10 April - “Vice Senior General Maung Aye again stated the SPDC stand that federalism will break up the country. He was speaking to graduates of Officers Training School at Ba Htoo.”
(Narinjara)

In Burma, no one is more powerful than the military government. No one can do anything if the military leaders refuse. The future of Burma also depends on them. However, whatever the system of the union, the military leaders will claim and struggle for 25% of power of the government as they have already marked and claimed. This means the military will always be prepared for another new coup or intervene with government by military means, and no one can ask questions, if any non-Burmese don't want to listen to what the Burmese government has to say. It is like whilst Democratic union of Burma existed in 1948-1958, General Ne Win was always standing by and preparing for the coup. Military is like the stick for Burmese government. They always want to be the winners, if they lose in dialogue on the table; they will try to win by other ways (by guns). The mindset that Burmese politicians and military leaders always want to be the master of others will never vanish from their hearts until Burma is totally ruined or completely fulfils their wishes. 

The first and only reason that there was a Burmese dictatorship regime coup was the power to control and to be a master of non-Burmese nationalities. Ne Win achieved the title as a hero for most Burmese people.

After Ne Win became a master of the non-Burmese, he later tried to be a master of all Burmese or the union which was a mistake that pulled him down. He was rejected by other Burmese when they learned the reality, and would not allow him to be their master but only as the helper for the Burmese Empire.

SPDC now continue to claim themselves as the helper for the Burmese nationality or Burmese Empire as well as the master of all the union too. They even want to be the master of ASEAN by not listening to anyone in ASEAN and have always done as they liked, ignoring others who try to intervene.

The problem of Burma is that SPDC is trying to be master of all.

The majority of Burmese politicians who are anti-SPDC want SPDC to free all Burmese nationality, but still want SPDC as a military wing, to help to control non-Burmese groups.

And all non-Burmese want the freedom like the Burmese, "free from all" but they are too weak by themselves to overthrow SPDC if they struggle as an individual movement. It is like throwing a small stone at an elephant. 

To overthrow the common enemy SPDC together, all anti-SPDC (all Burmese and non-Burmese) must be united again by trusting each other like the event of pre-independence when all ethnic nationalities leaders struggled to be free from British colonisation. There must be a conference like a Second Panglong Agreement to regain the unity and signed by current national leaders to be free from the common enemy yoke, SPDC. But to have a positive and true unity, and trusting each other at this critical time, the spirit of the Second Panglong Agreement must be based on the First Panglong Agreement, in meaning, definition, agreement points etc., because the first initial path of all problems from 1962 to today comes from there. It did not start from the King Kyansitta, King Anawratha or the King Sao Surhkanfa or Alongpaya or any other the Kings who had governed Burma or Shan State at that time. The true place that leaders of Union of Burma missed the way was at 12 Feb 1947, then 1958 and then 2nd Mar 1962 and then for the last time at 1990, not any other place. 

Panglong Agreement is the parent of Union of Burma. So, as long as trying to solve the problem of Burma without considering the importance of Panglong Agreement, there will be no way to see the right solution for Burma. Democracy system of Burma without respect for Panglong Agreement failed in 1958 and 1962 respectively. Then in 1990 the election to step towards the new democracy failed again because of SPDC trying to abuse the Panglong Agreement by trying their new way, democracy the Burmese way without counting on the parents of the Union.

As long as the Burmese regime or other Burmese national leaders neglect the Panglong Agreement (the fundamental of the genuine Union) the problem of Burma will never be solved in any system of government in Burma. Burmese leaders should not be so afraid of the secession of Shan State and vigorously oppose the secession because it will dim the democratic means and will extend the problem. The secession of Shan State really depends on the reality of how the Burmese regime’s attitude and treatment toward the people of Shan State, and not those created by any Shan State people.

We need to solve the right current problem first, before we think about the new union or common democracy for union of Burma. The union will automatically settle when all ethnic nationalities respect each other as true gentlemen respect each other.