The Truth and Legality of the Panglong Agreement

Shan Herald Agency for News

According to the state-run news paper, New Light of Myanmar Than Shwe’s message on the 62nd.anniversary of Union Day said that the Union Day marks the signing of the 'Panglong' agreement between Burmese independence architect General Aung San and ethnic leaders to form the Union of Burma in 1947 and urged the people to nurture the Burmese spirit regardless of where they were.

Only the Union Spirit is true patriotism that will ever protect and safeguard all the national races," the paper quoted Than Shwe as saying.

Has anyone ever wonder why Than Shwe gave such a speech?

1. Is he admitting that the Union of Burma was formed because of the Panglong Agreement, after being in denial for decades?
   
   
2. Is he admitting to the legality of the Panglong Agreement?
   
   
3. Is he beginning to realise that he cannot break up the Union and glue the pieces together by force?
   
   
4. Is he in trouble, and now needs the loyalty of all ethnic nationalities
   
   
5. Or could this be his first step towards reconciliation with the ethnic nationalities? If it so, wonder will never cease
   
   
6. Has he misunderstood the meaning of Panglong Agreement altogether?
   
   
7. If he meant to accept that the Union of Burma was formed due to the principes of the Panglong Agreement is he willing to accept all the clauses that are contained in the Agreement? For instance

• All ethnic nationalities are to be treated as equal partners, with equal status and opportunities?
• All states have the right to self-determination?
• Each state has the right to secede after ten years? And etc.

The Panglong Agreement is a whole package with many built in clauses. Bogyoke Aungsan and the Ethnic Leaders signed an agreement to all the clauses that made up the Panglong Agreement. The Panglong Agreement is a fact and legal

It has been decades since the military regime has been in conflict with citzens of Burma. It is about time the Generals realise that conflict can be resolved only through talking with all Leaders of the Opposition? It is about time they release all political prisoners. The citizens are tired and weary with this unresolved dire situation.

S.n. Oo
The author is from the former illustrious State of Lawkzawk in the Federated Shan States, as today's Shan State of Burma was known until 1948. Opinions expressed here are those of the author – Editor

READ MORE---> The Truth and Legality of the Panglong Agreement...

Ethnic groups: No Panglong Agreement, no Union of Burma

“Non-Burmans could struggle on their own,
but no one can predict how long it will last.
But if you join hands with the Burmese,
independence at the same time is assured,”
--Aung San, at the Panglong Conference, 12th February 1947

By Hseng Khio Fah
Shan Herald Agency for News

The exile Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC) released a statement marking the 62nd anniversary of the historic Panglong Agreement today that were it not for the Agreement, there would not have been the Union of Burma.

“The statement reflects the background of how the Union Day come into being,” said Saw David Taw, ENC Joint General Secretary.

The said treaty between the non-Burman leaders and Aung San was the basis for the Union, he added.

Aung San and his delegation had gone to England in January 1947 to demand Independence. As a result, Burma was promised freedom which did not include the Frontier Areas, as the non-Burman States were known at that time.

He returned to Burma to convince the ethnic leaders to join hands for Independence. On 8 February evening he delivered a speech at Panglong promising adequate safeguards for non-Burman rights should they decide to join Burma.

Aung San said, “Non-Burmans could struggle on their own, but no one can predict how long it will last. But if you join hands with the Burmese, independence at the same time is assured,” according to a SHAN report in 2000.

Later on 12th February 1947, the Panglong agreement was signed between leaders of the Frontier Areas and Aung San to unite and jointly fight for independence, and to establish a sovereign country, composed of co-independent equal states, in accordance with the principle of the Right of Self-determination.

Likewise, Shwe Ohn, 87, a participant at the Panglong Conference, wrote in his Toward the Third Union of Burma (1993), to the following effect:

What would have happened if the Panglong Agreement was not signed?
The answer is clear. The country would have been divided into two parts: Burma and the Frontier Areas. The former would become independent in 1948, while the latter would continue to remain under British rule.

How long would that rule be?

The Federated Malay States, also under British rule, became independent in 1957 without having to fight for it. By the same taken, I believe the Frontier Areas, in which Federated Shan States was a part, would also be an independent country by now.

READ MORE---> Ethnic groups: No Panglong Agreement, no Union of Burma...