• No results found

COLONIZATION TO DECOLONIZATION: END OF EUPHORIA AND BEGINNING OF

l.Chrom c Situation

COLONIZATION TO DECOLONIZATION: END OF EUPHORIA AND BEGINNING OF

INSTABILITY

During th e m id-eleventh century, th e Pagan Em peror Anawrahta M insaw

established a unified Buddhist em pire by gradually absorbing the peripheral

principalities o f the Irraw addy valley, which encompasses M yanm ar's contem porary

m ainland. How ever, th e Pagan Empire could not entirely incorporate th e princely states

of Kachin, Arakanese, and a few others facing external challenges. M an y o f th e

challenges prim arily em anated fro m th e Arakanese, Mons, Mongols, Shans, and so

forth. The decline of th e Pagan Empire was initiated due to internal problem s and

centrifugal forces trying to break out, which eventually proved the em pire's incapability

to cope with domestic and external challenges.5

The Pagan Empire established th e strong roots o f Buddhism and religious

tolerance in th e culture o f M yanm ar. Eventually, this notion of tolerance provided

conditions fo r external forces to control the region or p erm it flexibility fo r ruling elites

to establish despotic orders.6 The external powers found th e domestic socio-political

environm ent m ore conducive to m icro-m anagem ent in th e political system and reaped

the fruits of M yanm ar's geographical "pivot-ness." U ltim ately, by January 1st, 1886, th e

once Pagan Empire encompassing the m ajority o f Burmans was annexed to British India

as its province. M yan m ar becam e a British colony and lost its com plete sovereignty in

th re e phases, as a result o f th ree conflicts, the Anglo-Burmese W ar of 1 8 2 4 -1 8 2 6

(gaining Assam, M anipur, Tenassrim and Arakan); the Second Anglo-Burmese w ar o f

1852 (with the annexation of Pegu province, which the British called "low er Burma");

and the Third Anglo-Burmese W a r of 1885 (com plete annexation of th e rem aining upper

5 M ichael Aung-Thwin, Pagan : The Origins o f M odern Burma (Honolulu: University o f Hawaii Press, 1985), 28.

6 Alan W arren, Burma, 1942 : The Road fro m Rangoon to M an d alay (London ; N ew York: Continuum, 2011), 4.

Burma te rrito ry ).7 There was a fam ous rum or a fter th e third Anglo-Burmese w a r of 1885

historical id en tity.11 The nature of British unpopularity can be traced through the people

of upper Burma, w ho became rebellious; the guerilla forces targeted British m ilitary

troops and th eir garrison posts.12 Despite a British reinforcem ent of 4 0 ,0 0 0 troops,

tactics to shoot anyone found possessing arms, and threats to burn th e entire village as

punishm ent, such actions backfired.13

7 David I. Steinberg, B u rm a /M y a n m a r: W h a t Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford ; N ew York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 27; Michael Aung-Thwin and M aitrii Aung-Thwin, A History o f M y a n m a r since Ancient Times: Traditions and Transformatons (London, UK: Reaktion Books, 2012), 178-88; W illiam J.

Topich and Keith A. Leitich, The History o f M yan m ar, The Greenw ood Histories of th e M o d ern Nations

By 1890 British forces comprised o f m inority ethnic groups and Indian soldiers

subdued the resistance. Over this period o f Anglo-Burm ese wars, colonial rule gradually

altered Burma's political-econom ic and social system. A fter the second Anglo-Burm ese

w ar, colonial rule experienced a sudden rise of a rice exporting economy. In low er

Burma, under British rule, there was a 600% increase in acreage under cultivation.14 A

huge influx of dom estic m igration from upper Burma to Lower Burma to o k place in

order to benefit economic gains. H ow ever, the n ew settlem ents had to fo llo w colonial

regulations, not the traditional accustomed village style o f headman dealing villages.

British rule appointed its own headm an, called an agent. Under the "colonial village

act," British rule m odified a num ber of traditional practices. Among these changes,

"Shiko," a traditional salutation supposed to be observed fo r sacred Buddha, monks and

entitled elders, was now made m andatory fo r ordinary Burmese to perform to "British

officers as recognition of submission to British m astery."15 In addition, the colonial

village act also required obeying the appointed political agent; villagers w ould render

duties as night w atchm en in th e assigned areas of village. M oreover, villagers w ere

responsible for providing inter-village transportation, food, and oth er m aterials on

arrival of British m ilitary or civil officials. Punishm ent of villagers w ith o u t trial was a

normal judicial fo rm a t for political agents.16

In response to many exploitative acts, cultural and religious-driven factors

became fundam ental Burmese resentm ents th a t challenged British rule. These

14 Michael W . Charney, A History o f M o d e m Burma (Cambridge, U K ; N ew York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 6.

15 A History o f M odern Burma (Cambridge, UK ; N ew York: Cambridge University Press, 20 09 ), 7.

16 Ibid.

resentm ents later transform ed into nationalist m ovem ents th at created anti-colonial

force tow ards independence of M yan m ar. M a n y Buddhist Burmans referred to th e

colonial period as persistently distorting th e ir cultural and religious identities. The influx

o f im m igrants from o th er British colonial regions, like India and China, gradually

changed the dem ographic structure o f main cities. The consensus o f 1872 shows th a t

m ore than tw o-third s of Rangoon's population was comprised of Burmese, and by the

1920s the m ajority of residents w ere o f Indian descent. By 1937 out o f 4 0 0 ,0 0 0

residents in Rangoon, only 127,000 residents w ere Burm ese.17 In addition, m any

Christian missionaries w ere allowed to convert ethnic minorities at fro n tie r areas to

Christianity and prom ote th e positive image o f Europe.

In India, British rule was already w orking on educational reform s to adopt

secular forms of education and encouraged similar patterns in Burma to o . Secular

education was eith er w elcom ed or encouraged am ong the colonial ruling elites to be

trained. The repercussion was a Burmese society culturally, intellectually and politically

divided betw een "British educated colonial elites and Buddhist tra d itio n a lis t^ ]." 18

Historian Michael W . Charney (2009) em phasized th e nature of external involvem ents

th a t changed the domestic socio-political and economic dynamics o f Burmese society.

He writes th a t the colonial authority backed th e "broad intrusion of foreign institutions

and practices th a t regulated or interfered w ith rural life to a degree g re a te r than any

indigenous, central institution had a tte m p te d in the pre-colonial past."19 Hence,

17 A History o f M odern Burma, 22; Topich and Leitich, The History o f M yanm ar, 52-53.

18 The History o f M yan m ar, 52-53.

19 Charney, A History o f M odern Burma, 8.

M yan m ar in th e past and present has persistently experienced foreign in terference;

how ever, the level of interference was higher during colonial times which resulted in the

establishm ent of a m ixture of a m odern -trad itio n al social milieu.

In 1906, Buddhist monks established th e Young M e n 's Buddhist Association

(YMBA), a model copying the Young M en 's Christian Association (YMCA). Initially the

objective of YMBA was to address society's religious and social issues; how ever, w ith the

passage of tim e, it transform ed into a political m ovem ent. M any young lawyers,

Buddhist monks, and nationalists transform ed YMBA into a political association called

th e General Council of Burmese Association (GCBA) to prom ote nationalistic

objectives.20 Until the 1930s the dom estic unrest and riots w ere w ell-d irected by

Buddhist monks. British officials agreed th a t Buddhist monks were chiefs am ong the

resistance groups.21 M ost Burmans believed th a t British rule not only transform ed th eir

culture to adjust a newly constructed social milieu but also became disrespectful to

Buddhism. Instances show the blending of English words or practices into Burmese

society started to alter the social structure. Term ing Burma a new British-lndian

province itself constructed a new identity over a historical one.22 M o re o v er, British

officials or soldiers did not take o ff th e ir shoes w hile entering pagodas, m onasteries, or

o th er Buddhist sacred places. Buddhist tradition calls for th e respect of places of

worship by entering w ith bare fe e t.23 In 1916, an active m em ber o f YMBA and young

lawyer U Thein M aung resisted the shoe question in response to the colonial authority's

20 Fink, Living Silence in Burma : Surviving under M ilita ry Rule, 13.

21 M yint-U , The M aking o f Modern Burma, 205.

22 Aung-Thwin and Aung-Thwin, A History o f M y a n m a r since Ancient Times: Traditions and Transformatons, 198.

23 Fink, Living Silence in Burma : Surviving under M ilita ry Rule, 13.

erected banner stated th a t "No one is p erm itted to w ea r shoes in this Pagoda but

Englishmen and Asiatic Europeans." In resistance M au n g placed a banner th a t inscribed

the banning o f shoes in pagodas fo r everyone in o rd e r to replace a banner erected by

th e colonial authroities a t Shwe Sandaw Pagoda in P rom e.24

Two monks, U O ttam a and U W isara w ho had been exposed to W estern culture

and political norms due to foreign tours, decided to use political platform s to protect

the threaten ed religious sanctity o f Buddhism. Their political m aneuvering did not align

w ith colonial rule. They w ere imprisoned fo r anti-colonial speeches and actions. During

im prisonm ent, U Wisara called fo r a hunger strike against th e colonial regulation th a t

forbade the w earing o f monk's robes. His strike lasted fo r 1 66 days, w hen he died on

Septem ber 19th, 1929. As a result, a revolutionary m indset started to take shape across

Burmese society, even those "Burmese w ho had no t concerned them selves w ith politics

before" stepped into the nationalist struggle against the colonial rule.25 The nationalist's

m ovem ents accelerated its pace, and British rule experienced its first arm ed rural

rebellion in 1930 under Hsaya (teacher) San. Hsaya San was a traditional-m edical

practitioner and active m em ber o f GCBA.26 During th e rebellion he disguised him self as

a m onk named U Nyana to escape his arrest. The colonial force suppressed th e rebellion

and tried Hsaya San.27 He was sentenced to death, and on N ovem ber 28th, 1931, hanged

in Tharraw addy jail.28 The U Wisara and Hsaya San events w ere significantly symbolic to

24 Charney, A History o f M odern Burma, BO.

25 Fink, Living Silence in Burma : Surviving under M ilita ry Rule, 13.

26 Charney, A History o f M odern Burma, 13.

27 A ndrew Selth, "Myanm ar's Police Forces: Coercion, Continuity and Change," Contem porary Southeast Asia: A Journal o f International and Strategic Affairs 34, no. 1 (April 2012): 55.

28 Charney, A History o f M odern Burma, 17.

gather nationalistic fervor, and th e events w ere also substantially supported and

published by th e Burmese press.

To satisfy th e Burmese nationalists, the G o vern m en t of Burma Act o f 1935

separated Burma from India. It should be noted th a t Burmese nationalists developed a

positive nationalist inspiration from political activities of th e Indian Congress party and

M ah atm a Gandhi; eventually the British realized th e rise o f political protests in Burma

too. It became one of factors th a t lead to th e separation o f Burma fro m India.29 The act

cam e into force in 1937. The G overnor retained executive powers, and th e new act

established tw o legislative houses. How ever, the legislatures were subject to veto by the

Governor and Secretary o f State.30 In a w ay, Burma was separated fro m India as a

province, and gained a half-autonom y w ith less legislative o r governing powers.

Unhappy young nationalists started to look for help from neighboring Asian countries.

W hile 1939 saw the start o f the Second W orld W ar, Dr. Ba M a w (w ho later held

governm ent position during the Japanese occupation) created the Burma Freedom Bloc

Organization (BFBA) under the secretary-ship of Aung San. The objective o f BFBA was to

set a clear tim efram e fo r independence from British rule, as Britain was engaged in the

Second W orld W ar, but th e proposal for independence w as turned d o w n .31

In the following years, Aung San fle w to Japan and recruited his th irty comrades

mainly from Burman ethnic group, which shows a division o f Burmese ethnicities since

th e early days o f independence. These th irty comrades w e re trained under Japanese

29 Steinberg, B u rm a /M y a n m a r: W hat Everyone Needs to Know, 30.

30 Fink, Living Silence in Burma : Surviving under M ilita ry Rule, 15; Charney, A History o f M o d ern Burma, 41.

31A History o f Modern Burma, 48.

authorities at Bangkok to learn "com m and, com bat, espionage, guerilla w arfare, and

political tactics."32 It m ight be th e reason th a t Burmans fe lt segregation from other

ethnic groups as British rule always rem ained doubtful tow ards Burmans and used o th er

ethnicities to m aintain rule.33 Th erefo re, most o f th e nationalists, particularly Burmans,

w ere striving to get m ore representation in the legislature because, by and large,

Burmans believed th a t "British policy to dismiss Burmans from the arm ed forces

(deliberately) segregated the races (see table 5 )."34

Table 5: Ethnic Composition of th e Arm ed Forces in Burma, 1931 & 1941