Manawatu Evening Standard. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1931. THE FUTURE OF BURMA.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 4, 4 December 1931, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1931. THE FUTURE OF BURMA.

The Burma Round Table Conference which was ceremoniously opened by the Prince of Wales in the House of Lords will not be confronted with the extremely difficult problems associated with the proposed Constitution for India. Its essential task, it was stated when the announcement of the Conference was made three months ago, is to discuss the lines of a Constitution for Burma separated from India. The principle of separation has been generally supported. It was recommended by the Statutory Commission, and received the full endorsement of the Burmese delegation to the Round Table Conference a year ago. Whether Dominion status is to come now or in a delayed future, said a Burmese delegate then, the desire for separation from India is almost universal. The British Government at the time accepted the policy, and the present Government is not likely to depart from it. The protracted rebellion in parts of Burma contributed to the delay in proceeding with the Conference, but in recent months the general conditions have shown a vast improvement compared with a year ago, and the unrest is, with the execution of the leaders, now subsiding. The Conference, therefore, meets without the shadow of conflict being thrown over its deliberations. The growth of nationalism in Burma is an important political happening in this century. As the Prince of Wales remarked in his address to the delegates, twenty years ago there were no politics in Burma in the modern sense of the word. But the political transformation has been radical and swift. Following the Montagu - Chelmsford scheme, Burma demanded the same constitution as the Indian provinces at present enjoy. But no sooner had recognition of the right to this been obtained in London than a new political party demanded home rule. This Avas in 1920, and since then the nationalist aspirations of the people have grown in strength. Recognising Burma’s special position, the Simon Commission recommended that it should be excluded from the new Indian policy, and declared that “an opportunity should be taken to break a union which does not rest on common interests.” The maximum of provincial autonomy was suggested. Burma never has been a part of India racially, and an effort is now being made to end the “historical accident,” as the Commisisoners termed it, under which it was included in India. The problems of diversity of races, languages and religions, so common to India, and which have contributed to the failure so far to frame a workable constitution, do not occur in Burma, where 91 per cent .of the people comprise indigenous races. Burmese is the language spoken by the great majority. Territorially, the separation of Burma from India presents no obstacles. It has its own economic problems, and m the matter of government, as the Prince of Wales staled, the Bur-

mese have developed a capacity which is significant of the changing conditions in the country in the past two decades. Another reason which suggests the advisability of separation from India is the point made by the Commission of the constitutional difficulty of giving to Burma a satisfactory place in the new system of Government, which is desired for India. At present in the Central Assembly, in which there are 145 members, Burma Jias five representatives, who wield little if any influence. Where Burmese policy conflicts with that of the majority of the Indian Central Legislature, they are eclipsed by weight of numbers. The two practical issues before the Conference now are the form the new Constitution will take, and the financial adjustments to be made between India and the separated State. The Simon Commission urged that the form should, like the proposal for India, be a stage on the road to self-government. It. is for the Conference to build the framework of the new Constitution, and the Prince of Wales, in urging the members to be wise and careful architects, because their “building will have at once to bear the strains and stresses of a very difficult, restless phase of human history,” has hinted that the task may not be so simple as it might appear.