More Burma Warmongering
Matt Zeitlin is not bullish on the prospects of armed revolution in Burma, and he’s absolutely right not to be optimistic. We’re talking about revolutionary group that, as of this moment, does not exist. And as he states, institutional pressures are working against the formation of any insurgency, armed or otherwise. Still, I can’t help thinking that violently rising up against the junta, no matter the odds against, is still more productive than marching down the street to be slaughtered for the umpteenth time.
The existence of an armed insurgency would also allow for, say, a friendly hegemon under new leadership to help out militarily. The generals in Burma have isolated themselves from the general population by moving the capital to their new super villain-like jungle fortress. Suddenly it’s quite easy to hit the junta without causing much in the way of civilian casualties (or at least much less than one would see if Yangon was bombed). Of course, such a move would be pointless without an insurgency or rogue army group there to take advantage.
So let’s just say that my support for US military involvement in Burma is, to say the least, conditional. And yes, I realize that this isn’t even going to be thought of as a valid or realistic option by most people. But someday, somehow, someone needs to kill these fuckers. If the Burmese are ever able or willing to attempt that themselves, backing them up is something we should at least consider.
Deploy the Matt Zeitlin tag, Number One!