Thread by @Kim_Jolliffe

Critical story on a US gun enthusiast using faux CIA credentials to train #Myanmar activists in highly problematic methods, including home-made indiscriminate weapons.

Some of my thoughts below 👇

#WhatsHappeninglnMyanmar #Sep9Coup

newnaratif.com/dr-sasa-visits…

Activists and political leaders underwent an extremely difficult decision-making process in March and April, deciding whether to take up arms.

They received no protection from anyone, and the zero sum nature of the SAC's agenda meant it was 'fight, be arrested/killed, or flee'

Myanmar has suffered unimaginable violence for decades, not because of parochial conflicts, competing economic agendas or sectrarian divides.

But because of a particularly peverse and violent institution that controls nearly everything and never compromises with anyone.

That is why it seems certain that the movement:
A) had no choice about going to war;
B) had a just cause for going to war; and
C) reasonably determined that war was the only way it could achieve peace and justice.

But there is a big difference between:

1) Just cause for war (i.e. jus ad bellum); and
2) Just conduct (actions) in war (i.e. jus ad Bello)

There are also crucial decisions to make about which violent methods actually help to achieve your strategic objectives.

The NUG has developed a code of conduct to deal with number 2.

The new 7-point version is very clear and covers the main risks to civilian well-being and IHL.

But adhering to code will also require **careful training** as well as effective enforcement from the authorities.

It is not my place to judge exactly which methods should or should not be allowed in Myanmar's war, but I would be extremely cautious about pipe bombs, shrapnelling and other methods in the article above. The risks to the public greatly outweight the benefits.

Additionally, I would be very careful of zero-sum 'kill or be killed' strategems or casual acceptance of civilian casualties.

NUG and its security forces are there to serve the public first and foremost. Nothing can be above that or the whole thing is meaningless.

I mentioned 'cowboys' in the above article.

But there have also been many foreign military advisers and trainers that have brought invaluable life-saving expertise to EAOs and others.

Today, the majority of PDFs are NOT being trained lby cowboys. This is likely a one-off.

But it shows NUG needs to be discerning with the training it accepts.

Deciding it is right time to go to war, is not the same as saying "now all violent methods are OK".

It is also not acceptable to deflect criticism by saying "it is a warzone", "this was not our choice".

Finally, critical voices like @the_ayeminthant will be crucial to the success of the revolution.

The overwhelming narrative in the media rightly shows the NUG and the revolution to be just and the SAC to be evil

But nuances and messages of caution are also needed at all times.

Myanmar's revolutionaries are doing incredible things for their people, for justice and for human rights.

They are taking unbelievable risks with no outside support.

They are nothing like the Tatmadaw and never will be.

But they are also human and mistakes are always possible, especially in such a rapidly changing environment with so much pressure.

NUG & everyone in the movement needs to be aware of those risks, listen to criticism and constantly reflect on decisions.

This is key to success.