Myanmar Findings
Key findings from PeaceRep research in Myanmar
Our Myanmar research seeks to understand, analyse and explore opportunities for peace and democracy in Myanmar. Through research, stakeholder engagement, and comparative analysis, the programme seeks to explore the evolving nature of the crisis in Myanmar, and how domestic and international support could be leveraged to support Myanmar’s transition into a peaceful, democratic and inclusive state.
The Pathway to Peace and Democracy
The post-coup context, and the resulting anti-military resistance movement, has engendered an unparalleled form of inter-ethnic collaboration within Myanmar, coalescing different fronts of the opposition together. The result is a natural sense of reconciliation which has been forged between the dominant Bamar majority and the minorities, underpinning the successes of the resistance movement. Patterns of funding for the resistance movement illustrate this trend, as ethnic minorities in the diaspora tend to fund the newly created People’s Defense Forces (PDFs) and the National Unity Government (NUG) more than Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAOs) (Tueseng, Khual, Adhikari and Hodge 2024).
Beyond the objective of ‘winning the revolution’, which unites the broad anti-military opposition, there is also an acknowledgement of the need for dialogue on immediate strategies and pathways in managing the political transition. Discussions on pathways need examination at a greater level of granularity and to connect with emerging challenges on the ground, such as interim measures to support the new governance mechanisms being incepted across the country (Adhikari and Hodge, 2024).
A consensus has emerged amongst stakeholders that coherence and trust-building amongst the anti-military opposition is crucial for the future political trajectory, yet at the same time emerging realities on and off the battlefield paint a mixed picture on prospects for unity. Multi-mediation may be a helpful response to the current situation, rather than encouraging or waiting for a ‘grand bargain’ peace or transition moment, which may not arrive. This approach could be framed as ‘sets of conversations’ on distinct issues that are built up and connected over time (Adhikari and Hodge, 2024).
Along with the need to build trust between the opposition groups, there is also an acknowledgement of the need to sequence different sets of conversations – first amongst the broader opposition, and then ultimately with the military on issues such as accountability for human rights violations. Yet ongoing extreme violence, conscription laws introduced by the military in February 2024, failed dialogue processes of the past, and a lack of trust that the military will abide by the terms of any future agreements are all reasons why engaging in ‘dialogue’ with the military remains distant for many of the anti-military opposition (Adhikari and Hodge, 2024).
The need for ensuring inclusivity beyond ethnicity, and accountability beyond the military are also increasingly being articulated. Amongst post-coup revolutionary groups, there has been some systematic thinking around the need to integrate ‘gender’ into Myanmar politics. Issues around women’s representation in the senior leadership of ethnic movements, as well as the need to address ‘patriarchy’ embedded within Burmese society, featured as core issues needing to be dealt with. Overall, a lack of women in leadership positions in various groups was seen to have implications for the representativeness of the possible dialogues taking place across anti-coup decision-makers, potentially leading to key underlying issues not being raised in discussions (Adhikari and Hodge, 2024).
Global fragmentation has not only accentuated domestic fragmentation in Myanmar but also impeded the success of steps being taken to address conflict fragmentation in the country (Adhikari and Hodge, 2024).
Four years since the coup, while the resistance movement has grown from strength to strength, their ability to mobilise and raise funds has been impeded by the control of the junta’s State Administrative Council (SAC) over central institutions like the central bank, and digital repression (Tueseng, Khual, Adhikari and Hodge, 2024).
References
*When referencing these key findings, please cite the individual research paper or blog referenced in the text.*
Adhikari, M. and Hodge, J. 2024. Pathways Ahead for Myanmar: Assessing the Challenges and Opportunities [PeaceRep Policy Brief]. PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.
Tuseng, Z., Khual, Z., Adhikari M. and Hodge, J. 2024. Financing the Anti-military Resistance: Unpacking the National Unity Government’s role in Myanmar’s political transition [PeaceRep Blog]. PeaceRep: The Peace and Conflict Resolution Evidence Platform, University of Edinburgh.