Fighting Imagined Invasions with Administrative Violence 1982, Burmese citizenship legislation allowed for the naturalisation of all persons legitimately entitled to Burmese nationality through jus soli provisions and other rules. 34 Then, in 1962 a military coup led by General Ne Win took over the government of the country and initiated a military regime which in one form or another continues until now (at present, under the 2008 Constitution, the army retains three ministers, one third of the parliamentary seats and veto powers). 35 It is important to understand Ne Win’s point of departure in order to read the Burma Citizenship Law 1982 in context. In line with a nativist view of the nation state, Ne Win saw the complex social heterogeneity of Myanmar as a problem. As he stated during the presentation of the citizenship law, ‘the natives or Burmese nationals’, had been ‘unable to shape our own destiny’. 36 Hence, according to him the non-legitimate internal minorities (primarily persons of Indian descent) constituted a threat to the nation. Ne Win’s regime overtly attributed negative traits to the ‘others’. 37 Therefore, in consonance with the logic of nativism, Ne Win justified the superiority of the native Taingyintha at the expense of such others. Following this xenophobic logic, which carried the baggage of colonial legacies — including the idea of ‘whiteness’ — his solution was simple: ‘racially, only pure-blooded nationals will be called citizens’, while all others would be what has been translated into English as ‘naturalised’ and ‘associated citizens’ (another plausible translation would be ‘guest citizens’). 38 B Erosion of Jus Soli In 1982, Ne Win presented his citizenship law, which erased the double jus soli provisions existing in the Union Citizenship Act 1948 and established a secondclass category of citizenship for persons not belonging to the eight recognised national races (and their 135 sub-groups, defined later on by the regime). The Burma Citizenship Law 1982 has since been applicable, and discriminates persons on grounds of ethnicity and religion. 39 To prevent further external influences and ‘mixing’, the Burma Citizenship Law 1982 created a closed system where the naturalisation of foreigners was not possible. For example, naturalisation through marriage to a Burmese citizen is only possible if the date of marriage precedes the enactment of the 1982 Burma Citizenship Law 1982 and the non-citizen had been issued with a ‘Foreigner Registration Certificate’. 40 It is therefore no longer possible for a foreign spouse 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 ibid s 4, 5. Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar 2008 (Republic of the Union of Myanmar) ch IV. General Ne Win Speech (n 19). ibid. The Burmese terms are eh-naing-ngan-tha (‘Associate Citizens’) and naingngan-tha-pyukhwint-ya-thu (‘Naturalised Citizens’). Another possible translation would be ‘guest citizens’. See Citizenship and Human Rights in Myanmar: Why Law Reform is Urgent and Possible: A Legal Briefing (Report, International Commission of Jurists 2019) <https://www.icj.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/06/Myanmar-Citizenship-law-reform-Advocacy-Analysis-Brief-2019ENG.pdf>. For gender aspects, see A Gender Analysis of the Right to a Nationality in Myanmar (Report, Norwegian Refugee Council, The Seagull, Institute of Statelessness and Inclusion and SNAP 2018) <https://www.nrc.no/globalassets/pdf/reports/myanmar/cedawreport-web-7-march-2018.pdf> (‘A Gender Analysis of the Right to a Nationality in Myanmar’). Burma Citizenship Law 1982 (n 18) s 45; Burma Registration of Foreigners Rules 1948, 4 January 1949 (Union of Burma) s 6(2). 201