[东亚研究所线上研讨会]

YouTube 链接 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njvxNJNVPEk

东亚研究所（所长孙烈）举办了第六期“民主合作”线上研讨会系列，主题为“2020年缅甸大选与民主转型前景”。在此次会议上，EAI邀请了项目缅甸的桑迪治理研究所、最大的选举监督组织PACE、德国的区域研究机构GIGA以及新加坡的ISEAS尤索夫·伊萨克研究员作为特邀嘉宾，分析了2020年11月8日举行的缅甸大选结果——这是自2016年文官政府上台以来举行的第二次大选，并就缅甸的民主化和民主的未来展开了讨论。本次研讨会是“增强缅甸公民社会能力”（MDRN）项目的一部分。

视频文字稿

你知道，这是我在东亚研究所，同时也在三 given 大学任教。我们组织了一次特别的网络研讨会，以反思缅甸11月的大选结果，并讨论该国民主的前景。请允许我简要地向与会者汇报一下12天前缅甸的选举情况。众所周知，缅甸在非常严格的军事统治下经历了近50年的孤立。但自2000年代中期以来，随着军方将军们开始放松权力，面对民众日益高涨的民主化诉求，该国开始了民主转型。

2010年举行了第一次选举。然而，众所周知，昂山素季的全国民主联盟（NLD）抵制了这次选举。随后，NLD参加了2015年的选举，并以压倒性优势获胜。这一次，NLD再次在议会两院制选举中以巨大优势获胜，并得以继续执政。我查看了网站，截至昨天，NLD在议会两院共赢得了396个席位。

而人民团结与发展党（USDP）仅获得29个席位，其他政党则获得了45个席位。所以，如果看看这些数据，NLD取得如此巨大的胜利是令人惊叹的。尽管有新冠疫情，缅甸还是及时、和平地举行了自由选举，我认为这是一个伟大的成就。然而，也有批评认为此次选举存在舞弊，取消了若开邦的投票，一些罗兴亚少数民族再次无法投票，这是一个大问题。总之，这次选举被视为

对昂山素季政府和她本人的公投。尽管罗兴亚危机损害了她们的国际声誉，NLD在缅甸国内似乎仍保持着巨大的声望。凭借如此广泛的民意支持，昂山素季和NLD能否更自由地执政，无需与军方分享权力？特别是，她们能否修改宪法，将军方控制的议会三分之一的席位改为全民投票？这也是一个巨大的问题。此外，民意支持的NLD政府

能否说服缅甸人民允许罗兴亚难民安全返回家园？尽管赢得了选举，但在许多人看来，缅甸民主转型的前景似乎并不光明，因为军方将领势力强大，而且民族主义佛教非常极端，对穆斯林少数群体非常排斥。为了讨论这些非常重要的问题，我们邀请了四位杰出的特邀嘉宾。请允许我按他们姓氏的学术顺序介绍他们。我们的第一位特邀嘉宾是赛义德·斯瓦特。

明，他是可靠选举人民联盟（PACE）的执行董事。科赛是仰光政治学院的政治学联合创始人兼讲师，也曾在英国文化协会担任网络官员。感谢您参加本次网络研讨会。我们的第二位特邀嘉宾是理查德·洛弗尔，他是德国全球与区域研究学院（GIGA）的研究员。罗伯特，理查德，抱歉，理查德是牛津大学圣安东尼学院的博士候选人，

他是国际刑事法院缅甸问题顾问。我们的第三位特邀嘉宾是明，她是ISEAS尤索夫·伊萨克研究员。她负责该研究所的缅甸项目，并曾担任2014年东盟轮值主席国的缅甸顾问。最后但同样重要的是，我们的特邀嘉宾是凯因·温先生，桑迪治理研究所的执行董事。他是缅甸透明度和问责制领域领先的民主研究和社会运动活动家。我欢迎

四位杰出的特邀嘉宾。好的，让我们开始第一轮讨论，每位特邀嘉宾可以发言约七分钟。我想听听您对11月8日选举结果的看法和评估。您是否预料到NLD会取得如此巨大的胜利？如果是，为什么？这次大选的主要议题是什么？此外，有人说NLD政府变得有些威权主义，但他们似乎仍然很受欢迎。有人说他们有

一个理性的、务实的策略，只是逐步推进民主以实现和平，而有些人则认为他们背叛了我们对更强民主化的期望。因此，针对这些问题，我想首先邀请科赛分享您的观点。谢谢。谢谢邀请我。关于选举结果，我认为在选举之前，分析人士、观察人士甚至选举委员会本身，大多数人都预计NLD将再次赢得选举。

但没有人预料到会取得如此大的胜利，我甚至不认为NLD自己会预料到如此大的胜利。所以，这无疑让每个人都感到非常惊讶。但对我来说，正如您刚才提到的，在选举后这段时期，主要反对党USDP及其领导的其他政党对选举过程的公正性提出了很多批评。我想稍微谈谈这一点。但在我们进入下一个主题之前，我们可以将选举过程分为两个阶段：选举前和选举期间。在选举前阶段，由于新冠疫情以及政党之间以及与选举委员会（UEC）之间紧张的关系，所有人都担心选举将如何进行。因此，大多数政党都在批评UEC管理选举进程的方式，而所有人都担心

其他议题可以分解为两个或两个阶段，即选举前阶段和选举阶段。因此，在选举前阶段，由于新冠肺炎疫情以及政党间的紧张关系和UEC，每个人都担心选举将如何进行。与UEC的关系非常紧张。因此，大多数政党都在批评UEC管理选举进程的方式，每个人都担心

为政党和候选人接触选民提供基础设施。这在有权势的政党和无权势的政党之间，以及有资源的政党和无资源的政党之间造成了巨大的不公平竞争。这是显而易见的。所以，我认为这使得选举前阶段非常不公平，并且对选举后阶段（也就是你们现在所见证的）非常令人担忧。所以，我认为在透明度和公平竞争方面，

选举前阶段，从民主原则的角度来看，存在很多不足。这是我对选举前阶段的分析。但在选举日，我们非常幸运，而且我必须承认，工作人员和各委员会成员努力确保每个人都安全并努力使选举日顺利进行。选举日非常平静，非常顺利，正如我们所期望的那样。当然，存在一些

我认为选举前阶段在民主原则方面非常非常不足。这是我对选举前阶段的分析。但对于选举日，我们非常幸运。我必须感谢工作组和分委会成员，他们努力确保每个人都安全，并努力使选举日顺利进行。因此，选举日非常平静，非常顺利，正如我们所预期的。当然，有一些

行政上的违规行为，存在一些错误，但我们没有看到系统性的欺诈试图改变整个选举格局的结果。所以，我认为如果我们将选举分为两部分，选举前阶段非常令人担忧，从民主的角度来看，确实可以看到很多缺陷，但选举日非常顺利，而且非常透明，非常平静。所以，我认为这就是我们现在的情况。因此，我认为政党

有合法的关切，并且有权审查当前的结果和选举过程。但对我来说，选举结果是可信的，我们应该接受结果。当涉及到整个过程，315个选区，当然，在一些投票站存在一些问题，边境地区的问题，提前投票的问题。但就整个过程而言，结果是可信的，我们应该接受。

这是肯定的。但从长远来看，我认为已经很清楚，目前的选举法律框架不适合不断变化的政治背景。这是我们需要首先解决的问题。首先，选举委员会的独立性，这是我们需要认真审查的。其次，看看选举结果，即使NLD赢得了多数席位，它也没有反映少数族裔的投票。因此，我们也需要看看选举

制度。我们目前使用的“领先者当选制”（FPTP）可能不一定，我不是说NLD赢得了多数席位就代表了整个国家，但仍有一些少数群体需要获得代表。因此，如果我们想做到这一点，我们需要改变，我们需要审查法律。我现在没有答案，但我们需要审查我们目前的选举制度，看看我们是否能找到一种方式来实现更

包容性的选举制度。因此，这两项根本性的选举法律框架结构是我们未来五年需要优先考虑的事项。除此之外，还有结构性问题，以及实际问题，例如旅行限制和不公平的竞争环境，以及90天投票期。这些也使得新进入者处于不利地位。如果我们能确保公平竞争，如果我们能确保

他们的声音被听到，他们的声音得到自由表达，那么在某些特定选区可能会有一些变化。我不是说整个选举格局会改变，但肯定有一些备受瞩目的社会活动家在一些地区竞选，他们有很高的政治声望，一些政治活动家在一些地区竞选，但由于这种情况，他们从未接触到他们的选民，他们的可见度与有权势的政党相比确实很低。他们从未有机会。因此，

我认为，在考虑是否应该感到惊讶之前，对我来说，我对这次11月8日选举的初步印象和初步分析是这样的。这是我对2020年11月8日选举的初步分析。我很乐意就此进行更深入的讨论。谢谢。我有一个非常简短的后续问题想问科赛。听起来您认为新冠疫情帮助了执政党以意想不到的优势获胜。您是否同意

新冠疫情，因为在这种大流行危机中，选民倾向于支持政府。这是否帮助了执政党？不，我的意思是，因为新冠疫情，一些其他政党和一些其他候选人无法接触到选民，所以选举本应更具竞争力，但由于新冠疫情，它变得不那么具竞争力了。因为你已经看到了，我们在不同州都有政党边缘化。

但由于新冠疫情，他们从未接触到他们原计划接触的选民。我认为这使得新进入者处于不利地位，并且降低了竞争力。好的，从这个角度来看，它确实帮助了执政党。好的，理查德，轮到你了。首先，我想感谢东亚研究所。我很高兴能与我非常尊敬的各位嘉宾同台交流。当然，在总结得如此之好之后发言总是很困难。我同意

科赛所说的绝大多数内容，我将尝试强调一些不同的方面。我认为，首先要问的是，为什么NLD取得如此胜利并不令人意外？我认为这在很大程度上是因为大家都意识到，这次选举实际上与政治关系不大，而更多是关于个人。而这种动态非常有利于NLD，因为昂山素季仍然是缅甸最受尊敬的政治家，而其他政党根本

没有同样的曝光度。这一点甚至得到了加强，因为选民继续投票给NLD，是因为其作为缅甸国防军主要反对派的形象。这种文官权力与军方之间的裂痕继续定义着缅甸，而不是，比如说，详细的政策平台。而这也是一个问题。通常你会问，定义政治的要素是什么？

这次选举的讨论重点是什么？但我认为，如果强调实际的政策承诺或类似的东西作为选民决定的决定性因素，那将是错误的。而这一点很重要，因为这种对内容关注的空白被其他东西填补了，它被高度个人化的竞选活动所填补。如果你看看NLD的许多竞选活动，

对于议员，对于非资深候选人或首次参选者，他们的竞选活动很大程度上围绕着与昂山素季的联系，并利用她的声望。因此，你看到了这些以个人为中心的竞选活动，同时又存在大量的虚假信息。我认为这是目前许多人关注的焦点，并关注正在缅甸社交媒体上进行的虚假信息宣传活动。

以及攻击个别候选人的仇恨言论。而且，特别是对于NLD来说，这些高度以个人为中心的竞选活动也存在风险，因为如果人们主要因为你的党派领导人而不是你的政绩而与你联系，那么，如果有一天这位领导人因任何原因无法参与政治了，那么你将面临一个大问题。而这实际上是NLD内部许多人，特别是党内最高层人士，

非常担心的事情是，如果那一刻到来，党内将发生分裂。由于NLD在缅甸政治中拥有如此强大的影响力，并在议会两院都占据多数席位，这当然会对政治格局以及未来的政治运作方式产生严重影响。我还有几分钟时间吗？好的。让我们来谈谈2015年选举和今年的选举之间的看法差异。有一种观点认为，民主精神正在减弱，而今年的选举被认为更具批判性。

我认为关键原因是，2015年缅甸在很大程度上被对未来的高度希望所团结。而许多这些希望，如民族和解、进一步削弱军方影响力以及增强经济实力，现在在缅甸几乎都破灭了。

现在，我认为这就是我们正在谈论的，也是这次选举后时期的后果。我们看到一个极其分裂的缅甸。你可以说，缅甸一直沿着几个重要界限分裂，但我们看到的党派支持者之间在集会上的暴力冲突，以及在胜利集会和竞选集会上的冲突，都证明了

这些更深的裂痕。此外，人们对选举本身的信心也日益增强。毫无疑问，与以往相比，信心仍然很强。但我们看到USDP决定质疑选举结果的有效性等举动。这些是我们从世界各国都知道的，会削弱民众对选举的信心。

过程。有人曾说过，第一轮投票制（FPTP）的选举制度确实无济于事，因为它巩固了缅甸目前存在的裂痕，并使得少数党，无论是民族党还是以缅甸本土为中心的党派，都极难获得席位。当然，我认为这可能是我们在第二部分会更多讨论的内容。由于NLD的表现，人们也认为民主精神正在减弱。

它明显采取了一些更专制的治理方式。但在这里很重要，这也是我最后一句话，要始终意识到存在不同的层面。如果缅甸的观察家、研究人员和民间社会组织的从业者谈论这些问题，或者我们谈论的是选民，我认为可以说，今天的选民仍然非常认为NLD保护民主，他们不会认为民主精神正在减弱。

谢谢理查德。现在我们转向莫莫。科赛和理查德都谈到了缅甸选举制度改革的问题。例如，理查德提到，领先者当选制（FPTP）赋予了主要执政党更大的权力。那么，是否有人在讨论引入比例代表制？你长期关注缅甸选举，我相信你有很多话要说。请继续。非常感谢李教授，

我也想感谢科赛和理查德在我之前发言。感谢东亚研究所邀请我们分享对缅甸选举和民主转型的看法。关于选举的意外与否的元素，我想补充一下科赛和理查德的观点。我认为，对我们所有人来说，NLD将获得第二个任期是显而易见的，这是确定的。但是，

如果说有什么意外的话，我认为在于评论员、分析人士等之间对于其连任幅度存在不同看法。当然，现在我们已经看到，这是一个响亮的授权，获得了比2015年历史性胜利更高的压倒性多数。所以，我想说的是，这是缅甸最大规模的民主实践，正如科赛所说，对于超过3000万参与投票的选民来说，这在很大程度上是一次安全、公平的实践。当然，我们也必须承认这次历史性投票的不同方面和经历。

因为，我认为意外因素也可能在于投票率。对于外部观察者和缅甸人民来说，他们确信投票率会很高。而理查德和科赛也谈到了被剥夺投票权的人。是的，有些人根本无法投票，其中最重要的是国际社会关注的缅甸罗兴亚社区和难民营中的罗兴亚人。但也有许多人在该国几个少数民族地区，由于安全原因取消了投票。所以，对他们来说，没有参与的体验，压倒性的胜利对他们来说可能更抽象。所以，我想说的是，是的，这是不幸的，但这仍然不能否定当选者获得的民主授权。

所以，我想接续科赛和理查德关于民主转型的前景，关于如何进一步改善和发展民主制度的讨论，以便缅甸的民主进程能够更加包容和参与，并为所有公民提供公平的竞争环境。这当然很重要，因为民主的实践不仅仅是选举。良好的选举不一定能自动转化为民主，尽管

关于戈赛和理查德所谈论的民主过渡的前景，关于“进一步改善和发展民主制度”，以便“缅甸的民主进程能够更具包容性和参与性”，并且“为所有公民提供公平的竞争环境”。“当然，这很重要，因为民主的实践不仅仅是选举。良好的选举不一定能自动转化为民主，尽管

选举是民主的重要组成部分和重要仪式。当然，然后你会开始审视人们在2015年和2020年再次压倒性做出的选择和决定。公民想要民主。2020年投票中一个非常明确的简单信息是，我们投票给NLD，因为我们不再希望军方在国家政治生活中扮演更重要的角色。所以，基本上，这归结于此。而我认为，这

将是另一个起点，继续促进和巩固民主制度，包括关于民主意义的公民教育，即做出明智的选择。你问我关于领先者当选制（FPTP）的问题，理查德也提到了，关于未来国家民主转型需要改变什么。在2011年至2015年人民团结发展党（USDP）政府执政期间，议会曾有过一些讨论，关于选举制度，以及领先者当选制与比例代表制之间的选择。

因此，我想说，讨论已经开始，但我认为这仍然是一个进行中的工作，因为我认为需要有更多关于领先者当选制（FPTP）的优缺点，以及比例代表制的优缺点的知情讨论和辩论。在像缅甸这样多元化的国家，比例代表制将如何运作，以及它如何转化为不同邦和地区的议会。当然，如果我们简单地看，我们继承了英国的领先者当选制，它被写入了2008年的宪法，当然，这需要被审查和重新审视，这也是NLD政府

自2015年以来以及在其当前纲领中承诺的另一个重要优先事项。所以，我想说的是，支持和反对的论点仍在继续。当然，缅甸走向多党民主制度，这是缅甸社会主义纲领党决定下台并引入民主或多党民主制度时宣布的。他们使用多党民主，意味着有两党以上。

而如果你看看实际的领先者当选制，例如我们在美国看到的。所以，我认为需要进行这种关键的对话，继续探讨哪种模式最适合缅甸，而不一定非此即彼，而是能够真正回应缅甸多元化社区非常独特和特殊的情况。谢谢莫莫。我认为，前面三位特邀嘉宾已经就如何改革缅甸的选举法和规则进行了大量讨论。

然而，如果你看到的是“赢者通吃”制度的实践，例如我们在美国所见到的。因此，我认为需要继续进行这种关键对话，讨论哪种模式最适合缅甸，而且不一定非此即彼，而是某种能够真正回应缅甸多元化社区非常独特和特殊的状况的模式。谢谢。莫，我想前面三位小组成员已经就如何改革缅甸的选举进行了很多讨论。

但对我来说，在讨论有多少比例的选区投票和多少比例的比例投票之前，更重要的问题是如何将三分之一的席位转为全民投票。这样军方就不能指定他们选出的人担任三分之一的议会立法者。但似乎还没有这样的辩论。您能否也分享一下您对此问题的看法？您需要静音。谢谢。谢谢您的邀请。

李博士，实际上，您能听到我说话吗？是的，但请说得大声一点。好的，是的。实际上，我同意科赛和安德鲁的观点。科赛指出了选举前阶段的公正性问题，我同意他的观点。实际上，这个制度格局不是由NLD创建的，而是由军方创建的。所以，我们所有人都不是，所有其他政党都在按照

2008年宪法行事。我认为这对他们，特别是对少数民族来说，是一个劣势。当然，选举制度和选举委员会（UEC）的制度性变革是需要的。我们需要改变它，但我们需要达成共识。我们需要讨论这些问题，无论是在议会内部还是外部，无论是以正式还是非正式的方式。

我认为这非常重要。执政政府现在需要创造空间来讨论这些问题，既要非正式也要正式。但实际上，我想讨论的是公众认知和精英认知。因为我在2019年和2018年曾广泛地在国内旅行。实际上，我知道这次胜利是可以预见的，正如科赛所说，但没有人预料到任何人会

赢得如此多的席位。但我可以预料到它会获胜，尤其是在缅族占多数的地区。所以，我想解释的是，NLD的胜利并不完全取决于昂山素季的个人魅力。我想指出这一点。它也取决于公众的看法和它的表现。当我访问农村地区和小城镇时，我遇到人们，通常我会和他们讨论，我问他们，你们怎么看，你们

怎么看NLD政府？他们到处都有问题，但总的来说，他们确实喜欢并支持它。他们支持NLD，因为在基础设施方面，道路比以前好多了。所以，我认为我们需要意识到，普通民众支持NLD是因为它的预算支出。通常，公众舆论认为，在2015年之前，预算的30%被用于社区发展，而80%被用于社区发展，而20%可能被浪费了。人们有这样的看法。我认为这就是为什么他们赢得了这次选举，他们想要改变。但我们没有预料到。但同时，结构性因素我们也需要考虑。实际上，在选举前，一些

包括国际危机组织、亚洲基金会以及奥斯陆大学的克里斯蒂安·斯托克斯等，他们也撰写了关于缅甸选举抵抗和政党问题的文章。他们指出，即使少数民族政党合并，也无法解决主要政党赢得多数席位的问题。这是因为结构性条件。

通常，如果我们看看过去的1990年、2000年、2010年、2015年，通常是更大的政党，全国性政党赢得多数席位。但尽管少数民族占人口的30%，但他们通常只赢得15%的席位。但这次，我认为他们表现得比以前更好。所以，我的看法是，NLD已经成为一个纲领性政党，他们接受了

通常，当我们回顾过去的选举历史，如1990年、2000年、2010年、2015年，通常是更大的政党，民族政党，他们赢得了多数席位。虽然少数民族人口占30%，但他们通常只赢得了15%的席位。但这次，依我看，他们的表现比以前更好。因此，我的SNLD已经成为一个纲领性政党，他们接受了

all all other not all the minority group now within within they are within their uh constituency so they can now they they could perform well and more unity party also they the the party also they want more seats than before so it's a it's a long long-term process but the in this election i think the the main problem is at uec so you see maybe i have to put a put up late on uec you you see in in pre-election period uec was not acting like an independent commission that's a that's a problem that's a

problem but now as you know annually also as a ruling party in this maybe they they would see it as a game now they would see it as a game and then the rule of the game was created by the military so they may they might have taken advantage of it they can take an advantage of it in my opinion several not several people actually political party also holding a party also they were encouraging and uh ruling government and uec to postpone not to postpone the election because of the kobe 19 situation but

in my opinion did not usually also didn't possible might be the reason might be they want to gain they want to gain the legend messy legitimacy again strong legitimacy again to to not to continue to implement major major reforms political social economic economic reform that's fine but now nadine recently energy issued a statement actually telling telling the people are telling the political ethnic political party that they they are on the same page they were actually the exploration of the ethnic

political party political party and energy are the are the same so they want to work well they want to cooperate they want to work together so i think i don't think democratic no wayne democratic spirit is waning i think uh actually the people some people the majority of maybe the ethnic minority group may be may be saying that uh only only the bomb and much majority is uh because of the majority rule so we will energy one or something like that but actually the people can express their desire for democratization

that's why i don't think that the democratic spirit is waning me i think that the democratic spirit is actually increasing so we are actually thinking about long term okay uh thank you very kind uh to hear that the democracy is not raining at all actually it has been more strengthened and you know i collected the four excellent questions i think a kind already alluded to these questions let me pose three questions to to kosai and richard and more um i guess as uh kainen has alluded briefly some participant

raises issue of integrity of election criticizing the uh u uh the union election committee uh saying that it is bias so we need to change the procedure of you know setting up and reforming uec so maybe if cosi can answer this question will be good and then a second question uh i think maybe to lichard um that's about this sne minority and and one of the participants has emphasized that the nld won many seats in ethnic states like the qin kachin and kane states so doesn't mean that it energy support uh secured support

from ethnic minorities so therefore this election uh did it empower the essence minority or not so if the child can answer this one that would be nice and to the sort of questions to more um and reminding the barack obama's mentioning in 2012 when he visited the yangon university staying the near mars geopolitical significance so therefore with this popular uh mandate good energy can exercise a more uh stronger foreign policy like to attending isaf or the striking big ftas and also or they're strengthening their position uh in this

uh delicate china-india relations as it is question of a foreign policy so let's uh start with the kosai about this independence of this uh commission sure uh i mean the these electoral legal frameworks uh was initiated and approved in 2008 with along with 2008 it means that it's usg sbtc the former sbtc has been has was the one who formulate this like the law so the lord was not the law was not meant to move forward with democratic process the law just kind of moving from sbdc to some kind of of semi civilian government it's kind of

transitional document from one regime to another regime so it's it's very centralized even though it doesn't mean it doesn't mean to it was not meant to control the result but it meant to control the process that's why the way the the election commission appointed was very centralized the president nominated and then the parliament needed to prove so it was not impossible to parliament to reject the president nomination so that was the case but in the last five year nad has been facing this issue

before 2014. and he was the one who criticized a lot about this the previous union election commission but during the last five year energy doesn't touch anything on that and no political body touch on this issue that's why we face this issue in 2019 and 2020.

that's that was the case so i think that it's not i mean majority of the people were saying that the personality of the uec members uh was the case i don't think it is the personality can be changed easily but the thing is a legal framework so definitely we need to find a way how to make sure the union election commission's member of the union the union election commissions are independent there are two ways one thing is you need we need to change the constitution i'm not sure whether this is possible in

the next four year or five year that's something but if we can't change the constitution there are some mechanisms to make sure that the uec are more independent and and and non-partisan something like the president can create a mechanism to select to collect the name for the nomination and the president can and the parliament of the president can create a mechanism to select from the nomination and making sure that the uec is more independent it's kind of there are a lot of issues i mean like options if you want to change

we just need a political world we doesn't need for the long run definitely we need a constitutional reform but before that there are so many options we can adopt to make sure that ubc are more independent and non-partisan and more credible thank you richard are you comfortable for this claim that the energy got the mandate from ethnic minorities because they won in the ethnic states but you know i read that in la kaine state because lohini agree was excluded from exercising their voting rights there is a rebel group is forming uh

so there'll be more uh conflict with the ruling party and the military so what's your assessment i mean i certainly you know wouldn't support this kind of broad statement i think the first thing to keep in mind is that it's not always useful i mean we we sometimes we have to use this term ethnic minorities um but it's actually not often often it's not a very useful term because i mean that's it's a it's that's a extremely diverse group of containing different interests different um traditions cultures uh and and so also different

allegiances right i mean there's some ethnic groups if you consider for example the issue who are traditionally more allied to the usdp because of grievances they have with another ethnic minority um and you have um you have some uh i think most most other ethnic minorities who strive for sort of um their own uh political parties but you know and we've been sort of through this uh it's not a unitary category even within a large ethnic group so sometimes you have multiple parties that try and win the votes of the same group and

then you you have vote splits occurring which in the first past the post system gives the advantage uh to dnld and i mean this is very drastic the way the nld win seats because in some regional parliaments some of the ethnic political parties can't even win any number of significant seats to make any changes and this is also you know it's it's kind of partly due to dnld having pursued a really predatory approach to how they campaigned in ethnic minority areas we have to understand that you know like historically there's strong

alliances between major ethnic parties such as the snld and the nld right and um these alliances were broken just before uh the last election so far they have not been uh taken up again and which means that the nld campaigns and all the districts sends out candidates in areas where where parties contest that look for their own representation and that were partners of the nld before and so that's that's a shift that the party has undergone and this is something you bring up rakhine state that at times this

approaches is deeply troubling um because of course you know everyone would be aware that uh the the the uh the region government is uh appointed uh by the majority winner of the election by the by the union government and so if you take the case of rakhine this is the same in in 2015 where um you had the party uh the amp get a sizable number of votes but can't get it into into uh into government uh then you have a huge amount of voters who feel disenfranchised and um the same thing i think we'll

we will be seeing uh uh now uh again and so i think uh it's it's i don't i i wouldn't go as far as making the sort of general statement saying that the electoral districts that the nld does win in ethnic minority areas constitute any form of broader support okay thank you lee charles mo what's the foreign policy implications from this election well usually foreign policy doesn't feature much in election platforms but i did notice that when the national league for democracy when the nld was putting out the the progress

that had been achieved or accomplished over its term from 2016 to 2020 they also included a report from on external relations so i think going forward looking at the the the strong mandate that the nrd has um you know one of the one of the more pressing concerns that the the government will need to address now will be twofold one is uh addressing that economic and social fallout from covet 19 which of course many governments across the world now have as the top of their governance responsibility

but also uh again dealing with uh the the engaging with uh you know the international community on um the topic that myanmar is currently under scrutiny for uh with relation to uh the treatment of what happened in rakhine over the rohingya communities in 2017 so so all of these of course will now be refracted through the lens of foreign policy and i would see or i would look at maybe going forward foreign policy would take on more of the economic diplomacy uh aspect in in the sense that myanmar of course now

is a signatory to the regional comprehensive economic partnership which is which actually was um mooted by asean in 2012 as a kind of a delicate balance also between the the interests say from china for example and also the global power rivalry so so asean always tries to uh bring together this constructive platform where all the partners can try to engage constructively and the rcep which is led is one of those platforms so myanmar being an asean member has been a negotiating party of the rcep since since it started since the

discussion started in 2012 and uh you know myanmar is also as a member of asean um party to the asean korea free trade agreement for example and several other free trade agreements that asean has negotiated as as an organization as a regional uh body with several dialogue partners so what i'm saying is all of these have uh the multilateral dimension they are based on uh established and agreed uh you know international rules such as the wto so i think myanmar uh of course will be i i think in a position to to leverage

on uh these uh different platforms to to boost up that economic performance legitimacy as well as to to uh address the the social economic fallout from corvit 19. um but of course you see when we talk about the rcep now being adopted that's the step one step two is getting it um ratified and for that all of the governments who have signed this agreement will have to go back to their national legislature and get it ratified and that's where the domestic consultation processes uh will start and should start

in order to explain to the different communities you know the business community the investors but also um all the communities in myanmar the population who will be affected by one way or another from the implementation of these uh agreements that you know what is in it for them and how how this will impact them and so on so uh you know it like i said step two means the national uh implementation part comes in and i think that is where the the link between myanmar's international and regional alignments

and the national priorities uh will need to be uh becoming sync thank you mo okay great discussion let's move to the second round of discussion that's more you know the prospect of a long-term um road to democratizations uh many people especially from the west is saying myanmar has been stalled in the process of democratic transitions and it became is stuck there not moving to the next stage of more consolidations um then for that kind of consolidations happens what kind of civil military relations have to be there and then

how the the people in myanmar uh is ready to go for the further more consolidated the full democracy so let's start uh with the kosai first thanks for the question this is a great question a big question too uh i i i will rather go from the people perspective so we've been conducting a survey since 2015 before the election so trying to test we just borrow some questionnaires from the asia parameters questionnaires from the world value service to trying to test like what is the citizen attitudes toward democracies

human rights and democratic process and good governance or whatever we're just trying to understand the people perception and then how as a civil society can engage to improve the perception of the people commitment to democracy so the data i mean like the the asia barometers asia foundation and and then a lot of surveys show that our peoples are committed to democracy that's for clear so it's being proved that in 1990 elections it's been proved that in 2012 by election in 2015 and now it's already proved that

the are are committed to do the part the only thing is how the people can cr and engage and to promote that that's that's a very difficult part and that's the thing something i think that the annual government needs to commit it to because for from us a civil society member and as a member the prospecting from the civil society us the role of civil society is very crucial to move forward to create a space for the people to participate in this democratic which is crucial and this is very foundation to move forward to be more

democratic so i think that for the last five years when you when we look at the indicator from freedom house indicator from free press that the indicators are declining because because of the the the regulations regarding the free speech free freedom of associations the the rules of society has been i have to shrinking and declining that's the dangerous for father democratic uh uh process we are we we are just just just the the very first the very beginning of the journey towards democracy the militaries are staying there a lot

of people has been disadvantaged to participate not necessarily i mean like i uh citizenship but also other uh legal framework and other processes we have a lot of migrant workers who are not able to participate even though they are citizens they are the citizens in thailand there are many thousands millions of people has never participated in the election and in malaysia i mean a lot of people so i mean like so so so i think that for me uh if we want to move further uh energy government need to

instead of inviting so need to open up for the citizen or for the civil society to participate in the process and open up for the media to be independent media to to communicate with the democratic person that's i think crucial and fundamental to move forward for me from i mean as a civil society member i would rather press on that approach yeah i think it will be more sensible with this popular mandate nld should feel very confident to open up more but i don't know because they may be still worried about their relations with

the military uh maybe their party can address later uh richard you know the country well and you also know the you know criticism primarily from the from the western society focusing on rohingya issues do you think the western is a little bit biased emphasizing too much about this minority issues rather than looking at the overall achievement of energy for these ongoing democratic transitions i mean first of all i mean i would say that in my perception of this i i don't see so strictly a divide between uh people from

say europe and the us and people in myanmar in general i'd say it's a divide between people whose job it is to do research or to focus on on sort of policy issues and people who do not do that who are ordinary citizens or have some other kind of profession because i would say that you know many many of the researchers are civil society actors and to some extent people working in politics that i do meet in myanmar share a grievance over the way uh the rohingya crisis unfolded um and and you know i think what sometimes does get

lost in the west is um you know there was this there was a series of newspaper sort of headlines and saying well you know now the nld is sort of cozying up to the tatmador and they are now sort of best buddies and sort of have a very cooperative partnership because of you know rakhine because the west sort of people in in europe when they see that that onsen suggest goes to the hague to make the case to defend myanmar they think well you know this must be must be very pleasing to to people in the armed forces

and you know certainly i think it doesn't harm the relationship but it goes missing that within myanmar and certainly for media that is uh military affiliated um the nld and aung swansea g are still being depicted as sort of uh being too close with the the muslim population and it is sometimes a sentiment that the stance of the nld on the rohingya is not strict enough even right and so it's not necessarily the alliances that i think sometimes i perceive um but in the future you know of course you know when we're looking at the

question of um the sort of democratic challenges and democratization yeah it has to be said that the protection of of of the most essential values of democracy right these are the essential sort of human rights like freedom of movement freedom of speech you know um freedom to participate in elections right these need to be protected there needs to be we cannot have uh you cannot have a government uh that doesn't protect these things and expect that at the same time you have uh somehow democratic process right you

might have structural improvements but i think in the long term uh that will be very difficult and i think you know sort of you there was a question coming through a little bit and sort of you know what why is dld doing what it's what it's doing and how it's been acting and i you know from you know i've talked with uh with many many many many uh uh nld politicians uh over the years and there is a perception within the party that the party is aware of acting at times undemocratic of defending right like when i when you

know when the party like decided not to repeal article 60 of the telecommunications law that is a a way of repressing uh criticism uh you know there's an awareness within the nld that this is not completely in line with the democratic policy platform but the justification is to say well while myanmar is not entirely democratic we can't afford to be entirely democratic either um because we can't we we need have actually like sort of more control simply because we have to navigate as an environment where we

uh where it's not complete democracy where the military still plays an important role but i think you know looking forward that's one of the things that will have to to change because i think that that's a really dangerous um approach to to kind of if you delay um your advocacy for for democratic values and to delay uh democratic uh decisions or democratic policies um then what you're inevitably doing to some extent is that you're more strongly consolidating um you know whatever way you do behave and

if that's an autocratic more autocratic way or if it's more fruitarian uh decision you know like the nld's uh took out the section on protecting uh media freedom and freedom of speech from its election manifesto now for this for this election i mean these are kind of developments uh that will have to be reversed and we will have to get back to sort of an open advocacy of the ruling party for democrat democracy and democratic values if we're to see more democratization yeah i cannot agree more because south

korea was under the long authoritarian period and this ruling black bloc usually finds a reason to delay democratizations so i think i i always compare myanmar to the 70s and 80s of south korea okay mo what's your opinion you know at one point in time i was also looking at south korea's democratization model to see how that could um have some some resonance in myanmar's own experience um but okay we're talking about myanmar today um i i think uh you know what uh well kozai and richard have highlighted i think

really points to this um to this importance of looking at um democracy and you know the the transition to democracy the democratization and all the elements or the qualities of it right so yes elections are one part you know the right to vote in standing elections yes that's one key element of democracy but so do those freedoms that richard has talked about and um and also the respect for the rule of law so when we come to that respect for the rule of law right this is where i i start thinking we need

a new roadmap of our own creation and why i say this is because you know people who are familiar with myanmar's recent political history will know that the current democratization process that we have is not one that was imagined by the people it was something that was welled into reality by the military government i said this at a panel yesterday as well so we are living with this uh something that was uh willed on us this democratization process that was imagined and conceptualized and somehow

uh you know laid out in a road map a so-called seven-step roadmap by the military and if and you know if you look at it right um we are still in that final step of that roadmap of trying to construct a democratic union right so so i think uh as long as the 2008 constitution uh goes on as it is it is uh it is a constraint and it will continue to be a constraint you know unless we we try to negotiate this amendment and what goes on said about bringing in inputs from a wider range of stakeholders is also very important

because earlier on we were talking about how democracy promotion needs to be further entrenched beyond just you know uh voting for or against based on your own uh you know emotive response to the process but really looking at that kind of you know deeper civic um awareness and and and that kind of um uh higher political awareness which core science surveys have been tracking so i i think uh that that is the next step going forward in terms of you know the discussions of the conversations on what

democracy means for us we really need to do a lot more of that kind of civic uh advocate advocacy and the education you know i used to naively think that as long as there's this kind of established process to discuss all these um amendments and so on you know we could tackle that but you know we've seen that process has run into roadblocks because um either the military does not seem ready to relinquish the role and reach that it currently maintains in the country's political life or you know um how do they view

their own uh role uh they've been preparing for so-called returning to the barracks uh by by preparing that uh economically but the withdrawal from political life i think has its own complexities you know uh the 25 percent in parliament the the appointment of three ministerial portfolios and so on so i i think when we start discussing among all the stakeholders i think you know one of the important stakeholders is also the military you know if they're part of the problem they they have to be part of the solution uh

simplistically but uh those crucial conversations taking place need to take place across that wide range when we talk about you know entrenching those values of democracy and getting that wider understanding towards the the enlightened self-interest and if you look at it um you know the international institute for uh democracy and electoral assistance international idea they have this um global democracy index uh i looked at myanmar's position it's in the mid-range of democratic performance so looking at that

of course we can see where are the areas that uh further need to be um constructively dealt with and again you know uh we're not that bad if we look around in southeast asia our neighboring countries and so on asean you know myanmar's democracy is not that bad in terms of voice and expression and freedom of choice i mean after all look at the votes we've we've showed that you know we want to vote in the government we want to collect the government that we want to chart the future but so now the question now is

how do we chart that future and and how do we then you know use our social collective action uh to to continue with those consultative and communal actions that are also very central uh to democracy so i think you know there's a lot to be done but um again going back to what i talked about responding to the economic and social fallout of covet 19.

if you look at what are the challenges of addressing or responding to covet 19 you will see the same kind of topics come up when we talk about democracy you know there are questions of inclusion there are questions of equality there are questions of consultation they are questions of going with evidence-based decisions so i think these are important ingredients also for democracy and we need to have um that kind of uh more constructive dialogue and crucial conversations to to find that common ground or

mutual interest that you know all of us can agree uh to work on together and and you know call me an idealist call me a constructivist but i do believe in in the power of of dialogue and discussion okay yeah it's better to be sitting across them uh you know sitting face to face uh with them across the table then having them in the streets with guns thank you kind i guess uh your institute and your uh networks have studied a lot and with the under the local government setting so there seems to be more cooperation

between local government and civil society regionally so uh watch your in the long-term prospect for uh the more to to the past to democracy you you need to mute yeah we actually to consolidate consolidate democracy we need to promote a civic engagement in in every sphere of the society i think that it's very important or participatory democracy we can call it so with the the the energy government they they need to create or and enlarge these spaces but uh what actually we are also seeing seeing these spaces

at the at the local level but not especially in burma majority area so actually the that's why sometimes yeah it's very difficult for us to uh to uh to generalize uh to generalize blanketly and say that our civil space is uh sharing the completely in in our country so there are areas especially especially i think that especially freedom of association freedom of protest something like that especially in in rakhine rakhine state rakhine state uh internet in the internet service was disrupted and then the the student

aragon student they protested and then they were they were they were sent to prison that kind of thing should not have been not should not have occurred but at the same time there are there are areas there are areas where uh civil engagement is enhanced enhanced especially uh especially at the township level now especially in environment majority regions region seven seven regions so they are local people they are actually working closely with the members of parliament members of parliament and township

planning and implementation committee so township blind planning and implementation companies are they they are responsible for coordination and and implementing development development pro projects so the mvs because they they want to get votes not from from from from their constituency they have to listen to their listen to their voices so now the local voices are hard and then they get into account in in budget planning budget planning and development development uh process but at the same

time i think that more more deliberation more institutionalized institutionalization of these spaces it's very very important very crucial to democratization because because they usually these are uh these engagements they are not up to now they have not been formalized so it depends on it sometimes it depends on context or something like that there are personal personal contacts so we they're not the energy government they must they should they should formalize these civil engagement civic space and then

so concern more no they should conduct more conservation especially in the ethnic area because the brm project bell and road initiative project the big mega project this projects can have huge impact on on the on the local community even now the the ethnic people they excluded they think that uh their voices are not hard with respect to these manga projects so i think mechanisms and the spaces should be created to listen to their voices otherwise they don't have they don't have outlets to not to bend their

anger or to to defend their grievances i think that that that that kind of mechanism very crucial in in the next down thank you kind i guess uh i i have only about 10 minutes to discuss and i like this question and yey ang has asked even before we are discussing how we move to full-fledged full democracy we have to discuss the current quality of myanmar democracy and he or she is asking myanmar getting closer to liberal democracy or mob democracy more populist democracy i would say if i add you know um

您在缅甸运动中存在某种问题，非常激进的民族主义佛教等等，显然与自由民主的愿景不符，所以我想，先不谈少数群体问题，如果您只关注主流，您如何评估您国家民主的现状？考虑到这种非常民族主义的佛教和那种情绪，这对您国家的民主质量有什么影响？那么，我们先从科赛开始，也许您

每人可以讲两分钟。我认为我们离民主生活还很远，我们只是走在路上，我们才刚刚开始行使选举权。选举不等于民主。我的意思是，每个民主国家都有选举作为选举政府的手段，但一旦我们有了选举，我们就不能仅仅放任不管，然后我们就有了民主。我认为称我们的政治体制为民主还为时过早。所以我们还很远，我们才刚刚开始。

马姆刚才提到，目前的框架不是人民的，我们还没有拥有这个过程。所以我们需要拥有这个过程，然后我们才能前进。我认为要评估民主的质量，还有很长的路要走。是的，保持关注。谢谢你，理查德。是的，非常感谢你的问题。你知道，我同意科赛的观点。今天，我会将缅甸描述为一个混合政权，它既有这方面的部分。

威权主义的部分，也有合法民主的部分。问题在于你如何处理这些。过去有一种理解，一旦你开始民主化进程，它就会自动展开，你会自动进入巩固阶段。我们现在不再这样想了。每个人都知道这很艰难，而且它不是一个你可以预知其方向的过程。但有一点我想强调的是。

你知道，也许几十年来我第一次认为，这次选举也表明，缅甸目前的状况相当稳定。无论文官政府拥有什么权力，它们都相当稳定。无论军方拥有什么控制权，它们都相当稳定。而且，不要忘记，尽管存在所有批评，但这些批评是正确的，但文官政府将在两院都再次获得多数席位。任何不需要修宪的改革都可以进行。

并且在其中有很大的潜力来取得民主进步和制定民主政策。我认为，展望未来，虽然每个人都希望在修宪、民族和解与和平等重大问题上取得进展是可以理解的，但我认为，正如我之前所说，军方在未来五年内不会放弃权力。但如果文官政府专注于它通过拥有多数席位所拥有的一切可能性，这可能包括。

司法改革，你知道，法治，你知道，加强民主原则，我们谈到了所有这些事情在技术上都是可行的，而且我认为这也是我想强调的一点。好的，嗯，我想有人问了你关于缅甸是否有足够的言论自由的问题。你的反应是什么？是的，我认为，是的，这是真的，我们可能听到更多的批评，因为压制声音的现象越来越少，我认为这是一个加分项。我的意思是。

你知道，我们在民主制度中看到的真正是不断地突破界限，这是一个持续的努力，不仅仅是建立民主，而且一旦你相信你已经达到了一定的稳定水平和民主制度的基本原则，你就会继续建设它，培育它，努力改进它。所以它确实是持续性的。我认为，这正是我们现在所看到的。人们的声音确实无法被压制。我认为一旦。

上一届政府，在全国民主联盟（NLD）之前，USDP政府突然放宽了对互联网、媒体审查的大部分限制。一旦你放开了这些限制，你就无法真正收回。那么，关键在于这些对话如何继续下去。我之所以使用“关键对话”这个词，是因为这些是你需要在不同层面、不同社群之间进行的对话，以便它们能够向行政部门、向。

立法部门提供反馈，以实现持续改进。所以，我认为，我总是试图从建设性的角度看待事物，我认为这是必不可少的，正如科赛和理查德也强调的那样，言论自由以及宗教自由、集会自由等等，它们也是民主的本质特征，我们也需要不断地，你知道，建设和改进。我一直在思考这种持续建设和改进的性质。

关于民主，以及民主的一部分，即选举过程，它们并不完美，系统存在缺陷。对我来说，这些缺陷表明我们需要在哪里专注于持续改进，以达到科赛早些时候在节目中提到的包容性地位，并提高民主质量。你知道，国家必须拥有它，公民和领导层必须拥有并领导它。拥有并领导它。而且，你知道，我。

昨天也分享了这一点。你知道，1935年，缅甸作为英国殖民地，赋予了妇女投票权，我认为这是亚洲第一个赋予妇女投票权。如果你进行比较，美国妇女在1920年获得了投票权，而英国（当时缅甸的殖民宗主国）的妇女在1918年获得了投票权，但那是在多少个世纪的争取之后。如果你看看美国。

非裔美国男性在1870年获得了投票权，这几乎是在美国成为一个独立主权国家近一个世纪之后。当然，我们现在看到的这些消息提醒我们系统和实践中的不完美以及持续改进的必要性。所以我想再次强调这一点。我认为，缅甸在继续其转型过程中需要牢记的是持续改进的必要性。

这种改进的需要需要我们所有关心我国政治未来的人的投入。谢谢。科赛，两分钟。是的，我同意马姆的观点，这是一个持续的过程。我认为缅甸在民主治理方面需要改进民主化。在某些领域已经取得了进展，例如预算透明度。过去我们看不到预算的细节，现在预算透明度已经达到了国际标准。

所以需要改进，但现在，例如预算透明度和政策以及非政策领域。所以政府必须承担责任。现在他们必须对政策的构成部分负责。这就是为什么我认为这是一种斗争。所以有些领域需要大幅改进，但也有一些领域已经有了很大的改进。所以我想，民主化和民主。

促进民主治理将是一个非常有趣的主题，现在对我们缅甸所有人来说，我们必须继续监测，无论是由谁执政，是执政党还是其他政党。我们必须与这些问题保持联系。公众必须能够获取信息，这一点非常重要。获取信息，这就是为什么我们也在鼓励和推动政府更加透明，让公众能够获取。

公共信息。所以我认为，这对于政府以及民间社会和公众在近期、中期和长期来说都将是极具挑战性的。非常感谢您。这是一次精彩的讨论。我的四位杰出小组成员的主要收获是：第一，尽管存在一些问题，例如克钦邦的投票问题以及选举委员会的一些问题，但我认为你们似乎都同意。

这次选举是公正的，你们相信选举过程的公正性。第二，尽管如此，你们许多人都指出，缅甸仍需进行大量改革，以使制度更加包容，让少数群体获得选举权，并改变选举规则，使其更倾向于比例代表制，而不是简单的多数制。第三，你们相信大多数缅甸人民都非常致力于民主。

因此，有很大的空间和能量进行改革，走向稳定之路，走向进一步的民主化，即使目前的宏观图景是从顶层强加的。我的愿望是，所有这些来自上次选举的民众授权都能更积极、更自信地一步一步走向完全的民主。非常感谢来自缅甸、汉堡、新加坡和韩国的与会者。这是一次精彩的。

谈话，祝你们一切顺利。感谢与会者提出非常重要的问题。谢谢。谢谢。