The policy and mindset of Tatmadaw is tied to the concept of being the owner and protector of the country’s sovereignty, which means, all those resisting the Bamar-centered central government are enemies of the state and have to be crushed, one way or the other.

In the eyes of the Bamar-dominated Tatmadaw, all ethnic resistance forces are enemies and those supporting them in any way are also enemies, which means the ethnic population are also the Tatmadaw’s enemies and have to be dealt as such.

This doctrine and indoctrination of its soldiers have been there for as long as the ethnic armed resistance have existed, which means from the beginning period, shortly after the independence and exacerbated at the end of 1950s and 1960s stretching to these days.

That is why it is not a wonder that repeated gross human rights violations keep on happening, regardless of the C-in-C Min Aung Hliang’s ad hoc emphasizes that it has been revamped into a “Union Army”, serving the democratically elected U Htin Kyaw and Aung San Suu Kyi-led regime.

Thus it is quite evident, as the recent report of SHRF’s human rights violations shows, that the change of tag from “Myanmar Army” to “Union Army” has not in any way changes its mindset and hatred on the non-Bamar ethnic population.

Regarding the EU ambassador Roland Kobia when he said a few weeks ago that the ethnic armies should lay down their arms first, he was only showing how little he understood the nature of the ethnic resistance, which is deeply rooted in the political grievances of the ethnic peoples.

The point here is the ethnic armed resistance came into being because there is no possibility to resolve their political grievances of equality, rights of self-determination and democracy, through political means in a fair manner.