When I was 17, I received a letter from the Norwegian military requiring me to complete the first step of my compulsory military service. All this entailed was filling out a survey including questions about my physical activity and health, academic standing, and motivation to join the military for førstegangstjeneste. Given the large pool of candidates (my year was the first to include women), this survey was used to select those who would serve.
Already in the midst of planning my travel and studies for the next year, never did it cross my mind to consider what would happen if the Norwegian military would not accept my “0/10” desire to participate in the military, if it had not even allowed me the chance to express that desire, or if we had been at war. As I have worked with PYO to figure out how to best support vulnerable populations in Myanmar, I have been confronted with these questions and a deeper consideration of the right to refuse to fight.
On February 10, the Burmese military (aka SAC, the State Administration Council) announced that it was enacting the country’s conscription law and would begin drafting the first batch of 5,000 young men in March. The SAC followed up the announcement with a campaign, including rallies and pro-junta propaganda, to attract new ranks and boost the troops’ plummeting morale after months of losing ground to resistance fighters.
Myanmar’s conscription law requires men aged 18-35 and women 18-27 to serve for at least 2-7 years, and evasion is punishable by 3-5 years imprisonment and fines. The SAC announced that it would draft 4 batches of 5,000 men before conscripting women in the fifth group, and in April, it claimed that over 10,000 people had already enlisted voluntarily. Evidence of forced recruitment methods and changes in the SAC’s plan to now draft women in batch 3, however, indicate that the campaign has been far from successful. In fact, HURFOM estimates that under 5% of conscripts are volunteers.
The jungle around Chiang Mai, similar to the jungle people trek through to cross the border
Those with means began applying to study and work abroad; two days after the campaign started, two people were killed in a stampede at the Mandalay passport office. After the SAC banned men from leaving the country for work in May, however, growing numbers have sought to escape by illegal means, frequently by crossing the Thai border. Some see no choice but to pick up arms – just not those of the junta – and have joined resistance groups who have welcomed them. Some resistance groups have even pursued their own forced recruitment, both in competition with the military and, among allies, to support it.
Not everyone can leave so easily, though, and many fear the consequences of doing so. The SAC’s methods of recruitment include both carrot and stick beyond the law. They have advertised offers of job security and pay while also threatening to “beat to death” those who refused to join and “drive away like dogs” the families of those who flee.
The conscription campaign has also had ripple effects across the society and economy. It has increased internal conflict between administrators and resistance groups who have threatened anyone fulfilling orders relating to conscription, already resulting in several deaths. The military has strategically targeted areas with existing ethnic tension and vulnerability, notably the Rohingya in Rakhine state. Even in the military-controlled areas, the exodus of young people has created labor shortages, further exacerbating labor exploitation and filling gaps with child labor.
These effects are expansive, and demand a wide range of actions – not least from the international community, as this Diplomat article calls for. As a result, PYO and other CSOs are focusing on sharing information regarding forced recruitment and displacement, providing aid to IDPs, and supporting safehouses near the Thai-Myanmar border.
In the coming weeks, I will be supporting this work by interviewing people who have escaped conscription by coming to Thailand. We aim to compile a report detailing these individuals’ experiences and the effects of conscription to increase pressure on the junta and inform the international community. As we conduct this project, I will delve deeper into some of these issues in my blog posts, so stay tuned to learn more about conscription and the experiences and perspectives of young people.
A T-shirt-turned-poster for the office from Lose and Hope, the Karenni film from my last post
Posted By Madeleine Schneider
Posted Jun 19th, 2024
6 Comments
Thomas Carver
June 20, 2024
Maddie, this sounds like a good project to get your teeth into. it’d be interesting to know what these conscript fugitives are doing once they get to thailand, whether they are organising into any kind of action to put the junta under pressure to stop conscription
Best Tom
Mary Ellen Cain
June 24, 2024
Madeleine, I look forward to hearing the stories of these young people escaping forced conscription. What a tough situation for them and for their families and communities! Your interviews and reporting on these brave people will be a vital communication link between them and the rest of the world, hopefully contibuting to the junta’s defeat.
Iain Guest
June 25, 2024
Excellent blog Maddie. Given how recently this new law came into effect, I imagine this issue will overshadow the rest of your fellowship. I know your host plans to launch a fundraiser to help refugees from conscription who make it to Thailand and we will happily support this. Conscription adds another layer of misery to an already brutal conflict and as you write it forces young men to fight, Many now face an invidious choice – between fighting with the junta, leaving the country or (presumably) joining with the rebels. But let me also ask this: Ukraine is making many similar demands on young men, and many are fleeing rather than serve. Are these two cases different just because Ukraine has been invaded and is fighting for its life? And what of South Korea, which does not recognize conscientious objection because it sees itself faced by an existential threat? Or Israel, which allows CO for some religious exceptions but otherwise not. Should there be a human right to CO? Interested to hear what you think, when you have a moment!
Bobbi Fitzsimmons
June 27, 2024
Maddie, what an insightful look into an always unpopular government action. People don’t often consider the impact of this action beyond the effect on those being conscripted. Economic, familial, and societal tolls add to the previously inflicted pain of the population being displaced. I look forward to more detailed stories of those directly affected by this law.
Madeleine Schneider
July 1, 2024
Thank you all for your comments and these great questions, Iain. In distinguishing what is happening in Myanmar and Ukraine, as you point out, Ukraine has been invaded by another country, whereas the war in Myanmar is a civil war. The Burmese military is widely recognized as neither the de jure nor the de facto ruler, given how little land they control and that they forcibly took power in a coup against the elected government (most of the legitimacy they do have comes from international actors). The elected government (known as the NUG) is still operating but in exile, supporting resistance groups. So, although the situation is messy, the question here I think is, which government has the right to conscript people – if any. Another issue is that the military consistently targets civilians, and forcibly recruiting people to attack civilians is different from conscripting people to fight another militia, as in Ukraine.
Regarding CO – I personally definitely think it should be recognized as a human right, regardless of religion. The growing restrictions on this option in Israel are concerning, and we can see – perhaps even more clearly now – the resulting militarization of society, as well as the stigma around CO. South Korea seems to be making some progress, having recently changed the prison sentence for COs to conducting service in prisons, but a CO recently protested that it’s functionally the same thing. I’m actually a big supporter of civil service, having served for 2 years with AmeriCorps, so ultimately I think civil service should be the default and military the alternative in places that require national service. I have many more thoughts on this I hope to share in future blogs – thanks again for the questions!
Iain Guest
July 3, 2024
Ok – you’ve convinced me. Actually, a very thoughtful response. I think you’re right to say that the legitimacy of the government, and whether it is targeting civilians, are the key considerations. As for why CO isn’t viewed as a core right, my guess is that the majority of states fear it would curb their ability to draft during an emergency. I wonder if that applies to countries like your own, which are generally peaceful and are committed to human rights The war in Ukraine has made Europe very jittery…