This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 RANGOON 000451 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EAP/MLS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/03/2016 
TAGS:                
SUBJECT: NLD AND ETHNICS: DIFFERING VIEWS ON FEDERALISM 
 
Classified By: APAO KPENLAND FOR REASONS 1.5 (b) and (d) 
 
 1.  (C)  SUMMARY: During the recent PD-sponsored visit of a 
U.S. federalism expert, senior National League for Democracy 
(NLD) party leaders asserted that they do not consider ethnic 
minority states capable of properly forming and running their 
own subnational administrations in a post-transition Burma. 
Not surprisingly, a well-connected Kachin youth leader told 
us that the top NLD leadership did not respect the ethnic 
party leaders, nor did they discuss federalism with the 
ethnic parties in preparing for a democratic transition.  The 
Kachin leader had confidence that Aung San Suu Kyi, if 
released, would steer the party toward a federalist system. 
Nevertheless, mistrust of NLD's commitment to implementing a 
power-sharing system lingers.  This lingering mistrust, which 
few have seriously addressed in the ethnically and 
religiously diverse democratic opposition, facilitates the 
military's continued control using divide and rule policies. 
END SUMMARY 
 
More Agreement on Federalism than Realized 
------------------------------------------ 
 
 2.  (C)  Professor Alan Tarr from Rutgers University 
presented a series of lectures on federalism at the American 
Center and in Myitkyina, the capital of Kachin state in 
northern Burma, from February 27-March 6.  Tarr first 
conducted a day-long workshop for second-line leaders of the 
NLD and of several ethnic pro-democracy political parties. 
The group of fifty included Parliamentarians elected in the 
annulled 1990 elections, party spokespersons, and student 
activists.  Tarr first defined federalism, and described the 
different models in place around the world along with the 
advantages and disadvantages.  The class broke up into 
smaller sections to discuss how federalism might work in 
Burma.  After reassembling, the diverse audience reached 
consensus on the following: 
--"Burma must have federalism" -- stated by an NLD mid-level 
party official; 
--Subnational units should have autonomy in the areas of 
education, culture, language, health, and environment; and 
--A new constitution should outlaw secession, but retain 
provisions for a state-wide referendum on separation in the 
event of egregious human rights abuses. 
 
 3.  (C)  This consensus on federalism among mid-level NLD and 
ethnic leaders represented a major breakthrough in achieving 
some consensus on federalism since we began hosting 
discussions six months ago on this issue.  Initially, the two 
groups would not mix or speak to each other.  When asked to 
write questions on index cards, which were read aloud without 
attribution, almost all of the questions posed by the ethnic 
leaders to the NLD related to federalism.  The second-line 
NLD party leaders tried to avoid talking about federalism, 
they referred to the more unitary model of China. 
 
A Different Tune from Senior NLD Officials 
------------------------------------------ 
 
 4.  (C)  The Charge held a dinner on March 5 at her residence 
for Prof. Tarr and senior members of the NLD. At the dinner, 
only the two most senior members of the party's Central 
Executive Committee (CEC) spoke: party spokesperson and 
Secretary U Lwin and senior economist U Nyunt Wei.  CEC 
 
SIPDIS 
Members U Than Tun and U Hla Pe, junior spokesperson and 
MP-elect U Myint Thein, and MP-elect U Soe Win only listened. 
 
 
 5. (C) U Lwin and U Nyunt Wei doubted Burma could support a 
federalist system.  Lwin doubted the abilities of the states 
to responsibly collect and spend local tax revenues, and 
allocate some of the funds to a central authority.  Tarr 
pointed out that citizens would be more comfortable paying 
taxes to local authorities over whom they have sway.  U Lwin 
did not seem convinced, remarking, "The Kachin count hills 
rather than people."  U Nyunt Wei spoke even more 
pessimistically about the possibilities of federalism in 
Burma.  Asked by the Charge whether younger NLD members 
should be educated in the different models of democratic 
government, he said, "No, they just need to learn English." 
He then recounted the story of a young man who faithfully 
supported the NLD without question, even after being 
imprisoned and tortured. 
 
 6. (C)  NLD officials U Myint Thein and U Soe Win both 
attended  a "Federalism wrap-up" discussion the morning after 
the dinner.  During the wrap-up, U Myint Thein complained to 
the APAO that ethnic parties want too much power to 
self-govern.  The APAO pointed out that Arakanese, Shan and 
Kachin student activists at the workshop called for states 
rights to cover only education, health, environment, culture 
and language.  But Myint Thein insisted that ethnic parties 
wanted more. 
 
Federalism A New Option for the Mobilized Youth in Myitkyina 
--------------------------------------------- --------------- 
 
 7.  (C)  Over the weekend of March 3-5, Tarr and a PD FSN 
specialist flew to Myitkyina to deliver lectures on 
federalism to the Myitkyina elders, the KIA delegate to the 
National Convention, Kachin Consultative Assembly Youth, 
University lecturers, representatives from Naung Nan Baptist 
Seminary and Metta, and youths from the Kachin Baptist 
Convention.  The discussion with the elders, important 
decision-makers in Kachin society, evolved slowly as Duwa Zau 
Guang first took it upon himself to act as spokesperson. 
However, as the meeting continued meaningful discussion 
ensued among all participants. 
 
 8.  (C)  Kachin youth seemed to get the most out of the 
discussion (septel).  Kachin political youth appear more 
active and self-confident than other youth groups in the 
country.  However, according to youth leader Dau Hkaung, the 
youth see only two options for their future: a Burmese 
democracy in which ethnics have no role or an independent 
state formed with ethnic Kachin from neighboring China.  Tarr 
presented federalism as a third option, stressing it could 
only take place under a democracy.  He added that a 
democratic country, even if not federalist, gives all 
citizens a role through voting and participating in the civic 
process.  The youth listened intently to the lecture, asked 
insightful questions, and appeared to accept the idea that 
federalism might offer another option for Burma.  On 
returning from Myitkyina, Tarr said he wished the American 
students in his own classes asked as many intelligent 
questions as the Kachin youth did. 
 
Muslims Unsure of Relevance 
--------------------------- 
 
 9.   (C)  On March 1, Tarr presented a lecture on "Federalism 
and Minority Rights" to an audience of about 70 Muslims at 
the American Center.  While the discussion of federalism 
among the ethnic minority groups had been much more dynamic, 
with people eager to talk about how it would apply in Burma, 
Muslim audiences viewed the lecture as much more abstract and 
academic.  One audience member asked after the lecture: What 
should a people who are restricted in their worship and even 
their ability to move about the country consider when 
thinking about federalism?  Even so, Muslim participants 
returned in force for the final evening lecture and accounted 
for the largest percentage of the mixed audience. 
 
COMMENT: 
-------- 
 
 11.  (C) Dr. Tarr's intensive 10-day series of lectures, 
workshops and discussions on federalism with key members of 
the NLD and ethnic political parties, including the youth 
wings, student activists, and Muslims, provided new insights 
on the importance of federalism as an issue in Burma.  The 
discussions underscored that the democratic opposition is not 
at all united on the political structures that Burma should 
adopt in a transition to democracy.  The desire for greater 
autonomy among the ethnic minorities elicits little sympathy 
among the ethnic Burman NLD leaders, who focus on unity.  The 
mistrust on both sides about the motivations of the other 
plays into the hands of the military to keep the democratic 
opposition divided.  We will continue encouraging discussions 
about future political arrangements among the diverse people 
we meet to try to open minds and build understanding.  END 
COMMENT 
VILLAROSA