By Nai Lawi Aung (Political Science and Geopolitics Researcher)
Introduction
“When people speak of revolution under the premise of ethnic self-determination and interests, it cannot be detached from politics. And once we mention politics, the matter becomes one of territory. Therefore, only by looking at this issue through the lens of territory and politics—or rather, geopolitics can we fully and meaningfully discuss the revolutionary journey of an ethnic group.” Let this be the starting point for our discussion.Â
The term geopolitics was first coined by Swedish geographer Shelin. Today, it plays a vital role not only in a country’s internal political affairs but also in global politics. When political affairs are studied through geographical elements (such as land, water, and natural resources), they fall under the scope of geopolitics.
When a country or an ethnic group analyzes political matters based on geographic conditions, those geographic factors significantly influence the group’s or nation’s destiny, for better or worse. Utilizing one’s geographical assets, such as land, water, and climate, to safeguard rights and interests is the fundamental principle of geopolitics.
According to Shelin, “Geopolitics is essentially the study that links geography—such as maps of land and water—with politics.” Therefore, when discussing the geopolitics of a particular country or ethnic group, it is first necessary to study the geographical characteristics and foundational elements connected to them.
With that said, if we are to examine today’s Mon region from a straightforward geopolitical perspective, we can identify its strengths and weaknesses based on the fundamental principles of geopolitics. In the following sections, I will explore some of these critical geopolitical viewpoints in depth.
What Is Geopolitics?
Geopolitics is the field of study that explores how a country, ethnic group, or region is influenced by its geographical position, historical background, political context, social structures, and economic conditions, especially in relation to international affairs. It is used to inform foreign policy decisions through the application of geographic and political knowledge.
In essence, geopolitics is the scientific study of how political events and decisions are shaped by natural and geographical factors. It examines how geography affects power dynamics and political developments.
Geopolitics is generally explained through three main perspectives:
- The Study of the relationship between politics and geographical locationÂ
- Forecasting and analyzing a region’s future involves assessing its strategic importance and the dynamics of political power exercised within it.
- Leveraging geographic positioning in politics means using a location’s strategic advantages to achieve political or economic gains.
Perspective (1): Territorial Size and Its Geopolitical Implications
The size of a territory significantly influences the power and influence of a country or an ethnic group. In general, a country or group with a large territory naturally tends to have greater influence and geopolitical weight. While we cannot say that all small nations or ethnic groups inherently lack influence, smaller size often correlates with reduced geopolitical power.
Typically, the larger the territory, the more military power is required to defend and control it, leading to increased military expenditures. If internal instability or a lack of unity exists within the country or ethnic group, it may struggle to maintain control over its territory or provide adequate protection, which can lead to serious consequences.
For example, whether the Mon ethnic group exists within a federal system alongside other ethnicities, establishes its own independent state, or functions as a confederated unit, one key factor must always be considered: the importance of territory in securing ethnic rights, entitlements, and interests.
In the nearly five years since 2021, we have witnessed armed revolutionary movements led by political leadership focusing on reclaiming their land, establishing control over their own territories, and ensuring territorial security.
In the Mon region today, when we compare its geographic location to its neighbors—such as Thailand and ethnic groups like the Karen and Burman—we must classify its size. Based on geopolitical considerations, the Mon territory would fall under the “small” category. However, when compared with countries like East Timor, Singapore, Israel, or Vatican City, the Mon territory is relatively expansive.
Perspective (2): Geopolitical Significance of the Mon People’s Location
When analyzing a country or an ethnic group through a geopolitical lens, location is an essential factor that must be considered. While a nation or group may craft its political systems according to its national interests, its physical location cannot be altered at will. A country’s peace, instability, poverty, or development is often closely tied to its geographic position, making location a major determinant of its political fate.
Geopolitically, locations can typically be categorized into three types: Landlocked areas, Coastal regions, and Island nations.
The Mon people’s current region falls under the second category: coastal. Because it is not landlocked, it is less constrained in crafting its political strategies and less dependent on other countries or ethnic groups for development.
For instance, the Mon region, which connects both coastal and inland areas, possesses various socio-economic advantages. It serves as a strategic junction for land and sea routes in Southeast Asia, making it significant not just economically and politically, but also militarily. Although the Mon territory may be small in size, its location gives it a strategically advantageous geopolitical position.
However, a strategic location alone is not enough to ensure success. Without strong national unity, a deep sense of ethnic identity, effective leadership, and appropriate defense capabilities, the Mon people’s interests may be vulnerable to external and internal threats. This highlights the need for proactive vigilance and strong internal organization to safeguard and leverage their geopolitical advantages.
Perspective (3): The Geopolitical Impact of the Shape of the Mon Region
Whether a territory inhabited by ethnic groups is small or large, its shape can be studied and classified into five types: an elongated shape like Chile in North America; a compact shape like Poland in central Europe; a prorupted shape with extended parts like Thailand in Southeast Asia; a fragmented shape made up of many islands or separated parts like Indonesia and the Philippines; and a perforated shape surrounded by other countries like Italy. The region where the Mon ethnic group lives likely fits one of these five shape types. Countries with elongated shapes often face challenges in transportation, communication between regions, relations with neighboring countries, and economic activities, which tend to weaken national unity. For example, Vietnam, with its elongated shape along the South China Sea coast, has experienced division between its northern and southern parts, and Korea was also split into two countries, North and South Korea.
The area where the Mon people currently live also has an “Elongated Shape,” which contributes to weaknesses in national unity. This may lead to mistrust not only among the Mon communities themselves but also between the Mon and neighboring Karen people. If the Mon leadership fails to carefully pursue both “nation-building” and “state-building,” maintaining stability in these border regions will face significant challenges. Similarly, without systematic and prioritized efforts toward national unity, the elongated shape of the Mon region could become a long-term geopolitical weakness.
Historically, successive ruling governments have influenced the Mon people’s fortunes. Comparing periods when Mon resistance was strong with times it was weak reveals patterns that prioritized or neglected Mon interests. For example, past Burmese rulers deliberately intertwined Karen and Mon territories, causing ethnic mixing and disputes, which escalated into armed conflicts between the Mon and Karen. This systematic management of such weaknesses was likely intentional.
However, these weaknesses could be quickly transformed into strengths by promoting robust cross-border economic development, thus turning geographic disadvantages into geopolitical advantages.
Perspective (4): Demographic Composition
A “census” conducted by any country where an ethnic group resides primarily aims to study the population distribution pattern. Through the census, one can learn about the country’s total population, gender ratio, working-age population, income levels, unemployment rates, availability of human resources, number of children and elderly, educational attainment, and development status. By analyzing this data, it is possible to understand the current conditions of development and poverty in a country, as well as to estimate future development prospects. Therefore, population distribution patterns are an important part of studying geopolitics.
Although countries with large populations are often considered more powerful, there is a principle that if a country has a large population but remains impoverished, political instability and conflicts are likely to occur. While the total population includes everyone from newborns to those nearing death, having a large population alone does not guarantee the progress of an ethnic group or country. More crucial are factors such as the size of the skilled workforce and the quantity of human resources with advanced education. In other words, both quantity and quality matter.
In today’s Mon region, several concerning demographic trends are emerging: ethnic intermixing, language dilution in many major Mon villages, significant outmigration of Mon people to foreign countries, and the increasing settlement of Bamar populations in Mon areas since 2021.
As a result, most Mon people are now concentrated in rural areas rather than urban centers, which raises serious concerns for the future of the Mon identity and presence in the region.
National Mon leaders must pay attention to this demographic vulnerability. The Mon community should prioritize human capital development as a strategic objective, transforming from a user society into a producer society. By doing so, weaknesses can be turned into strengths.
Examples like Singapore and Israel illustrate this point well: despite having small territories and limited populations, these countries focused intensely on cultivating skilled individuals and building strong human resources. As a result, they have earned a prominent place on the world stage. Under the leadership of visionary leaders, these smaller or minority nations successfully turned demographic disadvantages into strengths and overcame their challenges.
Perspective (5) – Ownership of Natural Resources
Although having natural resources does not guarantee a country or an ethnic group will be developed or prosperous, possession of natural resources is a major factor driving development. Natural resources have always been valuable, and their worth can increase further when combined with technology.
In the Mon region, in addition to the resources and heritage mentioned above, many types of resources can be categorized as supporting tourism activities, capable of producing consumer goods, suitable for building ports and economic zones, and providing raw materials for industries. Beaches, waterfalls, evergreen forests, colonial legacies, and Mon history and cultural heritage can be leveraged to sustainably grow the tourism sector. This could create jobs for at least ten percent of the Mon population.
The welfare of the Mon population can be assured through fishing and shrimp farming in the open sea or by utilizing the vast plains, forests, irrigation canals, large rivers, and streams for the systematic production of rice, vegetables, fruits, fish, and clean water. Furthermore, such products could be distributed and sold to neighboring countries such as Thailand.
If the large natural gas fields in the offshore Gulf of Mottama are systematically extracted and produced, the region could generate substantial foreign currency (US dollars). If the rivers in the Mon region are harnessed for hydroelectric power, the entire region could have a full 24-hour electricity supply and even be capable of distributing and selling electricity. If these natural resources and heritage are combined with human labor and technology, the Mon region can rapidly develop and prosper day by day.
In summary, the Mon region has both advantages and disadvantages from a geopolitical perspective. Regarding land and water territory, the Mon region’s size and strategic location give it access to water routes and mountain paths that connect to Southeast Asian countries, providing significant advantages for both economic and military purposes.
Moreover, the region is situated in a delicate international relationship context between the Western bloc led by the United States and the Heartland bloc of Asian mountain states led by China, requiring special attention. The Mon region’s elongated shape and the coexistence of diverse groups necessitate prioritizing border peace, territorial stability, and national unity. Therefore, it is essential to have capable and effective leadership that can govern cohesively and correctly through appropriate methods.
Conclusion
Due to its climate conditions, the Mon region frequently experiences natural disasters such as flooding, storms, and landslides. Therefore, it is essential to take preventive measures and foster good relations with neighboring countries and friendly allies. These vulnerabilities could become opportunities or grounds for political and military conflicts among hostile parties.
From a geographic perspective, the region remains favorable, but it is also necessary to anticipate potential conflicts akin to a rivalry for affection, similar to how the Mon area has experienced Burmese incursions, Karen territorial expansions, and Kula population growth.
Regarding population, the Mon region shows many weaknesses in geopolitical terms. The population inflation due to Burmese, Hindu, and Muslim settlers inside the Mon area, combined with border encroachments from Thailand, and the emigration of Mon people abroad, leading to ethnic mixing, all contribute to this. Additionally, the Burmese-dominated education system and administrative practices have led many Mon people to experience cultural and linguistic assimilation, with some adopting Burmese identity. These factors weaken the ethnic unity and national solidarity of the Mon people. Mon patriots and leaders must remain vigilant and urgently seek the best strategies to address these challenges.
From a modern education and workforce perspective, it is crucial to prioritize the Mon people’s economic interests by preparing skilled labor and human resources in advance. Supporting the adoption of modern technologies is also especially necessary.
In terms of natural resources, authorities governing the Mon region must be cautious not to fall into the “resource curse.” To avoid this, Mon leaders should implement systematic approaches such as Social Impact Assessments (SIA), Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), responsible business practices (RBC), and transparent financial management through initiatives like the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
Finally, the strengths and weaknesses of the Mon region’s geopolitical situation depend heavily on the qualities of Mon leaders—their capacity, vision, thinking, knowledge, and expertise, which will ultimately determine how these challenges and opportunities are managed and governed.
