Myanmar’s civil war. Now in its sixth year. Has become a complex and multi-front conflict involving the military regime, ethnic armed groups, and pro-democracy forces. The conflict was triggered in 2021 when the military, led by Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, ousted an elected government and detained civilian leaders, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. This power grab reversed a decade of fragile democratic transition and sparked a nationwide uprising.

The Military Regime and Its Ideology

The military. Known as the Tatmadaw. Has been a dominant force in Myanmar since its formation under Japanese imperial forces during World War II. Its core ideology positions the armed forces as guardians of an almost exclusively Buddhist society, with the ethnic Bamar majority at the center of the nation. The military seeks to preserve Bamar dominance while absorbing the country’s many ethnic minorities into a centralized state in a subordinate role, according to Morgan Michaels of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).

Michaels estimates the military fields between 150,000 and 250,000 soldiers, with up to 100,000 conscripts bolstering military ranks since draft laws were rushed into force in 2024 after rebel fighters inflicted heavy losses on the battlefield. Conscripts, together with pressure from Beijing on the ethnic armies situated on the China-Myanmar border, have halted earlier rapid advances against the military. Reduced weapons flows to resistance groups, support from armed militias for the military, as well as improved tactics, have helped the military claw back much lost ground, Michaels said.

On the military’s side. Its air campaign has evolved into a high tempo of intelligence-driven strikes targeting personnel, infrastructure, and logistics — Long accused of attacking civilians, the military’s tactics have shown a shift toward more strategic and targeted operations. However, the military is not without its challenges. Despite its ideological cohesion, deep-seated disaffection with commander Min Aung Hlaing could raise the prospect of internal tensions as a future route for the conflict to handle.

The People’s Defence Force and the Shadow Government

The 2021 coup and the subsequent bloodshed as troops fired on street demonstrations against military rule pushed protesters to take up arms, nationalizing what has now become a protracted civil war. Forming resistance groups, they captured swaths of countryside in the central drylands and the south of the country. Others sought out and fought under the leadership of ethnic armies in exchange for training and weapons with which to fight the military.

These resistance groups, known as the People’s Defence Force (PDF), nominally operate under the leadership of the National Unity Government (NUG), a shadow government formed by Myanmar lawmakers removed by the military coup. In fighting the PDF, the military found itself confronting its own ethnic Bamar – historically the military’s core support base – face to face.

In 2022, the NUG claimed roughly 250 PDF battalions, suggesting about 100,000 personnel, although this likely includes noncombat roles, said Armed Conflict Location and Event Data’s (ACLED) Asia Pacific senior analyst Su Mon. With casualties mounting, recruitment slowing and some troops under the command of ethnic armed groups, the number of PDF fighters is likely lower, said Su Mon, noting that the PDF ‘appear to be managing a gradual loss of strength.’

The PDF sources their weapons from battlefield seizures from the military, surplus from ethnic allies, sales on the black market, homemade weapons production, and defecting soldiers. But those supplies have tightened, and so has funding to buy weapons – from diaspora donations overseas, local taxation, and online fundraising campaigns. Originally, the PDF was ‘envisioned as a national army, even as a potential substitute for the Myanmar military,’ said Su Mon. However, the NUG has struggled to unify the disparate militias that comprise the PDF or provide sufficient resources to help make it a force that could be recognized as truly national.

Ethnic Armed Groups and Their Divergent Goals

Ethnic armed groups have dealt the most serious blows to the military regime. However, these groups are not uniformly aligned with the pro-democracy movement, the PDF, or the NUG, and their goals often diverge from one ethnic group to another. In many cases, the military coup has sharpened differences among the ethnic groups themselves, of which there are about 20.

After decades of conflict, some have fractured and fought each other. While some remain focused on autonomy, others are driven more by financial interests or the influence of neighboring China. For some, the current period of revolution burns with urgent necessity. For others, it is more of a bargai. The ethnic armed groups have long been a part of Myanmar’s political and military landscape, with many having been involved in decades-old struggles for an autonomous identity.

These groups have been strengthened by arms sales from China and Russia, allowing them to deploy fighter jets, attack helicopters, tanks, and a growing arsenal of drones in their fight against the military. However, the military’s ability to secure arms from these sources has also been a point of contention, with some groups seeking to negotiate or align with the military for their own strategic interests.

The conflict has resulted in significant human costs. According to the international conflict monitor ACLED, more than 96,000 people have been killed in Myanmar’s civil war, while the United Nations says at least 3.6 million have been displaced. These numbers expose the scale of the devastation and the urgency of finding a resolution to the conflict.

With the military showing signs of resurgence and factionalism among opponents, the balance of power is tilting back in the military’s favor. However, the war looks set to grind on, with no clear end in sight. The fluid nature of alliances and the diverse goals of the various groups involved make it difficult to predict the future trajectory of the conflict.