During his return flight from Russia on March 9, terrorist military leader Min Aung Hlaing addressed military-controlled media outlets, stating that Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) should focus on discussing what is possible and appropriate rather than merely expressing their desires. These remarks were extensively covered in the military council’s newspapers on March 11. Min Aung Hlaing claimed that it was the most opportune time for EAOs to collaborate with them, asserting that democratic rights and ethnic rights had been granted, while emphasizing that unilateral privileges could not be extended.
Min Aung Hlaing elaborated on his position, stating that while everyone has their own aspirations, including himself, it is important to focus on what is achievable and appropriate. He claimed that his administration has provided democratic rights and ethnic rights, comparing the situation to global standards where he argued that rights must be balanced and cannot be granted unilaterally. He specifically called on ethnic groups to reconsider their approach to negotiations and demands.
In response to these statements, Padoh Saw Taw Nee, who serves as both spokesperson and Central Executive Committee member of the Karen National Union (KNU), issued a strong rebuttal. He characterized Min Aung Hlaing and the military as an illegal fascist organization that has no legitimacy to speak about ethnic armed organizations. Padoh Saw Taw Nee emphasized that since the military illegitimately seized power through violent and fascist means, they and their organization have become illegal entities. He pointed out that their daily mafia-like oppression and brutalization of the public clearly demonstrates their illegitimacy, stating that none of their actions or statements deserve any consideration or respect due to their illegal status.
Following his return from Russia, Min Aung Hlaing has been actively promoting through military council media outlets the narrative that Myanmar is on the verge of rapid economic growth and development. However, ethnic armed organizations and the general public continue to resist these claims and maintain their opposition to the military regime. The military council’s attempts to project legitimacy and progress have been met with continued resistance and rejection from both ethnic armed groups and the broader population, who remain committed to their struggle against military rule.
