Chapter IV Citizenship Laws and the Illusion of a Collective National Identity The embedding of military dominance into Burma’s constitutional process is not the only legal maneuver taken by the Tatmadaw to ensure its perpetuity. Crucial to the continuity of military control is the illusion of a national Burmese identity, and the idea that the Tatmadaw is the only institution capable of developing and defending it. Legally, Burma’s citizenship laws provide a window into the mindset of the military. Throughout the colonial period, Burma operated as a plural society, and various ethnicities crossed paths only in the marketplace. Other than that, the sectors of society lived entirely separate lives (Furnivall, 1952). In 1922, Burma was granted a semi-elected parliament while still maintaining the power to make crucial decisions. This created an environment conducive to the cultivation of revolutionary sentiment, particularly among the younger generation. Further incentives for young nationalists came when the British began categorizing Burma’s various “native” people: The British had divided the “natives” of Burma into “martial” and “nonmartial.” The Burmese were classified as “non-martial.” This rankled the young nationalists who imagined a Burma restored to its past glory, free of colonial rule, with a new and proud army. (Myint-U, 2019, pp. 27-28) To this generation of nationalist young adults, past glory meant the days when Burma was dominated and administered entirely by Burman kings, a past where those ethnic groups privileged under British rule were subject to each king’s unhindered political and economic preeminence.