Like Steinberg and many others, Petrie surmises that the "democratic opposition [lacks] sufficient traction on the ground to bring the disparate pieces [of the country] together."
What kind of standards need to be set for this revolutionary movement to be taken seriously?
Until the federal democracy movement is steamrolling to immediate success, it just seems like so many commentators won't even take it seriously.
The alternative to junta rule is apparently just a jumbled chaotic mess without any agency or purpose. So sad.
Firstly, this is what millions of people, most legitimate political leaders and basically every MM person who has ever done anything for human rights, peace or democracy is focused on
They are not hopeless idiots. They are extremely focused and organised
Give them some respect
Secondly, we need to consider seriously the many possible scenarios in which the federal democracy movement achieves many (if not all) its goals
The whole concept has just been taboo for many foreign observers since Feb 2021 so it never gets any serious thought
Even if you think its more likely the junta is somehow going to get control, or you believe Myanmar is probably heading into an unending spiral of conflict
...you have to given some serious space to the odds of it going the other way
It is shocking how little focus this gets
This scale of popular uprising, unwaivering commitment from the public, incredible ethnic unity and continuous collaboration across different factions is completely unprecedented.
Charles calls for internationals to support "civil society, ethnic and local community structures" but essentially ignores the huge investments these groups are taking everyday to END MILITARY RULE.
There is just a huge gap between local and international perspectives
Get on the phone with people from all backgrounds actually engaged in this revolution every day
Talk to ERO leaders, NUG, CDM participants, CDM organisers, women's rights activists...
Spend an hour a day reading the posts of protestors and organisers from all backgrounds...
And then actually take them seriously and focus on the world from their perspective.
Take the protestors seriously, CDMers seriously, EROs seriously NUG seriously, and the NUCC seriously
Then, fair enough, have a serious conversation about their flaws and the risks of failure
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The specific accronym "ERO" was introduced by the National Unity Consultative Council in 2021, but is essentially what they'e always been called in Burmese.
EAO was a neutral term agreed in 2013 for the NCA text but it is less accurate in my opinion.
ERO is better
I personally define EROs as:
Well-established ethnic-based organisations that actively oppose rule from Naypyitaw militarily, politically & socially.
This excludes state-backed ethnic militia (BGFs and PMFs) and ethnically based 'defence forces' (more below)
Firstly, local media and Myanmar Twitter/Facebook are constantly reporting on:
- Funerals of resistance fighters
- Desperate lack of weapons
- Lack of effective leadership
- Capture, torture, burnings of fighters & civilians believed to support resistance
What is being ignored?
There are indeed reports of the very real and historic losses that the Myanmar military faces on all fronts.
The following are happening every week
- Attacks on mil bases
- Losses of whole platoons
- SAC retreats from roads
- Defections
- Admin abandoning entire areas
Myanmar's public defence forces lack capability to take down or even constrain these aircraft
Germany and Netherlands alone have sent at least 700 MANPADS to Ukraine in past week
If Myanmar's elected government had just 10 MANPADs, it would be a game changer
Feb last year, Myanmar's UN rep called for "strongest possible action from the international community to immediately end the military coup, to stop oppressing the innocent people, to return the state power to the people and to restore the democracy.” reuters.com/article/us-mya…
UN Special Envoy calls for non-military-led dialogue with all parties to agree a power sharing agreement as first step towards long-term military transformation.
Reasonable common sense suggestions but lack attention to practical realities...
This is exactly what the UN has been calling for since the 1990s (at least) and what has been consistently blocked & avoided by the military.
This is not an accident. The military could not be more explicit. It knows what is best for Myanmar and its power cannot be questioned.
The closest Myanmar has come to power sharing is the '08 constitution.
The SLORC/SPDC held National Convention but dominated proceedings like a petulant monarchy, offended everyone, took no one elses suggestions and - of course - did not let the UN anywhere near the process.
KNDF: "We will take back step by step, slow and slowly," he said. "We will continue, day by day. We are getting stronger. We are winning day by day."
@YeMyoHein5 : "In the past, their strategy and objective was how to control the country. Now they are focused on how survive."
@khinsandarwin: "I have never seen this kind if unity in our history... We believe that we will win this time. We never think we will lose ... Whether we die or whether you die, this is our slogan,"
This is a relatively small unit of troops. Report say max. 120 trucks. If 25 men per truck, that is 3,000 troops.
I'd expect only a handful of support personnel (comms, medics, intelligence) for every 100 and they will be greatly isolated, hens the long, high-profile journey
MAJOR THREAT that this relatively weak and poorly supported infantry force will lean into Tatmadaw strategem #1:
Abuse, terrorise, destabilise and disperse the local population, destroying food stores, clearing people from the region, and instilling terror in those who remain.