Myanmar's Red Shan as Naypyidaw's Strategic Proxy: Understanding the Invisible Hand behind the Red Shan's Protests against the Kachin Independence Army

Naypyidaw has found a local proxy - the Red Shan - to open a new local and propaganda front against the Kachin Independence Army. 

Myanmar generals and its puppet Thein Sein regime have used 'ceasefire negotiations' as a show pursuit of 'peace' - to keep the so-called donors and China on its side. 

Because the KIA insists on political settlement before ceasefires - and has enabled other weaker armed groups to rally around its possible, Myanmar generals are now using the Shan Ni (or red Shan) as its strategic proxy creating the wedge between the KIA and the non-Kachin populations there. 

I am sure the KIA troops are also guilty of rights abuses. But the ultimate culprit is DISHONEST and NEO-FASCIST Myanmar generals and ex-generals who have refused to accept any viable federal system of government. 

In the case of Sri Lanka's colonial war against the Tamil Eelam, Colombo used, among other things, the issue of 'child soldiers' used by the LTTE to try to turn the 'donors' opinion about the Tamil resistance, and Washington eventually aided and abetted Colombo government in the latter's choice of the zero-sum military game with the Tamil resistance. UN agencies and other international bodies were complicit in enabling Sri Lanka's genocidal regime in its pursuit of military victory over lasting political and peace arrangements with the Tamils. For instance, Sri Lanka Government would inflate the number of child soldiers used by the Tamil Eeelam resistance and UNICEF would use those figures at face value, knowing full well that Colombo was un-trustworthy with its pronouncements and facts and figures. 

In my view it is likely that Naypyidaw is emulating Colombo's victorious strategy of aligning its strategic interests with those of the key international players such as USA, China, UK and India. 

(in fact, President Rajapaksa's first trip overseas right after the military defeat of the Tamil resistance was Naypyidaw. He was said to have advised a similarly zero-sum mission against all ethnic resistance groups in Myanmar, when Than Shwe and Maung Aye asked if the Sinhalese had any input to end Myanmar's civil war). 

In fact, Naypyidaw as an internally colonial power is adept at using the classic 'divide and conquer' strategy against ANY GROUP in opposition to it. 

Myanmar generals cannot be trusted when it comes to power, wealth and control of the population, resources and territories. 

They have turned Karens against Karens, the Buddhist Karens against the Christian Karens, the older war-fatigued ethnic resistance leaders against the younger generation resistance leaders, Bama dissidents against themselves, Kokants against the Shan, the Pa-O against the Shan, the Kachins against the Red Shan, the Chinese against the Bama, the Indians against the Bama public, the Rohingya against the Muslims, Buddhist monks against themselves, the students and intellectuals against the dissident ex-army veterans, the Muslims against Muslims, wives against wives, etc. 

This is their strategy - they will NEVER EVER give up or share power, unless they are FORCED to. 

Any strategy or efforts to change the country's political institutions must be based solely on this cardinal and unassailable FACT about the nature of the Burmese generals and their power base - the Armed Forces or Tatmadaw. 

I know what I am talking. Anyone who has not internalized this empirical reality is either delusional or dishonest intellectually about the regimes in Myanmar and their signature pathos of power.


Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.