Well done Simon thank you for providng coverage for the SEA games when they have been completely ignore by the media in Ausralia. My wife saw the national team played against the Soviets 30 years ago and they still had to queue through that single door to buy tickets.
We look forward to your next post.
Dave e
How much of the profit of the 100K copies sold that you contributed to the cause of Karenni people well being. Please don’t include your expenditure in ETOH as part of it.
Incidentally, well-being тЙа SPDC body count.
Example of well-being are:
1)Medicine for the sick.
2)Food for the hungry.
3)Comfort for the broken. So you may claim your travel expense as contribution.
Fair? I shall await your answer.
Ralph – WHAT “rumours of your own” have I peddled ?
YOU never cite the source of this allegation !
As for myself not citing source re. Handley – this is simply because the LM laws prevent me : if I do I can be accused of
repeating Handley’s LM ! Such is the silliness of Thailand’s LM laws.
If you don’t get what I’m referring to, I can only suggest you re-read Handley. I’ve read his book twice – the first time in anger, especially re. his warped “interpretation” of Black May ’92.
Severeal other distortions in his book angered me – not least Handley’s downplaying Prem’s economic achievements as Prime Minister.
Speaking of which, I never based my response “on a rumour that Prem remains close to the Queen”. I simply remarked that I thought it unlikely Prem would be so disloyal as to oppose Her Majesty assuming a Regency role.
Nor did I compare “a blog to soc sci”. I compared JOURNALISM to social science.
Obviously the chosen blindness to the results of past 2 decades prove your own denial of reality.
Here you go:
1)SPDC caused of Myanmar citizenry sufferings = X
2)The west contributions: “sanctions and useless interferences” (that includes you Dave e, Rod and all your ilk)=Y
X тЙаY.
Is X>Y or Y>X is up to individuals here.
I can not make it any simpler
Can you tell where I stand from these two points made as simply as can be for your comprehension?
Your sarcasm “thinking” might have been funny as you might have intended.
Some how it just prove your callous cold blooded nature that take pride in “Killing”.
So what is the difference b/t SPDC and your ilk again?
Nothing, just plain old murderers of the citizenry of Myanmar.
You are right about my disdain for people like you. Unfortunately more often then not they are white and from the west. WOnder why they is no such “other races can’t Jump”.
Incidentally when your objective is met and SPDC retaliate with it usual 4 cuts ruthlessness, you can then use that as an excuse for your next round of “helping Kerenni thingy” or project the false bravado of standing up to SPDC.
Don’t come crying in New Mandala about the devastation that SPDC has had effected 2┬║ to your useless contribution.
I hope you pay for your part sooner as much as you wish SPDC eventually paying for their iniquities.
could you please take the time to read my last request. I have reprinted it for you again below.
“Not to mention the lies that are stated that I can counter “line by line”.
I am still awaiting your line by line response/counter to the “lies” you claim I have mentioned.
I await eagerly for your well debated and analytical reply so that we can attempt to have dialogue on the issues that you take exception to.
By the way, my book has sold approximately 100 000 copies and is soon to be released in the US, Canada, Japan, England and India. I have received no negative feed back except by you.
All your three points are valid. Like Indonesia is a potential threat in Australian strategic thinking, in Burmese strategic thinking China is the main real threat, not India or Bangladesh or even Thailand, contrary to the popular belief.
In the late fifty’s when the army and U Nu government were deciding the locations of planned heavy industries and arms-manufacturing plants, they intentionally picked the sparsely-populated west-bank of Irrawaddy so that the wide river will become a natural and final barrier between invading Chinese armies and the life-blood of Burmese army once the invaders crossed Salween river.
Apart from the British-built old bridges, successive Burmese regimes had refused to build new bridges across Irrawaddy and Salween River especially for a very long time because of that perceived Chinese threat. From mid Seventy’s to early Ninety’s, the Kun-lone bridge over Salween had been explosive-laden and wired ready to be destroyed.
You can not blame Burmese on that paranoia, for old Pagan kingdom was totally destroyed by Kubalaikhan’s Yunan armies in 1287 and Ava was almost overrun in 1411. Recently in the seventy’s and eighty’s the large Burmese territory east of Salween river was basically occupied by Burmese Communists as a proxy for China in an undeclared war bitterly fought between China and Burma.
I fought as a 16-year-old boy soldier in that war and I would never forget the terrifying sound of the bayonets-unfolding from under the barrels of Chinese SKS rifles as they charged in waves after waves at our fortified hill just 20 miles from the border-line.
They called themselves people-volunteers then but they are the well-trained irregular units from then quarter-a-million strong south-western army of PLA camouflaged as BCP troops.
The Wa do not need Vietnam era volunteer-fighters as that same battle-hardened and now almost half-a-million strong Chinese South-Western Army is still there sitting right behind the border-line and watching every move Burmese army does.
It is noteworthy that one of the participants, Dutch Ambassador Thaco van den Hout, was recently treated to a luncheon by privy council president Prem, his fellow councilors Surayudh and Sawad, and the King’s principal private secretary Krit Garnjana-Goonchorn (according to a picture in Bangkok Post of Dec. 16). Have his statements on lese majeste and the Dutch monarchy aroused the interest of Thai palace circles?
I just think of something, that maynot directly concern Thongchai’s point above, but quite relevant.
Certainly, Thongchai’s sentences that JFL quotes deal with the present. But in the context of a discussion that goes back a long way to 1932 and beyond, to identify the monarchs with ‘royalists’ could be problematic. Was King Anan during the 10 years or so between 1933 to around 1944-45, a ‘royalist’? Even in King Bhumibol’s case, was he himself a ‘royalist’, say in the first few years of his reign, perhaps even down to his return in 1950 or 1951-52? They were ‘royals’ alright, but ‘royalists’ as well? I’m not saying that they weren’t, I just think we simply don’t have enough information to say. And it’s important for the understanding of history, because during the two periods, there were indeed many royalists acting, ploting against the People’s Party government (without the monarchs in the country or perhaps even without the monarchs’ roles). To identify ‘monarchs’ with ‘royalists’ in such cases could run the risk of misleading, in the opposite direction from the above.
The issue of monarchy, royalism in modern Thai history is quite complicated, and I’d prefer to be as clear as possible about who did what and how much, who were responsible for what and how much, etc.
“You will see the history is almost repeating itself once you read the following events, recorded in details by Burmese Historian U Kala in his U Kala Mahayarzawindawgyi, written in year 1724.”
What I think you are trying to get at with the story is:
(1) that there have been conflicts in this geographic area in the past; (2) given the (I would argue highly questionable) presumption that “peoples” or “ethnic groups” are the subjects of history some of the actors in past conflicts are also actors in this conflict; (3) there is a consciousness of prior conflict with China in Burma and it is something that the regime makes efforts to cultivate (thus the teaching of the story in schools).
For me point (3) is the most interesting (and the specifics of how these arguments are made, I think, depends on what I see as the questionable ontology in [2]).
I am sure you will let me know if you think my interpretation if off here.
On a more general note, I too saw this report yesterday. I doubt that there is much to it. It cites “sources close to the rebels” for information about this development. Maybe this is a way of trying to put out the word (true or not) that China, or some actors (local?, central?, military?, civilian?) have take a pro-UWSA (or ceasefire group in general) position in relation to the BGF issue.
Frankly, I think it sounds very dubious. If the veterans are from the PLA’s aid to North Vietnam, as the report claims, how old would they be now? If there are thousands of them one can assume that they are (supposed to be) combat troops and not a core of experienced officers. Even if the veterans are from China’s war with Vietnam, they would not be that spry. So I have my doubts about the veracity of the report.
I have a friend who lives back and forth between Burma and China. His father-in-law, who is a PRC citizen and lives on the China side of the border, claims to have fought with the PLA in and for North Vietnam. Though he is in his 50s (or maybe even early 60s) my friend’s father-in-law is in great physical shape and gets up very early everyday to exercise. Maybe I should give me friend a call and see if his father-in-law and his old army kit have suddenly gone missing?
If these guys fought in the Viet Nam war, the one that the U.S. was involved in, then they’d be in their late 50’s to mid 60’s.
I have a mental picture of a bunch of old farts hobbling through the mountains. Oh wait; that’s what I did, too. Yeah, they could do it.
You have issues that you need to work out. Your deep rooted hate towards whites, westerners and people whom you disagree with is eating you up.
You ramble on and on, never offering up an original thought. Yet you would like all of us to believe that you’re the one with the correct answer to the problems in Burma.
You really lost the debate when you started the name calling.
I’ll be thinking about you later this evening while I’m packing up gear for the Karenni Army.
A friend emailed me this, and while I doubt there are thousands, there might be a grain of truth here somewhere. I’ve been told that Kachins from Yunnan served with distinction in Vietnam, and attained fairly high rank in the PLA. These men later used their influence to help the KIO. As I said, I was told this, I don’t know if it is true.
Furthermore, if I remember my recent history correctly, China and Vietnam had several border clashes in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and China definitely aided the Khmer Rouge against the Vietnamese backed government. Clearly, ethnic minorities from Yunnan could have been part of the PLA during this time as well. I guess the question is, whose Vietnam War?
I suspect, however, that any veterans- if any- crossing over number in the tens rather than the thousands.
You should read and re-read my quote of #14 by your equally ignorant and callous compardre in #15 . If you can not see what my claim “line by line” is all about I have nothing more to say beyond what I have about you and your so called “helping the Karenni people”.
I forgot you do not know Karenni= karen.
My #26 post describe you well.
Enjoy your twisted life as it get shorter everyday.
The warfare involving Shans, Burmese, and Chinese are not new in the Burmese history. You will see the history is almost repeating itself once you read the following events, recorded in details by Burmese Historian U Kala in his U Kala Mahayarzawindawgyi, written in year 1724. You can understand more of the Burmese Psyche by knowing that this story and similar others are compulsorily taught in Burmese primary schools as part of History of Burma.
“1411 Duel Between Burma and China”
In the Burmese lunar year 774, the Christian year 1411, Shans from Mawtone Mawkel invaded the town of Myedu in upper Burma. King Mingaung of Ava sent an army of eleven corps led by the Crown Price Minyekyawzwa to repel the Shans. The huge army consisted of three hundred war elephants, four thousand strong cavalry, and eighty thousand strong infantry. Once Minyekywzwa reached Myedu he immediately attacked and destroyed the smaller army of Mawtone Mawkel brothers. As the brothers fled on horseback to China, Minyekyawzwa brought their families, elephants, horses, and many prisoners of war back to Ava.
A few months after Myedu war Minyekyawzwa marched down into Lower Burma and attacked Pegu. Riding the Pegu King Yarzardayit’s own war elephant called Bagamat, Thameinbayan, a son-in-law of Mon king, came out of Pegu and had a duel with Minyekyawzwa. But he was defeated and taken prisoner together with his elephant Bagamat. Minyekyawzwa then marched farther to Bassein and laid siege to the town. But Bassein was too strong to be taken. So the Burmese army marched to nearby Myaungmya and laid siege to the town. During the long siege, Minyekyawzwa took Thameinbayan and more than twenty high-ranking Mon prisoners of war back to Ava in eight fast boats along the River Irrawaddy. The upstream trip took eleven days. Minyekyawzwa stayed for only seven days in Ava and came back down to Lower Burma. The return trip downstream to the town of Dala across the river from Dagon (Rangoon) took only four nights and five days. His army then laid siege to the towns of Dagon and nearby Syriam.
Meanwhile, the fleeing Mawtone Mawkel brothers had reached China, where they begged the Chinese Emperor Uteebwa to help them to rescue their captured families now in Burmese hands. Chinese sent their General Erawaka with an army of two hundred war elephants, two thousand strong cavalry, and forty thousand strong infantry into Burma and reached Ava, then the royal capital of Burma. The Burmese army led by Minyekyawzwa then was waging a protracted war of attrition against Yarzardayit led Mons near Pegu in Lower Burma and couldn’t come back to relieve the capital Ava. The invading Chinese surrounded Ava and sent in an ultimatum demanding that Burmese either release the captured families of Mawtone Mawkel brothers or come out and fight them outside. Burmese had refused and the Chinese laid siege to Ava, and after a month the Chinese army had run out of food and so they sent another ultimatum into the besieged city.
This time the Chinese had challenged the Burmese to a duel on horseback and if their man was defeated they would end the siege and withdraw, but if their man won Burmese had to release the families of Mawtone Mawkel brothers. In a court gathering King Mingaung asked for anyone who dared to take the Chinese challenge, but none there dared as all the Burmese warriors and most of the Burmese lords were with Minyekyawzwa in Lower Burma. Then the lord of Paungde told the King about the Mon prisoner Thameinbayan, and advised him to ask Thameinbayan to take the challenge as he was the bravest Mon warrior who even dared to fight Minyekyawzwa in an elephant duel. So King Mingaung ordered and Thameinbayan in leg Irons was brought to him.
King Mingaung asked Thameinbayan if he was brave enough and willing to face the Chinese warrior, and the Mon lord Thameinbayan answered that he wasn’t afraid of anyone on this surface of the earth, face to face, sword to sword, shield to shield, either on an elephant, or on a horse. So the Burmese king released him and let the princesses wash his hair and give him a feast good enough for a king. After that King Mingaung promised him a reward better than from his own Mon king if he defeated the Chinese warrior, Garmani. Thameinbayan bowed to the king and guaranteed the favourable outcome for the Burmese, his captors.
King Mingaung then showed Thameinbayan every single horse in Ava to choose, but he didn’t find the horse of his liking. Only later Thameinbayan saw and liked a mare in the colour of tamarind seed grazing by the moat and took it as his horse. He then told Burmese he needed seven days to know the horse well, and he would then face the China’s Garmani on the seventh day from then. Once Burmese told the Chinese the date for the duel their hero Garmani spent that seven days drinking and eating and boasting to kill Thameinbayan horribly on the day they meet.
On the appointed day King Mingaung looked at Thameinbayan and liked what saw and said that the Mon lord was strong and brave and calm as his name had preceded him. He then gave Thameinbayan his own ruby crusted royal sword and said, “My son, do not to lose my sword!”, and Thameinbayan replied, “We will win, Leave it to me.” He then asked, “I have a basket with me tied to the saddle. Once Garmani is speared, I will cut his head and put it in the basket to bring back. I need a hook to pick his head up from the ground. Please give me a hook?”
So King Mingaung gave him a goading hook used in plodding an elephant behind its ear, but many Burmese lords laughed at Thameinbayan and said that our Mon hero was already looking for a lemon to cook the rabbit even before he had a rabbit in hand. Thameinbayan just bowed to the King and rode out of the besieged city towards the Chinese army. He was followed by a few people who could speak Chinese. All the people of Ava including the Buddhist monks climbed up the city wall to watch the duel ground from above as Garmani also rode out from Chinese army’s camp to meet Thameinbayan once he saw him coming out.
In a full body armour with a ruby crusted enormous sword in his huge right hand, seven foot tall Garmani rode a giant red horse with a gold saddle. His face was painted black and he also carried a gold-plated long spear. Under a helmet of seven steps, he looked like a Chinese demon straight out of their folklore. He met Thameinbayan near the water-filled moat. Through the interpreters Thameinbayan said to him that they both were the lords and warriors, and so they should show the people watching from both sides what they were capable of on the horseback. Garmani agreed.
Thameinbayan leaned forward and made himself as small as possible on the horse and then rode real fast. Garmani copied him masterly and rode even faster. Thameinbayan then stood up on the saddle and rode away from him. Garmani copied him again and rode faster again. Then Thamenibayan stretched both hands and rode again while still standing on the horseback. Garmani copied him again and rode faster again. While he rode past him on his left Thameinbayan saw the thread tying the two armour plates covering his right underarm was cut and loose.
Immediately Thameinbayan yelled out to Garmani that they had ridden three times and now was the time to fight. Holding the short spear in right hand behind his back and stretching the left hand by his side, he rode away from Garmani. Garmani chased him immediately. As Garmani reached near him, Thameinbayan wheeled his horse around to the right and faced him. After stopping in his track Garmani immediately raised his enormous sword and tried to strike down Thameinbayan with a mighty stroke.
In the process the thread holding his underarm plates broke exposing his flesh through a gap of at least four fingers width, and Thameinbayan, expecting that perfect opportunity, swiftly sent his spear thrust through the gap. The spear went in at Garmani’s right underarm, through the body, and came out at left underarm, killing Garmani on the spot. He then cut his head with a single stroke of his sword and picked the still rolling head up from the ground with the goading hook and placed it in the basket tied to his saddle. He then rode back and entered Ava while the mass of people on the wall cheered. Even the Chinese were amazed by the short and decisive fight and they said that Thameinbayan was not a man but a demon from hell.
Hugely satisfied King Mingaung gave him rewards and married him to his youngest daughter Talokeyarzathu. The Burmese king also gave Thameinbayan the town of Legai. The people of Ava also gave him many rewards. As promised the Chinese army folded their camp and withdrew back to China.
Nganadeeleg: How different is the Royal involvement in Angkhana Radappanyawut’s funeral to their involvement is the sad case of Juling Pongkunmul?
Actually, they are vastly different. The Angkhana visit was in fact, historically, the first ever* that the King or Queen presided over funeral of a person/persons died in the course of opposing the government and in the hands of government officials. Moreover, her fellow protesters’ conflict with that government was still on-going, with great intensity, at the time of the Queen’s presiding over her funeral. In fact, Angkhana did not just die opposing government, but a particular political party in government. In short, her death was eminently political. And politics is, as every one knows, supposed to be the domain where the monarchy wouldn’t tresspass.
Juling’s case, like a number of civilian deaths during the course of government/state’s war with communism, was the case of “officials and civilians died in the line of duty in the service of the country/state”, which is regarded not only proper, but a key, official duty of the King and Queen, to pay their respect.
I think that day should be added to all the other actions (& non actions), and observers should then be able to draw their own conclusions, based on the cumulative evidence.
It’s my fault not to make it clear earlier that, the Angkhana case was ‘Eye-Opening’ not for me personally (my eyes had been opened long, long time ago), but for great many people especially those who supported Thaksin. Contrary to accusation and widespread belief, the Reds or Thaksin’s supporters did not initially had this ‘critical to the monarchy’ stance (or, to use Sondhi L’s phrase, “khabuankan lom chao” stance) that a large number of them certainly have now. The October 13 events turned things around for them quite abruptly, hence their felling of ‘Eye-Opening’. Of course you’re right, they should have been able to draw conclusion based on cumulative evidence. But, that was actually what happened. (I still remember, earlier in July, when mysteriously the Queen’s personal recording was played at PAD rally, I wrote an article drawing attention to this ‘strange’ occuring, many Thaksin’s supporters on political webboards were still sceptical of its importance. I suppose, it’s kind of like long-held love affairs, people would rather be in a state of denial, that they’re over, for as long as they could.)
*I’m aware that there maybe two partial exceptions to this statement, 14 October and especially the case of a Village Scouts who died during the storming of Thammasat on Oct 6, 1976. But the 14 Oct case was regarded as a ‘national’, not a political matter. (At least initially, by the time the funeral took place, the Palace, I believe, would have wanted to ‘back off’ from their commitment of a royal-sponsored funeral, but it would be too great a problem if they did.) The Village Scout’s case was very similar to Angkhana’s, except that it actually was not ‘official’: the two princesses went there not as offcial representatives of the king and queen. And the funeral was not an official ‘royal-sponsored funeral’ (р╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕Щр╣Ар╕Юр╕ер╕┤р╕Зр╕ир╕Ю), not like Angkhana’s. Also the two princesses at the time, were far from very ‘high-profile’, socially active royals they had later become (think of Princess Sirinthorn especially). In any case, as I said above, the Ankhana case made no different for me personally.
Thongchai: As far as I understand, the monarch is also a royalist, isn’t he?
I suppose, in a sense, he is. But then again, we wouldn’t normally regard both the King and Queen themselves as just ‘royalists’, would we? Especially, not in the same sentence (“the royalists..are dangerous to the monarchy”)? I would have thought that if anyone deserve to be identified with ‘the monarchy’, surely the King and Queen themselves eminently do. In any case, my argument still stands, namely, even if one is supposed to include the King and Queen as ‘royalists’, to say that “the royalists…..are dangerous to the monarchy; they are the ones who undermine the future of the monarchy” is bound to invite people to draw conclusion as JFL (and many others) do.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
SEA Games update at the halfway mark
Well done Simon thank you for providng coverage for the SEA games when they have been completely ignore by the media in Ausralia. My wife saw the national team played against the Soviets 30 years ago and they still had to queue through that single door to buy tickets.
We look forward to your next post.
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
Dave e
How much of the profit of the 100K copies sold that you contributed to the cause of Karenni people well being. Please don’t include your expenditure in ETOH as part of it.
Incidentally, well-being тЙа SPDC body count.
Example of well-being are:
1)Medicine for the sick.
2)Food for the hungry.
3)Comfort for the broken. So you may claim your travel expense as contribution.
Fair? I shall await your answer.
Bob Hope Christmas special
… here’s another important mission for MICT coming.
Thaksin on Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Ralph – WHAT “rumours of your own” have I peddled ?
YOU never cite the source of this allegation !
As for myself not citing source re. Handley – this is simply because the LM laws prevent me : if I do I can be accused of
repeating Handley’s LM ! Such is the silliness of Thailand’s LM laws.
If you don’t get what I’m referring to, I can only suggest you re-read Handley. I’ve read his book twice – the first time in anger, especially re. his warped “interpretation” of Black May ’92.
Severeal other distortions in his book angered me – not least Handley’s downplaying Prem’s economic achievements as Prime Minister.
Speaking of which, I never based my response “on a rumour that Prem remains close to the Queen”. I simply remarked that I thought it unlikely Prem would be so disloyal as to oppose Her Majesty assuming a Regency role.
Nor did I compare “a blog to soc sci”. I compared JOURNALISM to social science.
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
Obviously the chosen blindness to the results of past 2 decades prove your own denial of reality.
Here you go:
1)SPDC caused of Myanmar citizenry sufferings = X
2)The west contributions: “sanctions and useless interferences” (that includes you Dave e, Rod and all your ilk)=Y
X тЙаY.
Is X>Y or Y>X is up to individuals here.
I can not make it any simpler
Can you tell where I stand from these two points made as simply as can be for your comprehension?
Your sarcasm “thinking” might have been funny as you might have intended.
Some how it just prove your callous cold blooded nature that take pride in “Killing”.
So what is the difference b/t SPDC and your ilk again?
Nothing, just plain old murderers of the citizenry of Myanmar.
You are right about my disdain for people like you. Unfortunately more often then not they are white and from the west. WOnder why they is no such “other races can’t Jump”.
Incidentally when your objective is met and SPDC retaliate with it usual 4 cuts ruthlessness, you can then use that as an excuse for your next round of “helping Kerenni thingy” or project the false bravado of standing up to SPDC.
Don’t come crying in New Mandala about the devastation that SPDC has had effected 2┬║ to your useless contribution.
I hope you pay for your part sooner as much as you wish SPDC eventually paying for their iniquities.
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
Dear PlanB,
could you please take the time to read my last request. I have reprinted it for you again below.
“Not to mention the lies that are stated that I can counter “line by line”.
I am still awaiting your line by line response/counter to the “lies” you claim I have mentioned.
I await eagerly for your well debated and analytical reply so that we can attempt to have dialogue on the issues that you take exception to.
By the way, my book has sold approximately 100 000 copies and is soon to be released in the US, Canada, Japan, England and India. I have received no negative feed back except by you.
Regards,
Dave E
Vietnam vets (PLA) to fight in Burma?
Semuren,
All your three points are valid. Like Indonesia is a potential threat in Australian strategic thinking, in Burmese strategic thinking China is the main real threat, not India or Bangladesh or even Thailand, contrary to the popular belief.
In the late fifty’s when the army and U Nu government were deciding the locations of planned heavy industries and arms-manufacturing plants, they intentionally picked the sparsely-populated west-bank of Irrawaddy so that the wide river will become a natural and final barrier between invading Chinese armies and the life-blood of Burmese army once the invaders crossed Salween river.
Apart from the British-built old bridges, successive Burmese regimes had refused to build new bridges across Irrawaddy and Salween River especially for a very long time because of that perceived Chinese threat. From mid Seventy’s to early Ninety’s, the Kun-lone bridge over Salween had been explosive-laden and wired ready to be destroyed.
You can not blame Burmese on that paranoia, for old Pagan kingdom was totally destroyed by Kubalaikhan’s Yunan armies in 1287 and Ava was almost overrun in 1411. Recently in the seventy’s and eighty’s the large Burmese territory east of Salween river was basically occupied by Burmese Communists as a proxy for China in an undeclared war bitterly fought between China and Burma.
I fought as a 16-year-old boy soldier in that war and I would never forget the terrifying sound of the bayonets-unfolding from under the barrels of Chinese SKS rifles as they charged in waves after waves at our fortified hill just 20 miles from the border-line.
They called themselves people-volunteers then but they are the well-trained irregular units from then quarter-a-million strong south-western army of PLA camouflaged as BCP troops.
The Wa do not need Vietnam era volunteer-fighters as that same battle-hardened and now almost half-a-million strong Chinese South-Western Army is still there sitting right behind the border-line and watching every move Burmese army does.
Compare and contrast
It is noteworthy that one of the participants, Dutch Ambassador Thaco van den Hout, was recently treated to a luncheon by privy council president Prem, his fellow councilors Surayudh and Sawad, and the King’s principal private secretary Krit Garnjana-Goonchorn (according to a picture in Bangkok Post of Dec. 16). Have his statements on lese majeste and the Dutch monarchy aroused the interest of Thai palace circles?
Thaksin, twitter and Thai turbulence online
People do not go to manager online to read Yellow shirt news. They vsit the site for ” Sor 7 ” , the bitchiest gossip column in Thailand !
Thongchai on Thailand in transition
I just think of something, that maynot directly concern Thongchai’s point above, but quite relevant.
Certainly, Thongchai’s sentences that JFL quotes deal with the present. But in the context of a discussion that goes back a long way to 1932 and beyond, to identify the monarchs with ‘royalists’ could be problematic. Was King Anan during the 10 years or so between 1933 to around 1944-45, a ‘royalist’? Even in King Bhumibol’s case, was he himself a ‘royalist’, say in the first few years of his reign, perhaps even down to his return in 1950 or 1951-52? They were ‘royals’ alright, but ‘royalists’ as well? I’m not saying that they weren’t, I just think we simply don’t have enough information to say. And it’s important for the understanding of history, because during the two periods, there were indeed many royalists acting, ploting against the People’s Party government (without the monarchs in the country or perhaps even without the monarchs’ roles). To identify ‘monarchs’ with ‘royalists’ in such cases could run the risk of misleading, in the opposite direction from the above.
The issue of monarchy, royalism in modern Thai history is quite complicated, and I’d prefer to be as clear as possible about who did what and how much, who were responsible for what and how much, etc.
Vietnam vets (PLA) to fight in Burma?
@ Hla Oo
“You will see the history is almost repeating itself once you read the following events, recorded in details by Burmese Historian U Kala in his U Kala Mahayarzawindawgyi, written in year 1724.”
What I think you are trying to get at with the story is:
(1) that there have been conflicts in this geographic area in the past; (2) given the (I would argue highly questionable) presumption that “peoples” or “ethnic groups” are the subjects of history some of the actors in past conflicts are also actors in this conflict; (3) there is a consciousness of prior conflict with China in Burma and it is something that the regime makes efforts to cultivate (thus the teaching of the story in schools).
For me point (3) is the most interesting (and the specifics of how these arguments are made, I think, depends on what I see as the questionable ontology in [2]).
I am sure you will let me know if you think my interpretation if off here.
On a more general note, I too saw this report yesterday. I doubt that there is much to it. It cites “sources close to the rebels” for information about this development. Maybe this is a way of trying to put out the word (true or not) that China, or some actors (local?, central?, military?, civilian?) have take a pro-UWSA (or ceasefire group in general) position in relation to the BGF issue.
Frankly, I think it sounds very dubious. If the veterans are from the PLA’s aid to North Vietnam, as the report claims, how old would they be now? If there are thousands of them one can assume that they are (supposed to be) combat troops and not a core of experienced officers. Even if the veterans are from China’s war with Vietnam, they would not be that spry. So I have my doubts about the veracity of the report.
I have a friend who lives back and forth between Burma and China. His father-in-law, who is a PRC citizen and lives on the China side of the border, claims to have fought with the PLA in and for North Vietnam. Though he is in his 50s (or maybe even early 60s) my friend’s father-in-law is in great physical shape and gets up very early everyday to exercise. Maybe I should give me friend a call and see if his father-in-law and his old army kit have suddenly gone missing?
Vietnam vets (PLA) to fight in Burma?
If these guys fought in the Viet Nam war, the one that the U.S. was involved in, then they’d be in their late 50’s to mid 60’s.
I have a mental picture of a bunch of old farts hobbling through the mountains. Oh wait; that’s what I did, too. Yeah, they could do it.
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
planB
You have issues that you need to work out. Your deep rooted hate towards whites, westerners and people whom you disagree with is eating you up.
You ramble on and on, never offering up an original thought. Yet you would like all of us to believe that you’re the one with the correct answer to the problems in Burma.
You really lost the debate when you started the name calling.
I’ll be thinking about you later this evening while I’m packing up gear for the Karenni Army.
Vietnam vets (PLA) to fight in Burma?
A friend emailed me this, and while I doubt there are thousands, there might be a grain of truth here somewhere. I’ve been told that Kachins from Yunnan served with distinction in Vietnam, and attained fairly high rank in the PLA. These men later used their influence to help the KIO. As I said, I was told this, I don’t know if it is true.
Furthermore, if I remember my recent history correctly, China and Vietnam had several border clashes in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and China definitely aided the Khmer Rouge against the Vietnamese backed government. Clearly, ethnic minorities from Yunnan could have been part of the PLA during this time as well. I guess the question is, whose Vietnam War?
I suspect, however, that any veterans- if any- crossing over number in the tens rather than the thousands.
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
Dave e
You should read and re-read my quote of #14 by your equally ignorant and callous compardre in #15 . If you can not see what my claim “line by line” is all about I have nothing more to say beyond what I have about you and your so called “helping the Karenni people”.
I forgot you do not know Karenni= karen.
My #26 post describe you well.
Enjoy your twisted life as it get shorter everyday.
Thongchai on Thailand in transition
Thanks for the explanations, and FWIW, I agree.
Vietnam vets (PLA) to fight in Burma?
The warfare involving Shans, Burmese, and Chinese are not new in the Burmese history. You will see the history is almost repeating itself once you read the following events, recorded in details by Burmese Historian U Kala in his U Kala Mahayarzawindawgyi, written in year 1724. You can understand more of the Burmese Psyche by knowing that this story and similar others are compulsorily taught in Burmese primary schools as part of History of Burma.
“1411 Duel Between Burma and China”
In the Burmese lunar year 774, the Christian year 1411, Shans from Mawtone Mawkel invaded the town of Myedu in upper Burma. King Mingaung of Ava sent an army of eleven corps led by the Crown Price Minyekyawzwa to repel the Shans. The huge army consisted of three hundred war elephants, four thousand strong cavalry, and eighty thousand strong infantry. Once Minyekywzwa reached Myedu he immediately attacked and destroyed the smaller army of Mawtone Mawkel brothers. As the brothers fled on horseback to China, Minyekyawzwa brought their families, elephants, horses, and many prisoners of war back to Ava.
A few months after Myedu war Minyekyawzwa marched down into Lower Burma and attacked Pegu. Riding the Pegu King Yarzardayit’s own war elephant called Bagamat, Thameinbayan, a son-in-law of Mon king, came out of Pegu and had a duel with Minyekyawzwa. But he was defeated and taken prisoner together with his elephant Bagamat. Minyekyawzwa then marched farther to Bassein and laid siege to the town. But Bassein was too strong to be taken. So the Burmese army marched to nearby Myaungmya and laid siege to the town. During the long siege, Minyekyawzwa took Thameinbayan and more than twenty high-ranking Mon prisoners of war back to Ava in eight fast boats along the River Irrawaddy. The upstream trip took eleven days. Minyekyawzwa stayed for only seven days in Ava and came back down to Lower Burma. The return trip downstream to the town of Dala across the river from Dagon (Rangoon) took only four nights and five days. His army then laid siege to the towns of Dagon and nearby Syriam.
Meanwhile, the fleeing Mawtone Mawkel brothers had reached China, where they begged the Chinese Emperor Uteebwa to help them to rescue their captured families now in Burmese hands. Chinese sent their General Erawaka with an army of two hundred war elephants, two thousand strong cavalry, and forty thousand strong infantry into Burma and reached Ava, then the royal capital of Burma. The Burmese army led by Minyekyawzwa then was waging a protracted war of attrition against Yarzardayit led Mons near Pegu in Lower Burma and couldn’t come back to relieve the capital Ava. The invading Chinese surrounded Ava and sent in an ultimatum demanding that Burmese either release the captured families of Mawtone Mawkel brothers or come out and fight them outside. Burmese had refused and the Chinese laid siege to Ava, and after a month the Chinese army had run out of food and so they sent another ultimatum into the besieged city.
This time the Chinese had challenged the Burmese to a duel on horseback and if their man was defeated they would end the siege and withdraw, but if their man won Burmese had to release the families of Mawtone Mawkel brothers. In a court gathering King Mingaung asked for anyone who dared to take the Chinese challenge, but none there dared as all the Burmese warriors and most of the Burmese lords were with Minyekyawzwa in Lower Burma. Then the lord of Paungde told the King about the Mon prisoner Thameinbayan, and advised him to ask Thameinbayan to take the challenge as he was the bravest Mon warrior who even dared to fight Minyekyawzwa in an elephant duel. So King Mingaung ordered and Thameinbayan in leg Irons was brought to him.
King Mingaung asked Thameinbayan if he was brave enough and willing to face the Chinese warrior, and the Mon lord Thameinbayan answered that he wasn’t afraid of anyone on this surface of the earth, face to face, sword to sword, shield to shield, either on an elephant, or on a horse. So the Burmese king released him and let the princesses wash his hair and give him a feast good enough for a king. After that King Mingaung promised him a reward better than from his own Mon king if he defeated the Chinese warrior, Garmani. Thameinbayan bowed to the king and guaranteed the favourable outcome for the Burmese, his captors.
King Mingaung then showed Thameinbayan every single horse in Ava to choose, but he didn’t find the horse of his liking. Only later Thameinbayan saw and liked a mare in the colour of tamarind seed grazing by the moat and took it as his horse. He then told Burmese he needed seven days to know the horse well, and he would then face the China’s Garmani on the seventh day from then. Once Burmese told the Chinese the date for the duel their hero Garmani spent that seven days drinking and eating and boasting to kill Thameinbayan horribly on the day they meet.
On the appointed day King Mingaung looked at Thameinbayan and liked what saw and said that the Mon lord was strong and brave and calm as his name had preceded him. He then gave Thameinbayan his own ruby crusted royal sword and said, “My son, do not to lose my sword!”, and Thameinbayan replied, “We will win, Leave it to me.” He then asked, “I have a basket with me tied to the saddle. Once Garmani is speared, I will cut his head and put it in the basket to bring back. I need a hook to pick his head up from the ground. Please give me a hook?”
So King Mingaung gave him a goading hook used in plodding an elephant behind its ear, but many Burmese lords laughed at Thameinbayan and said that our Mon hero was already looking for a lemon to cook the rabbit even before he had a rabbit in hand. Thameinbayan just bowed to the King and rode out of the besieged city towards the Chinese army. He was followed by a few people who could speak Chinese. All the people of Ava including the Buddhist monks climbed up the city wall to watch the duel ground from above as Garmani also rode out from Chinese army’s camp to meet Thameinbayan once he saw him coming out.
In a full body armour with a ruby crusted enormous sword in his huge right hand, seven foot tall Garmani rode a giant red horse with a gold saddle. His face was painted black and he also carried a gold-plated long spear. Under a helmet of seven steps, he looked like a Chinese demon straight out of their folklore. He met Thameinbayan near the water-filled moat. Through the interpreters Thameinbayan said to him that they both were the lords and warriors, and so they should show the people watching from both sides what they were capable of on the horseback. Garmani agreed.
Thameinbayan leaned forward and made himself as small as possible on the horse and then rode real fast. Garmani copied him masterly and rode even faster. Thameinbayan then stood up on the saddle and rode away from him. Garmani copied him again and rode faster again. Then Thamenibayan stretched both hands and rode again while still standing on the horseback. Garmani copied him again and rode faster again. While he rode past him on his left Thameinbayan saw the thread tying the two armour plates covering his right underarm was cut and loose.
Immediately Thameinbayan yelled out to Garmani that they had ridden three times and now was the time to fight. Holding the short spear in right hand behind his back and stretching the left hand by his side, he rode away from Garmani. Garmani chased him immediately. As Garmani reached near him, Thameinbayan wheeled his horse around to the right and faced him. After stopping in his track Garmani immediately raised his enormous sword and tried to strike down Thameinbayan with a mighty stroke.
In the process the thread holding his underarm plates broke exposing his flesh through a gap of at least four fingers width, and Thameinbayan, expecting that perfect opportunity, swiftly sent his spear thrust through the gap. The spear went in at Garmani’s right underarm, through the body, and came out at left underarm, killing Garmani on the spot. He then cut his head with a single stroke of his sword and picked the still rolling head up from the ground with the goading hook and placed it in the basket tied to his saddle. He then rode back and entered Ava while the mass of people on the wall cheered. Even the Chinese were amazed by the short and decisive fight and they said that Thameinbayan was not a man but a demon from hell.
Hugely satisfied King Mingaung gave him rewards and married him to his youngest daughter Talokeyarzathu. The Burmese king also gave Thameinbayan the town of Legai. The people of Ava also gave him many rewards. As promised the Chinese army folded their camp and withdrew back to China.
Thongchai on Thailand in transition
Nganadeeleg:
How different is the Royal involvement in Angkhana Radappanyawut’s funeral to their involvement is the sad case of Juling Pongkunmul?
Actually, they are vastly different. The Angkhana visit was in fact, historically, the first ever* that the King or Queen presided over funeral of a person/persons died in the course of opposing the government and in the hands of government officials. Moreover, her fellow protesters’ conflict with that government was still on-going, with great intensity, at the time of the Queen’s presiding over her funeral. In fact, Angkhana did not just die opposing government, but a particular political party in government. In short, her death was eminently political. And politics is, as every one knows, supposed to be the domain where the monarchy wouldn’t tresspass.
Juling’s case, like a number of civilian deaths during the course of government/state’s war with communism, was the case of “officials and civilians died in the line of duty in the service of the country/state”, which is regarded not only proper, but a key, official duty of the King and Queen, to pay their respect.
I think that day should be added to all the other actions (& non actions), and observers should then be able to draw their own conclusions, based on the cumulative evidence.
It’s my fault not to make it clear earlier that, the Angkhana case was ‘Eye-Opening’ not for me personally (my eyes had been opened long, long time ago), but for great many people especially those who supported Thaksin. Contrary to accusation and widespread belief, the Reds or Thaksin’s supporters did not initially had this ‘critical to the monarchy’ stance (or, to use Sondhi L’s phrase, “khabuankan lom chao” stance) that a large number of them certainly have now. The October 13 events turned things around for them quite abruptly, hence their felling of ‘Eye-Opening’. Of course you’re right, they should have been able to draw conclusion based on cumulative evidence. But, that was actually what happened. (I still remember, earlier in July, when mysteriously the Queen’s personal recording was played at PAD rally, I wrote an article drawing attention to this ‘strange’ occuring, many Thaksin’s supporters on political webboards were still sceptical of its importance. I suppose, it’s kind of like long-held love affairs, people would rather be in a state of denial, that they’re over, for as long as they could.)
*I’m aware that there maybe two partial exceptions to this statement, 14 October and especially the case of a Village Scouts who died during the storming of Thammasat on Oct 6, 1976. But the 14 Oct case was regarded as a ‘national’, not a political matter. (At least initially, by the time the funeral took place, the Palace, I believe, would have wanted to ‘back off’ from their commitment of a royal-sponsored funeral, but it would be too great a problem if they did.) The Village Scout’s case was very similar to Angkhana’s, except that it actually was not ‘official’: the two princesses went there not as offcial representatives of the king and queen. And the funeral was not an official ‘royal-sponsored funeral’ (р╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕Щр╣Ар╕Юр╕ер╕┤р╕Зр╕ир╕Ю), not like Angkhana’s. Also the two princesses at the time, were far from very ‘high-profile’, socially active royals they had later become (think of Princess Sirinthorn especially). In any case, as I said above, the Ankhana case made no different for me personally.
Thongchai:
As far as I understand, the monarch is also a royalist, isn’t he?
I suppose, in a sense, he is. But then again, we wouldn’t normally regard both the King and Queen themselves as just ‘royalists’, would we? Especially, not in the same sentence (“the royalists..are dangerous to the monarchy”)? I would have thought that if anyone deserve to be identified with ‘the monarchy’, surely the King and Queen themselves eminently do. In any case, my argument still stands, namely, even if one is supposed to include the King and Queen as ‘royalists’, to say that “the royalists…..are dangerous to the monarchy; they are the ones who undermine the future of the monarchy” is bound to invite people to draw conclusion as JFL (and many others) do.
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
Dear PlanB,
“Not to mention the lies that are stated that I can counter “line by line”.
I am still awaiting your line by line response/counter to the “lies” you claim I have mentioned.
Regards,
Dave E
Thongchai on Thailand in transition
Srithanochai’s point is the one that convinces me more than the ‘eye opening’ day.