This status has already been posted on my account. WHAT TYPE OF FEDERAL ARMY SHOULD BE FOUNDED? YE KYAW THURA You might have known that Myanmar government’ representatives said at the peace talk held in MPC (Myanmar Peace Center) on 8 August 2014 that they had agreed to federal union in principle. If our country is going to practice federal union, political powers will be exercised by the states and divisions including legislative, administrative and judicial powers. As a matter of federal union, some armed ethnic groups claim that federal army must be founded on ethnicity and the post of commander-in-chief must rotate among ethnic peoples. On the other hand, it was said that KNU (Karen National Union) had decided to temporarily stop its cooperation with UNFC (United National Federal Council) because KNU believes that policies set by UNFC can make confrontation between government and armed ethnic groups and some people are concerned that KNU’s announcement might impact on effort to national peace. I would like to present some historical facts associated with so-called federal army to readers. Please see the following. The Burmese have continuously accused the British of pitting one ethnic group against another – the “divide and rule” policy. To a degree this was true, but the British did not need to divide to rule; they had sufficient power. It was rather convenience that prompted them to separate “the hills” from the Burman-dominated river valleys. The periphery, a horseshoe arc of hills and mountains on the west, north, and east where many of the minority peoples resided, was governed separately from Burma Proper, or Ministerial Burma, the homeland of the Burman ethnic group (but including the Arakanese and Mon). (Burma The State of Myanmar, P- 183) As the British recruited military forces in Burma, they did so from was called the “martial races” (the hill peoples), as they had done in India, and some regiments were formed based on ethnicity – e.g., the Kachin Rifles. Approximately 87 percent of the Burma Army in the colonial period was composed of non-Burmans. Since it was the Burmans who were occasionally in revolt and who offered the major political problem as nationalism and anti colonial developed, the use of minority forces was a means to ensure loyalty among the troops because they would support the British and be presumed to be less reluctant to fire, if necessary, on Burmans. (Burma The State of Myanmar, P- 183) In addition, with British rule came the expansion of Christian missions. But the Burmans, devote Buddhists as were the Shan, were essentially impervious to missionary activity, while many of the non-Buddhist minorities were converted. The tie between some of the minorities and the colonial power, especially the Karen and the British, was quite strong, and the Karen insurrection, first for an independent Karen state, which some British had unofficially advocated, and later for autonomy, became the major insurgencies after independence and continued in truncated form at the close of the century. (Burma The State of Myanmar, P- 183/ 184) These rebellions represented an enormous financial drain on the state. Aside from the Vietnamese communists, the Burma Army was probably the most battle-hardened force in Southeast Asia, and although it remained relatively small, it was a major expense on a government whose ken was limited. No insurgency, separately or in union, could threaten the existence of the center after the initial success of insurgents in the first few years of the republic, but they did exert pressure on the treasury, denied to the government the development of the extensive and potentially valuable resources located in those areas, allowed the minorities to engage in extensive smuggling (thus denying revenue to the center), undercut the legitimacy of the state, and kept much of the minority population in poverty. (Burma The State of Myanmar, P- 186) If diplomats usually characterize their attitudes toward crises as “cautiously optimistic,” in the Myanmar case it would be more accurate to portray our views as “pessimistic.” Perhaps some new initiatives might move the categorization to “cautiously pessimistic.” That, in any case, might be called progress. “The essential issue is not how foreigners, however well-wishing, may regard Burma, nor how theoretically sound their analyses. Rather, it is how well these foreign perspectives conform to Burmese conceptions of their own society. Whatever road Burma/ Myanmar choose, and whatever the results, action will be taken bama-lo, in the Burmese manner.” (Burma The State of Myanmar, P-310) Given the above, I think there is no need to add something to understand why the British had founded ethnic military forces called martial races” (the hill peoples) in Myanmar. British used its old weapon called divide and rule between Burmans and other ethnic peoples especially Karen that it had been using around the world after annexation of Myanmar in 1824 and the British created some stories to divide between Karen and Burmans. The Karen was the elder brothers. And obtained all the words of God. God formerly loved the Karen nation above all others. But because of their transgressions, He cursed them. And now they have no books. Yet He will again have mercy on them. And love them above all others God departed with our younger brothers. The white foreigner. He conducted God away to the West. God gave them power to cross waters and reach lands And to have rulers from among themselves. Then God went up to heaven But He made the white foreigners More skillful than all other nations. When God had departed The Karen became slaves to the Burmans, Became sons of the forest and children of poverty; Were scattered everywhere. The Burmans made them labour bitterly, Till many dropped down dead in the jungle, Or they twisted their arms behind them, Beat them with stripes, and pounded them with the elbow, Days without end. MEMOIRS OF THE FOUR – FOOT COLONEL- P. 6 Alas! Where is God? Our ancestors said that when our younger brothers came back, The white foreigners Who were able to keep company with God, The Karens will be happy. MEMOIRS OF THE FOUR – FOOT COLONEL- P. 6 The worst situation came when the British, with strong urging by a very limited number of enthusiastic but somewhat misguided American missionaries, including J. B. Vinton, used Karens trained as policemen or soldiers to suppress the Burman resistance movements, most of which were euphemistically called dacoities or armed robberies, during the first few decades of British rule in Burma. “True Love and Batholomaew” , J. Falla, Cambridge University Press 1991, pp. 21- 22 was quoted in p 9 of 53 – Fifty Years of Struggle , Ba Saw Khin, Tucson, Arizona , 1998 (Revised 2005) Actually, Indian, Punjabi, Gurkha, or Nepalese, and other minority (Kachin and Chin) troops were also employed to subdue the Burmans, especially in large uprisings, including the 1930 Saya San rebellion. Particular resentment, especially toward the lowland Karens, may have focused on the fact that they had always been neighbors of the Burmans for many generations without any serious conflict between the two ethnic peoples. These peaceful pre-colonial days of course represented the time when the Burmans would always have had upper hand, until the arrival of the British (rulers) and Americans (missionaries) who managed to win the allegiance of the Karens and used them in their nefarious (in the eyes of the Burman) service to suppress the Burman nationalist activities. (p 9 of 53 – Fifty Years of Struggle , Ba Saw Khin, Tucson, Arizona , 1998 (Revised 2005) In actual fact the cat was out of the bag the evening before. Whilst he was talking to his two Brigadiers, Let – ya and Kyadoe, his then Deputy (Col, Ne Win at that time) came in; Dun, doubting his capacity to read orders, briefed him about the conference that was to take place. He listened quite attentively, but at the end he got up and said, If only the Karens had started two months ago it would be alright for them, not now, and left. The two Brigadiers were just left there, stunned at such an attitude and behavior. No doubt it would look strange and funny in other countries for a deputy to be so brazen as to make such remarks in the face of his Commander, but nothing was strange in Burma then. (P- MEMOIRS OF THE FOUR – FOOT COLONEL) The existing state stands for just name of one ethnicity. Although we call the state where most of the Shan ethnic people live Shan state, that state is not one where only Shan people live. Many ethnic peoples such PaO, Wa, Lishaw, Icall, Ahkha, Danu, Inn, Lahu and Bamar live together in the same state. In other states here, different ethnic peoples live together as in Shan state. Depending on those facts, we can say that it’s not natural if an army would be founded on just Shan race. Who will assure other minorities in Shan state that so-called Shan federal army founded on Shan race would not oppress them? The foundation of so-called federal army for only one majority race is like amounting to negligence of other minority races residing within the same state. If so, we have to let them found 135 types of federal army based on 135 national races as there are 135 ethnic peoples identified as national races by Myanmar government. Actually, the foundation of federal army which is proportional to the number of each of national race is easier said than done and it can be said that it’s very dangerous for our country. So-called federal army did not include even in the claim of federalism known as Shan principle 1961. Suppose one race had 20 regiments proportionally as federal army were founded on eight national races, then Bamar, the majority, had only 20 regiments while there were 140 regiments among other ethnic peoples. We need to consider whether Bamar, the majority, would willingly accept that foundation of federal army when it so happened that 20 Bamar regiments were surrounded by 140 ethnic regiments which had once fought against Burma army for long. Preparation depends on how it is defined. If non-Burman races demand the foundation of federal army based on ethnicity, Burmans may also claim that federal army should be founded on the proportion of number pointing at their majority power. Words can be defined as you like. Can’t we consider that federal army should be founded as army reserved for union armed force on various ethnic peoples not one race only making compromises for the sake of internal peace, national reconciliation and development of political reforms? Only when our country has been familiar with democratic practices, can we revoke that army reserved depending on situation. For the time being, we need to build trust between us. We have never learnt that there are federal army, federal navy and federal air force founded on Black people, Asian people, Sino people, European people, Arab people and Red Indian in the United States of America, the very first country that has practiced federalism in the world. Our country’s future depends on how history will be utilized. Both chauvinism and narrow mindedness are extremism. There are few countries, the states of which are named after specific racial groups in the world including the US composed of diversity. We know the US’s history is not identical to ours. We can also sympathize with the aims of national races struggling for self-determination. We support national ethnic peoples who have been claiming federalism. It should be noted that once Myanmar regained her independence, there were regiments founded on racial groups such as Burma Rifile, Kachin Rifile, Karen Rifile, Kayah Rifile, Shan Rifile and Chin Rifile etc by the British. At that time, non-Burman minority regiments collaborated with one another in fighting against a coulple of Burman regiments on the pretext of chauvinistic behavior of Burmans. At the beginning of the fighting, Burmans were unexpectedly defeated in almost every operation area. They did not hope to be so. With the majority people and the frequent lovers of fighting, Burmans organized as much as they could. Then they revised the results of fighting. However, they suffered severe trauma as they were harmed by those ethnic groups. They did not hope ethnic groups did so. I think military rule and civil war were born out of such trauma. We, Burmans look upon all national races or ethnic peoples as our brothers, but we see most of them do not do as we do. Now that they claim federal army, we need to be careful when dealing with them. Anyway, we will have to choose something for our country. Unity or secession? Peace or War? We need far-sighted leaders for our country and our people. Politics cannot be identically copied. YE KYAW THURA
Posted on: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 01:47:55 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015