I’m very pleased to be invited to participate this very important international symposium. I am a newcomer in this area of study. I’ll welcome any comments and criticism on some of the comments I would like to make.

I would give a brief introduction of my organization, China Association for International Friendly Contact. It’s actually one of the major China’s friendship promoting organizations based in Beijing. I’m the director of the Center for Peace and Development Studies, which is research afflux of this organization. And we publish one magazine called Peace and Development.

I’ll now make a brief overview of the major demands of all participants and future tendency of Myanmar peace process.

As we know, ethnic problems have long been one of the hottest nuts for Myanmar which hampered peace development and the reputation of the country. Since President Thein Sein took office in 2011, his government seems to be keen on speeding up the national peace process. However, the ways to Myanmar’s national peace and unity may still be long even if an overall peace agreement reached soon.

First, let me make a brief summary of the major fields the parties concerns for the peace talk. The Myanmar government has formed its own negotiating bodies, the Union Peace-making Central Committee and the Union Peace-making Work Committee, aimed at three main goals. The first is to realize peace in the ethinic regions and bring a political unity to the country. The second is to enable the government to develop the abundant natural resources in areas once controlled by the ethnic groups so as to achieve interactions among different places to promote development of national economy and transportation. The third is to set up the bright image to the outside world to justify its legitimacy by properly solving the ethnic problem.

The government strategy can be featured by three steps. First, state by state negotiation for a ceasefire. Second is union level negotiations for political dialogue. Third allowing the ethnic groups to establish their own political parties to participate in the 2015 state and union assembly elections. At present, the talks are focused on future political status of the ethnic groups, implementation of regional administration, distribution of national resources earnings and de organization and reorganization on the armed ethnic groups, etc. But little progress has been achieved in regard to political dialogue. With the president’s tenure ending next year, Myanmar government may well hope for realization of substantial nation-wide peace within this year. So it’s likely to seek a cease fire agreement collectively with ethnic groups as early as possible. However, dispuse over issues like 2008 constitution amendment, make-up of the union army, future political status of the ethnic groups are not easy to be resolved in a short time. Key questions remaining to be answered, include how to integrate the government and the respectively ethnic groups drafts into one consented by all parties; how to ensure that the agreement is binding upon all parties and seriously implemented; how the restrain the national army’s operations against ethnic forces, especially to clarify the rules of engagement for the grassroots units; how the further promote political talks to settle the issue of ethnic status in nation’s political ethnic administration life.

Second, about the assembly of the union. Actually the parliament has so far played a limited role in Myanmar’s peace process. However, by placing 8 members from the House of Nationalities and 8 others from the House of Representatives into Union Peace-making Work Committee, the parliament mainly seeks to create momentum for the Speaker to run for the next president. If the ethnic groups can form their own parties and participate in the national election, the parliament will have some say on issues relevant to admission seats and constituency.

And the military, their chief objective lies in manifesting their pillar role in the country’s political and security life through long-standing dealings with the ethnic groups, gaining controls in the corridors in northern Myanmar to cut off the ethnic groups’sources of finance and finally disorganizing and reorganizing ethnic forces to achieve ultimate unification of the country.

The fourth one is the KIO KLA and UNFC, their main demands are 1) to seek more opportunities for their own development by achieving a nation wide ceasefire and peace with the Myanmar government. 2) to gather more capital for their future political status and keeping bargain on constitution amendment, the ceasefire agreement draft, etc; 3) obtain support and aid from the international community, esp from the US, Japan and China.

The last one is UWSA and UDAA. They seem to be more interested in maintaining the status quo with their territories upgraded to the same level which can enjoy a certain degree of autonomy so that they can carry out no more economic and trade activity within this regions, esp. with joint external riots on natural resources while building up their military to offence force disarmament by national army.

Then a brief about future process for the peace talk. From both historical and realistic prospective, it will be a long and complicated evolution to Myanmar’s total national peace based upon all accepted and well respected peace agreement. I think there will be 3 possibilities: 1) a peace deal could be signed within this year, yet the peace process would be put aside due to the elections and will continue or renew the policies by the next government; 2) in the process of negotiations, all the party could keep accumulated strength while certain ethnic groups will be divided or regrouped which bring about significant differences as to what should be written in the agreement so that certain group or groups would be excluded from the process, faced with the afraid of further marginalized nation political life; 3) the national army would maintain a strong military pressure on some ethnic forces who may be compelled to continue their armed resistance which may resulting fresh accidental conflicts and the return by the 2 sides to building up mutual political trust before a national peace agreement is reached. The bottom line is that the 2015 Myanmar elections could be fairly free and fair, and the government to be elected could have fairly high legitimacy and prestige both at home and abroad. In this case, how to ensure the development right in those ethnic regions will further test the political wisdom of the new government. History has proved time again that it’s impossible to eliminate a people or a race by force, and that only enhance national identity, instead of ethnic identity can lay a solid foundation for the achievement of national unification.

Thank you.