“Decolonization not only refers to the complete "removal of the domination of non-indigenous forces" within the geographical space and different institutions of the colonized, but it also refers to the "decolonizing of the mind" from the colonizer's ideas that made the colonized seem inferior.” Karl Hack (2008)
As we all know, 75 years ago on 4 January 1948, at 4:20 am — a time specifically chosen by astrologers as the most favorable hour for the momentous occasion — the Union Jack flag was lowered for the last time at the Government House in Yangon, and replaced by the flag of the new independent Burma.
The Union of Burma came formally into existence on 4 January, 1948. On this day, Sir Hubert Rance, the last British Governor, handed over authority to Sao ShweThaik, the first President of the Burmese Republic; the Cabinet took the oath of office, and Parliament ratified the treaty with Great Britain providing for the independence of Burma as a country not within His Britannic Majesty’s dominions and not entitled to His Britannic Majesty’s protection. This treaty was signed in London on 17 October, 1947, and enacted by the British Parliament on 10 December, 1947. This treaty was known as Nu-Atlee Agreement. Thakin Nu became the first Prime Minister of independent Burma.
This is worth to mention that, in the election held in April 1947, the two Rohingya representatives, Mr. Sultan Ahmed and Mr. Abdul Gaffar, returned on the votes of Rohingya Muslims as members of the constituent Assembly, were also among them who took the oath of allegiance to the Union of Burma on the 4th January 1948 as members of the new parliament of the Union of Burma.
The Union of Burma was formed on the basis of the 1947 Panlong Accord, one year prior to its independence. As the British was looking to withdraw from their colonial territories as quickly as possible, began to see the Burman leaders, led by the war hero General Aung San, as their best negotiating partners. They made a halfhearted attempt to ensure representation of the non-Burman ethnic groups in a new Burmese state by requiring as part of the 1947 Aung San-Atlee Agreement that the Burman leaders hold a conference to determine the political desires of all the ethnic groups. This was fulfilled by the Panglong Conference of 1947 to satisfy the British, leading to independence on January 4, 1948.
The Panlong is not an accord between ethnic segments—between the Burman and the non-Burman, rather, it is an accord between Ministerial Burma and other territories which were not part of Ministerial Burma – i.e., the Frontier Areas, including the Federated Shan States. It was signed by U Aung San, the head of the interim executive council of Ministerial Burma, and Shan princes, Kachin and Chin chiefs. The Karean, Mon, Rakhine and Karenni leaders were represent as observers.
The essence and spirit of Panlong Accord was to join together in order to jointly obtain independence from Britain. As well, there was an understanding that no constituent territory would be more equal than the others or occupy a super-ordinate or supper position vis-a-vis the rest. By the same token, no constituent state was to be subordinated to any other territorial entities or units.
However, for Arakan, which was forcefully occupied by Burman inJanuary 1785, was marked as unfortunate day that has lost of the legitimate right to independence of the people of Arakan by transferring of their sovereignty to the so-called Independent Sovereign Republic, which was to be known as ‘Union of Burma’. It was a joint-stock company of old-colonialism with Neo-colonialism, a joint venture between the British and the coalition of Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League (AFPFL) that was to form Burma’s first independent government, to fabricate the artificial and false nationhood of ‘Burma’. And in this process the people of Arakan lost their right to independence, on account of these monstrous imperialists’ creation. This imperialist imposed administrative ‘unity’ or ‘nationality’ that has no legal validity under the Decolonization Law, and they cannot, legally deny the right to self-determination, and the right to separate legal existence of the people of Arakan.
Resolution 2625-XXV of the general Assembly of the United Nations that now constitutes a part of International Law regarding decolonization stated that “all colonial territories have ‘juridical status’ that is ‘separate’ and ‘distinct’ from the colonialist country, and ‘from their colonial territories’, and this separate juridical status remains as long as the people of each of this colonial territory have not yet exercised their right to self-determination.” The Britishers violated this principle of separate juridical status of colonial territories, when they transferred their legal ‘sovereignty’ over Arakan to the Burma Union.
Another fundamental principle is that a colonialist power has no sovereign right over a colonial territory, that it cannot transfer sovereignty to other power regarding territory that has also been trampled on. Sovereignty over a colonial territory resides with the people of that colony and not with the colonialist power. This has been stipulated in the UN Resolution 1514-XV. British’s transfer of ‘sovereignty’ over Arakan to Burma was therefore downright illegal. Britain has no sovereign power over Arakan. ‘Nemo datquod non habet’, ‘No one gives what he does not have.’
The concept of ‘Union of Burma’, which was invented by the colonialists and based on the sanctity of the illegal boundaries of the colonial empire, was established by conquests. It is a state that is based on colonialist conquered territories without reference to the conquered peoples, their cultures, languages, histories, identities, and inalienable rights. Union Burma is thus admittedly a state based solely on British colonialism—without decolonization. M. Dillard, judge of the international Court of Justice, had stated that ‘it was the people who should determine the destiny of a territory and not the territory should determine the destiny of the people’. In the case of Arakan, the British conquered territory determined the destiny of the people of Arakan.
There can be no compromise between the concept of ‘Union of Burma’ and the principle of ‘decolonization’, because the one goes directly against the other. Decolonization requires ‘liquidation of all colonial empire’ with specific steps and definitive procedures, but Union of Burma exists on the principle of the total preservation of the territorial integrity of the previous colonial empire; an empire is not liquidated if its integrity is preserved. ‘Union of Burma’ is still an UN-liquidated and UN-decolonizes colonial empire with Burma replacing Britishers as the colonial masters.
In addition to these, there is no legality and judicial values of the Treaty on the transfer of ‘sovereignty’ between British and Burma signed on October 7, 1947, especially concerning the transfer of ‘sovereignty’ over Arakan to Burma.
Firstly, the glaring incompatibility of the Treaty with the decolonization principles of the UN, that had been imposed universally.
Secondly, this Treaty clearly violated the right to self-determination of the people of Arakan.
Thirdly, the Treaty was neither signed by any representative of the people of Arakan nor given mandate from them.
Fourthly, the power and authority of the people of Arakan was arbitrarily ignored in the Treaty.
Finally, the transfer took place without consulting the people of Arakn through plebiscite or referendum, and doing it outside all established procedures of the United Nations Decolonization Law and precedents set up by the International Court of Justice.
It is irony of the fate that the portion of time preceding Burmese independence was a very dark period for the people of Arakan. The people of Arakan hardly believe that the Burmans govern them; but they strongly feel that they are colonized. After being integrated into Burma the people of Arakan have been a part of unitary state of the Union of Burma during which time they have been subjected to brutal and inhuman treatment such as; human rights abuses, killings, rapes, ignorance, poverty and social injustice and have been subjected to virtual ethnic and cultural genocide.