When Democracy Goes Wrong
Human rights violations in Myanmar: what’s happening and how to stop them
by Krishna Hammond
Where democratic traditions are young, there will inevitably be an ongoing struggle between the government and the governed. Where institutions and norms do not work together to form a just civil society, violence and repression will inevitably be used to maintain order and stability, often by militaries that operate outside of any appreciable civilian control. Similarly, when institutions exist, but are weak, ill-conceived, or are managed by politicians without the drive to rein in abuse, chaos and violence roils around the margins of society, imperiling the disadvantaged and hampering any progress made towards justice. The human cost of this failure is enormous, and many nations struggle, with sometimes catastrophic results — for current examples look no farther than Sudan, Syria, and the Central African Republic. In this article, we draw crucial attention to a growing crisis in the nation of Myanmar, obscured by the interregnum following a peaceful democratic revolution (and by similar crises occurring simultaneously elsewhere).
Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, is a southeast Asian nation bordering Bangladesh, India, China, Laos, and Thailand. For decades, it was ruled by a military junta — a military-run dictatorship — that was known for incredible acts of cruelty. Systematic efforts to rape and kidnap women as military strategy, torture of dissidents and enemies of the regime, and arson were commonplace, particularly against ethnic minorities like the Rohingya, an ethnic minority consisting of mostly Muslims. As a response to these atrocities, unilateral sanctions were instituted by the United States. The efforts of dissidents and pro-democracy activists promised change, especially as Nobel laureate and human-rights activist Aung San Suu Kyi was elected in 2015 (along with her party, the National League for Democracy) and assumed power as State Counsellor in March of 2016. Over the past few years, a slow stream of reforms have been put in place: the official disbanding of the junta in 2011, internationally monitored elections in 2012, anti-corruption regulations, the unblocking of YouTube and other websites. The release of thousands of political prisoners in 2016 led to the lifting of sanctions by the United States.
However, while power has begun to shift towards civilian institutions, the constitution written in 2008 still heavily favors the military (over 25% of seats in the government are guaranteed to the military, and many actions require 75% approval) and provisions exist that prevent Kyi from becoming President due to technicalities, creating instead the role of State Counsellor. Citizens allege factions of the military continue to act with impunity, raising the specter of a relapse into autocracy. To make matters worse, attacks on the Rohingya have only escalated. After a terrorist attack in the early days of October 2016, over 86 members of the Rohingya have been killed by the military, prompting nearly 35,000 people to flee to neighboring Bangladesh. Reports from the Burmese state of Rakhine allege the military has engaged in burning villages, and arbitrarily imprisoning Rohingya at random. UN monitors from the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights noted widespread targeting of women and children for murder and rape. Over 50% of Rohingya women interviewed by the monitors alleged experiencing rape and/or sexual violence.
In his report, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein wrote:
“The devastating cruelty to which these Rohingya children have been subjected is unbearable — what kind of hatred could make a man stab a baby crying out for his mother’s milk. And for the mother to witness this murder while she is being gang-raped by the very security forces who should be protecting her… Testimonies were collected of several cases where the army or Rakhine villagers locked an entire family, including elderly and disabled people, inside a house and set it on fire, killing them all… What kind of ‘clearance operation’ is this? What national security goals could possibly be served by this?”
The consistent unwillingness of a regime ostensibly focused on human rights to respond is incredibly discouraging. In official statements, the government under Kyi questioned whether Rohingya were citizens (Rohingya were frequently referred to as Bengali migrants by the Junta, presumably to justify abuse), and denies mounting reports of assaults on the Rohingya. The refusal to recognize the ethnic group, and complicity with abuse on a massive scale, has led to a devastating feedback loop. Riots due to high profile crimes committed by and against Rohingya in 2012 were used as pretext for a government crackdown that has continued to escalate. And when the army engaged in large scale attacks on Rohingya communities in 2016, guerilla attacks on the military hardened into a coordinated Islamist insurgency, Harakah al-Yaqin (Faith Movement in Arabic).
The tide of violence and suffering must be stemmed. It is clear Kyi and her ruling party must be made to understand that an insurgency by a major ethnic minority group cannot be quelled through refusing to acknowledge the issue. Nor can they allow the military to engage in crimes against humanity and still lay claim to a desire for reform. The question of whether this continued violence is malice or incompetence in managing a corrupt and vile military is immaterial — it must be stopped. However, it is critical in resolving this crisis that the insurgency be managed and abated as well, as the insurgency provides ammunition for the military to claim some legitimacy and gives the government an excuse to side with the military (beyond the 25% of seats it already holds). The United States can — and must — provide assistance in grinding the insurgency to a halt and stopping the cycle of retribution as well as protection for embattled Rohingya civilians seeking refuge from extermination, though a crisis of this magnitude will require a multifaceted approach.
First, the United States has the capability to take significant unilateral action. It can contribute significantly to the country’s economic development (Myanmar remains one of the most undeveloped nations in the world) as well as provide additional funds for refugee management in neighboring nations. In addition, the US can facilitate the rebuilding of communities destroyed by the military and provide safe zones for refugees to rebuild within the country itself. The US also has the ability to offer asylum to Rohingya, which has the added benefit of providing resources to Rohingya activists, in the form of a safe zone to organize political resistance to attacks on their communities and to effectively distribute international aid received from the United States. In terms of putting pressure on the regime, an expanded version of the 1997 sanctions could be instituted, alongside the revocation of diplomatic privileges by the US. Finally, the acknowledgement of ethnic minorities could be a demand in future trading agreements with Myanmar (which is, understandably, in dire need of foreign investment).
Second, in Myanmar itself, a campaign to end the attacks, provide resources and justice for the wronged, and transition towards a condition of peace must begin immediately. These must start with a ceasefire on the part of the military and the insurgency. The United States and its allies must leverage their international muscle to accomplish this goal. In terms of the insurgents, a great deal of ideological and material support of the insurgent forces come from Rohingya exiles and sympathetic clerics in Saudi Arabia. The United States must demand the Saudis put a stop to the flow of funds and support to the insurgents. If the majority of Harakah al-Yaqin do not lay down their arms, American or Chinese advisors could monitor the campaign in exchange for material assistance to the military and closer cooperation in the future. However, it is important to recognize the insurgency only exists as a reaction to the radicalization of the community by years of abuse — American messaging on the issue will be critical to avoid Rohingya being scapegoated further. It will be critical also to insist that any assistance in quelling the insurgency is predicated on international monitoring of the conditions of the Rohingya and subsequent protections for civilians.
Third, pressure must be applied on the military to push for peace. On this issue, China could be a powerful voice; advocating for a ceasefire and condemning the attacks would cost them little and would increase their standing as global leaders. In addition, a united US-China front would prevent the military from seeking to use China as a shield to protect from international scrutiny. On a smaller scale, the US could request the Nobel Committee formally condemn the behavior of one of its laureates (Counselor Kyi) with respect to the attacks on the Rohingya. Finally, the United States can also rally the support of Bangladeshi and Indian Muslim leaders to advocate for a peaceful solution to the crisis, as well as provide a moderate counterbalance to the radicalization of the population by years of consistent abuse.
Fourth, efforts to rebuild trust between the Rohingya and the Rakhine Buddhist majority are critical. Two crucial components of this effort will be a) the swift and impartial prosecution of both soldiers accused of crimes against the Rohingya and insurgents associated with attacks on Rakhine Buddhists, and b) building coordinated political opposition to the insurgency in the Rohingya community. While it is clear the brunt of the human suffering lies with the Rohingya, some overture towards the majority Buddhist population is critical, as the pretext for this crackdown were the riots in 2012, initiated by the gang rape of a Rakhine woman by Rohingya. Any effort to install a system of international restorative justice that does not have the appearance of impartiality will be rejected by the population and will be seen as occupation by the West (a charge the Chinese, who will likely already be unhappy about American involvement along their borders, will be hypersensitive to). The inevitable blowback would scuttle the entire endeavor, and so the administration of unbiased prosecution will be incredibly delicate. Going further, it will be necessary to guarantee some kind of representation on a national level and autonomy on a local level to ensure the community has a basic expectation of safety going forwards. In addition, some level of restitution must be offered by the state. The scale of the abuse is too great for any progress to be made without an admission of guilt by the state — though in many cases this is the most difficult part. Throwing a few unpopular policemen to the mob is easy; holding senior military officials responsible will be hard. This does not make it any less necessary. As a final step, the military must surrender its seats in parliament, and independent law enforcement institutions must be created as a check on their power domestically.
Myanmar represents a opportunity in terms of the institution of democracy in Asia, despite the horrors transpiring there. It is important to recognize, after all, that developing democracies have a tendency to allow injustice to fester. If the United States of America wants to continue to bear the mantle of the “Leader of the Free World”, we must intensify our efforts to protect the downtrodden and preserve the pace of progress, in penance for our own misdeeds and failures. Like anything worthwhile, the creation and maintenance of a democracy is hard. Working to keep the institution of democracy around the world strong, healthy, and just is even harder. But the maintenance and expansion of liberty brings blessings- prosperity, healing, and peace. That is something worth fighting for.
