Are the K N U Days Numbered ?

[mbeer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

What does the writer suggest the KNU do instead of signing a ceasefire 
besides economic sabotage?  SLORC currently has close to 100,000 troops 
in Karen State.  Failure to sign a "ceasefire" document may lead to 
genocidal annhilation.  If any of us were the KNU, would we risk the 
genocide of our people if a "ceasefire" were demanded.  Would we be 
willing to sacrifice our organization for the survival of the Karen?
I don't pretend to know what the KNU should do in this situation.

The writer has identified serious problems with the KNU. It is dominated 
by an undemocratic older elite who are not capable of waging a modern 
struggle in this post guerrilla age.  But they may be willing to try.  
Look at their willingness to openly discuss the progress of 
negotiations with the SLORC.  Have we ever seen any other ethnic 
group openly work in this way?

A handful of the older elites do well economically. None of them however 
is very rich.  Mahn Shar who is the chief negotiator owns nothing but the 
clothes on his back.  His wife and family live in a refugee camp and he 
hasn't seen them in one year.  The argument that they would sign the 
ceasefire for economic reasons seems stretched particularly since most of 
their assets are in Thailand.

The older generation is more likely to sign with SLORC because many grew 
up in the Delta and amidst many burmese.  The younger generation of KNU 
raised in Kawthoolei tends to be more anti-burman, and hard line nationalist.
Many don't speak Burmese. They are less likely to sign a cease-fire.

Let us not judge the KNU too harshly if they feel compelled to sign a 
ceasefire agreement which is tantamount to a surrender.  The KNU may 
change or fail, but the aspirations for justice and peace for the Karen 
and all the peoples of Burma will remain.

On 16 
Apr 1996 an400642@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
wrote: >                         Are the K N U  Days Numbered
> Kanbawza Win
> 
>         Karen National Union or the K N U that form the main part of the
> Burmese resistance movement has completed   its  second round of talk
> for the cease fire agreement with SLORC and have called its Central
> Committee Members meeting  to evaluate the outcome. I ts twelve points
> proposal and its rejections together with its counter proposal by SLORC
> has already being outlined by Padoh Mann Shar in the Bangkok Post. The
> very fact that KNU is forced to agree to the cease fire talk inside the
> country on SLORC's terms had demonstrated its position of weakness, on
> the other hand if it does not respond to the talk would be labelled as
> an organization that does not want peace and would fall into the trap of
> SLORC's propaganda machine. This is the picture which has been acce pted
> or rather painted by the KNU and its sympathizers. But on travelling to
> the jungles and talking face to face with the majority of its leaders
> seems to depict quite q different scene. The crux of its crisis is
> disunity and the vested interest of some of
>  its influential  KNU leaders.
> 
>         The dividing line can be drawn with the poor patriotic Karen or
> rather the underdogs who have carried on the torch of resistance for
> nearly five decades and the rich leaders, who have accumulated enough
> wealth and desire to live in peace whatever the cost.
>  Those harboring  these vested interest are the ones that usually send
> their off springs to foreign countries for further studies and those who
> have connections with the Thai counterparts either through marriage or
> through business partners and have been gr eatly influenced by the Thai
> National Security Council led by its de facto spokesman Mr X.
> 
>         The acceptable point or rather a fair argument  made public by
> SLORC in every cease fire agreement  was that the proponents were to
> stick on to their guns until the peace agreement  is reached and now in
> this cease fire talk sensing the kill have come up with their usual
> rhetoric of "coming in to the legal fold and renouncing, the armed
> struggle" tantamounting to complete surrender without conditions. If the
> KNU were to go in for another round of talk with that factor in mind
> then the world will soon be witnessing yet another scene of betrayal of
> the peopl e by its leaders, similar to what Khun Hsa had done to the
> Shan and its Mong Tai army. To be candid the wording use by SLORC "to
> come to the legal fold and to renounce armed struggle" is what they
> themselves should have practice as they should come to the legal fold
> and renounced their armed atrocities committed on the people of Burma
> for the legal government is the NLD lead by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi that
> has been mandated by the people since 1990. Besides Article 21 of the U
> N Declaration of Human Rights clearly says " that the authority to
> govern must derived from the people" and that SLORC has been  governing
> Burma in direct violation of the U N Charter (Why was SLORC was not kick
> off from the U N is another topic). This point was already known by the
> KNU delegation and yet fail to mention it to SLORC. Why the timidity? Is
> the KNU delegatio n afraid to jeopardize the talk? Or  just towing the
> SLORC theory of might is right?
> 
> 
>         The world has known that SLORC  still dance to the tune of its
> great helmsman, the Evil Genius U Ne Win who have taken lessons of
> "Divide and Rule Policy" from the British Colonialist. Admittedly this
> Buddhist-Christian crisis has been smol dering since the 1980s and the
> inability of the KNU to nib it in the bud finally lead to the creation
> of DKBA (Democratic Karen Buddhist Association) resulting in the fall of
> Manerplaw. No doubt this split was greatly orchestrated by SLORC who now
> sees anot her crack in the KNU in the form of denomination viz the
> Seventh Day Adventist and the Baptist including other denominations as
> the Anglicans which SLORC label it as Sunday Group and Saturday Group
> That is why in the first talk they have put in the General Secretary of
> the Burma Baptist Convention, Saw Margay Gyi as one of the neutral
> observers. If SLORC is sincere enough and is desirous to have a
> religious representative, as the majority of the Karen delegation being
> Christians then they coul d have invited the General Secretary of the
> Burma Churches Council, Saw San C Htay another Karen Christian
> representing all the Christians in Burma. Why fishy?
> 
>         In half a century since the KNU had embarked on its armed
> resistance, the world has changed a lot except the KNU leadership.
> Perhaps in this aspect, they have taken a page out of U Ne Win's book,
> the de facto if not the de jure leader of Burma. But U Ne Win is wise
> enough to pump in young blood as Khin Nyunt and Than Shwe, whereas most
> of the KNU leaders are on the wrong side of the sixties if not
> seventies, so much so that the SLORC Gen erals have to address them as
> "Phati" (uncle). This trend also resulted in driving the young Karen
> intelligentsia out of the KNU folod and indirectly encourage them  to
> search for greener pasteur. The old guard could not comprehend that weap
> ons of the ethnic wars has changed. From guns and cannons to television
> cameras and computer internets and other sophisticated Information
> Technology. The classic examples being Saddem's Hussein War of
> eradication against the Kurds. When he unleash that war
>  of genocide, a substantial number of reporters and newsman happens to
> be in the right place, at the right time and their report is so
> effective that the world opinion was moved and finally forced the U N to
> set up a buffer Zone.Such kind of episodes cannot
>  be seen not only by the KNU but also be the majority of the Burmese
> dissidents.
> 
>          On discussing with the brigade commanders operating inside
> Burma, I discover that they have well documented all the atrocities
> including several killings which SLORC's soldiers have committed in
> their respective area but in the absence of camera or televi sion there
> seems to have no proof. Even when Manerplaw falls there is no single
> reporter or camera crew to documen the episode with the result that the
> world does not know that the headquarters of the Burmese aspiration for
> democracy,  human rights and federalism has fallen to SLORC. No news on
> Star T V nor any other electronic media, except the sympathe tic Thai
> printed media and soon the story was forgotten.
> 
>         The mode of war has also changed drastically. We are essentially
> fighting an economic war.SLORC because of its resources both in men and
> materials have been able to marginalized the opposition. Why can't the
> dissidents use the expatriates economic experts so abundant in this part
> of the world? Simple logic will tell that one is not urging them to
> become  terrorist organization but sometimes is feasible to uses these
> techniques so numerous in the world. When the IRA switch its techniques
> on the Briti sh and began to concentrates on the economic targets as
> blowing up a bomb in central London without any casualty, thousands of
> American tourists stayed away from Britain.This finally led to the
> negotiating table. How about a minor explosion in Rangoon and M andalay
> in the Visit Myanmar Year 1996 ? Surely it will scare away the tourists,
> not to mention blowing the TOTAL and UNOCAL pipelines? Only the young
> energetic persons can think on these innovative lines. New strategy,
> techniques and the tactics cannot eas ily come to the old conservatives
> who simply ask, what can the television camera do?
> 
>         In this part of the world where the truth follow the rumors, it
> has been said that the Thai Premier in going to Rangoon has come up with
> the idea that SLORC would prohibit its scape goat DKBA from incurring
> into Thailand to attack the Karen Refugee Camps w ith an understanding
> that the Thai authorities on its part would eventually move the refugees
> back into Burma and hence have now started placing these unfortunate
> refugees  in the vicinity of the Burmese army. Burmese blood for
> economic gains being one of t he fruits of Constructive Engagement is
> obvious. The very fact that unlike the Laos, Cambodian and Vietnamese
> refugees  the UNHCR (United Nations High Commission for Refugees) and
> the UNBRO (United Nations Border Relief Organization) were not able to
> se t up the good offices in Western Thailand for the Burmese refugees
> have prove beyond doubt of the connivance of the Thai and the Burmese
> governments. My talk with the refugees have come to the conclusion that
> the KNU will have to sign a cease fire agree ment for their very
> survival. Or otherwise the DKBA could make short work of them is also
> one of the factors playing in the signing of cease fire agreement.
> 
>         In the entire history of Burma or Thailand, DKBA is the only
> example where religion is use as a pretext to cause havoc. Even though
> their tactics are very much categorical to the teachings of Lord Buddha,
> the two Theravada Buddhist countries of Burma and T hailand are finding
> it a good pretext to condone them and attain their means.
> 
>         Because of unfavourable circumstances if the KNU were to sign
> the one sided cease fire agreement, it will be a great blow to the other
> para Myanmar groups that are still fighting against SLORC e.g. ABSDFs
> (All Burma Students Democratic Fronts  two factions ), DPNS (Democratic
> Party for New Society), as well as other members of the DAB (Democratic
> Alliance of Burma)that are still holding it out up to this day. Moreover
> the three million Burmese expatriates, most of whom are professionals
> and have now come arou nd to near unity will be greatly disheartened. It
> will also tantamount to SLORC's theory that there is no such thing as
> the 1988 episodes and that only a few misguided youths have taken
> sanctuary with the KNU and that KNU should lull these youths back to th
> e legal fold. SLORC is ready to recognize the ethnic group aspirations
> but would not budge the Myanmar groups fighting for Democracy and Human
> Rights as this will shaken its very foundation. That is why it would not
> negotiate with the ABSDF or any other Mya nmar orientated groups
> including the NLD (National League for Democracy) lead by Daw Aung San
> Suu Kyi.
> 
>         But the unkindest cut of all  will be that hundreds and
> thousands of patriotic Karens and otheres minorities as well as the pro
> democratic forces that have sacrificed their lives  in vain because of
> the vested interest of the few present  leaders to sign a cease fire
> agreement. Lamentably the struggle for democracy and human rights inclu
> ding the legitimate rights of the ethnic minorities will be set back for
> some more years to come if the KNU days are numbered and acquiesce to
> the unfair cease fire agreement.
> 
> Kanbawza Win
> April 1996
> --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION***
> Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED.
> Please, report inappropriate use to                abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to    help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> If you have any problems, address them to          admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 

Warmly,
Michael
mbeer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx