Review

Uprooting Insurgency

General Staff College

The document, which was among others that fell into the hands of the Shan State Army (SSA) two years earlier, gives the reader a fresh look at the 69 years old armed forces of Burma that calls itself the Tatmadaw.

It is 50 pages thick with, 4 chapters sub-divided into 147 sections.

The year of its publication is not mentioned. But, reading through it, it appears to have been written after 1998 (when the Shan United Revolutionary Army became the SSA South) and before 2009 (when the 17 armed organizations had concluded ceasefire with the military government). It notes that there were only three armed groups to be reckoned with, namely: Karen National Union (KNU), Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP) and the SURA aka SSA South.

Chapter 1 is “Knowing insurgency.”

It delves into the histories of the Communist Party of Burma (CPB) whose members are “allowed to live in Yunnan opposite Muse with the promise not to engage in politics” and the Kachin Independence Organization/Kachin Independence Army (KIO/KIA) that had “at present established peace with the government.”

Chapter 2 “Combating insurgency” talks about counter-insurgency experiences of Algeria Malaya, Kenya and Sri Lanka “which is still far from peaceful today.”

Operations against insurgency, it counsels, include:

Chapter 3 is “Counter-insurgency doctrines” that devotes one and a half pages to the employment of People’s Militia strategy, which has been developed since 1964. “It must not be formed only during emergencies but must be organized and trained to be ready at all times for the defense of the nation.” During peace time, the People’s Militia Forces (PMFs) will be engaged in state building, local security and combating “internal armed destructionists.”

Chapter 4 “What should be done” includes, among others, the “Four Cuts” tactics, which many Burma watchers, including the reviewer here, have mistakenly taken as cutting food, funds, intelligence and recruits.

However, the booklet is unambiguous about it. It says in Section 123:

“That” means “kill” and “phyat” means “cut” but “That-phyat” together means “kill.”

Apart from that there are several pages on 100 do’s and don’ts in dealing with insurgency, such as # 63. “one must refrain from aims and actions that can be construed as narrow racism” and # 64- Such offenses must be promptly taken action against and must be informed to the populace.

After reading it, one thing does occur to me: Isn’t it about time the Burmese government considers changing its Burmese rendering of the English word “Insurgent”? If the current peace process is for real?

In English, “insurgent” which, the dictionary says, comes from the Latin word “insurgere” (rise), meaning a person fighting a government of their own country. In the past, such a person was known as “Tha-bon” (which happens to sound like “The bone”), conveying a neutral sense. But the Burma Army’s rendering “Thaung Gyan Thu” means “one who is on a rampage “or “one who has gone berserk,” which may not go well with the peace process that President Thein Sein has initiated.

I remember one of my friends who is a member of a Shan group that had made its peace with Naypyitaw. (Hint: He used to be one of the famous fighters) One Burmese general reportedly asked him, “How could such a gentle and decent fellow like you become a thaung gyan thu?” And he replied, “It was the Burma Army that did it. They killed our people, burned our homes and raped our women. They jailed my father and they were hot on my heels. What would you do in my place?”

So, after all is said and done, who’s the real thaung gyan thu?