The junta or State Administration Council (SAC) and Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) met in Kunming from February 16 to 17 due to the insistence and brokerage of China to further its national interest.

The nine-member TNLA delegation is led by Lieutenant General Tar Gu Jar and Colonel Tar Moe Hein, while the junta’s delegation is led by Lieutenant General Ko Ko Oo, commander of the Bureau of Special Operation (BSO) 1.

The meeting was adjourned after the two sides made mutual demands, but due to difficulties in reaching a consensus, the meeting was adjourned by the Chinese government’s special representative, Mr. Deng Xijun, to resume the discussion after the relevant organizations have made preparations, according to Shwe Phee Myay and RFA news agencies on February 19.

The TNLA said that during the meeting, it only discussed the following points: a ceasefire in the areas where both sides’ forces are present, a cessation of attacks by both sides, all military activities such as using drones, artillery, and air strikes, and the permission for local people to transport medicine and food in areas controlled by both sides, according to the statement.

Speculations are that ceasefire issue was supposed to be the main concern of the TNLA, so that the people living under its captured territories will at least be able to live a normal life, without having to fear from airstrikes and bombardment of the military junta or SAC, according to its public announcement posture.

However, many thought that the following issues will come into consideration. They are: Ceasefire and de-escalation of hostilities; Political autonomy and rights; TNLA role in peace process; and Humanitarian issues affecting civilians in conflict zones.

While we don’t know whether the junta SAC and TNLA actually touched on all the issues mentioned above, as no party has made comprehensive public announcement, except for the TNLA recent short statement made on February 19, the issue dominating the talks is said to be the demand of the TNLA for a Palaung or Ta’ang ethnic state, in par with the existing 7 ethnic states, with 14 towns which it captured from the junta troops to be incorporated into its desired Ta’ang or Palaung State.

During the Kunming talks between the military council and the TNLA in China, the Ta’ang side reportedly demanded that 14 towns in northern Shan State be designated as Palaung State. The 14 towns of which 12 towns are under the TNLA control, including Namhsan, Mantong, Namkham, Kutkai, Namtu, Momeik (Mong Mit), Mogok, Hsipaw, Kyaukme, Nawnghkio, Mong Long, and Mong Ngaw, as well as the towns of Kachin Independence Army (KIA) and allies controlled Mabein; Tangyang and Muse, which are under the control of the military council, according to the media reports.

The TNLA also said that it would release the junta’s prisoners of war and that it would not secede from the union.

But surprisingly, TNLA was said to proposed it’s Ta’ang State aspirations to include all territories it captured from the junta, with the help of Bamar People’s Defense Force (PDF), Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) or Kokang and so on. They were Mandalay-PDF, Bamar People’s Liberation Army (BPLA), Danu PDF, Karenni Nationalities Defense Force (KNDF), People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Burma National Revolutionary Army (BNRA) and so on.

Most Bamar and other ethnic revolutionary groups rallied around the Three Brotherhood Alliance (3BHA) under the slogan of uprooting the military dictatorship and establishment of the federal democratic union, to fight along side the 3BHA.

The junta’s response was as expected, all ethnic state-level creation will have to go through parliamentary process and according to military-drafted constitution of 2008. Moreover, the SAC is only a caretaker government and it has no power to enact any such political mapping.

In short, it is a rejection. Ironically, why on earth did the TNLA thought that the junta has such power and believe it could create a new ethnic state without the consent of the people, is beyond understanding. It should have known that the consent of the people is paramount and sovereignty belongs to the people, besides historical significant factors of ownership of the land has to be observed at all cost and cannot just claim for itself because it was able to dislodge the junta troops from the area.

To look at it from a different angle, the TNLA leadership might really lack theoretical broad vision and worldly foresight on how things work in contemporary realpolitik, not to mention the inability to set the priority right.

They should have known that political mapping, new federal constituent creation to decentralization down to the very bottom of local administration within the mold of constitutional democracy, like Switzerland and Germany, which are bonafide federal union countries, need the basis and central federal authority consent and blessings. In other words, without the people’s consent, it isn’t going to work as sovereignty belongs to them, and not to any armed group or military dictatorship regime can just dictate and give away so easily.

Asking Ta’ang State and demanding endorsement of recognition from the SAC is way too naive and can also be translated into going against it declared goal of uprooting military dictatorship system.

It should also take a cue of the United Wa State Army’s (UWSA) which has taken over of southern Shan State territories, across the Thai border, by force decades ago, when the Khun Sa’s Mong Tai Army disintegrated, with General Khin Nyunt’s blessing. It is still not recognized by the successive military government and even ordered and asked the UWSA to withdraw back to Wa Self-Administered Division. The Wa declined but it doesn’t mean it is officially recognized. That’s the case in point.

Other than that, the TNLA clearly showed it’s real face of narrow, aggressive ethno-nationalism, rather than the noble aspirations of uprooting the military dictatorship system and establishment of the genuine federal democratic union for the whole country and people, as it claimed on the eve of Operation 1027, at the end of 2023.

In an interview with the BBC on December 14, 2024, General Tah Phone Kyaw said in reply to the question if all TNLA captured territories will be included into its aspired Ta’ang State, he replied that this has to be discussed and thrashed out with all stakeholders at appropriate time. But now even this cautious diplomatic talk is not honored, as only getting more territories or territorial expansion seem to be the real push and intention. Never mind if the realization comes from the pact with the devil or or not, so to speak.

Meanwhile, even during the Kunming peace talks, the junta continuously bombarded the TNLA captured places like Nawnghkio, Namtu, Kutkai and so on using a large amount of bombs in form of airstrikes and as well heavy artillery, to destroy civilian and military targets alike, without discrimination. This implies that the SAC sees the TNLA as underdog and not equal negotiation partner.

Analysis and lessons learned

It is nothing wrong to ask for more rights of self-determination on the part of TNLA, not to mention its aspirations for ethnic state-level administration. But it has to be done properly within the given constitutional framework, which will only be possible after the federal democratic union comes into being.

What is wrong is asking it from the SAC, which is an illegitimate coup regime and it has no authority nor legitimacy to do the political mapping or creating new constituent units.

Moreover, ethno-nationalism mustn’t mean subordinating other ethnic groups’ identity and destroying cultural heritage and undertaking territorial expansion at the others expense.

Looking at the example of the 3BHA, of the three members, TNLA and MNDAA will go into the category of narrow ethno-nationalism, while Arakan Army (AA) may be seen as a considerate one, with some exceptions.

The TNLA and MNDAA clearly make use of the country people’s aspirations to further their local need and territorial expansionism as can be seen by what they are doing now, and conveniently abandoning the original battle cry of “uprooting military dictatorship system and establishment of federal democratic union”.

In contrast, the AA is still on the ball, as can be seen in its leader General Tun Myat Naing’s interview with The Irrawaddy on September 12, 2024.

Tun Myat Naing said: “In Myanmar, most revolutionary forces are being driven by their own ethnic agendas. However, after 70 years of civil conflict, it has become clear that focusing solely on one ethnic goal will not lead to a comprehensive victory. Even if we were to drive junta troops from all our territories, they would only retreat temporarily.”

“Initially, our efforts were centered on Rakhine’s national interest, but working with various allies across Myanmar has given us a clearer perspective on the situation. We have come to realize that we are not alone in our struggles. Alongside our “Way of Rakhita,” we have been collaborating with many allies, addressing both our local needs in Rakhine and supporting our partners in their territories as we confront a common enemy.”

Hopefully, the TNLA will change track, toe the AA line of thinking and consider the big picture of the whole country’s freedom, liberation and achieving democracy, rather than looking for piecemeal solution for its own good and ethnic group only.