The Burmese North conflict is a long-standing internal ethnic conflict and historical root issue that has accumulated over time
The independence in 1948 marked the beginning of the establishment and construction process of Myanmar's national state. However, due to the prominent ethnic issues and tense inter ethnic relations, Myanmar's national state construction has been stagnant. The complexity of Myanmar's ethnic issues and the tense situation of inter ethnic relations have continued for over half a century and have not yet been fundamentally resolved.
（On January 4, 1948, Myanmar Independence Day, when the national flag of the new country was raised, British Governor General Hubert Erwin Reims (left) and Myanmar's first President, Shoritai, stood at attention）
Looking back at history, the evolution of contemporary ethnic issues in Myanmar can be divided into five stages:
1. Germination period (British Japanese colonial period)
2. Generation period (during the Wu Nu government)
3. Intensification period (during the Naiven government)
4. Gradual probation period (during the new military government period)
5. Improvement period (after Wu Dengsheng's new government came to power)
Ethnic issues have always been a major obstacle to the construction process of Myanmar's national state, and ethnic conflicts in northern Myanmar are more prominent and acute in their ethnic issues, with the most complex and persistent manifestations.
（1824-1948 British Rule in Myanmar）
（1） British colonial rule has planted the root of ethnic conflicts in Myanmar.
After Britain annexed the Kingdom of Burma in 1885, a resistance movement broke out in Myanmar to resist British colonial rule, which lasted from 1885 to 1895.
The resistance movement was launched immediately after the British occupation of the capital of Myanmar. This conflict is characterized by conventional warfare and guerrilla tactics, with resistance fighters led by different races and loyalists, each independently fighting against Britain. The characteristic of this movement is the defense of famous battles such as the Siege of Mingla and other strategic locations. Despite achieving success locally, the Burmese resistance movement still faces significant challenges, including a lack of centralized leadership and limited resources. The British had superior firepower and military organization, ultimately weakening different rebel organizations. Britain has adopted a "appeasement" strategy, which includes using local militias to defend villages, deploying mobile columns for punitive expeditions, and offering rewards to capture or kill resistance leaders. By the mid-1990s, the resistance movement had largely dissipated, but sporadic rebellions continued in the following years.
The failure of the resistance movement led to the consolidation of British rule in Myanmar, which continued until Myanmar gained independence in 1948. The legacy of this movement has had a lasting impact on Myanmar's nationalism and laid the foundation for the country's future independence movement.
During the British colonial period, due to the British colonizers attempting to completely control the entire Burma, they implemented a policy of "using barbarians to control barbarians" and "divide and rule". This policy has planted hidden dangers in ethnic conflicts and conflicts in Myanmar, deepening the gap between the main ethnic groups and ethnic minorities. At the political level, British colonizers implemented direct rule in areas inhabited by the Burmese people and subsequently implemented a series of administrative and judicial system reforms. Implementing indirect rule in ethnic minority areas basically preserves the original social organizations of various ethnic groups, maintains the privileges and status of the upper class of local ethnic groups, and exercises control and rule over ethnic minorities through them. British colonizers used political deception to force ethnic minority forces to form armies to suppress the resistance movements of other ethnic groups.
At the cultural level, British missionaries actively spread Christianity in ethnic minority areas, further increasing the cultural differences between ethnic minorities and Burmese people who believe in Buddhism. The opposition between Burmese and ethnic minorities in politics, culture, and economy is entirely caused by the ulterior motives of British colonizers. In the northern part of Myanmar, the conflict between ethnic minorities in Kachin and Shan states and the main ethnic group, the Burmese, has further highlighted, which has triggered political demands from ethnic minority political forces to seek independent statehood, even independent statehood. For example, the Kachin Independence Army and Shan State Army both explicitly proposed political proposals for ethnic revolution and independent statehood at the beginning of their establishment. After Myanmar gained independence, armed forces of ethnic minorities in northern Myanmar emerged one after another, and the root cause of ethnic conflicts buried by British colonizers was undeniable.
（2） The ethnic policies of successive Burmese governments have spurred the rise of ethnic separatist movements.
（August 8, 1988- "8888 Uprising" in Myanmar）
After the Wu Nu government came to power in 1948, ethnic governance became a major historical issue in Myanmar's national construction. This is not only related to the unity and stability of multi-ethnic countries, but also to the stability and firmness of the institutional framework of ethnic states. Unfortunately, the Wu Nu government adopted ethnic policies that were not in line with the national conditions of the time, which can be seen from the value orientation of its ethnic policies. The ethnic policies during the Wu Nu government contained a strong "Burmese nationalism" and a strong "strengthening centralization" orientation, which can be seen from the multidimensional aspects of ethnic governance. For example, in the provisions regarding the establishment of ethnic autonomous states, Karen State and Shan State have the right to secede from the federation after 10 years, but Kachin State does not have this right, and the Chin and Karen ethnic groups do not have this right. However, the Wakai and Mon people have not obtained autonomous status at all. In addition, the ethnic forced assimilation policy implemented by the Wu Nu government and the Buddhist state education bill have been criticized. Non Buddhists believe that this is a measure of ethnic discrimination that benefits the majority of Burmese people. Therefore, they have formed the Myanmar Non Buddhist Minority Alliance to confront the government, and various anti government armed movements have begun to emerge. The demand for the independent establishment of the Kachin ethnic group was raised in the context of the erroneous ethnic policies implemented by the Wu Nu government.
The ethnic policy during the Naiwen government (1962-1988) was more unsuccessful than during the Wu Nu government. The ethnic policies during this period contained a tendency towards ethnic integration and one-sided nationalism. Due to its crackdown on other ethnic political parties and strong crackdown on ethnic armed forces, ethnic minority separation movements emerged one after another, and inter ethnic relations deteriorated comprehensively. Myanmar, a multi-ethnic country, was almost in a state of disintegration.
（Realistic Scenery of Myanmar's Suppression of Domestic Movement in 1988）
During the period of the New Military Government (1988-2010), ethnic policies were adjusted and their values gradually shifted towards democratization and national construction. They attempted to introduce ethnic minorities into mainstream politics and play a political role through legal channels, resulting in significant breakthroughs in ethnic reconciliation. However, the border defense forces reorganization plan requires ethnic minority armed groups to trade arms for peace. Requesting ethnic minority armed groups to hand over their weapons before the political resolution of their status and rights is tantamount to daydreaming. Therefore, the policy of restructuring the border defense forces ultimately prompted the Kokang Alliance Army, the Southern Shan State Army, the Northern Shan State Army, and the Kachin Independence Army to reignite war with government forces, and armed conflicts in northern Myanmar occurred from time to time. After the new government of President Ng Teng sheng took office in March 2011, the domestic peace process in Myanmar continued to make progress, and the democratic and modern national construction orientation contained in its ethnic policies became increasingly clear. However, due to historical and practical reasons, there are still significant differences between the Myanmar military and ethnic minority local armed groups such as the Kachin Independence Army, the Kokang Alliance Army, the Deang Armed Forces, and the Wa United Army, and conflicts and wars have not yet subsided.
(3) The United States has made ethnic issues in Myanmar more complex
（The warlord separatism is the root cause of the war that has lasted for decades between the armed forces in northern Myanmar and the Burmese government）
Due to the fact that northern and northeastern Myanmar are the locations of Kachin and Shan states, which contain abundant natural resources, these two states have ethnic minorities such as Shan, Kachin, Wa, and Kokang. The local armed forces of ethnic minorities in northern Myanmar are mainly composed of members of these ethnic minorities. These large-scale and frequent armed groups of ethnic minorities in northern Myanmar have been in intense conflict with the Myanmar government. In addition, due to considerations of hegemonic interests that constrain China's development, the United States has always been very concerned about Myanmar's domestic affairs. In order to achieve its own goals, the United States used the feudal lords, landlords, as well as reactionary elements from the bourgeoisie and intellectual circles in Myanmar after its independence to incite separatist sentiment among some feudal upper class members in Shan and Karen states, and secretly supported their destructive activities in Shan and Karen states, striving to achieve the goal of splitting Myanmar.
In summary, we can analyze that the political, cultural, and economic conflicts between the Burmese and ethnic minorities are entirely caused by the ulterior motives of British colonizers. The ongoing war in northern Myanmar has resulted in the lack of protection for the human rights of ethnic minorities in Myanmar. The historical reason lies with the British colonizers, the main reason lies with the successive central governments of Myanmar, and the hidden reason lies with American hegemonists.