Nation and State-building, Self-determination and Conflict Resolution in Southeast Asia
- Part 2 -
Prof. Dr. Kamarulzaman Askandar *
14th Martyrdom Anniversary of Arambam Samarendra at Khurai on 10 June 2014 :: Pix - Daniel Chabungbam
The full text of the 9th Arambam Somorendra Memorial Lecture which was held on June 10, 2014 at Manipur Dramatic Union, Imphal and delivered by Prof. Dr. Kamarulzaman Askandar of the Universiti Sains Malaysia
Self-determination Struggles as Unfinished Decolonisation Processes
This section will look at some examples of self-determination struggles from around
the region.
Thailand
Thailand is the only country in the region that has never been colonised. In fact
Thailand or Siam as it was known before was the one that terrorised neighbors in the
region. One such former neighbour was the Malay Muslim Sultanate of Patani in what
is now known as Southern Thailand. The Patani Sultanate was invaded by Siam in
1786 and vassals were installed to rule the area on behalf of the King in Bangkok.
The
annexation of Patani was formalised with the London Treaty in 1909 between Siam
and the British. This treaty gave international recognition to the annexation of the
Sultanate. The five provinces, which were annexed into Siam, were a Muslim
majority area. Thus, they were clearly distinct from the rest of the country and are
now becoming a minority group in a country dominated by the Buddhist Thais.
Phases of anti Thai movements were carried out. Initially, the royalist elites led the
movement, which was followed by the Muslim Ulamas and finally by broad
ideologically-based pro-independence groups. The last category consist of several
groups such as the Patani United Liberation Organisation (PULO), Barisan Revolusi
Nasional (BRN – National Revolutionary Front), Islamic Front for the Liberation of
Patani (BIPP), the Bersatu, and many others.
These groups, most of which were
established in the 1960s are still present to this day, having increased their
prominence and the intensity of the conflict since 2004. Demands have been on
achieving independence for their region, and to a lesser extent autonomy, self rule and
the control of development in the area. A peace process was started in 2013,
facilitated by Malaysia, but was derailed by the instability and eventual collapse of
the Central Government in Bangkok and infighting within the Patani groups.
Philippines
The Bangsamoro of Southern Philippines is a Muslim minority group living in a
country dominated by the Christian Filipinos. Bangsamoro is divided into 13 ethnolinguistic
groups and are spread out throughout the mid and western Mindanao, as
well as in the smaller islands of Sulu, Basilan, Tawi Tawi and Palawan. They have
fought the Spanish invaders since the 17th century only to be included as part of the
Philippines by the Americans in the late 19th century and eventually by Manila.
Comparatively underdeveloped and poor, the Bangsamoro people also lost their land
to land-grabbing activities and trans-migration programs supported by Manila. They
now constitute only about 25 percent of the island population and are concentrated in
the middle and western parts of the island.
The Mindanao Independence Movements in the 1960s gave way to a more organised
liberation movement in 1970 led by the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF). An
Islamist faction broke out of the MNLF in 1977 and became MILF. These two
became the major movers of the self-determination struggle in Southern Philippines.
While the MNLF started negotiating with Manila in 1976, culminating in the Final
Peace Agreement (FPA) of 1996, MILF started their talks with the government in
1997. Indonesia represented the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in the
MNLF talks, while Malaysia facilitated the MILF talks.
The MNLF talks resulted in the creation of the Autonomous Region of Muslim
Mindanao (ARMM), which consisted of five provinces and a city. It was a failed
experiment with autonomy for the MNLF.
MILF signed a few notable agreements - the most important being, as mentioned
above, FAB in 2012 and CAB in 2014. CAB laid out provisions for a new
Bangsamoro Basic Law, power and wealth sharing between Manila and the
Bangsamoro, and what they termed 'normalisation' of relations.
The conflict is poised to be resolved with the creation of the Bangsamoro Government and parliament
scheduled for 2016. This will be the climax of the self-determination struggle of the
Bangsamoro people of Southern Philippines.
Aceh
Aceh used to have its own Sultanate ruling over the Acehnese people. The Acehnese
fought against the Dutch valiantly during the colonial period and are proud to say that
they have never lost their independence to the Dutch. After the independence of
Indonesia in 1949, Aceh was incorporated into the new nation under promises of
Islamic solidarity and nationhood.
They were also promised a province of their own
and self rule within Indonesia. The promises were not fulfilled resulting in the first
phase of Aceh self-determination struggle in the 1950s led by the Ulamas. The
conflict ended when they were given special autonomy status and freedom of religion
in the late 50s.
The second phase of conflict was more secular in nature and started with the
formation of the Free Aceh Movement in 1976 to fight against economic and political
injustices. The war was bloody and protracted and ended only in 1998 when President
Suharto was ousted.
Aceh then went on a couple of phases of peace processes, a
military and civil emergency, a tsunami, and finally a peace agreement in the form of
a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the two sides facilitated by the
Crisis Management Initiative of Finland. This MoU was then translated into the Law
on Governing Aceh (LOGA) of 2007 to structure and guide new relations between
Aceh and Jakarta.
Among the notable new arrangements are the reverse in the formula for wealth
sharing from 30-70 to 70-30; the constitutional amendment allowing for the formation
of local political parties in Aceh; and the enhanced decentralisation and autonomy
formula for Aceh including consultation with the Acehnese on any decisions affecting
them. Conflicting issues, however, continue to linger amidst accusations of abuse of
power, neglect and incompetency of the current Acehnese administrators, lawmakers
and leaders, most of whom were former combatants in the long self-determination
struggle in Aceh.
Myanmar
Myanmar is currently undergoing a process of limited transformation and 'guided
transition' after being in political isolation for many years. The problem in Myanmar
is symptomatic of a problematic decolonisation process that has never been properly
addressed. The current on-off ceasefire agreement with the 14 ethnic nationalities in
the country shows just how difficult a nation building process is and can be.
The 1947
Panglung agreement could have paved the way for peace with at least some of the
minority ethnic groups but was never fully accepted and implemented. The result has
been the continuation of pre-independence era issues of nation and state-building,
compounded by internal struggle for power and dominance within the country.
Further, it has resulted into military domination and oppression as well as violation of
civil and political rights of the people, the continuous bloody self-determination
struggle of ethnic minorities and persecution of other ethnic minorities, most notably
the Muslim Rohingya population in the Rakhine state.
Pressures from outside including ASEAN 'constructive engagement' and sanctions
from many countries has resulted in the 'softening' of the military approach and the
opening of Myanmar to outsiders, including investors. This year's ASEAN Civil
Society Conference organised in Yangon in March drew about 3000 people all
demanding change and faster transformation of Myanmar, albeit under the watchful
eyes of the State.
It is accepted that Myanmar needs a constitutional reform to resolve
the existing problems, and this would only come about after a national dialogue and
successful peace process with the ethnic minorities. While all these are being planned,
the self-determination struggles of the minority ethnic groups continue.
Profile of Speaker
Prof. Dr. Kamarulzaman Askandar is Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at
Universiti Sains Malaysia. He is the Coordinator of the Research and Education for
Peace at the School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia (REPUSM). He is
also the Regional Coordinator of the Southeast Asian Conflict Studies Network
(SEACSN). He sits on the board of many international networks including the
Southeast Asian Human Rights Network (SEAHRN) and the Global Partnership for
the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC). He is active in peacebuilding and
conflict transformation activities around the Southeast Asian region and has worked
in Aceh – Indonesia, Patani – Southern Thailand, Mindanao – Philippines, and
Myanmar. He has published many articles and edited books on peacebuilding in these
areas. He can be reached at zam(at)usm(dot)my
To be continued...
* Prof. Dr. Kamarulzaman Askandar presented this paper for the 9th Arambam Somorendra Memorial Lecture on held on June 10, 2014
This paper is forwarded by Homen Thangjam who can be contacted at homenth(at)gmail(dot)com
This article was posted on June 30, 2014.
* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.