How to cite this journal: Author, Date of the post, WMO Conflict Insight, Title of the post, ISSN: 2628 6998, https://worldmediation.org/journal/
ABSTRACT *
This article examines how a co facilitator in the Myanmar peace process, Ja Nan Lahtaw of the Nyein Foundation, converted a role assigned to her for appearances into an active mediating role. After outlining the conflict between the government and the ethnic armed organisations, the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement of 2015, and the marked underrepresentation of women among the negotiating delegations, the author describes how Lahtaw was designated a master of ceremonies and instead adopted a technique she called summarising, restating what the parties had said in impartial terms until participants came to value the contribution. The article sets out the conditions under which such a strategy can work, principally trust with all parties and impartial phrasing, and closes with an ethical question: whether earning an invitation to mediate in this way constitutes legitimate practice or manipulation.
KEYWORDS *
Myanmar, insider mediation, Ja Nan Lahtaw, Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement, women in peace processes, summarising, mandate, ethnic armed organisations, trust, mediator legitimacy, Kachin
INTRODUCTION
In this article, the process of becoming a mediator in the Myanmar war is being analyzed from the perspective of a co-facilitator, Ja Nan Lahtaw. She was forced into a passive role which she turned into an active role as a mediator. Taking matters into her own hands unauthorized, for the greater purpose of peace is the very subject of this analysis.
MAIN CORPUS
Conflict: Myanmar civil war
The longest-running civil war, history has seen so far is the Myanmar conflict between various armed ethnic organizations (AEOs.). Since the end of the British rule in Myanmar in 1948, there has been struggling between the government and the AEOs, who wish to have more autonomy.
The Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement was signed by eight of the AEOs in October 2015 and two more by the end of 2019. In 2015 the National League for Democracy party was elected as well as in 2018 which has been the leading party until the announcement of the state of emergency during a military coup on the 1st of February 2021 only days prior to the completion of this paper.
The mediation during the lengthy Myanmar civil war was very complex since there were several parties and several opposing interests. During the negotiations of the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement, women were underrepresented. This female-male ratio among government negotiators was two to fifty-two while among the EAOs it was one to sixteen.
The underrepresentation in this instance was a clear sign of male opinion on the inferior female roles in such negotiations. There was however one particular individual that was a co-facilitator for the talks Ja Nan Lahtaw Executive Director of the Nyein (Shalom) Foundation who redefined her own role and earned an honorable invitation to act as a mediator.
Mediator: Ja Nan Lahtaw
Ja Nan Lahtaw is a member of the Kachin ethnic minority group and has a history with mediation since her father, Baptist Reverend Saboi Jum, was the mediator of a previous ceasefire between the Tatmadaw and the Kachin Independence Organisation in 1994 that lasted 17 years.
In her article – Unsticking stalled peace processes: insider mediator perspectives from Myanmar – she explained that the role that was assigned to her by others during the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement negotiations was more about appearances as a so-called “master of ceremonies” which was fitter to a woman according to men. She was however more interested in the actual content as well as bringing the parties closer to each other. She called her strategy “summarising” and explained in the article that not everyone was open and positive about her added input.
Still, after a few sessions, there were some generals who appreciated it. One general even went as far as saying how “useful this new style was”. Even though the openness was crucial in bringing this act to success it was an innovative strategy of taking on the role of a mediator without plainly asking for the parties’ cooperation in the process of mediation and having their acceptance (for the most part in this particular case). This is another example of how versatile tool communication is. Communicating about the very topic of the negotiations and repeating the words of the generals was powerful enough to open them up and turn them towards each other without adding any additional information.
Strategy
The above-mentioned strategy (if executed as an insider party) has a key element which is building and maintaining a relationship of trust with all parties. The summary that builds the bridge between the parties has to be firm on both ends, reflecting both their interests but conjoined in the middle by an impartial phrasing. It can also secure an insider mediator in its position if there is personal sympathy between them and the parties.
A friendly female voice might do the trick in a negotiating room full of men threatening each other with their mere presence and interest. It might sound judgemental still Ja Nan Lahtaw herself experienced situations where male negotiators asked her to express certain issues because it will not ruffle as many feathers if she verbalizes them as if a male party does.
SUMMARY *
The case examined here concerns the relationship between formal mandate and actual function. Lahtaw held no mandate to mediate; the role she was given was ceremonial. What she exercised instead was the influence available to anyone trusted by both sides who is permitted to speak, and the instrument was the most elementary in the repertoire, restating what had been said. The article’s interest lies in the observation that this produced acceptance retrospectively: the generals came to value a contribution they had not requested, and the parties themselves subsequently asked her to voice matters they could not raise directly.
CONCLUSION
These components are present at a mediation session initiated by the parties where they conscience invite a mediator as well. The question is whether it is ethical to earn such an invitation or not? Does the greater goal of peace justify the means? One might suggest that gaining trust and building a positive relationship between parties by a third party with the above-described method is manipulation hence it is immoral although it builds a bridge between parties that could have a compromise and could live in peace if only they trusted the mediator in the first place. The question of morality still remains and it is for the reader to decide if it’s an invitation well-earned.
POTENTIAL SOLUTION *
The ethical question the article leaves open has a clearer answer than it may appear, and separating two things resolves most of it.
Summarising is not manipulation. It is the most transparent technique available: the parties hear exactly what is said, they know who said it, and they can object immediately if the restatement misrepresents them. Nothing is concealed and nothing is decided by the person doing it. What would cross into manipulation is a summary that quietly shifts emphasis, omits what one side found important, or presents the facilitator’s own preference in the parties’ words. The distinction is not between authorised and unauthorised speech but between accurate and distorted restatement, and it is testable in the moment: if a party can hear their position summarised and recognise it as their own, the technique is doing what it claims.
The question of mandate is real, however, and worth separating from the first. Insider mediation of this kind almost always operates without formal appointment, because the people best placed to do it are precisely those already inside the situation: religious leaders, elders, respected professionals, people with standing on both sides. Waiting for a mandate that no party is willing to grant would mean that nothing happens at all. What such practitioners can do instead is make the shift visible rather than gradual, saying plainly at some point that they are moving beyond the assigned role and inviting objection. Consent given after the fact is still consent, and it is what distinguishes this practice from quiet steering.
The gender dimension the article records deserves careful handling, because it contains both an opportunity and a trap. Being underestimated can create space to act, and Lahtaw evidently used it; being asked to voice what men cannot say without loss of face is a genuine function, familiar from many settings. The trap is that this is influence without standing, revocable at any moment and dependent on remaining unthreatening. It is a route into the room, not a substitute for a seat at the table, and the ratios the article cites, two women among fifty four government negotiators, describe what still needs to change.
Finally, the article’s own timing gives its subject renewed importance. The coup of February 2021 removed the political framework within which the ceasefire process operated, and in such conditions the formal track disappears while insider mediators remain, because they live there. Their work becomes local and unglamorous: negotiating access for aid, preventing incidents between communities, keeping channels open across lines that governments have closed. This is where most mediation in Myanmar has actually taken place over seven decades, and it is what preserves the possibility of a settlement for whenever the political conditions permit one again.
* Added by the WMO Editorial Team
REFERENCES
Biography
Myanmar: Military Coup Kills Fragile Democracy. (2021, February 1). Retrieved February 3, 2021, from https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/01/myanmar-military-coup-kills-fragile-democracy (Human Rights Watch)
Myanmar Case Study Current Peace Effort. (n.d.). Retrieved February 03, 2021, from https://www.cfr.org/womens-participation-in-peace-processes/myanmar (Council on Foreign Relations)
Origins of the longest civil war in the world. Milko, V. (2019, September 19). Origins of the longest civil war in the world. Retrieved February 03, 2021, from https://www.globalgroundmedia.com/2019/09/19/origins-of-the-longest-civil-war-in-the-world/ (Global Ground Media)
Unsticking stalled peace processes: Insider mediator perspectives from Myanmar. Ja Nan Lahtaw. Retrieved February 03, 2021, from https://www.c-r.org/accord/pioneering-peace-pathways/unsticking-stalled-peace-processes-insider-mediator-perspectives (Conciliation Resources)
Women’s Inclusion in Myanmar’s Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement. Muehlenbeck, A. Palmiano Federer J. (2016, July). Case study – the institute for inclusive security. Retrieved February 3, 2021, from https://www.inclusivesecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Womens-Inclusion-in-Myanmars-Nationwide-Ceasefire-Agreement.pdf (Inclusive Security)
Supplementary references added by the WMO Editorial Team
Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement between the Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar and the Ethnic Armed Organizations, 15 October 2015.
Panglong Agreement, 12 February 1947, and the Union Peace Conference (21st Century Panglong) documentation.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women, Peace and Security.
Wehr, P., & Lederach, J. P. (1991). Mediating Conflict in Central America. Journal of Peace Research, 28(1), 85 to 98 (on the insider partial mediator).
Mason, S. J. A. (2009). Insider Mediators: Exploring Their Key Role in Informal Peace Processes. Berghof Foundation, Berlin.
Svensson, I., & Lindgren, M. (2013). Peace from the Inside: Exploring the Role of the Insider Partial Mediator. International Interactions, 39(5), 698 to 722.
Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators (2005), provisions on self determination and impartiality.
