_edited.png)
By Khaing Aung Aung, GAN
Shortread: Opinions February 1, 2025
Let’s break down the concept of a confederation, its key characteristics, and why some argue that a confederate state of Myanmar might be more feasible than establishing a federal union in the current context of Myanmar’s political and ethnic landscape.
What is a Confederation?
A confederation is a political system in which sovereign states or regions come together to form a loose association for specific purposes, such as defense, foreign policy, or economic cooperation. Unlike a federal system, where power is divided between a central government and constituent states, a confederation grants most authority to the member states, with the central body having limited and delegated powers.
Key Characteristics of a Confederation:
1. Sovereignty of Member States: Member states retain full sovereignty and independence. The central authority derives its powers from the states, not the other way around.
2. Weak Central Government: The central government has limited powers, typically restricted to areas like defense, foreign policy, and trade. It cannot impose laws or policies on member states without their consent.
3. Voluntary Membership: Membership in a confederation is voluntary, and states can choose to leave if they wish.
4. Decentralized Power: Most political and administrative powers reside with the member states, which have significant autonomy over their internal affairs.
5. Unanimity or Consensus-Based Decision-Making: Major decisions often require unanimous or near-unanimous agreement among member states, ensuring that no single state can dominate the others.
Examples of historical confederations include the Articles of Confederation in the United States (1781–1789) and the Swiss Confederation (prior to its transformation into a federal state in 1848).
Why a Confederate States of Myanmar Might Be More Feasible Than a Federal Union
In the context of Myanmar, a confederation could be seen as a more realistic and practical solution than a federal union for several reasons:
1. Deep Ethnic Divisions and Historical Mistrust
Myanmar’s ethnic groups have long been marginalized and oppressed by the central government, particularly the Bamar-dominated military. Decades of conflict and broken promises have created deep mistrust between ethnic minorities and the central government. A confederation would allow ethnic states to retain significant autonomy and sovereignty, addressing their historical grievances and reducing the risk of domination by the central government.
2. Strong Desire for Self-Determination
Many ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) and ethnic political parties in Myanmar have long sought self-determination and control over their own affairs. A confederation would grant them the autonomy they desire, allowing them to manage their own security, resources, and governance without interference from the central government.
3. Weak Central Authority
The Myanmar military (Tatmadaw) has historically been the dominant force in the country, but its legitimacy and control have eroded significantly since the 2021 coup. The central government is weak and unable to enforce its authority in many parts of the country, particularly in ethnic regions. A confederation would reflect the reality of decentralized power and allow regions to govern themselves effectively.
4. Flexibility and Voluntary Cooperation
A confederation is a flexible system that allows for voluntary cooperation among member states. This would be particularly appealing in Myanmar, where ethnic groups have varying levels of trust in the central government and differing aspirations for autonomy. A confederation would allow regions to cooperate on issues of mutual interest (e.g., trade, defense) while maintaining their independence in other areas.
5. Avoiding Centralized Control
One of the main criticisms of a federal system in Myanmar is that it could still lead to centralized control by the Bamar majority or the military. A confederation, by contrast, would ensure that power remains decentralized and that the central government cannot override the decisions of member states.
6. Parallel Governance Structures Already Exist
In many ethnic regions, EAOs and resistance groups have already established parallel governance structures, providing services such as education, healthcare, and security. A confederation would formalize these existing arrangements and provide a framework for cooperation between the central government and ethnic states.
7. Lessons from Federalism Failures
Myanmar’s attempts at federalism, such as the 2008 constitution and the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA), have largely failed to address ethnic grievances or establish a genuine power-sharing arrangement. A confederation could offer a more radical and inclusive solution that goes beyond the limitations of federalism.
Challenges of a Confederation in Myanmar
While a confederation might be more feasible than a federal union, it is not without challenges:
· Coordination and Consensus: Decision-making in a confederation can be slow and cumbersome, as it often requires unanimous or near-unanimous agreement among member states.
· Risk of Fragmentation: A confederation could lead to further fragmentation, with regions becoming increasingly independent and less willing to cooperate with the central government or each other.
· Military Opposition: The Tatmadaw is unlikely to support a confederation, as it would significantly reduce its power and control over the country.
· Economic Disparities: Wealthier regions might be reluctant to share resources with poorer ones, leading to economic imbalances and tensions.
Conclusion
A confederation could offer a viable path forward for Myanmar by addressing the deep-seated ethnic divisions and historical mistrust that have plagued the country for decades. By granting significant autonomy to ethnic states and decentralizing power, a confederation could provide a more inclusive and flexible framework for governance than a federal union. However, the success of such a system would depend on the willingness of all parties to compromise, the ability to build trust, and the establishment of mechanisms for cooperation and conflict resolution. Given the current realities of Myanmar, a confederation might indeed be a more feasible and practical solution than a federal union.
Comments