System of Government in MyanmarMyanmar's system of government
Myanmar federalism and state-building
Burma is federalising. The continuing policy turnaround since 2011 shows this tendency. This is clearly demonstrated by changes in the state structures that the state government in Naypyitaw and the state/regional government and the federation talks between the state government and the military force of ethnical minorities constitute. This shift is aimed at developing a more resilient federation that allows an appropriate division of powers between key and constituting entities.
The development of Myanmar's federation is, however, a laborious challenge that has long been called into question by the country's unique state construction. In Myanmar, the historical development of state-building influences the result of the federal-unitary divided. While the Panglong Accord and the 1947 Bill provided fundamental federative rationales for state inclusion, the 1962 army putsch led to the collapse of the federalist system and the emergence of centrist government.
It is these crucial junctions that show the great transformation of the art of the state in contemporary historiography and also lead to a federal-unitary flaw in Myanmar's policy-making. Although the reappearance of the federalist system since the great 2011 policy reforms, the heritage of unity, centrism, authoritarianism in Myanmar still affects the policy of federalisation.
In theory, the nature of the federal system is dependent on whether the historical path results from a federalisation convergence or cohesion mechanism. Burma was created as a future federalising state by bringing together distinct entities of the UK government on the basis of the volunteer union rule. The recent federalisation was, however, a cohesive exercise, replacing government by a former unified authority regimes, leading to permanent political dominance by the warlords.
Panglong in 1947 was a historical milestone that laid the foundation for the territorial-demographic inclusion of Burma itself and the administration of the border areas and then opened the way for new state building. Despite most of Myanmar's ethnic minorities' remembrance of the federalisation of 1947, Myanmar's state-building processes were strongly affected by the powerful nation-building effort, mainly by the historical education of Myanmar's armed forces (Tatmadaw) during the Second World War.
Tatmadaw's development resulted in the consolidation of the federalization course and the creation of a centralised unified state system. Myanmar's federative designs issue is an inherited heritage from a crucial wartime time. As World War II arrived in Myanmar, an Embryo of the Myanmar Patriot Armies was slowly forming under fascist Japan and its centralised system of centralised force missions.
Thus the Tatmadaw emerged and began its historical function as the spine of state construction in Myanmar. To a certain degree, this development demonstrates that the war has led to the creation of a state and the power of a centralised association in Myanmar's policy-making. Since Myanmar's liberation, Myanmar's nationwide rulers have had to take over the task of rebuilding and defending the nation from state collapse.
As a result, the task of creating a fully-fledged federal system was difficult, as the Myanmar reunification was geared towards centralisation, with the aim not only of protecting the EU from the fluctuation of domestic and foreign policy, but also of establishing a new state through a coherent system of government under a strong Burmese nationality and the power of Myanmar's armed forces, which specialised in state construction through war.
This historical character cannot be escaped by the present federalisation of Myanmar; this centralised power, a subproduct of the vibrant relationship between conflict and state building, is continuing to influence the perseverance of the Myanmar federalisation unit. At the first meeting of the Union Peace Conference of the 21st Century Panglong or UPC-21CP, which took place in Naypyitaw from 31 August to 4 September 2016, the heritage of the Panglong Agreement of 1947 was commemorated.
Saw Mutu Sae Po, Chairman of the Karen National Unions, said at this meeting that "a federation of democracy could be established through the Panglong 2016, just as the Panglong in 1947 brought the country to autonomy. "At the second meeting of the UPC-21CP on 24-29 May 2017, State Councillor Aung San Suu Kyi clearly stressed the importance of a federation settlement as an appropriate way to end the ongoing conflict in Myanmar.
Nevertheless, General Min Aung Hlaing, Commander-in-Chief of the Myanmar Armed Forces, declared that the country's state education continues to face domestic and foreign dangers and that it is therefore a crucial period for the reunification of the state. The historical body in charge of the protection of state safety, the Tatmadaw has constantly tried to maintain its policy function in order to keep the federation on track and protect the trade unions from splintering.
Federalisation in Myanmar is a historical result of many years of state building. Myanmar's historical path has shown that even as the federation evolved, the war was on. Moreover, Myanmar's policy has undergone a repeat of its past, as in the 1962 military coup d'état, when a federalist state-building movement culminated.
In this sense, the conflict between federalisation and union has become a classical feature of Myanmar's contemporary policy. The Myanmar Union Day, held on 12 February, marked the year 1947, when the Panglong Accord was initialled and put into effect to achieve state intigration. Before 1947, however, there was at least one significant policy incident that strongly influenced state construction in contemporary Myanmar.
That was the hour of the Myanmar armed forces that wanted to unite the state. Now that the reunification of Myanmar has preceeded federalisation, Tatmadaw continues to play a leading and leading part in the determination of the real significance of "Union" in the Myanmar region and in monitoring the stages of the federation transition policy as well.