Since independence from Great Britain in independence in 1948, Burma/Myanmar has remained entrenched in a cycle of state failure and civil war that have continued through every era of government. Integral to this breakdown have been a number of unaddressed issues – political repression, ethnic conflict and military rule – that have often been shared with other countries undergoing post-colonial transition. But whereas the challenges of national transition and peace-building have been addressed or acknowledged in other parts of the world, Myanmar has generally appeared as an exception, a ‘forgotten’ land or somehow politically unique.
In part, this exceptionalism has been for internal reasons. Historically, this was most evident during the 1962-88 era of the ‘Burmese Way to Socialism’ when the ruling generals of the Myanmar armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw or Sit-Tat, became so non-aligned that they withdrew the country from the non-alignment movement. But it is also, in part, for international reasons. Across the decades, it has often been difficult for international actors to know who to work with and who to shun. Such concerns were at a height during the Cold War when China and the USA supported different movements for control of government, concerns that are resurfacing again today.
It is in the international response that the failings of the United Nations (UN), generally the prime body for peace mediation, have proven outstanding. As in other states in conflict, the UN has proven incapable of dealing with the challenges of a country where there have been enduring conditions of militarisation and repression, rival claims to government, and armed struggle by ethnic and other opposition movements that control territories of their own. Such a contested landscape continues in the third decade of the 21st century.
In themselves, such failings should not be surprising. In essence, the UN is a body of member states represented by governments, not peoples. As a result, despite growing awareness of the scale of crisis, there has never been international consensus about how to support regime change and democratic freedoms that will reach to all peoples. Indeed following the military coup by the State Administration Council (SAC) in February 2021, Myanmar is currently in a cycle of national collapse as grave as any since the British departure in 1948.
All, though, is not lost. A land of great human and natural resource potential, the fledgling Union of Burma was predicted to have the most progressive and prosperous future of any Asian neighbour at independence. Such aspirations remain strong. Despite the precarity of the situation, there are still reasons to believe that the country is ultimately moving towards a better future where the underlying challenges of democratisation and peace-building can be addressed. The present crisis is political at root, and political solutions have always been required.
At the same time, this is not a moment for naivety. As this commemorative analysis highlights, many urgent difficulties remain. From health and education to conflict and humanitarian emergency, Myanmar is among the most war-divided countries in the world. Rather, confidence is predicated on two factors that are driving the dynamics for change. First, after many years of groundwork, momentum has continued to build in all parts of the country since the SAC coup in support of inclusive reform, political solutions and an end to military rule today – not at some uncertain time in the future. And second, in the focus and energy of youth, there is a belief and determination that young people today will be the first generation to achieve breakthroughs and peace. It is vital that their hopes are fulfilled.
