Grand Strategy for Burma/Myanmar (II)

by Thang Za Dal

(Its the first modification of the original paper under the title of Grand Strategy for Burma/Myanmar, which was released on April 27, 2012. I rename it as it stands above in order to differentiate it from the original version.)

Since the present government came to power more than one and half years ago I have been closely watching what the newly elected representatives of the people, the government and the armed forces are saying and doing in the country. This paper is the product of my close observation and analysis of Burmas general situation during the past several years, and especially since the current government came to power. So far until now I have found out that FIVE MAJOR FACTORS that are most crucially important for the survival and development of a country and the society in it are missing.(Since about the lack of human rights, and the rule of law, etc., in the country are already universally known, I shall not deal with these topics in this paper.) - Peace - Visions or Visionary political leaders - Strategic thoughts or Strategies - Systematic Planning - Grand Strategy These major factors certainly are the main reasons why all the key ministries such as defence, home, commerce and trade, foreign affairs, education, industry, health, finance, social welfare, tourism, etc., keep on doing as they have been doing in the past several years - that is, without setting any specific, realistic goals and priorities, and without following any Strategies at all. (Im not talking here about the governments current strategical manoeuvres and tactical moves to court the West and Japan, and for the safe-guarding of their private fortunes and political power!) My main reason therefore for writing this short paper is to point out at how and where the said factors could be found and developed. As this paper is prepared for the ordinary man on the street as well, I shall write it as simple and short as possible - and only the fundamental ideas in general. THE FIRST FACTOR: PEACE In my first released version I had intentionally omitted the absence of Peace in the country simply because not only everybody in Burma but also the whole world already knows about it since a long time ago. I shall discuss about this factor briefly later. VISIONS OR VISIONARY POLITICAL LEADERS What is a vision and who is a visionary political leader? According to the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, a vision is an idea

THE SECOND FACTOR: The Question: The Answers:

or a picture in ones imagination: An example: He had a vision of a world in which there would be no wars. And a visionary is someone who has the ability to think about or plan the future in an intelligent,

imaginative way. According to my own definition a visionary political leader is someone who can foresee the coming events years ahead and accordingly makes plans in advance in time to meet the coming challenges in the necessary fields. One may probably think that a visionary is a day-dreamer and that his visions are nothing more than wishful thinkings, but although the visions of a visionary may seem to be mere wishful thinkings to a layman at the beginning, his visions may turn out to be realities sometime in the near or distant future. Note: Since it is a generally accepted fact among learned community that a visionary is born, but not trained, I shall only give some hints below where and how such a person can be found. THE THIRD FACTOR: Question 1: The Answers: STRATEGIC THOUGHT OR STRATEGY What is a strategic thought or a strategy? There are several definitions of Strategy, depending on the fields - that is,

whether its military, or politics, or finance or economics, etc. The following are a few selected from Wikipedia:

- A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. - Military strategy is a set of ideas implemented by military organizations to pursue desired strategic
goal. Derived from the Greek strategos, strategy when it appeared in use during the 18th century, was seen in its narrow sense as the "art of the general", 'the art of arrangement' of troops. Military strategy deals with the planning and conduct of campaigns, the movement and disposition of forces, and the deception of the enemy.

- A strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a specific goal. Strategy is all about gaining (or
being prepared to gain) a position of advantage over adversaries or best exploiting emerging possibilities. As there is always an element of uncertainty about future, strategy is more about a set of options ("strategic choices") than a fixed plan. A layman may have great difficulty in understanding what the passages above really mean. Since its indeed a complex and abstract field, I shall try to define it in some simpler ways.

A Strategy is simply a principal guideline for the achievement of a certain goal. Lets say one

wants to go to Point B from Point A. He must make enquiry about the distance between them, the means by which one has to travel - by air or by rail or by ship or by car, and the expenses that he will have to pay out, and whether the places he has to pass through are peaceful or full of dangers, etc. Only then that he will be able to make the whole plan - or strategy or principal guideline - for the journey in advance. How he earns the necessary expenses and materials, for example, are to be understood as tactics. If he started out the journey without having first collected the basic necessary information mentioned above, he would most likely have to cancel his journey halfway, or he would even get lost somewhere along the journey.

Some of the characteristics of a Strategy or a Strategic thought are looking at things or Someone who can think strategically, for instance, sees a whole forest, not just a few trees in it.

problems from a broader perspective and the making of plans on a long-term basis.

In plain text: He can see a problem in its entirety - not just a part of it. That is, he sees the root and

nature of a problem and also the consequences that that problem could cause, etc. His perspectives are broad and far-sighted. Just one example of the opposite of this: Burmas successive political and military leaders of the past and present have always seen the problems of a certain ethnic people or a union state, or a section of the society, as its own problems, but not as the problems of the whole country. They therefore always try to solve these problems at local levels with the most ruthless methods. Thats one major reason why there is no peace in the country until now. Question 2: What could be the reasons of the missing of strategic thoughts on the part of the countrys political leaders? The Answers: There could be several reasons, namely

First, it is possible that there are a number of people among them who have got strategic thoughts or who fully understand what a strategy is and also the need for laying down strategies, but they are probably not in a strong position to successfully implement their strategic thoughts or concepts.

Second, if in case there are no personalities among them who have got such strategic thoughts, then it could be most likely that they are simply not aware of the important roles of strategic thoughts or strategies in politics, foreign affairs (or diplomacy), military, finance, commerce and trade, industry, education, health, social welfare, etc., in the first place. One can of course hear everywhere people loudly and loosely talking about strategies, but in reality there seems to be not very many people who truly understand the real nature of a strategy. And there are even less who can lay down a good strategy in any given field. (The strategies that Im talking about in this paper are the ones that would and could serve the long-term interest of a country, and not the ones that would only serve the interest of a certain group of people or political organizations!)

Third, their lack of strategic thoughts could be the result of the absence of transparency, freedom of expression, mutual-respect and trust among themselves so that they could not freely exchange opinions and ideas, or the lack of the necessary facilities and resources such as reading materials, trainings or courses, etc., for example, with which they could enrich themselves with the necessary knowledge.

Question 3:

What could/would be the results or outcomes of the absence of visions, strategic thoughts, or strategies for a country?

The Answers:

There could be a number of fatal setbacks, namely

If the political leaders of a country lack visions and they do not fully understand the true nature of a strategy, and realistic strategies are not laid down in time for key sectors of the country, priorities cannot be rightly recognized and set, and these failures in turn would result in the wasting of human and financial resources needlessly; and the country would as a result be just drifting aimlessly like a ship without a good captain and a good navigation system.

The countrys financial resources and economy would be concentrated in the hands of just a handful of interest groups or personalities. Investors - both domestic and foreign - could more easily exploit the countrys natural resources for their own benefit without the need to make consideration for the welfare of the country as a whole, and for the benefits of the environments as well; Or in other words, it would be very difficult for state authorities to control such investors according to the law, etc.

The present leaders of Burma certainly underestimate the countrys very strong bargaining position both geopolitically and the abundance of natural resources, for example - that they are begging outsiders to invest in the country by making so many concessions. This is a very clear sign of the void of strategic thoughts on the part of those leaders. With such a strong position we could in fact dictate our own conditions upon potential investors. There are more than enough potential investors in the outside world with hundreds of billions of dollars at their disposal. We shall only need to provide them with political stability, skilled workforce and the rule of law. (However, judging by the ways a great number of investors are doing business in poverty-stricken countries, several of these investors even seem to actually prefer the absence of law and order in those countries!)

Question 4:

How or where could people with strategic thoughts be found who could lay down excellent strategies for all key sectors in Burma?

The Answers:

There are a number of ways to find them, namely

The first place to find such people could be among the political, military and academic elites themselves in the country. Its even possible that there are a number of visionary people among them wih great visions for the country and strategic thoughts, but they are probably not powerful enough to implement their visions and strategic concepts. So its most important now to find them out. And one of the best ways to discover such unknown qualified people would be to organize discussion and debate forums in which they could discuss and debate on topics that are vitally important for the country with absolute freedom. And it would be vitally important as well that the peoples elected representatives in the parliament (Pyithu Hlutthaw), too, are fully included in the discussions and debates, because, as a number of them may have had been elected purely on political platform, and not necessarily on their skills or qualifications, it would be a great pity for the country to put its destiny entire in the hands of such people alone. In this way, they may also have a chance to learn the true nature of strategic thoughts and strategies.

The second possible place to find them would also be among the Burmese people themselves who are living and working in the outside world in various professional fields for years; they certainly have had accumulated a great amount of knowledge, skills and experience in their professional life, which could be of great value for the country if they could be persuaded to share their know-hows.

The third possible place would once again also be within the country itself - that is, among the highly qualified and experienced professionals or experts in various important fields or departments. The fourth possibilty would be to use the service of international consulting firms, or foreign experts in various disciplines. (However, if one is forced by inevitable circumstances to sort to this last option, great precaution may need to be taken in searching for the right firms or experts because the services of such a firm or an expert is said to be extremely expensive and there are several bogus firms and experts.)

And similar free discussion forums should also be organized for armed forces and police personnel from battalion commanders and township officers upwards, and from middle-ranking civilian officials upwards as well, etc. Besides, these people and the peoples elected representatives should be sent out on first-hand study tours to a number of neighbouring countries as a means to enrich their knowledge and widen their perspectives in many important fields. Their newly-won knowledge would thus enable them to see the multiple problems that the country is facing now from a different and more realistic point of view. Note: In writings on strategy and tactics - especially in the fields of politics and military - the following lines

can often be seen: He thinks both strategically and tactically and plans accordingly. He thinks only strategically, but not tactically. He thinks only tactically, but not strategically, and thus plans only tactically. He thinks and plans neither strategically nor tactically. SYSTEMATIC PLANNING What are the main reasons of the missing of systematic planning in all major sectors in Burma?

THE FOURTH FACTOR: The Question:

The Answers: There are several reasons. But the main reason, I believe, is the absence of highly qualified political leaders with visions in the first place. For example, there were and still are - several plannings being undertaken at present in various sectors. But most of the socalled plannings were and are from the very beginning doomed to failure, because there never were and are simply reliable and up-to-date statistics and data in the related fields, and the people who made these plannings - and the ones who supervise the implementation of the projects themselves are not sufficiently qualified enough for the tasks they are entrusted with. It is very clear that those who are in power apparently do not realize that without systematically and thoroughly collected reliable data, statistics and information, it is absolutely impossible to make a strategic and systematic planning. Or, in other words, if one cannot think strategically - or if he is not highly qualified enough in the field of his responsibility - he would not understand either why a systematic planning is so crucial for the successful implementation of a project. The first major step, therefore, that the present government has to take, if it really does sincerely wish to uplift the country, is first of all to collect and update reliable statistics and data in every major sector, and to select and appoint the right person for the right job at the right time. In other words, only truly qualifed people must be selected and appointed for the responsible positions, but if there are not qualified people in sufficient numbers, new ones must be trained for the tasks. To spend millions of dollar on badly planned and poorly managed and implemented projects is a waste of the countrys scarce and precious financial resources and therefore its an unforgivable crime against the countrys entire population. Last but not least, radical and ruthless measures also must be introduced and effectively enforced to reduce the corruption that has been ruining the whole society for decades. THE FIFTH FACTOR: Question 1: The Answers: GRAND STRATEGY What is Grand Strategy? If one would make a thorough search in the Internet under Grand

Strategy he would find several materials with different interpretations about it, and judging by the various contradicting titles one has to conclude that even leading international personalities from different disciplines still understand the real nature of it differently. My own understanding of the true nature of GRAND STRATEGY itself is different from that of others, but I would not elaborate about it in details here. A few selected titles of articles and two brief quotations below will support my points: Does the United States Need a Grand Strategy?, Does the United States Have a Grand Strategy?, Does obama have a Grand Strategy?, Obama needs a Grand Strategy, etc.)

Grand strategy is a term of art from academia, and refers to the collection of plans and policies that comprise the state's deliberate effort to harness political, military, diplomatic, and economic tools together to advance that state's national interest. Grand strategy is the art of reconciling ends and means. It involves purposive action -- what leaders think and want. Such action is constrained by factors leaders explicitly recognize (for instance, budget constraints and the limitations inherent in the tools of statecraft) and by those they might only implicitly feel (cultural or cognitive screens that shape worldviews). The study of grand strategy -- and arguing about grand strategy, for you cannot study something without arguing about it -- is experiencing a renaissance of sorts. Yale has pioneered an extraordinarily popular Grand Strategy Program headed by distinguished historians, John Lewis Gaddis and Paul Kennedy, and distinguished practitioner Charlie Hill. Several graduates of that program have gone on to positions of responsibility in the Clinton, Bush, and now Obama administrations... (What is grand strategy and why do we need it? Posted By Peter Feaver Wednesday, April 8, 2009.
http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/08/what_is_grand_strategy_and_why_do_we_need_it) ...........................................

When my colleagues Paul Kennedy, Charlie Hill, and I first began talking about setting up a grand strategy course at Yale in the late 1990s, at least half the people to whom we tried to explain this thought we were talking about grant strategy: how do you get the next federal or foundation grant?... (What Is Grand Strategy?* by John Lewis Gaddis** Yale University.) www.duke.edu/web/agsp/grandstrategypaper.pdf ...........................................
Question 2:

Why does Burma need it?

The Answers: For the survival of a nation in todays International Cut-ThroatAtmosphere it needs not only excellent Strategies in key sectors, but also a Grand Strategy as well. But by judging what has been happening in Burma since the present government came to power, it is clear that, the most difficult part would be how to convince those who are now in power - both military and political elites - about the dire need for such a Grand Strategy. The reason is that, if one looks at what they are doing these days, one easily gets the impression that some elements among them seem to think or believe that even the worlds major powers - and regional powers as well - are playing to their tunes. But the reality seems to be the other way round. Burma, in fact, is just a small pawn in their global strategies. The only reasons that they cannot afford to ignore Burma are its rich natural resources, its strategic location between two rival giants, China and India, and the Indian Ocean. And, of course, the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi factor also plays an extremely important role. The government and the military are trying now to exploit these advantages fully for their own gains.(According to the 2008 Constitution these are almost two entirely separate, independent institutions! That is also why the armed forces are still ruthlessly waging major offensives against the Kachins - and to a lesser extent - the Shans, although President Thein Sein had ordered the military two times to stop their military actions!) Now, before directly answering the above question - that is, why Burma needs a Grand Strategy - let us have a brief look at their hidden aims and objects and the Strategy and tactics that they are deploying for the achievement of these goals. There is no doubt that their hidden aims and objects are to retain the political power and the armed forces, and to keep all key economic and financial sectors in their own hands as long as possible. And for the achievement of these goals, they apparently are deploying a Strategy with three major Stages and several tactics in them.

The First Stage

They have been loudly propagating about their intention to build up - according to their own

term: an eternal peace or in Burmese thawara nyeinchanyi - by negotiating and signing ceasefire agreements with several armed organizations.

By using - or taking advantage of - the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi factor - they were able to By persuading and subtly forcing Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to candidate for a parliament

establish their relations with the West and Japan at a respectable level. seat in the recent general elections, they succeeded in reducing her status as the Mother of the Nation and her international reputation as the Icon of Democracy to a mere local politician. (In my opinion her entering the parliamentary general election was a great strategical mistake for her personally and for her party as well.)

They have partly succeeded in destroying the unity of armed organizations by separately They have succeeded in destroying the solidarity of ethnic armed organizations with various They have succeeded in minimizing the roles of various ethnic armed organizations by lulling

negotiating with them for ceasefire. ethnic Burman democratic forces, including the National League for Democracy (NLD). their masses with the idea of a future federal union which should even be far more broader than the one that was envisaged in the Panglong Agreement.

They have greatly succeeded in polishing their image in the international community as real

reformers by releasing a number of political prisoners,etc. The Second Stage: It seems that this Stage is already being implemented.

They are destroying gradually the unity within every ethnic armed organization, and ethnic

Burmese political party as well - especially the NLD. The tactics they are using are luring away some opportunistic elements within these organizations with financial and attractive jop incentives. They have already partly succeeded with the Chin National Front leadership by luring away one or two persons within it with some irresistible job and financial incentives. So, by corrupting some elements within every movement, these organizations would soon lose mass support and they would thus become irrelevant. The same tactics will surely be used sooner or later with all other ceasefire groups and other opposition political parties.

They are buying or dragging the time: With this tactic they are trying to frustrate opposition

politicians, political activists and ethnic armed organizations. These people and organizations would soon lose their patience and hope and they would become resigned.

By buying or dragging the time, they are trying to outlive the active and energetic phase of

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi; when she is no more energetic and active someday as she still is today, her party would gradually lose its driving force, because - at least until now - there seems to be nobody in the NLD who could take her place and role over.

By relaxing restrictions on the domestic news media, reshuffling the Cabinet, admitting about

the existence of a blacklist consisted of over 6 000 persons and then subsequently deleting some 2 000 people from the lists, the government could give the outside world once more the impression that they are serious about their reform processes.

They are weakening the powerful Buddhist monks by dividing them. By giving the West hints about possible cooperation in some strategic fields, and commercial

incentives they are neutralizing the Wests attitude towards them, and at the same time drying out

the morale and material support that the opposition groups were getting until very recently from the West, etc. The Third Stage: Its most likely that this Stage would be realized by deploying the following major tactical moves. However, by judging what they have done throughout the country for decades, these undertakings would surely anyway be just superficial or cosmetic.

They would try to polish the image of the armed forces, including the police, by radically

reforming them from the bottom up to the top by removing those who were and are stained in the internal social upheavels.

They would try to polish the image of the present ruling party - the Union Solidarity and

Development Party (USDP) - by radically reforming their programme, personnel, implementing some anti-corruption measures, and some important steps to enforce the rule of law, and methods of doing things in general (for instance, it could steal the programme of their other rival major adversaries and thus make them dispensible and irrelevant), etc.

They would try to improve the living standard of the general masses to some extent through

the inflow of external investment, and by inviting and allowing NGOs to carry out all kinds of humanitarian aid.

They would try to take steps to reconciliate with the powerful Buddhist clergy by making They would try to lull the masses of ethnic peoples by granting them certain amounts of They would try to reform education, heathcare, social security, infrastructure, etc.

concessions that it cannot afford to refuse. freedom in restoring and improving their culture and languages, etc.

Special Notes: It is worth making three mentions here with regard to the ceasefire negotiations between various ethnic armed organizations and government delegations, and the governments strategical manoeuvres and tactical moves mentioned above: What a sorrowful, painful and ironical twist of fate for the countless victims of Burmas decades-long military dictatorship it is! - that those whom they always wanted to bring to the gallow are gradually transforming themselves now to be their DELIVERERS whom they should be grateful endlessly for their newly won freedom and well-being! In handling their ceasefire negotiations with the government delegations, none of the ethnic armed organizations, except the Kachin Independence Organization, seems to have and use any strategy at all. (Although I myself am a Chin national with decades of political experience behind me the Chin National Front did not ask me for my advice on this matter - fortunately! But even if they had asked me I would not be able to give them any advice because none in its leadership has any idea about strategy!) I have been closely observing during the past several years how all the opposition forces were doing their political business. To my great disappointment, I found out that the leaders of all of them - without a single exception - have never seriously sought the opinions and advices of some experts outside of their organizations - nor even that of their own rank-and file members. Everytime they made a conference or a meeting, everybody only tried to impress his comrades with his knowledge and know-hows. They never really listened seriously to each other. So, its no wonder that they all meet the same fate at the end - that is, ending up kneeling before their former archenemy!

Question 3:

How could an expert on Grand Strategy be found?

The Answers: A truly expert or experts in this field could probably be found within the country itself, or in the outside world. A good method to find such a person could be to openly invite on competition basis for the submission of conceptual papers from those who regard themselves to be experts in this particular subject. Question 4: How could he develop it - supposing that the political leaders of the country fully realize its importance?

The Answers: If Im to admit honestly here, it would not be an easy task to develop or create a Grand Strategy for a country Iike Burma, because due to the several totally unexpected major political and social upheavels in the worlds most strategic regions, and the great economic and financial crises that are taking place nowadays around the world, even major industrial nations are off-balance. A normal human being may therefore wonder that, if even the worlds major powers are off-balance, why a poor and small country like Burma should need a Grand Strategy! My counter argument would be that exactly because of these reasons it needs a Grand Strategy. At least Burma would lose nothing by having it, because someone who truly understands the nature of it might still be able to create and lay down some fundamental guidelines anyway for a few decades to come. At first glance, the strategical manoeuvres and tactical moves of the government mentioned above may seem to be brilliant strategical masterpieces. And one could even very easily wonder if the government is already acting under the guidance of a Grand Strategy! However, someone who really understands the true nature of Grand Strategy would realize that these strategical manoeuvres and tactical moves have nothing to do with a real Grand Strategy at all. The reason is that, as already mentioned earlier above, with these strategical manoeuvres and tactical moves only short-term gains could be achieved, but not an eternal peace and true economic development for the whole country in the long-run! In the case of Burma a true Grand Strategist would therefore develop his Grand Strategy by taking into consideration such realities as: Burma is not Sri Lanka and all non-Burman ethnic peoples are no Tamils, and that its not surrounded by oceans like Sri Lanka but by two rival giants that are sharing over 2200 km and 1600 km of common borders with it and that the long-term survival of the ethnic Burmans itself will also largely be decided by how fairly and sincerely they handle the life-long aspirations of these non-Burman ethnic peoples. Here, some people may probably wonder if I myself could be qualified enough to do the task of developing the Grand Strategy in question. But I do not believe that I would be the right person for my concepts may perhaps be too radical for those in power. It should better be someone else from outside who can look at things from a completely neutral point of view. _________________ Thang Za Dal (Mr) Grindelallee 141 20146 Hamburg, Germany. September 14, 2012. _________________ PS. I myself am the author of a 570-page paper on my people, the Chins, and a number of other papers as well that are directly related to Burma. The reader of this paper may access the following papers of mine (except Supply & Command) under the following URLs.

1. The Zo People of Bangladesh, Burma and India: An Introduction[XIV] http://www.scribd.com/doc/18092021/ 2. Some Strategic Concepts for the Rebuilding of Burma/Myanmar http://www.scribd.com/doc/30773435/ 3. Four Radical Strategies for the Native Non-Burman Peoples of Burma http://www.scribd.com/doc/48347646/ 4. Burmas 60-Year Old Civil War (1948-2008 ): A Brief Chronology http://www.scribd.com/doc/61798219/ 5. Supply and Command http://www.scribd.com/doc/61798502/ 6. Appeal to Organisations and Individuals That May In One Way Or Another Influence the Future Destiny of Burma http://www.scribd.com/doc/57760225/ 7. An Open Supplication to the Governments of the Peoples Republic of China, the Union of India, and the ASEAN-Member Countries Regarding Burma/mManmar http://www.scribd.com/doc/78049561/ 8. Grand Strategy for Burma/Myanmar http://www.scribd.com/doc/91618930/Grand-Strategy-for-Burma 9. Grand Strategy for Burma (II) http://www.scribd.com/doc/105982775/