Preventing unrest also meant protecting the armed forces and government from the wrath of a resentful population. By 2005 the military-state decided to shift the country’s capital from Rangoon to Naypyidaw. Although that move should have symbolized completion of the state building process, in reality it augmented the illusion that Burma had achieved a national identity, thereby serving the interests of the Tatmadaw generals (Armao, 2015). The relocation of the capital was accompanied by the renaming of many locations within the country. Although not a new occurrence at this point in Burma’s history, the campaign held significance in the social implementation of control. It reasserted military power over the country on a national level (as did the renaming of the country to Myanmar in the early 1990s), as well its authority over the minutiae of every day life in forcing the language of ethnic groups to change in order to fit the preference of the majority (Houtman, 1999). Legal and Economic Control Tactics A major issue facing the Tatmadaw earlier and today is maintaining economic and legislative control. By keeping an iron fist around these two key aspects of society, the military is essentially given carte blanche in all of its operations, functions—and related corruption. As an institution, the military has a long history of dominating both the public and private sectors of Burma’s economy as well as major dealings in the black market trade of drugs, timber, and blood rubies. It has been speculated that 50% of the nation’s GDP came from illicit dealings, with money laundered through the state-run conglomerate, Myanmar Oil and Gas Company (Kar & Spanjers, 2015). The state’s involvement in Burma’s various illicit economic dealings further tightened its grip on 42