Burma: catch all thread

[Tim Heinemann]

Have been working with some volunteer buddies helping various ethnic resistance movements and underground activists in this region at intervals now into our seventh year.

After working with ethnics at political, military and grassroots levels, I am not sure of much of anything in this complex land, since I am not on the ground full time. There are, however, a few observations to share.

The media, along with rants from the political Left and Right as well as American audiences, in general, all remain fixated on simplistic images of Burma ... with Aung San Suu Kyi as "the darling of democracy" imprisoned and now released, juxtaposed against the dictator General Maung Aye backed one way or another by profit-hungry nations and international corporations, to include Chevron and TRANSOCEAN.

This misses the point.

After all we have been through in Iraq and Afghanistan in terms of "not getting it" early on in the matter "ethnic power brokers", it is well to consider that the real issue to be creatively faced in Burma is (1) "Ethnic Balance of Power", as well as (2) the role ethnic resistance armies could play in support of vital US National Security interests.

With over 130 different groups and sub-groups, most of which occupy Burma's border areas, and on whose ancestral lands most of Burma's natural resource wealth lies, these ethnic minorities comprise roughly half of the country's populace and legally 7 of its 14 states. The truth is that "Democracy" per means discrimination again to these minorities at the hands of the Burman majority, as has historically been the case. Ethnics dispute the "Democracy First" affirmation of Aung San Suu Kyi, and instead assert that "Matter of National Reconciliation" among all ethnics is the #1 imperative for what ails Burma. Its all about balance, fairness and the righting of old wrongs.

More importantly, ethnic resistance armies comprise the only internal military capacity able to thwart the Burmese dictator backed by China which is after unfettered access to the Indian Ocean. Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD dont have any such capacity. Ethnics, using simple unconventional warfare methods, can be an enduring thorn in the side of all those who seek to profit off of stolen ethnic lands. A target-rich environment.

UW remains the superior form of war in these parts...something that gives ethnics negative leverage to become potential stakeholders in economic development coming like a freight train at them, rather than being mere speed bumps in the way of others' profit.

The Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) for example racked up 80:1 KIA and 120:1 WIA ratios against the Burmese Army in 2009. This is testament to the resolve and competency of freedom fighters who have had their families murdered for decades going up against the conscript and child soldiers in the Burmese Army, which has almost fatally bad morale. Ethnics are a force to be reckoned with no matter how materially impoverished they may be.

Ethnics are also the only internal power base to be applied against the spread of radical Islamists coming through Bangladesh and India. (Bali bombers in 2002 admitted that the Islamic populace of Burma was a future target for radicalization).

So also are ethnic potential "players" in the matter of containing the Burmese dictator's aim of developing nuclear power.

America has a bad track record of not cultivating ethnic power bases well in advance of conflict come surely at us. Burma is now a case in point.

Bottom line. Working now on US vital interests in the region to contain China, radical Islamists and nuclear proliferation, is a compelling reality for us. Yet we remain dangerously fixated on 5 meter targets elsewhere.

Harnessing the Unconventional Warfare power potential of ethnic resistance movements should be part of our "condition setting" calculus. Part of that calculus should involve ethnics compelling needed evolution of the dictator's Dark Ages business model. This could be accomplished by experimenting with more enlightened entrepreneurship ventures that empower the masses as a viable tax base, instead of their being the object of rape, pillage and plunder, as is now the case.

Vulnerability? Fear. The dictator and his stakeholders / supporters are fundamentally fearful of loss of profit, loss of image, loss of economic opportunity, fear of increased insurance costs, fear of media and fear of the truth of what is going on in the shadows. In China's case, it is particularly fearful of unstable access to the Indian Ocean.

Getting wrapped up in Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD (an organization with internal effectiveness and corruption problems) is no different than once again putting all our money and hopes on single ponies like Karzai, Chalabi, and other dictators most recently in the spotlight.

As author Robert D. Kaplan once said when talking about SWA, "Its about tribes, Stupid."

Note: We coincentally smuggled him into the jungles of Burma in 2008 to do research for his present book "Monsoon".

[Backwards Observer]

A target-rich environment.

The dictator and his stakeholders / supporters are fundamentally fearful of loss of profit, loss of image, loss of economic opportunity, fear of increased insurance costs, fear of media and fear of the truth of what is going on in the shadows.

I could be mistaken, but a significant source of the Junta's revenue seems to flow from the gas pipeline. How feasible would a dedicated effort to sabotage the pipeline be? How would you describe or imagine the effect cycle of such a course of action? What about the assassination of military and civilian leadership, to include outside enablers of the regime? Would such activities be helpful or unhelpful? Thanks.

[anonamatic]

I could be mistaken, but a significant source of the Junta's revenue seems to flow from the gas pipeline. How feasible would a dedicated effort to sabotage the pipeline be? How would you describe or imagine the effect cycle of such a course of action? What about the assassination of military and civilian leadership, to include outside enablers of the regime? Would such activities be helpful or unhelpful? Thanks.

I don't know how helpful they'd be if they came from external sources. In that situation it's entirely possible that China could see them (understandably too) as a threat. That even when their own interests would be better served by regime change. In a lot of respects they're stuck, and that in unpleasant ways. On one hand if they want to get rid of a failed regime, they're stuck knowing that if they replace it with something that looks exactly like the last pile of thugs they'll end up with just a new pile of thugs, on the other toleration of corrupt regimes means that they're never going to realize the sort of trade and prosperity with their neighbors that they really want. In some ways (and this is a very bad & limited comparison), the US has been facing a somewhat similar problem with Mexican cartel violence. The most recent solution that the involved parties there have turned to has been intensive training of Mexican forces by Columbian police & military forces. That effort while very promising, is just getting underway, so the outcomes from it are as yet to be determined. In Burma, it might be possible for China to cut it's ties to the junta & put some support behind their opponents directly without falling into a trap of needing to create ideological and dogmatic models out of any new regime. It would be enough to say that they support self-determination for the people without insisting what that should look like. Such a stance might likely be politically palatable where other, more witlessly complex options would not be.

In part some of the key enablers are corporations like Chevron too, & even trying to get them to grow some ethics is a wretched can of worms. They'll quite happily buy their way out of any criticism, & it's because they're so intractably unethical that they're turning themselves into a valid target.

In terms of the opium trade, as far as I know 90% of it does come from Afghanistan, and an awful lot of it ends up in Arab states too. Iran for instance has a not very well reported serious problem with young people becoming addicted to opium that originates from there. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that has been a factor in muting the natural political opposition there.

[Backwards Observer]

In a lot of respects they're stuck, and that in unpleasant ways.

I appreciate that you took the time to whip up the diplomatic voodoo. Thanks for your thoughtful response.

[Dayuhan]

The degree to which the Chevron and Total stakes in the Yabama pipeline "enable" the military regime is I think substantially exaggerated. It's appealing stuff for the knee-jerk anti-corporate crowd but the argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The pipeline exists, and the Thais are going to buy the gas in any event: they don't give a hot round one about human rights abuses in Burma. If Total and Chevron tried to influence the Burmese government they'd simply be forced to sell their stakes, which would be bought by Chinese or Thai interests and business would go on as usual. If Total and Chevron backed out the same would happen. If retrospectively, Total and Chevron had refused to build the pipeline, someone else would have. No shortage of oil companies in Russia and China willing and able to take on a project like that. Burma's energy reserves, and the willingness of the neighbors to buy the product, are enabling factors, but placing the blame on those contracted to build the infrastructure doesn't accomplish much.

I don't see how the Chinese are in any way "stuck" by current circumstances. The status quo is acceptable to them. They don't have a US or western ally on that part of their border. The disorder in Burma has no major adverse impact on them. Burma would not be a major market for Chinese goods in any event and an open Burmese economy could emerge as a competitor in industries demanding cheap labor. The Chinese will be perfectly happy to deal with what is. Like the Thais, they don't care about the human rights abuses, any more than they do in Angola, the DRC, or Sudan. They will develop energy resources and build pipelines no matter what anyone else thinks. Of course there's a risk that pipelines could be sabotaged during a rebellion, or that a new government could cancel existing deals and nationalize projects, but the Chinese are taking similar risks in many places and apparently see them as acceptable.

I could be mistaken, but a significant source of the Junta's revenue seems to flow from the gas pipeline. How feasible would a dedicated effort to sabotage the pipeline be? How would you describe or imagine the effect cycle of such a course of action? What about the assassination of military and civilian leadership, to include outside enablers of the regime? Would such activities be helpful or unhelpful?

You'd get some publicity by whacking the CEOs of Chevron and Total, but there wouldn't be much impact on Burma. You could certainly wreck the Burmese economy (in a loose sort of way I suppose you could call it an economy) by sabotaging energy projects, or create a leadership vacuum by killing officials... but really, who cares enough to bother? There would be all manner of legal implications and risks, and whose interests are sufficiently threatened by the status quo to take them? As in many other backwaters, Burma's leaders are protected largely by their nation's economic and strategic irrelevance: lots of people will preach and deplore, but at the end of the day nobody is willing to do something about it.

[Backwards Observer]

Dayuhan, as always your stolid sobriety is invigorating. You ask,

... but really, who cares enough to bother?

What make you of this:

Ethnics, using simple unconventional warfare methods, can be an enduring thorn in the side of all those who seek to profit off of stolen ethnic lands. A target-rich environment.

Bottom line. Working now on US vital interests in the region to contain China, radical Islamists and nuclear proliferation, is a compelling reality for us. Yet we remain dangerously fixated on 5 meter targets elsewhere.

Harnessing the Unconventional Warfare power potential of ethnic resistance movements should be part of our "condition setting" calculus.

[Dayuhan]

The idea of harnessing the unconventional warfare potential of ethnic minorities in SE Asia to "contain China, radical Islamists and nuclear proliferation" seems rather farfetched to me. For one thing, I'm not at all sure the ethnic minorities have any interest in being harnessed, except to the rather limited extent to which it would serve their immediate interests. I doubt they'd be terribly interested in fighting our enemies; they have enemies of their own. I also doubt that the Chinese, the proliferators, or the radical Islamists would even notice.

If China were to occupy Burma the ethnic minorities would resist and could be "harnessed". If AQ were to establish a cell or the North Koreans (or the Burmese junta) were to set up a nuclear lab in the Shan or Karen territories some harnessing might be done... but none of these really seem like high-probability events. About as likely as a full moon on Chinese New Year, IMO, and scarcely worth planning for.

I can't see how they could be harnessed against the above in any sort of offensive capacity, as the subject of the offense would have to be rather far away, and they aren't folks that like to travel, or fight, outside their own domain.

[Backwards Observer]

Thanks Dayuhan, I appreciate your taking the time to reply. Perhaps in this Chinese New Year of the Rabbit / Cat, the peoples and polities of Asia could all take a moment to reflect on the wisdom of Confucius, who say, "Man who fart in church must sit in his own pew."

[anonamatic]

I can't see how they could be harnessed against the above in any sort of offensive capacity, as the subject of the offense would have to be rather far away, and they aren't folks that like to travel, or fight, outside their own domain.

I don't think it's reasonable to consider harnessing anyone in any of the nations bordering China for any purpose affecting China in a negative way. Objectively, things are such a mess in Burma it's entirely possible that resolution of any sort would result in anything other than a lessing of containment. Right now, abject failure is acting as containment. I'd dispute the idea that they need containment too. What I think they need is the sort of successes that teach them that totalitarian brutality is a strategy that only creates failure.

The sort of idea of containment of China isn't an invalid notion, they've got a really dysfunctional streak of hyper-nationalist imperialism going on in some quarters that does need containing. However they have to do that themselves, and have a higher need to do it than anyone else too. It's not something that's going to get accomplished through some ludicrous bankrupt notion of proxy warfare. One of the lessons that come from Iraq as well as other conflicts is just how pompous and silly that idea is. Containment through the use of force really only applies during armed conflict, outside of that I think a lot of containment stems from the strength of peace and success. By way of example, the maritime conflicts nationalist elements in China have been provoking have been contained by neighbor states perceptions of their own successes & the sentiment that they share a stake in keeping those. They don't perceive themselves as weak, or having nations built that are lacking in comparative value, so they are more invested with motivations to stand up to unreasonable international bullying.

Burma has a pile of internal ugly going on that none of it's neighbors like. The conflict there is growing worse, and it's more likely that things will get worse than they will get better. I'm not even so sure that the draft they just instituted won't end up training the army that will end up shooting them.

[Backwards Observer]

Rangers to the rescue in Myanmar

Founded 14 years ago by an ex-United States army officer and Karen refugees, the Free Burma Rangers provides a lifeline for displaced people in Myanmar's junta-designated "black zones" where soldiers have license to kill ethnic guerillas and civilians with impunity. Painstaking efforts to bring medical aid in and records of atrocities out make the Rangers a force to be reckoned with.

Rangers to the rescue in Myanmar - Photo Essay by Tony Cliff - Asia Times Online, Feb 18, 2011

[Backwards Observer]

Farce follows tragedy in Myanmar
By Bertil Lintner

BANGKOK - If Karl Marx was right that history repeats itself first as tragedy and then as farce, Myanmar may have just entered the farcical phase of its long-running military rule. The first general election held in over 20 years last November and announcement that a new elected National Assembly will be convened on January 31 have not excited many ordinary Myanmar citizens, but have led to wild speculation among foreign pundits about what it all means for the country's political future.

Farce follows tragedy in Myanmar - Bertil Lintner - Asia Times Online, Jan 25, 2011

$$$

Myanmar, North Korea in missile nexus
By Bertil Lintner

BANGKOK - Military-run Myanmar's growing weapons ambitions, including new revelations that the reclusive regime is producing long-range Scud-type missiles with North Korean assistance, threaten to destabilize the region and make the Southeast Asian country a new global weapons proliferation hotspot.

Myanmar, North Korea in missile nexus - Bertil Lintner - Asia Times Online, Mar 2, 2011

$$$

Fog lifts on Myanmar-North Korea barter
By Bertil Lintner

BANGKOK - With the Middle East and North Africa in turmoil, North Korea risks losing some of its oldest and most trusted customers for military hardware. Pyongyang has over the years sold missiles and missile technology to Egypt, Libya, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, Syria and Iran, representing an important source of export earnings for the reclusive regime. The growing uncertainty among those trade partners could explain why North Korea is now cementing ties with a client much closer to home: military-run Myanmar.

Fog lifts on Myanmar-North Korea barter - Bertil Lintner - Asia Times Online, Mar 4, 2011

$$$

Bertil Lintner is a Swedish journalist based in Thailand and the author of several works on Asia, including Blood Brothers: The Criminal Underworld of Asia and Great Leader, Dear Leader: Demystifying North Korea Under The Kim Clan.
Lintner is one of many blacklisted journalists who have not been allowed to enter Burma since 1985. Lintner has written numerous articles and books on Burma, and is considered to be one of the most knowledgeable foreign journalists on Burmese affairs. The State Peace and Development Council says his reports on Burma are groundless and based on wishful thinking.

Bertil Lintner - Wikipedia

...

The State Peace and Development Council [...] is the official name of the military regime of Burma (also known as Myanmar), which seized power in 1988.

State Peace and Development Council - Wikipedia (entry listed as 'outdated')

[anonamatic]

They're good, and the news is broadly, as opposed to more locally, very alarming. When combined with new about the serious increase in internal violence, blatant human rights violations, and overt violent repression, the larger national and international activities they're engaged in do not present any sort of good picture. I think it's a serious mistake for border countries & other nations to engage in alliance behavior, much less apologies & willful ignorance of what's going on. It's obvious that they have some rather ugly plans for their relationships with neighbors.

They have no end of problems, and any country that's governed by what's widely referred to as a "junta" is probably going to fail badly. In the case of Burma, the military has to create and continue all sorts of conflicts to justify it's existence. After all, if there was peace & success, there would be no justification for a military run government. People who think they can equivocate and bargain with these madmen are badly mistaken.

In particular I find it disappointing that US Sen. Webb has bought into their crap.

[AdamG]

A US warship intercepted and halted a North Korean vessel that was bound for Burma and was suspected of carrying missile technology, US media report.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13747912

[anonamatic]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13747912

I'm wondering if that same ship hasn't been stopped before...

[davidbfpo]

An IISS Strategic Comment, which opens with:

A year after Myanmar's first elections in 20 years, the country has taken important steps towards reforming its political system and its economy. It has surprised Burmese citizens and the world with a series of important liberalising measures. These have not yet, however, led to a relaxation of economic sanctions by the United States and European countries.

Ends with:

.. after almost 50 years in exile and said upon his return: 'They have decided to change. It's not what we called for, but there are changes. Even if they are pretending to change, we should push them so the change becomes irreversible.'

Link:http://www.iiss.org/publications/str...opeful-change/

[davidbfpo]

Much has been happening in Burma of late, mainly diplomatic, but after fighting the central government since 1948 a Karen group has agreed to a ceasefire:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...en-rebels.html

[Ray]

I have just met the Consul General Myanmar.

Things are changing!