Episode #258: Behind Enemy Lines
“I think one of the most important ways that you can approach a struggle like in Myanmar, or northeastern Syria, is to extract the hope that they represent. Revolutions represent the ability for people to enact their own will and to decide how they will live their own lives, and how they will lead themselves,” says Azad. “In Myanmar, the important [thing is that it] is the will of the people against the will of a dictator.”
Azad, a self-described “internationalist from the USA,” spent four years in northeastern Syria fighting in what came to be known as the Rojava Revolution, mostly with the Arab Syrian Democratic Forces (ASDF). After years of supporting the Kurdish struggle for autonomy, Azad came to Myanmar to do what he could to help the Burmese resistance forces overthrow their military oppressors. This story was first reported by recent podcast guest Lorcan Lovett, and the article appeared in Al Jazeera.
Azad's revolutionary journey began early, right after he finished high school. He traveled to Syria, having become moved by media accounts of what was happening there. Yet once in the country, he quickly discovered a gap between his idealized expectations and the actual experience of combat. "I went to Rojava when I was 19, as a young, ideologically motivated leftist from the West,” he recalls. “What you picture as revolutionary struggle when you’re sitting at home, and what it's actually like when you do it, is definitely different!" Yet overall, his experience in Syria validated his choice to travel to an active conflict zone, and despite the dissonance between the reality and his idealized expectations, he cherishes his memories of that time and describes the movement there as a “shining example of revolution in the 21st century [for] anybody excited about a people fighting for their own freedom.” He continues, “The reality of the situation was more than just being a place with progressive values; at its core, it was a revolution! And more specifically, it was a women's revolution.” In that spirit, his nom de guerre, “Azad,” means “liberated” or “free” in Kurdish.
While in Syria, he witnessed a significant transformation in the very nature of the conflict. Resistance forces had been fighting non-state actors like ISIS, but suddenly found themselves in direct conflict with Turkey. This marked a major shift in the dynamics of their operations and the challenges they faced, and required a comprehensive reassessment of their approach to combatting the much larger and better-equipped Burmese army. However, this wasn’t just a pivotal time for the resistance in Syria, but also proved to be a formative time for Azad as well, who developed a robust and valuable skillset as a revolutionary, and as a trainer.
The seeds of Azad's journey to Myanmar were first planted when the Karenni Nationalities Defense Force (KNDF) reached out to one of the Syrian resistance forces in 2023 in a spirit of solidarity. The resistance there was focused on its own struggles, so little thought was given to solidarity with liberation movements halfway across the world. But that message from the KNDF cut through that sense of isolation. “When that message got sent, that direct solidarity message, suddenly everyone started really paying attention,” he recalls. “Messages of solidarity, even though they're not material support, it really does break down that barrier of 'we're alone, we're fighting our own fight.’” And especially for Azad, this sense of connection and shared struggle became crucial for maintaining morale and motivation among revolutionaries separated by region and context.
The mercurial nature of media coverage bothers Azad. He stresses that liberation struggles like that in Syria or Myanmar do not end even when the media’s attention is grabbed by the next shiny object. For example, Azad recalls noticing how, when the fight against ISIS waned, international media coverage did as well. He also observed how politics creep into coverage. To illustrate this point, he describes how the Western media’s interest in the conflict diminished significantly once Turkey was involved, and the previously frequent references to the Kurds representing an “oasis of democracy” began to disappear. Azad believes that because Turkey is a NATO ally and plays a key role in the region’s geopolitics, media coverage changed accordingly. “As soon as it started being a fight against Turkey—still the same revolution, still the same values, still the same ecology, still the same democracy, still the same women's liberation struggle—but as soon as the fight started being against Turkey (who was trying to destroy this revolution), suddenly the tone of the media shifted a lot.”
That message from the KNDF not only provided a sense of solidarity for his Rojava cadre, but also jumpstarted Azar’s own, personal interest in what was actually happening in Myanmar. As a committed revolutionary, he decided he should play his part in that struggle as well … but first, he had to figure out where to land and who to fight with. "I reached out to several groups as it was mostly a matter of opportunity,” he says, referencing that the initial challenge was simply finding a safe border to cross. “So just for security reasons, and there were several other outside factors, but in the end I ended up here in Chin state. For me, it wasn't very important which part I arrived in.”
Once in country, it didn’t take long before he was able to glean insights into the nature his new enemy. Describing the military’s fighting prowess as almost pathetic, he highlights several issues faced by its soldiers, such as the lack of proper uniforms, inadequate equipment, and severe resource shortages. "When you look at their physical position in Chin state, their bases, as well as their numbers and the amount of reinforcements that they have, it's truly abysmal! In a serious fight of one-on-one, if you bring similar numbers, the Tatmadaw really just cannot defend their own positions.” Fundamentally, he affirms comments made in recent episodes by Saw Htee Char and Nathan Ruser about how soldiers are now reduced to holing up in bases across the mountainous state, and dependent on helicopters bringing in reinforcements and supplies. “In Tedim, a lot of the soldiers we were fighting didn't even have uniforms,” he says, echoing the past words of Zachary Abuza regarding the over-stretched supply lines. “Some of them weren't wearing shoes! We know that the Tatmadaw is strapped for resources, strapped for manpower, and strapped for ammunition everywhere. The limited reinforcements that they can dole out, they do when they absolutely have to.” This logistical bottleneck is a major weakness for the regime, limiting their ability to sustain prolonged operations. “They bring personnel, ammunition, and especially artillery ammunition,” he says. “They can bring theoretically a lot of soldiers per flight, but they have very limited flights, they have very limited space, and how many soldiers you can bring when you're also ferrying a couple hundred rounds of artillery is also limited.”
Azad has gained further understanding of his foe actually meeting soldiers who defect, desert, or are captured (a topic taken up by Helene Kyed in a recent episode). “Typically, they're well treated,” he explains, referencing his visit to various jails across Chin. “They are imprisoned, but well cared for. I saw their living quarters and they're able to access their family every now and again. They have hygiene, which is definitely much better than what happens if a member from the resistance gets captured.” He adds that soldiers who choose to leave their post are allowed to either join the resistance, or are given safe passage home; those that offer up their weapons and equipment are compensated.
Concerning the region’s infamously mountainous terrain, he describes how its treacherous roads severely inhibit the military’s ability to project power. “The roads are very bad, transportation almost non-existent,” he says. “There's a couple of paved roads between each town. That means that in the past couple of years since the coup, almost the entire countryside has been seized by anti-government groups.” This also makes the military’s outposts all the more vulnerable. Although their bases are usually built in the most strategic position in a given region, their actual defensive capabilities are limited by their lack of resources and personnel. This creates a situation where soldiers struggle to hold even the most strategically advantageous positions.
And when they do battle, soldiers rarely pick a fair fight, tending to avoid armed encounters, and instead go after vulnerable civilians, often targeting those who are suspected of having supporting the resistance. “The SAC has this policy of punishing the civilians in an area,” he says. “It's a form of collective punishment to make people not want to support the rebels. It is effective to some degree, because it does create fear among the civilians.” He also describes how soldiers are sometime not particularly professional or capable; Azad describes one military assault on a town that used, between a morning and evening, upwards of 5,000 rounds of ammunition … with no change in position, and resulting in not a single casualty.
Another issue that Azad addresses is the quantity of landmines and IEDs that have been laid by the military to compensate for their increasing vulnerability across the region—another indication of just how far the soldiers are going to avoid direct conflict. "[One] position had from 20 to 40 soldiers in it, that position had upwards of 600 mines surrounding it!” he notes. “It was like a little base on top of a hill with 600 Mines surrounding it.” This has significant humanitarian implications, as these mines pose a long-term threat to civilians even after the conflict moves away from these areas.
But when it comes to mines laid by the resistance forces, Azad believes that his comrades should also be developing that capacity to manufacture their own rather than mainly just repurposing military mines. “Resistance groups have not gotten too advanced in the use of mines or IEDs, he says. “The capability in regards to making IEDs safely and controllably should be increased from the side of the resistance. With more education in mines, they can be used to greater effect by the resistance forces, because right now, I would say there's actually underutilization of mines, or explosive devices.” He adds that while the military use mines predominantly for indiscriminate area-denial, the resistance would be best to use them for ambush purposes.
Turning his attention to his fellow resistance fighters, Azad is quick to commend their unquestionable bravery, adding that many of those fighting today were students and teachers before the coup. Still, he adds a word of caution, noting how far from the goal they still are. “We have to look at the reality of how much equipment they have, [and] how much training they have with that equipment,” he says. “Right now, in a lot of places, the training, the capability, the logistics, and the structure doesn't exist to organize a fighting force that can be effective on … the scale that you need to strategically get rid of the Tatmadaw from Chin state. So far, that coordination doesn't exist.” He alludes to fragmentation among resistance groups and the political considerations that complicate efforts at coordination. “There's the various political issues, there's the various kinds of rivalries and strifes,” he says. “I can without a doubt attribute it to something that is limiting the success of the rebels in Chin state."
In closing, Azad sees a thread connecting these struggles. “The revolution in northeastern Syria and the revolution that's going on here touch very much on the same wavelength, if you will,” he says in closing. “People all over the world, they're looking at these revolutions that are happening. And the question is people; not governments, not states, not organizations. The question is people! When they're faced with dictatorship, when they're faced with tyranny, or when people come together and they want to fight for their own freedom for their own autonomy for their own self-determination… can they do it?”