CFR Presents

Asia Unbound

CFR experts give their take on the cutting-edge issues emerging in Asia today.

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Is Myanmar’s Peace Process Unraveling?

by Joshua Kurlantzick
February 24, 2015

myanmar-kochin-region-clash An MI-35M military helicopter flies over a Christian church in Lashio on February 19, 2015. Fighting broke out on February 9 between the army and a rebel force in the Kokang region of northeast Myanmar, on the border with China, called the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army. (Soe Zeya Tun/Courtesy:Reuters)


Over the last three weeks, fighting has broken out in Myanmar’s northeast between the military and several ethnic minority militias, including the ethnic Kokang Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army and, allegedly, the Kachin Independence Army (KIA). The KIA is one of the most powerful insurgent groups in Myanmar. At least 30,000 civilians have fled across the border into China, and the fighting has killed at least 130 people. The Myanmar military has attacked rebel groups with air strikes, and the fighting shows no sign of letting up.

The fighting began on February 9, when Kokang rebels attacked government troops in the town of Laukkai and the Myanmar army launched a fierce counterattack. The exact reasons for the clash on February 9 remain somewhat unclear. The fighting may stem from a personal feud between the Kokang group’s leader and the Myanmar armed forces’ commander in chief, or it may have been sparked by a desire by the Kokang militia to take back control of Laukkai. Or, the attack may have been retaliation for previous unreported attacks on Kokang fighters by the Myanmar military. Or, it may have stemmed from a dispute over drug trafficking and its profits; the northeast of Myanmar is one of the biggest producers of opium and synthetic methamphetamine stimulants in Asia.

Still, the broader security environment in Myanmar clearly has played a role in this recent outbreak of fighting. Indeed, the Kokang clashes with the Burmese army are reflective of several disturbing trends in Myanmar – trends that, if they continue, could undermine the country’s peace process and possibly lead to a wider outbreak of civil war. For one, it remains unclear whether the president has total control over the military. Did President Thein Sein order Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing to hit back so hard against the Kokang, or did the military move essentially on its own?  Any lack of civilian control of the military under a president who is a former general himself is hardly going to improve if the National League for Democracy (NLD) wins the 2015 elections and takes over the reins of government, since the NLD is even less trusted by senior military men. The lack of clear channels of control over the military remains a major impediment to a national peace deal that includes all insurgent groups.

In addition, this fighting reveals that, although the government is pushing for a nationwide, long-term peace deal with all the remaining insurgent armies, it is still far from gaining the trust of many insurgent leaders. Such trust is a necessary predecessor for any permanent peace. Naypyidaw wanted to announce a nationwide cease-fire, a step toward a permanent peace, by Union Day, a national holiday that takes place on February 12. That date was missed.

Yet many of the insurgents do not trust the government to follow through on any promises, and a nationwide cease-fire appears unlikely anytime soon. Naypyidaw has not helped the process of trust-building by repeatedly attacking the KIA in recent years and by demanding that insurgent groups make major concessions, such as disarming, before the government responds with reciprocal concessions. Although the Kokang insurgent group is relatively small, the KIA has been reported to have at least 8,000 fighters under arms. The KIA will be critical to any nationwide peace deal.

Finally, the conflict in northeastern Myanmar is a reminder that narcotrafficking remains a major source of income for several insurgent groups, including the most powerful of them all, the United Wa State Army (UWSA), which reportedly has ties to the Kokang. Although it is unclear whether the Kokang battle is related to a dispute over drugs or drug profits, the leader of the Kokang insurgents, Peng Jiasheng, reportedly has a long history of involvement in the drug trade, according to journalist Bertil Lintner, the leading authority on narcotrafficking in northern and northeast Myanmar. The UWSA, meanwhile, has been cited by the State Department and many foreign diplomats in Myanmar as one of the world’s most heavily armed narcotrafficking organizations.

How will Naypyidaw address narcotics production in the northeast as part of any long-term peace deal? Narcotics have allegedly become the essential ingredient in the survival of the UWSA and several other groups, and in previous ceasefires the government in Myanmar essentially allowed the UWSA to keep producing drugs, as long as it refrained from attacking government forces. But this is not a model for a long-term deal.

Post a Comment 4 Comments

  • Posted by Steve

    There are a couple of comments I feel need some clarification. First, the use of the term “insurgent” when referring to the KIA and most other ethnic militia is misleading. Webster’s dictionary defines insurgent as “a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government.” In the case of the Kachin and most other ethnic groups of Myanmar, the authority of the ethnic groups to self-govern in their agreed-upon territories was established by an agreement signed by duly authorized representatives of the national government in 1947 (the Panglong Agreement, The fact that this agreement has been ignored by the national government following the assassination of then-leader General Aung San does not nullify it. Consequently, the real “insurgents” in this case are the Tatmadaw (Burma Army). In fact, it is the source of the 60+ years of conflict that Western media doesn’t seem to care about.

    Secondly, the comment that, “it remains unclear whether the president has total control over the military” reveals your lack of understanding of the real situation. President Thein Sein has zero control over the military, hence their boldness to act outside of the law, further complicating the “peace process.” For evidence of their willful disregard for the law, witness their response to accusations by several citizens of crimes committed against civilians (rape, torture and murder being rather common accusations). Any who allege the involvement of Tatmadaw soldiers in such things are routinely threatened with defamation suits. In the case of two young Kachin Christian missionary teachers who were brutally raped and murdered last month in northern Shan State, the families were first offered a substantial case settlement (which they refused), before being publicly threatened with a defamation suit via news release from Tatmadaw officials. There are many examples of this pattern.

    There are certainly verifiable involvements of some militia (and reported involvements of Tatmadaw officers) in drug trafficking and other deplorable illegal schemes, and the cultural complexities that go back for generations confuse most of us who are not from that part of the world. That situation certainly deserves exposure and action to eradicate. It may even be a significant contributor to the current turmoil involving the Kokang people.

    However, for western media to continue to miss-characterize any or all of the ethnic militia as “insurgents” and “rebels” is a gross misplacement of the full responsibility for the present state of affairs in Myanmar. Further, there is a more serious condition that a “lack of clear channels of control over the military” by the elected government. The civil government has no control at all over the military, and as you say, without that, there remain “disturbing trends” that “could undermine the country’s peace process and possibly lead to a wider outbreak of civil war.”

  • Posted by Marc Feder

    I’d love to see peace in my life. I’ve started the “peace challenge”. It’s as easy as just asking for peace, whoever, and wherever you are. Share the challenge. Let’s hear the whole world ask for peace

  • Posted by Dan

    Steve’s comments concerning the Tatmadaw are completely correct, though I would like to add one additional detail.

    Under the current constitution the political and military institutions of Burma are two separate entities. The president can make “requests” of the military and offer advice but ultimate decisions on “national security” are in the hands of the military high command. The president has no legal jurisdiction at all on military issues.

    Therefore Thien Sein did not order the military. He may have requested they act, but given the speed and ferocity of the Tatmadaw’s response they almost certainly reacted unilaterally as they saw fit to the situation.

  • Posted by Sandeep

    @Steve a few questions, if you would kindly answer them.
    As per your comment Ethnic militias are, more, representative of the populations of mountainous regions, am I right to interpret that? Secondly, in context of this and your second point, how you would judge the recent attempts of West to steer Myanmar by engaging with it? Specially, progress, if any in your view?

Post a Comment

CFR seeks to foster civil and informed discussion of foreign policy issues. Opinions expressed on CFR blogs are solely those of the author or commenter, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. All comments must abide by CFR's guidelines and will be moderated prior to posting.

* Required