MYANMAR’S armed forces, the Tatmadaw, has been significantly instrumental to the development of Burmese politics. The regime has historically anathematised entities that pose a threat towards national security. Internal threats, ranging from separatist insurgencies and communist revolutionaries, were swiftly counteracted through Tatmadaw initiatives under the supervision of the post-independence civilian government in the late 1940s. A deteriorating political situation led to Burma’s disintegration, which consequently allowed for the transfer of power to the Tatmadaw by senior government officials so as to restore stability.

In 1957, Tatmadaw initiated the creation of a caretaker government designed to mitigate the effects of factionalism in Burmese politics. General elections were nevertheless facilitated and power was eventually restored to an elected government, but conflict, however, ensued subsequently after factionalism brought about by staunch ideological differences within the elected Union Party destabilised the government, leading to the implosion of the administration. This collapse in Burmese governance inadvertently legitimised the intrusion of political groups vying for power. The Burmese military then staged a strategic operation to reclaim administrative powers. This led to the Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP), chaired by the former general Ne Win, assuming leadership.

The “8888 uprising” – a pro-democracy protest – sought to abdicate the socialist revolutionaries of the BSPP from governmental power after it characterised Ne Win’s leadership as particularly injurious to the economy. The military, established the State Law and Order Council in order to respond to the violent protests. These economic policies –intending to combat inflation, generate national revenue and liberalise the economy by withdrawing excessive currency in circulation and requiring the selling of items below market rates – incited mass civil unrest, citing significant financial losses, economic catastrophe as a consequence of state-sanctioned socialist policies and proceeded to initiate demands of the instalment of a multi-party democracy in Myanmar.

Over the years, the escalation of tensions and political pressure in Myanmar prompted the Tatmadaw to facilitate an electoral commission process which committed to the realisation of multi-party democratic initiatives. The Political Parties Registration Law was passed, allowing for political parties with differing ideologies to contest in elections.

In 2015, Myanmar held a general election which introduced a dramatic shift in governance with Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League of Democracy (NLD) assuming power under the designated title of State Counsellor and Foreign Minister. This was accepted by the Tatmadaw. Tensions, however, remained due to the administration’s provocation of political sentiments with the Tatmadaw through violations of the Myanmar constitution, limiting the powers of the military. During this time, the Tatmadaw saw it necessary to undertake perverse military operations in Rakhine under the auspices of preserving national sovereignty though this was a significant breach of the constitution.

In 2020, yet another election was held, the results of which appeared to be prejudiced, favouring the NLD, which prompted the Tatmadaw to engage in strategic intervention to restore stability to Myanmar and revive the military’s crucial role in preventing Burmese interest from being jeopardised as violence ensued after the seizure of power which was justifiably characterised as unnecessarily hostile by the international press.

In 2021, the Tatmadaw instigated a coup against the incumbent Burmese government, suspending democracy and effecting strict totalitarian control. The events that surrounded the 2021 brutal assumption of power by the Tatmadaw must be seen in context for one to understand the underlying reasons for the dramatic shift in governance.

The controversy surrounding the strategic seizure of administrative powers raises questions as to the nature of the motive that undergirds the operation. An understanding of the Tatmadaw’s ideological stance therefore is crucial to make coherent its resolute ambitions with regard to domestic and foreign policy.

In a document which serves as a transcript for a speech given by General Than Shwe of the Tatmadaw to senior commanders which outlines the Tatmadaw’s active policies:

(a) To perpetually safeguard national values concerning independence and sovereignty and prevent all acts detrimental to the three main national causes which are non-disintegration of the Union, non-disintegration of the national solidarity and perpetuation of national sovereignty;

(b) To build national defence avoiding external dependence as much as possible in striving for stability of the state, community peace and tranquillity and prevalence of law and order based on the strength of national forces within the country and with the armed forces as [the] pivot, combining the strength of auxiliary defence forces;

(c) To valiantly and effectively prevent interference in our internal affairs [,] deploying various ways and means while avoiding interference in the internal affairs of other nations; and

(d) To employ a defence system that gives priority to world peace, regional tranquillity in accord with the five principles of peaceful co-existence.

These promises, however, are egregiously deceptive as the Tatmadaw has repeatedly ravaged the country and shown that its motives are ultimately malicious. On accusations of “genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes”, Myanmar military said its own internal investigation had exonerated security forces of all accusations of atrocities. According to this internal probe, the use of force was only legitimised to combat ethnic minority militants. This was nevertheless proven otherwise as they had encroached upon innocent civilians. And on accusations of extrajudicial killings, the military described these acts were perceived to be necessary in counteracting and quelling internal threats to Myanmar, thwarting enemy combatants pertaining to the ethnic Arakan Army.

The Tatmadaw continues to wreak havoc across the country. International efforts to oust them from power must increase in intensity though this will not be an easy task given just how very deeply embedded the Tatmadaw in the country’s history. What must be envisioned therefore is a long-term effort to remove them from influencing the country altogether as this has yet to be formulated. – April 9, 2023.

* Pravin Periasamy reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.