Myanmar Spring Chronicle – August 12 Perspective
(MoeMaKa) August 13, 2024
The Future of a Nation Shaped by the Declaration of the Three Northern Allies
On August 12, the Brotherhood Alliance, comprising the three armed groups of the Kokang, Ta’ang, and Arakan, issued a statement declaring their unity in bringing about the realization of their military objectives and the political aspirations of the oppressed people. This statement comes after the second phase of Operation 1027 began over a month ago, during which key towns and military headquarters were captured. Following this, some ethnic armed groups and the National Unity Government (NUG) sent messages of congratulations, leading to the recent statement by the three armed groups.
The statement mentions the phrases “remaining military objectives” and “the political aspirations of the entire oppressed Myanmar populace.” These words raise questions about the political and military intentions of the Brotherhood Alliance, as well as the relationship and alignment between the armed groups and the NUG. This has led to speculation about possible differences in goals and strategies.
The mention of “remaining military objectives” from the second phase of Operation 1027, which started in late June, raises questions about what these remaining objectives might be. Speculation includes the possibility of seizing even larger territories or potentially launching attacks on regions predominantly inhabited by the Burmese, such as Mandalay, Bago, Yangon, Sagaing, and Magway. Alternatively, the objectives might involve targeting central military and administrative locations like Naypyidaw. However, the statement does not clearly specify these intentions.
The use of broad terms like “the political aspirations of the entire oppressed Myanmar populace” leaves room for interpretation, making it difficult to discern whether the goal is the overthrow of the military council, a nationwide victory, or the establishment of a federal union. The lack of specific language such as democracy, the downfall of the military, or federalism adds to the ambiguity.
The military, which has held power for decades through successive military leaders, now faces territorial losses not seen since the post-1949-1952 period. This raises questions among anti-junta forces about what kind of system should be established and what agreements should be in place among the armed groups post-military rule. Some believe that agreements on establishing a better system, one based on justice and freedom, should already be in place as the country transitions beyond military rule. The future direction — whether toward a federal union, a looser confederation, or another form of government — should be discussed and agreed upon now to avoid confusion later.
One perspective, which might be seen as overly optimistic, focuses on the immediate goal of overthrowing the military regime, with the belief that other issues can be resolved through dialogue. Another viewpoint suggests that at this crossroads, it is essential to have clear agreements and visions for the post-military era. Waiting until after the fall of the junta to define and negotiate these terms might be too late.
The current military successes in northern Shan State, along with the potential to expand into Mandalay and Sagaing, highlight the necessity of a clearly defined political vision. As military strength grows, there is a concern that military power might dominate political discussions and decisions, potentially sidelining broader political considerations.
While military victory is crucial, focusing solely on military solutions without establishing a political foundation could jeopardize the future of Myanmar. There is concern that the country might face challenges in achieving democracy, freedom, and justice if it becomes overly reliant on military power for its future.