• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Myanmar's Unnoticed Struggle for Freedom

When China cracked down on dissent, the troops used often came from the same areas as the pro-democracy demonstrators.
Just a few points of clarification here:

* the protesters came from all across China; it would have been virtually impossible to have troops that weren't from the same areas. I don't see the point or relevancy of this.

* It was not a pro-democracy demonstration. By far the majority of protesters, including the main leaders, were protesting for change and reform of the existing government. They wanted more freedom to express themselves, they wanted to stop gov't corruption, etc. But only a very small minority raised an issue of actually changing the government and implementing a democratic system. In fact -- a point rarely mentioned in Western medio -- a number of the student protesters were themselves Communist Party members; they were not calling for the overthrow of the Party, but rather for reform of the party.

* Many troops blatantly refused to follow orders in regards to the protesters, and even some military and government leaders expressed direct support for them. Many government, media, and military leaders lost their positions (and often were jailed) afterwards, for having supported the protesters. So do not try to depict this as some sort of government-wide evil; it was, in fact, an atrocity committed by a handful of people, and which was opposed by many others within both government and military.

I'm not really sure what your point was, in regards to this or other events that you mentioned; but at least in this case, I feel that some degree of accuracy is necessary, rather than the broad (and inaccurate) claims that you are using to support it.
 
Just a few points of clarification here:
......I'm not really sure what your point was, in regards to this or other events that you mentioned; but at least in this case, I feel that some degree of accuracy is necessary, rather than the broad (and inaccurate) claims that you are using to support it.

All corrections humbly accepted. The point was that troops will very often NOT express remorse for actions against their own population, for a number of different reasons; regardless of the sweeping broadness of my claims, I think the point is made and well-known from being well-evidenced so often.
 
Just a few points of clarification here:

* the protesters came from all across China; it would have been virtually impossible to have troops that weren't from the same areas. I don't see the point or relevancy of this. etc etc.
I seem to recall from news reports at the time that the troops who fired on the crowd were from remote parts of China, that in fact their dialects were so different from most of the demonstrators that it was essentially a different language. Anyone know if I'm remembering this corectly?
 
I seem to recall from news reports at the time that the troops who fired on the crowd were from remote parts of China, that in fact their dialects were so different from most of the demonstrators that it was essentially a different language. Anyone know if I'm remembering this corectly?
It is partly true; throughout China, there are many different dialects and even languages spoken regionally, some of which are next to impossible for others to understand. It was for this reason that Mandarin Chinese was made the "official" language in China, and all education is in Mandarin; in order to ensure that everyone is, in fact, able to communicate with each other.

Within the military, all training is in Mandarin Chinese exclusively, and soldiers who were unable to understand it would not be allowed to enter. So the idea that the soldiers would have been unable to speak or understand Mandarin is false.

There is, however, a significant degree of discrimination towards people from certain regions of China...beliefs they are dishonest, or unintelligent, or lazy, etc. The military unit in question -- the ones who first fired on the crowd -- were from such a region, and had (prior to the events of June 4, 1989) faced a fair degree of mockery and even aggression from the crowds.

There is a quite a bit of speculation that when they fired on the crowds, they had not actually been ordered to do so by the government, but that they saw a threat and acted independently, out of a sense of fear that they were about to be attacked. Once they started firing, other military units heard it, assumed they were under attack, and took similar action.

Lack of any serious investigation afterwards makes it impossible to determine the truth one way or the other; even if it was an accident, the government would never admit that they had lost control of their own troops, leading to many deaths. They would need to maintain an appearance of control.

I have a number of friends within the People's Liberation Army (including a very close friend who's father is an Admiral in the Navy), and most of them quietly state that it was, in fact, because one unit lost control and started firing into the crowd. The important thing to note about this is that, from a face-saving point of view, they would far prefer to say that it was the government, not that it was the fault of fellow soldiers. And publicly, they certainly stick to the government line. But in private, most of them tell a very different story.

I'm not saying this to absolve the government of blame; even if this were to turn out to have been a 'mistake', I have no doubt that at some point, the government would have resorted to violence, with similar results.
 
Believe me, Wolfman, lots of us are frustrated with how banal major media news coverage is these days. Last week it was Britney Spears and OJ Simpson all over damn near every form of news media I could get my hands on, and I kept saying, "I don't care! What else is going on in the world?! GAH!" :mad:

Fortunately as others have pointed out, the situation in Myanmar has been making some front page headlines now. You're right that awareness of Myanmar is low though. I'm not a total news wonk, but I've followed the news for many years, yet I'd never heard of Aung San Suu Kyi until around the end of 2000. This is silly, but I know that's when it was because I first saw the name when I was reading the liner notes of the U2 album "All That You Can't Leave Behind" and noticed that they'd dedicated the song "Walk On" to her. I knew all about the Tiananmen Square massacre, but still had never heard of the massacre a year later in Myanmar until I read a news story mentioning it this week. It said that thousands died.

We should be watching Myanmar and encouraging support for the protestors there. It has the potential to be an amazing situation or a very tragic one.
 
Putting the topic back on Myanmar:

I've been trying, without any success, to phone my friends in Myanmar. There are two friends in particular that I am very close to, both Myanmar citizens, and I've been very worried about them.

Ten minutes ago (a little after 10:00 in the evening Beijing time) I managed to get through to one of my friends' homes; he was not there, but his wife was. She explained that both of them have been out protesting with everyone else; and today, the two of them were part of the crowd who surrounded the monks, creating a human wall to protect them when police started firing into the air, and launching tear gas cannisters.

She had just come home to grab some food, before returning to the protest; her husband is still there.

Its amazing how much more urgent and important things like this become when people you know are involved; of course you admire the courage of those who are facing down the authorities, risking injury or death...but when it is someone you know personally, it just blows you away.

All internet access has been effectively cut off, so email communication is impossible; she did give me a cell phone number that we can use to exchange text messages, as long as the gov't doesn't cut off access to that, also.

So, where I seem to be ranting with excessive fervor, or seemingly exaggerating the world's general reaction -- please, take it with some degree of salt. This situation has left me unable to sleep, worry and apprehension gnawing at my gut. In such a situation, I hope it will be understood that some of my reactions may be more emotional than rational.
 
....So, where I seem to be ranting with excessive fervor, or seemingly exaggerating the world's general reaction -- please, take it with some degree of salt. This situation has left me unable to sleep, worry and apprehension gnawing at my gut. In such a situation, I hope it will be understood that some of my reactions may be more emotional than rational.


It's OK, perfectly understandable.

I'll even let you flame me twice more for free. :)
 
So, where I seem to be ranting with excessive fervor, or seemingly exaggerating the world's general reaction -- please, take it with some degree of salt. This situation has left me unable to sleep, worry and apprehension gnawing at my gut. In such a situation, I hope it will be understood that some of my reactions may be more emotional than rational.
It's all good, brother Wolfman, your heart is in the right place. :) Here's hoping the folks in charge consider a modicum of restraint and reform, in the face of reasoned opposition.

I sadly recall the films of the Bhuddist monk setting himself on fire in Viet Nam. One hopes it doesn't come to that any time soon in Rangoon.

DR
 
This situation has left me unable to sleep, worry and apprehension gnawing at my gut.

Have you considered becoming a monk?:)

Seriously, we here on the forum are lucky to have your reporting so close to the action. I appreciate both the information and emotion you are sharing with us.
 
As it seems I'm not going to sleep much tonight, I thought I'd share a little of my own personal experience of Myanmar, and its people.

In 1996, I first met a man from Myanmar who was in China studying Chinese; he lived in Qingdao (where I was living at the time, also) for a year, and over the course of that year the two of us became very close friends. His English name was Sam (I could never master his actual name). When the year finished, he returned to Myanmar, and we kept in touch by email and phone.

In 2004, he sent me an announcement that he was getting married, and wanted to invite me to join him for the wedding in Yangon (also known as Rangoon). The combination of a close friend's wedding, and the opportunity to visit such a fascinating country, was too much to resist. I scheduled two weeks of holidays, and set off.

Understandably, Sam was rather preoccupied with wedding preparations, and although we spent quite a few evenings together (eating, drinking, and laughing), he could not accompany me during the daytime. So he introduced me to another of his friends, Kool (that was his actual name, and one that fit him perfectly), who served as my informal guide. In the two weeks that followed, Kool and I became inseparable friends.

Of course, we did the tourist thing, and visited many amazing sites -- if the current troubles ever settle down, I would very very highly recommend Myanmar as one of the top destinations for people to check out. But my best memories are of the evenings spent with my friends there. Kool and Sam are my two closest friends there, and the only ones I've continued to keep in touch with actively, but I met many other wonderful people during my time there. They were incredibly warm and friendly, and very open in discussing the problems in their country. Their pragmatism in the face of significant adversity never ceased to amaze me. They never complained, they never wished for more than they had, and in fact went to great lengths to express appreciation for what they did have. Yet every statement of contentment was qualified with the comment that, "Some day, it will change." And if you asked them what "change" meant, they'd refer back to the demonstrations of 1988 (at which almost every person I met in Myanmar lost a friend or family member). The Myanmar attitude became most evident in these discussions. None of them considered the protests of 1988 as "defeated" or "stopped"; only as "temporarily delayed" or "postponed", awaiting the right time.

I particularly remember one evening with Sam and Kool, sitting outside under the stars, half-wasted on local beer, and musing on life in the way that you do when you're drunk. We all shared stories about our childhoods, and were surprised to discover that we'd had quite amazingly similar experiences and upbringings. Kool was quite unique in Myanmar in that he was a complete atheist; Sam was more of an agnostic, having real doubts about Buddhism, but not ready to give up on it, either. Almost all the other people I met there were quite devout Buddhists.

Anyway, talk of the past led to talk about our futures. In my case, I was able to talk about long-term plans and goals; but for Sam and Kool, they could talk about their lives only up until the point that "the protests start again". After that point, their 'vision' of their own personal futures was entirely blank. Maybe they would win, and gain greater freedom; maybe they would lose, and see the military government continue its abuses; and maybe they'd be killed, and never know what happened. They entirely refused to speculate about their futures beyond that unspecified point in time; only to do the best they could until it happened.

Now that time has come -- and the next few weeks will determine, one way or another, what that future will be. And I'm sure that whatever risks they are facing, they are also somewhat relieved to finally be at this point, and have this question resolved, one way or the other.

Sam and his wife came to China for their honeymoon, so I was also privileged to act as their host/guide for part of the trip, and to get to know his wife better. Kool came to China for a week last year, and again I was delighted to show him around the country. During that trip, Kool told me that he expected things to come to a head within the next year...turns out, he was quite right.

It was Sam's wife that I talked to on the phone tonight; I have not yet been able to talk directly to either Sam or Kool, but she promised to do her best to get them to call me, if they have the opportunity.

Neither of these guys are "heroes" in the conventional sense. They are average joes from the working class, living normal lives, with no great aspirations of wealth or power. They're not terribly political, judging any government by its results, rather than by the political labels assigned to it. They never preached passionately about freedom, never proclaimed vehemently against their government. They're not guerrillas, or freedom fighters, or anything like that.

Yet now they are on the streets of Yangon, facing down armed soldiers, part of a human shield to protect priests of a religion that neither of them even particularly agrees with or believes in. And they are doing it, quite simply, because it is what they feel needs to be done. It is the right thing.

It is striking to me the difference between China and Myanmar in this regard. In China, any political movement has political leaders, and tons of slogans. It has people standing up and giving long speeches, stirring the people to action, calling for unity.

In Myanmar, they seem to have almost none of that. The Buddhist priests are not chanting slogans or preaching to the crowds; they simply march quietly. The regular citizens aren't joining because of the exhortations of charismatic leaders; they just do it because each one feels that now is the time for this to happen. The entire country, it seems, has simply been biding its time, waiting for this moment. Now it has come, and they respond not because it is something they should do, but because it is something that is meant to happen.

All part and parcel of the influence of Buddhist culture, I'm sure. I've had a number of debates with Kool and Sam about this (although neither of them is a devout Buddhist, and Kool renounces Buddhism entirely, they are both still very Buddhist in their views of life) in the past. I always argued that such a passive stance was harmful; that one of the reasons their government was able to hold power for so long was because they knew that the people would just accept it as a part of "fate" or "destiny". It was tremendously frustrating to me. Their response was that, if they had had my world view, the massacres in 1988 would have destroyed the hearts of the people of Myanmar, seeing their hopes and dreams irrevocably crushed (which is, in fact, very much what happened with many of the Chinese who participated in Tiananmen Square in 1989). Instead, they were able to accept it and move on, simply waiting until the right time for change arrived.

Those debates seem rather trivial in the face of the actual situation they are facing now. But I really, really hope that, in future, I can look forward to more, similar debates with them.

That's all for now...I'll get downright maudlin if I say much more. Just the random ruminations of a rather stressed mind, but hopefully it at least puts a more personal face on the issue for others reading this thread.
 
Although I watch the TV news and read the newspaper frequently, I confess that I knew almost nothing of the situation in Myanmar until I read Saving Fish From Drowning by Amy Tan. It is a fictional story about a group of American tourists who are sight-seeing on the Burma Road ... and it told me more about the current situation there than any of our mainstream American news.
 
Wow... fascinating update, Wolfman. I hope to read more from you here as the situation develops.
 
FIrst time Mynamar has made the front page since World War 2.
A guy who is a Professor of History with a speciality in World War 2 in the Pacific managed to,after a lot of problems,get a Visa to enter Burma because he is writing a book on the Burma Campaign and wanted to "Walk the Ground" as most Military Historians do. SOme of the stories he told on a WW2 webpage he posts on about his experiences were pretty wierd.
 
I think this story is making mainstreams news so much,at present,is due to the monks protesting.The bbc have good coverage with people managing to get pictures from people with mobile phones.
Unconfirmed reports that monks have been arrested and maybe some killed.
China keeping out of it I think due to the upcoming olympics.
 
I think this story is making mainstreams news so much,at present,is due to the monks protesting.The bbc have good coverage with people managing to get pictures from people with mobile phones.
Unconfirmed reports that monks have been arrested and maybe some killed.
China keeping out of it I think due to the upcoming olympics.
The rest of this is true, but the comment about China is not...very much the opposite, in fact. The Chinese gov't has been having almost daily meetings with the Myanmar ambassador in Beijing, and has been putting pressure on the Myanmar gov't for more than two months (long before this came to world attention). As stated elsewhere, I'm not claiming any lofty goals for their intervention, they are doing it for selfish reasons -- to maintain important supplies of oil/gas from Myanmar, and to avoid a conflict in Asia that could mar the Olympics...particularly a massacre of protesters in Myanmar that would inevitably bring comparisons to Tiananmen Square in 1989.

In fact, there is probably no country in a better position to prevent this than China at present -- if it can be prevented at all. "Sanctions" from other countries mean little or nothing, since they've already severely restricted trade with Myanmar. It is only China that has both the political and economic clout to represent a serious threat to Myanmar's leaders. And they are doing their best to stop an event that would be problematic for China.
 
Thank you for sharing your insights, Wolfman. I was aware of the situation because i've watched John Pilger's excellent documentary "Burma - Land of Fear" some years ago. It contains an interview with Aung San Suu Kyi. Here it is:

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
 

Back
Top Bottom