here Prashant from the diplomat magazine. I'm wondering if I could push the panel on two questions The first was I liked women's scenarios or that you laid out in terms of How much of the vote that the military might get So I'm wondering if I could get you to be a little bit more specific and maybe other members of the panel could comment as well Because I see maybe four scenarios So one is they win 26% of the vote and together with the 25% they get the majority Another one is that they somehow get some kind of agreement with the other parties to get the sufficient votes And then if not they will come up with some kind of deal Or if not, they'll try to work out something with the ruling government and try to undermine it in some way My question would then be what are the probabilities for these various scenarios and are there differences within the panel members about How these scenarios might play out and then my second question, which I guess is more hypothetical Let's wait for that one because it's a complicated question. We'll come to your second. I promise you You won't leave you but let's answer that question first. Otherwise, I worry that the panel might forget What's your response in a brief? Well, you know military always in a plan and calculate and you know, they have strategy and like plenty plenty plenty, you know, normally But I'm not sure that what really happened or not even though they planned you know many Authority regime fall, you know, they thought they were in elections and they did it and they didn't know when right so These things were really happened or not. I'm not sure but this time what they are saying differently is that Okay, before they did not organize the you know military pulling tightly and they did not really give you know like order or like organizing but now They are going to convince the military personnel that if energy win military interests will be destroyed So now they say well many military personnel Convinced that they should vote against the NLT because you know All their military projectives, you know, they apply sir Even though also she said a very good thing about the military to what with the military in order to promote you know, but she doesn't see anything but you know Welfare of the soldiers and which is the most important thing that which is the military stick and continue to influence the military You're welfare this thing in a military business. What we just try, you know So that they have more worry this time that military personnel may be voting For the US TP. So that's the only difference for me to the also the same thing happened You know, they are pulling will be inside the military and Also, if you look at really real numbers They are even they don't need to win a lot actually because there will be three vice president if you really calculate in the details Right. So at the last time of that, you know, our presidential election I think they have like six six four six four six or something They think God like almost a full hundred and then another vice president got like 150 and the other one get like 50. So if the vote is going to split like that, you see Upper house one lower house one, right? So then the winner may not need a lot of vote actually Let's say like six four four like three three three, right to get the majority and you already have the military By one six seven, right? So you just need like 150 round that you see that and then 150 you still have your alliance and ethnic groups, right? Like, you know, I can kitchen that military have that people Malaysia and their own body, right? Their individual, you know, our candidates, right? And also NTF, you know, farmers party or this thing They can get you know, other so if they win, let's see like 1980 90 seat and then They are in a position, you know to be able to select The president I think. Okay, let the others let the others chime in Bill. What what's your response? Well, I Often as you know very well caution my students not to engage in speculative or hypothetical analysis Except when they have when they're in possession of valid empirical data. I got none I know Well, I also don't read tea leaves. So I won't speculate but just one point I think we should not take for granted the fact that the military will always work hand-in-hand with the US DP We already saw that in the past. There have been a lot of disagreements and the military Does not really trust the the US DP is a melting pot of interest It's not only made of retired military officials, but businessmen local cronies local ethnic leaders as well. So we should not we always mentioned the military backed usdp, but I'm not sure about that and then I think that we should not consider the US DP and the military has Strong a lie within the parliament and outside the politics Prashant will come back. What's your second question? Wait, just wait Yeah, so the second question just just a quick one and maybe it's too hypothetical or optimistic, but I Think all the presenters have sort of presented a Very strong picture of the military in terms of the various levers of power that they have and I think even the parliamentary representatives There was the idea that perhaps their power could even grow in a more fragmented parliament Which is maybe one of the likely scenarios I'm just wondering if we're trying to envision the military's role weakening over time or at least reducing to a certain extent how do we even go about thinking about that if we don't have the Constitutional changes and that remains further out five years What are some of the other indicators we look for in terms of how the military's role might be reduced if any? Thanks. Oh, that's a big question. Okay Let's try and keep our responses short because there are others who want to ask questions So, I know you want to start with that and then we'll come to you Bill and we'll go to I don't want to be pessimistic but It would of course come from Within the army within the new generation of leaders and in if there is one area where the military can reduce its influence or really create some of its control As I'm looking at the parliament It's in the local parliament in the in the 14 regional parliament if the military wants to start withdrawing its Present they may start with those Officers in the local parliament because this is where nothing much is happening and the key Function is within the national parliament Constitutional matters between local parliament may be in upcoming legislatures. It might be possible to reduce the number or disengage Well, I think it might be useful to reiterate what we have said in little pieces about the actual power that the Myanmar military has It is the commander-in-chief of the military not the president who is the supreme commander of the armed forces of Myanmar So we talk about orders that a new president might give to the commander-in-chief Politicians can give them all the orders they wish the Constitution gives them Exclusive authority for command and control for command of their of the armed forces Including the police and the paramilitary forces second the military controls the National Defense and Security Council through its ability to appoint a majority of the 11 members and it is the National Defense and Security Council that ostensibly sets national security policy especially policy affecting the armed forces third the Military nominates as we have said three cabinet ministers defense home affairs and border affairs that is an exclusive responsibility Granted by the Constitution to the military fourth of course, there is the Parliamentary opportunity of nominating 25% of the of the Parliament But more important than just that 25% It's what is the power that 25% gives to the military because that is sufficient to block constitutional change which many of many people who observe the political system think is a Necessary step in the democracy process and lastly of course the military Does have its ability to produce its own candidate for president through this complicated system that the Myanmar Constitution prescribes So those are five areas where the military has significant power and none as far as I can tell None of those five areas are at risk as a consequence of this election Right. I just want to also point out Prashant that in the case of Indonesia It took several decades under President so hard though for a gradual reduction of the presence of the military in Parliament and It was when he felt comfortable enough to do it. It came from the top. It was a top-down process There wasn't pressure to do this So it was when they were comfortable with the transition to democratic rule that it actually occurred. All right, let's continue We have to move on. Yes, please Please introduce yourself. I am Seng Pan ethnic kitchens from the north Currently working with UK Embassy in Yangon as senior political advisor. My questions to the panel is that I Would like to ask a questions regarding with the ethnic minority issue, which is always being a step-tie issue of the country With that said With this purposely and systematic exclusions to be able to participate in Political structure, how would you think would that be sustainable politically and economically if this? exclusion is exercising in the future So you're concerned about whether the ethnic groups will be allowed will be included politically and As well as economically in a post 2015 Myanmar. Yes, that's your issue. Okay Bill, why don't you start and then we'll move to women? I Don't off the top of my head. I do not know because it's a speculation that I can't support with facts my Surmise is that if there when there is a final political resolution That roles for all the parties will be clearly Stated in a way that all can agree to and that those roles prescribed in a final political resolution May offer may offer the opportunities that you described Or that you wish for I should say There will be more inclusion in the future even though we expect you know more powerful ethnic in the political parties in the like Local level before the 2010 elections But it didn't really happen because you really need you know unity among all the ethnic parties in the local area Like strong man, right so that you know find the Numa parliament and it was we are very powerful was because of shaman and his influence and So he opened up a way and you know, but in the ethnic Level in a states even the regional division. I do not see the powerful dynamic people You know moving that parliamentary very powerful and you know like inclusiveness Like if you look at shan, there are two main parties like mom to parties, right? I also could change there like different parties, right? So I think unity of the ethnic groups is also very important to influence the you know barman Politics so far only jacai bodies were merged, you know, but they are much in you know, not for good reason back to fight so They can season a split after what But you know that unity I think liquid leadership is very important And the second thing is that this election different from the last one Nobody will win the majority. I mean even though energy will you know when the majority it may not be enough to You know set up the government the same thing with the government already explained So, you know ethnic people may not be the king but they come in the kingmaker, you know the party that they join Well be able to you know form the government take that initiative and then you know Have like ethnic in alliance group then you will have more influence and you will be like ministers in the You know this government so generally a positive response people feeling bit optimistic. What about you? Just to follow up on this Relative optimism, but when you see the number of political parties with an ethnic base That have been created over the past few weeks or month and the number of ethnic candidates in that in For the current with the upcoming elections. You can be a relatively optimistic There is a demand among ethnic groups to join the year the current the ongoing political process There will be more Political leaders involved in discussions in in the dialogue after 20 or 15 within the parliament outside the parliament the civil society as its role But it's it's a gradual process But we nonetheless can be relatively optimistic at the back I'm also for my penalty member two questions One is what do you think about war statement on last September 4th? What said they cannot participate in see sir agreement because they have already promised union government not to participate in that see sir agreement because Western country, especially EU US Japan involved in the process China don't need Western country involved. So they cannot sign agreement. What do you think and? two question is if why AA TNLA SSP North RCSS and an SB KNPP will not participate in that see sir agreement Can it call the nationwide see sir agreement two questions? Thanks, right? I think you're the person to answer this question. Yeah, you know what has been very I Mean strong to continue They are, you know Kind of autonomy that they are enjoying now They even don't want that, you know and see and afterwards that they will have to share, you know, their resources and power So they were resist You know and see as much as they can and they felt like they already signed the peace and political, you know agreement Which is just giving autonomy to them. So they are not interested in and see at all plus The new military feet that you know, they have support from China so that they cannot really touch, you know, one much at this time So why may not be part of the NCA for sure and other ethnic groups also even they also did not organize what to be part of the NCA and Why even told them that you know, our main aim is to have the worst date You see that so for what they wanted to have more autonomous state in the political agreement So for second question, yeah, you cannot call it Nationwide, you know ceasefire Agreement so but you can call it nation part agreement We shouldn't get too hung up on semantics here But yes to a large extent even though there are a few groups that may be outside. It's still pretty much a nationwide Effort listen, it's coming to 330. I promise that I close the meeting by 330 I apologize to those who wanted to ask questions But we're excluded but the panel is here So feel free to approach them after the meeting and by all means raise these questions with them and continue the discussion But I must draw to a close. Thank you very much for coming for being such an engaged audience And please join me in thanking the panel for excellent presentations. Thank you