The person who came up with the Karenni characters was former KNPP Chairman Hteh Bu Phe (1937-2011). There were already characters in Karenni State employing an alphabet brought over by Christian missionaries, but after he read a book called “Languages of the World” (author unknown), he began to think that his people could not accurately represent their words with this alphabet. Then, when Hteh Bu Phe was studying history at Rangoon University, he and a friend set about creating written characters, which they made public in 1963. However, education in ethnic languages was banned under the policies of “Burmese-style socialism.” The writing system Hteh Bu Phe conceived later became a symbol of the KNPP’s independence movement as Karenni characters. The Burmese government imposes “three duties of the people”—do not dissolve the union; do not ruin consolidation and cooperation between ethnic groups; ensure sovereignty—but the KNPP’s movement came to present a threat to these “duties.”

A Nationalism Logjam

The dispute in Kayah State pits the government, which wants to integrate the state into the union as Kayah, against the KNPP, which aspires for independence as Karenni. However, this nationalism is not a dichotomy between the two, but rather a peculiar logjam. In order to understand this logjam, let us look at a different aspect of the relationship between the words karenni and kayah.

British officials in the colonial administration first used the term karenni, which how they pronounced kayinni, the Burmese word for “Red Karen,” originally used to denote the third person in that language. Meanwhile, kayah is a first-person word in the Kayah language that means “human.” Kayah reep is also used in the first-person and means “red person.” There is no clear-cut explanation for the use of the color red, but some theories connect it to the color of the native dress or to the color of the people’s skin. Furthermore, both karenni and kayah are grouped into the same linguistic category, the only difference being that they are used in either the first or third person.

The reason why the KNPP adopted the third-person word karenni for their name is that there are various ethnic groups in addition to the Kayah within the state (the Kayan, the Kayaw, the Paku, the Bwe, etc.). It is quite ironic for the anti-government side to adopt a name originating in the Burmese language, but they thought that to subsume the other ethnic groups, they could not use the word kayah as a name.

The problem that arises here is just what language Karenni is supposed to be. The Karenni language is not a newly invented tongue. Hteh Bu Phe, the man who created its written characters, was an ethnic Kayah from western Kayah (Kyebogyi), and the system of characters he conceived represent “the Kyebogyi dialect of the Kayah language.” In other words, the way the Karenni language is written is original, but it is actually the Kayah language. This becomes apparent through familiarization with the language. According to a survey Consortium Thailand conducted at refugee camps in 2001, when it came to conversing in Karenni and reading and writing the language, 81% responded that conversation is easy, while 60% said they cannot read the characters at all and 62% said they cannot write them at all. The reasons given for the low level of familiarity despite the many years of education in the language include the fact that the characters are only used in refugee camps and are not taught elsewhere in the country and that Burmese is the common language in the camps.

In order to make the Kayah language into the Karenni language, the KNPP’s political movement has primarily spread the language among the Kayah majority. The KNPLF, who split off from the KNPP, mainly comprises Kayans who criticize the Kayah-centric KNPP. The result of implementing Karenni-language education in the refugee camps was a corresponding rise in the number of people—mostly young—who can speak Karenni compared to the time the aforementioned survey was carried out, but it also caused the following situation: among the ethnic groups who form the Karenni people, “there are non-Kayah who speak Kayah, but no Kayah who speak something other than Kayah.” The Karenni have an internal bias for “Kayafication” and there is a visible majority-minority relationship among them. The composition of the Karenni people is a microcosm of the Burman-centric state of Burma.

When one takes note that the Karenni people are Kayah-centric, one can see there that they in fact share a recognition of Kayah nationalism with the Burmese government, which considers the Kayah a constituent member of the union. The nationalism logjam over Karenni and Kayah is evident here. That is to say, Karenni nationalism includes a logic that confers power on Kayah nationalism, and Myanmar nationalism includes a logic that confers power on Karenni nationalism, primarily for the Kayah. This logjam of “conferring legitimacy on a separatist movement within the nationalism itself” is nothing more than a concept, but nationalism that adds ambiguity to concepts gives rise to discord in a reality that is more complex and diverse.

The “ethnic” conflict contains three phases happening simultaneously: the Karenni movement opposed to Burmanization; the majority-minority relationship among the Karenni people; and the nationalism logjam. 

The Karenni Characters Have Returned to Kayah State

 The KNPP has agreed to stop fighting the government when Burma transitions to civilian rule and is continuing negotiations toward peace. Since then, the Karenni characters have been bestowed with new significance. These characters, which have come to symbolize the anti-government movement up until now, have become one of the official writing systems of Kayah State. The Kayah Literacy and Culture Committee (KLCC), organized by government officials, religious figures from churches, temples and the like, as well as representatives from Thailand (i.e. representatives of those under KNPP control), released a statement in June 2013 providing notification that these Karenni characters will be the official writing system. However, rather than casting them as “Karenni” characters, the KLCC calls them “Kyebogyi characters.” The place name Kyebogyi was used because it is the birthplace of Hteh Bu Phe, who created the characters.

 Reportedly, the debate over whether to call these characters Kayah or Karenni was a complicated one. In the government’s eyes, the KNPP is too informal a group and does not recognize its status as a “government in exile.” Although the use of the name Karenni was unacceptable at the close of debate, both sides did come to agree that they are “the characters of the people” who live in the state. I believe they were able to make this compromise because of the logic that karenni is a general term for the ethnic groups in the state, i.e. it refers to the people. In addition, we should also remember that the word kayah in the Kayah language means “human.”

 Meanwhile, the Karenni language’s official recognition as the writing system of Kayah State under the name “Kyebogyi characters” shows that the parties stopped the dispute over the name from entering a new phase. Can the government shatter Karenni principles by subsuming a Kayah writing system and thus find a path to peace, or will it spark a fresh dispute?

Toward a Resolution of “Ethnic” Conflict

Looking at the history of Burma since the period of military rule, approval of an ethnic language in this manner is an exception. Although the socialist era’s constitution permitted education in ethnic languages, this was actually in name only and education in Burmese was promoted. When considering the current standing of ethnic groups, there is one more suggestive event.

Photo 3: A billboard for the film “Kayan Beauties” (photo by the author). The movie won the Special Jury Award at the 2013 ASEAN International Film Festival and won awards for Best Cinematographer and Best Sound at the 56th Myanmar Academy Awards.

The film “Kayan Beauties” was released nationwide in Burma in September 2013. This movie is a story that denounces the Kayans (the so-called “chief group”) who run the tourism industry in neighboring Thailand for engaging in human trafficking. Specifically, the plot is about a Kayan woman whom a businessman attempts to kidnap and who is saved by a police officer who is a young, handsome Burman man. A Burman man saving a woman from an ethnic minority is very “Burma-like.” However, the groundbreaking thing about this film is that almost throughout, the dialog is spoken in the Kayan language with Burmese subtitles. This sort of change in the standing of an ethnic group might be a temporary thing, but we can interpret it as the process of searching for what a multi-ethnic state should be like.

The last point I will stress is that whether it be karenni or kayah, the people are exceptionally flexible in handling the words. Depending on the situation, they will call themselves karenni or kayah. The first census since 1983 is scheduled for March and April of 2014. The census categorizes people into one of the 135 ethnic groups recognized by the Burmese government, but rather than leading to a resolution of problems it could be a cause for further friction. To begin with, the people’s sense of belonging—their identity—needs to go back to being malleable, with multiple identities, rather than the rigid “ethnic groups” as defined by the state. This sort of flexible perception of ethnic groups could become a more solid foundation for fighting back against the modern divide-and-conquer tactic.