Burma Military Institution: Turning into a major power equation of National Reconciliation

Nyo Ohn Myint
Mizzima News
December 31, 2007
News Commentary

Burma's State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) have used Burma military forces as their core political element to face escalation pressures and awareness from international community including community of world body; United Nations. But, regime top leader senior general Than Shwe tended to save military institution from the political storm. He instead, sacrificed civil militia groups including USDA in this September people power movement led by Buddhist monks.

Recent days Thailand's elections results that showed Thai military coup leaders opened the door for people to decide. Leave the army away from the political struggle to avoid tension between army and citizens that happened in 1992 bloody suppression. Thai power struggle seems that elite political blocs have faced their own agendas than using military power in the final political struggle. Unlike Thai political society, Burma's generals used the military institution to challenge the citizens and defend their wealth and stability.

Nevertheless, International community and restless people of Burma, political activists and spiritual leaders adopted a very popular word of "National Reconciliation" and pose to downplay what regime has done against their own citizens and democracy movement almost two decades from rural to urban.

International community and various governments included regime's diehard supporters China, India and ASEAN decided to push the regime to grip the grand opportunity to reconcile with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to end the country's nightmare, disasters and backwardness. No matter, different strategies they made, the objective of their requests and demands are the same; "Enough is enough and let's move forward".

However, why regime has ignored the whole world's demands? Recently, one of the regime apologists stressed that Senior General Than Shwe needs a time to reinforce his tailor made domination of militarism after September political uprising. Apologist said that senior general might not have any immediately worry about Daw Aung San Suu Kyi as long as she is being detained or rest of the angry citizens, spiritual leaders or international pressures; he only cares about his own army and military officials who do not dare to show their unhappiness of his performance towards the country's stability.

Indeed, there might have some logically differences between top generals Than Shwe and Maung Aye, but Than Shwe cares about how long he could divide between military institution and citizens, this is a key for his maintaining a power. Most of his speeches and statements are meant to the army's unity, encouragement of militarism is needed in Burma for defending possible country disintegration, national pride, and ready to fight against the neo-colonialism and even he had created more enemies for his army to keep united.

One of the ASEAN diplomats stressed that "Than Shwe might not have any solution for his own army this time if he declares the defeat of his regime to the democracy movement based on the country needs a political changes lead to the better economy." He could not retreat his words of his regime is the best for the country, and unable to disclose this is a time to work with all parties to rebuild the country.

Obviously, he might use his brutality of keeping up a power. He has showed how his violent means against spiritual leaders, civilians, women, even Burma's once most powerful military institution "military intelligence" along with former prime minister general Khin Nyunt if someone tried to challenge his power. Hence, most of the military officials witnessed and scared these brutalities; knock down any opponents without hesitation with rapid brutal responses.

Closed to the SPDC stressed that "young and mid level officials are fully aware the current mounting political disasters but they have to look after their stability and status quo, position and promotion, of cause their families' wellbeing". But they indeed, wait for another round of civil movement and they would side with the winners. Bottom line is they may be expecting political leaders to assure their safety and their role in the post Than Shwe era, but they still do not have any guarantee or welcome from oppositions.

Indeed, Burma's current popular word of National Reconciliation does not focus the role of military after post Than Shwe era. One of the main power blocs; Burma military institution has been hijacked by elite generals since 1962. Current dictator general Than Shwe learned from late general Ne Win and synchronizes the military as main political bloc in the Burma's political landscape. Either oppositions or military insiders and reformers' limited request of the military institution to stay natural could not convey a clear message to the institution. Perhaps, international community forgets the role of military institution or pays too much attention towards the SPDC and elite generals to reconcile within different and distant political blocs.

Burma and Thai military have many different ideologies; Thai military withdrew from daily politics in 1992 regardless of military elites staged a coup in 2006. But Burmese generals have created more elite role for the defense services into daily political landscape. Than Shwe knows well about it, thus, he promises them as a country savor, created a superior role in social and political functions.

To the end of authoritarian rule, Burmese democratic leaders should work on the military institution, to see the division between SPDC and military personnel to bring future Burma. We all need to prepare for the transitional period with safe haven for military institution, and open minded officials to consider the alternative strategy for the country. All we have to do is to save both citizens and military institution are victims of authoritarian rule. Indeed, Burma's political landscape is a simply mathematic equation, who side with who and when.