What do you think?
Rate this book
Making Enemies: War and State Building in Burma
The Burmese army took political power in Burma in 1962 and has ruled the country ever since. The persistence of this government-even in the face of long-term nonviolent opposition led by activist Aung San Suu Kyi, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991-has puzzled scholars. In a book relevant to current debates about democratization, Mary P. Callahan seeks to explain the extraordinary durability of the Burmese military regime. In her view, the origins of army rule are to be found in the relationship between war and state formation.Burma's colonial past had seen a large imbalance between the military and civil sectors. That imbalance was accentuated soon after formal independence by one of the earliest and most persistent covert Cold War conflicts, involving CIA-funded Kuomintang incursions across the Burmese border into the People's Republic of China. Because this raised concerns in Rangoon about the possibility of a showdown with Communist China, the Burmese Army received even more autonomy and funding to protect the integrity of the new nation-state.The military transformed itself during the late 1940s and the 1950s from a group of anticolonial guerrilla bands into the professional force that seized power in 1962. The army edged out all other state and social institutions in the competition for national power. Making Enemies draws upon Callahan's interviews with former military officers and her archival work in Burmese libraries and halls of power. Callahan's unparalleled access allows her to correct existing explanations of Burmese authoritarianism and to supply new information about the coups of 1958 and 1962.
296 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
3 people are currently reading
78 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
May 25, 2021
This is hands-down the best overview of the history of Myanmar's military from Burma's independence in 1948 until the time of writing in the mid-2000s, based on in-field archival research. Mary Callahan is a leading authority of the subject of the Myanmar military, or Tatmadaw as it is known, and a first-rate political scientist. Her insights into the evolution of the Tatmadaw's power over time and its destructive (and incomplete) efforts at state-building offer keen understanding into the nature of power in the country, and her arguments stand the test of time. This book could have been written in 2021. In fact, maybe it's time for a new edition...
October 15, 2014
Callahan, Mary P., Making Enemies. War and State Building in Burma. Cornell University Press: Ithaca and London, 2003.
Book Review by Ralph Deckers
In her book Making Enemies. War and State Building in Burma Mary Callahan tries to explain why the Burmese army or tatmadaw is still in power in today’s Burma/Myanmar. She looks at the period dating from the beginning of British colonialism in 1826 to the take over of Burma’s political institutions by the tatmadaw in 1962. The tatmadaw were and still are not politicians, but Callahan shows that the tatmadaw took over power to prevent Burma from falling apart. Callahan was the first researcher to be allowed access to the Burmese military archives up to 1962. This provides her publication with an extra detailed perspective and specifically adds to certain interpretations in existing historiography. Her detailed historical analysis of the tatmadaw contribute a lot but this perspective puts too much emphasis on the role of the tatmadaw as Burma’s political leader.
The central thesis to Callahan’s book is that the tatmadaw are war fighters and not politicians. The tatmadaw reacts to in- and external threats in the way known to them: through warfare. Even citizens were and are made into enemies. One reason for is the colonial legacy of the British. The Burmese colonial state was based on organized violence and the post-independence Burmese state continued to built on this colonial structure. The invasion of the Japanese during the Second World War created a power vacuum and the Japanese helped to create an indepent Burmese army for the first time. The chaotic years after WWII were crucial to the future of Burma. As India was on the path of independence, the British were eager to leave the area which they had mapped a century earlier as Burma. The wars surroundings the transfer of power determined how much power the military would gain in Burma’s state organizations. At no point in the years after WWII was it clear that the tatmadaw would evolve into a military that could monopolize power for decades to come. One important factor to contribute to this rise of power was the influx of Kuonmintang (KMT) armies from China. This threat transformed the tatmadaw from a small group of undisciplined units into a professional standing army in the 1950s. The process of creating an army was highly political process which institutionalized the tatmadaw as a political force within Burma. The extremely detailed description of the chaotic years of 1945 � 1953 provide strong evidence for Callahan’s argumentation.
The book is organized in chronological order in which critical periods and transformatory processes within Burma are analyzed. It consists of seven chapters of which each chapter spans a critical transformation or period. The first three chapters sum up earlier historiography and add crucial details. For example in chapter one Callahan shows the devastating effect of the Croshwaite’s Village Act (1886). The century-old indigenous Burmese social unit was replaced by an administrative system imported from the British colony of India. In chapter two Callahan proves many scholars wrong who argue that Japanese militarism set the tatmadaw inevitable on a path of military dominance. Callahan argues that the tatmadaw was indeed influenced by Japanese militarism, but the tatmadaw adopted the lessons learned for its own purposes. In chapter three Callahan again adds to historical knowledge by exposing a grand network of Arakanese underground resistance during WWII which has been completely overlooked by the scholarly debate.
Callahan’s access to the Burmese military archives and her interviews with former tatmadaw members make this book necessary for anyone who wants to learn about modern Burmese history. The last four chapters are especially important in this sense. This book is the result of years spend in the Burmese military archives. The evidence for this can be seen in the book. In the period 1945 � 1948 even the British were not capable of controlling Burma, they were one among many contenders for national power. The ad hoc solution of the British was to form a two Burma army. By 1948 the army broke apart in numerous different groups, the tatmadaw being only one among many. In the years 1948 � 1950 the British Service Mission (BSM) favored Karenization of the Burmese army while ethnic Burmese distrusted the BSM. After independence the Burmese quickly purged the Karen out of ‘their� army and thus triggering a very long military conflict between the Karen and the Burmese state. The influx of KMT soldiers forms a threat for the Burmese state. The tatmadaw gain more political influence and by 1953 decide who is the enemy of the state. The tatmadaw is reorganized and centralized and Callahan exposes how tatmadaw leaders influence party politics through social networks. Overall the most important part of the book is the period spanning the years 1945 � 1953. Here Callahan really contributes to existing historiography by organization this period into a clear structure. Maps and tables clearify where certain groups were fighting at what time or how in what bad state the Burmese economy was in a particular year. But her approach might narrow her scope down too much. Questions which come to mind when reading this book are connected to other institions found in Burma throughout the colonial and postcolonial period. What about the role of the sangha? Or the role of Thailand or India?
Callahan’s book is important for scholars and the wider public who are interested in the development of the Burmese state and the tatmadaw in the 20th century. Her knowledge of Burmese has allowed Callahan to extract important information from archives and interviews. This knowlegde she has constructed into a clear narrative providing us with a better understanding of Burmese history, especially the period of 1945 � 1953. Personal rivalries and personal networks have shaped growth and influence of the tatmadaw and will continue to do so in the future. The Western media portray the tatmadaw as a very unruly tirannic regime. Callahan lets us travel beyond this scope of ‘the� Burmese ‘dictatorship� and shows how the colonial historical legacy, personal rivalries and family networks, the cold war and political developments and the mentality of an army contributed to the longest military reign in recent human history.
Book Review by Ralph Deckers
In her book Making Enemies. War and State Building in Burma Mary Callahan tries to explain why the Burmese army or tatmadaw is still in power in today’s Burma/Myanmar. She looks at the period dating from the beginning of British colonialism in 1826 to the take over of Burma’s political institutions by the tatmadaw in 1962. The tatmadaw were and still are not politicians, but Callahan shows that the tatmadaw took over power to prevent Burma from falling apart. Callahan was the first researcher to be allowed access to the Burmese military archives up to 1962. This provides her publication with an extra detailed perspective and specifically adds to certain interpretations in existing historiography. Her detailed historical analysis of the tatmadaw contribute a lot but this perspective puts too much emphasis on the role of the tatmadaw as Burma’s political leader.
The central thesis to Callahan’s book is that the tatmadaw are war fighters and not politicians. The tatmadaw reacts to in- and external threats in the way known to them: through warfare. Even citizens were and are made into enemies. One reason for is the colonial legacy of the British. The Burmese colonial state was based on organized violence and the post-independence Burmese state continued to built on this colonial structure. The invasion of the Japanese during the Second World War created a power vacuum and the Japanese helped to create an indepent Burmese army for the first time. The chaotic years after WWII were crucial to the future of Burma. As India was on the path of independence, the British were eager to leave the area which they had mapped a century earlier as Burma. The wars surroundings the transfer of power determined how much power the military would gain in Burma’s state organizations. At no point in the years after WWII was it clear that the tatmadaw would evolve into a military that could monopolize power for decades to come. One important factor to contribute to this rise of power was the influx of Kuonmintang (KMT) armies from China. This threat transformed the tatmadaw from a small group of undisciplined units into a professional standing army in the 1950s. The process of creating an army was highly political process which institutionalized the tatmadaw as a political force within Burma. The extremely detailed description of the chaotic years of 1945 � 1953 provide strong evidence for Callahan’s argumentation.
The book is organized in chronological order in which critical periods and transformatory processes within Burma are analyzed. It consists of seven chapters of which each chapter spans a critical transformation or period. The first three chapters sum up earlier historiography and add crucial details. For example in chapter one Callahan shows the devastating effect of the Croshwaite’s Village Act (1886). The century-old indigenous Burmese social unit was replaced by an administrative system imported from the British colony of India. In chapter two Callahan proves many scholars wrong who argue that Japanese militarism set the tatmadaw inevitable on a path of military dominance. Callahan argues that the tatmadaw was indeed influenced by Japanese militarism, but the tatmadaw adopted the lessons learned for its own purposes. In chapter three Callahan again adds to historical knowledge by exposing a grand network of Arakanese underground resistance during WWII which has been completely overlooked by the scholarly debate.
Callahan’s access to the Burmese military archives and her interviews with former tatmadaw members make this book necessary for anyone who wants to learn about modern Burmese history. The last four chapters are especially important in this sense. This book is the result of years spend in the Burmese military archives. The evidence for this can be seen in the book. In the period 1945 � 1948 even the British were not capable of controlling Burma, they were one among many contenders for national power. The ad hoc solution of the British was to form a two Burma army. By 1948 the army broke apart in numerous different groups, the tatmadaw being only one among many. In the years 1948 � 1950 the British Service Mission (BSM) favored Karenization of the Burmese army while ethnic Burmese distrusted the BSM. After independence the Burmese quickly purged the Karen out of ‘their� army and thus triggering a very long military conflict between the Karen and the Burmese state. The influx of KMT soldiers forms a threat for the Burmese state. The tatmadaw gain more political influence and by 1953 decide who is the enemy of the state. The tatmadaw is reorganized and centralized and Callahan exposes how tatmadaw leaders influence party politics through social networks. Overall the most important part of the book is the period spanning the years 1945 � 1953. Here Callahan really contributes to existing historiography by organization this period into a clear structure. Maps and tables clearify where certain groups were fighting at what time or how in what bad state the Burmese economy was in a particular year. But her approach might narrow her scope down too much. Questions which come to mind when reading this book are connected to other institions found in Burma throughout the colonial and postcolonial period. What about the role of the sangha? Or the role of Thailand or India?
Callahan’s book is important for scholars and the wider public who are interested in the development of the Burmese state and the tatmadaw in the 20th century. Her knowledge of Burmese has allowed Callahan to extract important information from archives and interviews. This knowlegde she has constructed into a clear narrative providing us with a better understanding of Burmese history, especially the period of 1945 � 1953. Personal rivalries and personal networks have shaped growth and influence of the tatmadaw and will continue to do so in the future. The Western media portray the tatmadaw as a very unruly tirannic regime. Callahan lets us travel beyond this scope of ‘the� Burmese ‘dictatorship� and shows how the colonial historical legacy, personal rivalries and family networks, the cold war and political developments and the mentality of an army contributed to the longest military reign in recent human history.
November 29, 2023
A detailed yet concise and easy-to-read analysis and history of the origins of Myanmar's armed forces (the Tatmadaw) and the context of Myanmar's permanent state of civil war. The book focuses on the early and mid-20th century, from the British colonial government and army, through World War 2 and its aftermath, and up to the 1962 military coup. Sometimes the details can feel a bit thin, and events can shift abruptly with seemingly little explanation, but that is to be expected with such a relatively short book. Overall a surprisingly engaging and pleasant read, well-written and well-paced, and accessible for people who don't know much about Myanmar's history and politics.
July 22, 2024
absolutely fantastic source research + the most interesting/accurate portrayal of the burmese military i've seen. could use more context at points, & there are some weird gaps, but these don't detract too much. only wish callahan had managed to write a follow-up from 1962-on
February 20, 2012
Good on the military side of the equation but those interested in aspects of civilian rule will have to look elsewhere.
January 1, 2017
Cries out for some Foucault, Virilio, or even Deleuze and Guattari.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.