Imitation Genocide: Burma’s Current Civil War and Ethnic Cleansing of 2022
I. Intro
The Myanmar Civil War has brought forth a frenzied sensation: genocide and communism in 2021. The very deception of the Tatmadaw had caused a mockery of Myanmar political competence in attempt to hide their horrific crimes against the Burmese people by blocking out the outside world. Imitation is the act of resembling something else that is usually genuine and of better quality, thus not real. The Rohingya Genocide, as well as the ethnic purging of the Mon, Karens, and Shan’s, is very much real. But it is the Tatmadaw’s façade stating this is a new policy evacuation of non-Burmese citizens which their genocide is the very imitation deflecting international intervention. — The prosperous democratic nation for which thousands had died enticed communists to reclaim power by instigating a replete civil war. Thus, resulting in hundreds of deaths, thousands of severely injured, rapes, burned villages, and massacres that have caused a great nation to bleed from old wounds. The momentum accumulating to the coup was facilitated by Aung San Suu Kyi, the head of the National League for Democracy (NLD). The Democratic League received a majority of votes, prompting the Burmese government to accuse them of voter fraud. This was the genesis of dissatisfaction with the election results. The military attempted to reimpose a dictatorship on February 1st, 2021, by seizing Aung San Suu Kyi and placing her under house arrest. Her arrest shattered people’s hope and fear began to spread. The junta had announced that they will begin their new order, and as a result, riots broke out. Thousands peacefully gathered in the streets primarily in Yangon and Naypyidaw. Each person bravely demonstrating their solidarity by pleading with red signs and flags to release Aung San Suu Kyi from any all conviction of wrongdoing, for she had committed no crime. The 3 military junta fighting against the people is known as the Tatmadaw. This terrorist group has made valiant efforts to enforce communism, maintain partial shutdowns, and silence people from expressing any form of democratization. Hundreds of heinous crimes against humanity have been reported and proved by the junta. Live burials and mutilations, brutal rapes, gassing, shootings, stabbings, and pillaging are all echoes of the Rwandan Genocide of the 1990s. Humanitarian violations, political corruption, and the unsurprising lack of intervention from the infamous UN have only progressed in the tolerance of the crimes committed by the junta. Though certain efforts had been made to propagate certain ‘contributions’, the result has proved inadequate. Considering that thousands are continuously affected by the incompetence of global political systems, such as the UN, which was fabricated to maintain peace and prevent upheaval. Myanmar has a long military history of totalitarianism, civil wars, and political upheaval. Their government had reformed three times within two decades. In fact, Aung San Suu Kyi’s father was Aung San, leader of the Communist Party of Myanmar. It is quite an irony that her father had propagated communism while she had righteously supported the cultivation of democracy in a pro-communist country. Subsequently, the dynamic political shifts had shattered convention time and time over again. This had progressively led to Myanmar gaining recognition as one of the most politically hostile country in southeast Asia. The significant issues are those focalized on the lack of freedom from the Burmese; their silencing and restricted access to the internet, which empowers them to express solidarity and expose the crimes of the junta. War crimes and crimes against humanity are most always prevalent, however in Myanmar these crimes surpass those of traditional warfare. Many citizens have used Facebook, online websites, and even twitter to expose the Junta’s crimes. There are hundreds of videos circulating online demonstrating the horrific atrocities committed by the junta, such as mangled civilians, burnt villages, and piles of burned, dead bodies. There is seemingly no end to the horrors of war and surely no mercy from their end. Relatedly, the current war is not a cause of the genocide. The Rohingya genocide was incepted in 2016. Before the nature of this complex incident is further analyzed, it is pivotal to understand its past. Approximately 4% if the Burmese population identifies as Rohingya. The central country of Myanmar comprises of over 150 various ethnic groups, each of which the Burmese government has found a reason to either banish or murder. The Rohingya were not recognized as one of Myanmar’s 135 ‘official’ ethnic groups until a new citizenship law was introduced in 1982. In 2014, thousands of Burmese fled to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka when the citizen law was passed and claimed that those born in Myanmar with ethnic heritage to the Mon, Karen, Rakhine, and Shan, were no longer considered Burmese and could not maintain their citizenship status. This is another prolific issue in Myanmar: the tension between Muslims and Buddhists. It is quite appalling how Buddhists, who maintain such a docile image, would shed saffron blood on their divine brothers and sisters simply to oppress their religion. Collectively, hundreds of ethnic groups are being persecuted and murdered daily. They are among the thousands of Burmese citizens that are feeling the effects of war and are yet again so intensely monitored and regulated that they are slipping away from the world’s eye. The Mon, Ao, Maren, Shan, and the plethora of other underrecognized ethnicities of Burma will slowly fade away like a dimly lit candle flickering in the breeze if we choose to let it. Fortunately, there are a few active NGO’s, such as the Freedom Burma Rangers, that are working in proximity to these persecuted ethnic minorities. They try to raise funds and awareness of these monstrosities. Myanmar is a country abundant in political discourse and current issues which cultivate a complex and ideal situation to analyze in international relations. Modern Burmese tend to be more democratic and refuse to be silenced, which has led to thousands of young protesters death by the junta. For my main sources, I will be using the library database to study the persecution of Burmese ethnic groups, political structure and history, the current coup, the UN’s efforts, and the junta’s violation of humanitarian code.
II. Are there any relevant international agreements about your topic? Has the United Nations or other IGO’s dealt with your topic? What NGO’s are active in this area and what are their goals? On the premise of human rights and IGO international intervention, the Gambia submitted a case against Myanmar with the UN in 2019. This was the primary recognition of the crimes against humanity taking place in Myanmar. International covenants able to reinstate and protect economic, social, and cultural rights have remained quite infective as the country Myanmar has refused to cooperate. The enforcement of such human rights is under the influence of the UN Human Rights Council. According to the Turkish-English article, “International Court of Justice’s Guilty of Genocide in Gambia-Myanmar Case an Assessment of the Four Basic Legal Problems It Will Face in Terms of Detection” by Onur Uraz, one of the only cases to materialize in recognition of the Myanmar crisis was the ICJ Gambia v. Burma case in 2019. Gambia’s charges against Myanmar stemmed from the persecution of Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine State, as both Gambia and the Rohingya are predominantly Muslim. As a result of Gambia’s interference and intolerance for Islam’s theological persecution, this issue flourished. Myanmar had breached the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” or simply the Genocidal Convention, which they had ratified in 1956, according to Uraz. In response, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a decision on January 23, 2020. The Court ordered Myanmar to prohibit the perpetration of acts enumerated in the Genocide Convention, including ensuring that its military and irregular armed forces do not commit these crimes. According to the Court, Myanmar must also avoid the destruction of evidence related to the ICJ proceedings and ensure its preservation. Finally, Myanmar was compelled to report on a regular basis on the efforts it has taken to comply with the judgement. As previously mentioned, the Freedom Burma Rangers is a Nongovernment organization contributing to the devastation of genocide in Myanmar. Their main objectives are to liberate persecuted ethnic groups, restore their civil liberties and rights, and provide medical assistance to those who have been gravely harmed by the junta. They have various search and rescue teams to assist in the recovery of sick, weak, deceased, or injured junta victims. There is also another group fundraising aid as well as directly fighting against the Tatmadaw, and they are known as the Arakan Army or AA. The Arakan Army functions as an Ethnic Armed Organization (EAOs) that serves to defend the Arakan state’s honor, protect their culture, and preserve its military history as a clan that had opposed communist rule. They aspire to unite all Burmese people together, regardless of creed or ethnic identity, to strengthen their resistance to the Tatmadaw by gathering widespread support. This group has a strong digital footprint, which has enabled them to expose the Tatmadaw’s transgressions and disseminate their educational lectures regarding their objectives and victories.
III. Who are the (most) relevant countries? What are their interests or goals as regards your topic?
In reaction to Myanmar’s religious persecution of Rohingya Muslims, Gambia has initiated legal action to demand Myanmar accountable. Previously, Myanmar is forbidden from committing the actions listed in the Genocide Convention, according to a verdict issued by the International Court of Justice on January 23, 2020. Gambia’s primary interests are to dismantle the genocide and provide international recognition of the persecution of Muslims and provide sanctions for them. However, this is not to say that Gambia is the only country who has maintained disputes with Burma. Sri Lanka had rejected the admittance of Burmese refugees during the Tamil Genocide of 2013–2015. They did not file a case, but their distaste was observed when Sri Lanka had wanted to refuse thousands of refugees. The initiative of Sri Lanka was to prevent he influx of unwanted refugees from Burma. During the 2020 coup, multiple countries, such as China, India, Japan, Malasia, Singapore, Thailand, and even Mongolia were protesting the coup and the murder of innocent lives. Burmese peace and democracy protesters hold up three fingers as a gesture of solidarity, which was demonstrated by millions of people throughout the world in peaceful marches in support of their efforts. In the article, “Can a Lawsuit Stop a Genocide?” by Paul Saunders, the Bambia case against Burma is discussed. Before we commence, it is important to note that Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh are other countries who have been directly impacted by the Myanmar Crisis. Saunders mentions that Gambia accused Myanmar of violating Article II of the Genocide Convention, “which prohibits such actions as killing members of the group or causing serious bodily or mental harm to them” (Saunders 1). As expected, the ICJ did not indite Myanmar formally, but rather alleged the plausibility that such crimes were committed. Even Saunder’s could agree that “this order will not resolve or even ameliorate the abhorrent conditions in which the Rohingya people are now living, primarily in Bangladesh, it will, if robustly implemented, prevent future acts of genocide against them” (Saunders 1). The collective rights of the Burmese population ensuing prosperity and self-determination possess the natural born rights to live in a democracy and dispute authoritarian regimes. This is the freedom all people of all nations are granted, a right that has been globally recognized and constitutionally ensured. Yet, our global provisions seem incapable of protecting the promise of that very freedom.
IV. Analyze your topic from a realist and liberal perspective. How would each approach explain the way countries and individuals have behaved in your topic?
This civil war, according to the defensive realist, would be far more harmful than beneficial, and should be avoided if the state is to stay secure. As a result, realists advocate reducing a state’s military to deter other governments from confronting it. Neorealists are also concerned with the distribution of power in the international system. Furthermore, neorealists believe that a state’s level of power influences how other states interact with one another, and that these levels of power might be unipolar, bipolar, or multipolar. Ultimately, realists emphasize the unity and abstract decision-making of analysis when it comes to imposing regulations. On the premise of genocide, realists would most certainly avoid this as it would weaken their inter-state affairs. Realists don’t believe that states will enforce human rights because they believe it is futile. From a liberal perspective, genocide and internal state conflict would be approached by a series of interstate methods. If the government overthrew itself, realists would impose a series of steps used to resolve the issue and stabilize the country. Realists would first clearly identify the problem, establish goals, determine policy alternatives, analyze costs and benefits, and select the action that produces the best outcome. The ultimate focus is on the security of individual states. In contrast to realist ideas, liberals believe that the world is intrinsically good, and that peace can be achieved via cooperation among groups. A liberalist would attempt to be diplomatic in their efforts when confronting the issue of war and genocide, for they would strive to preserve international relations with border countries. Thus, further maturing their benevolent ties to ensure cooperation that would be synergistically beneficial to both participating parties. Whereas realists believe that peace can be achieved through a balance of power in the government. A prime example of liberalist instructions would be NGO’s and IGO’s such as NATO. In this case, the Freedom Burma Rangers would be considered a liberalist endeavor. Although liberals may claim that negotiating rather than having protection is preferable, it is still necessary to have protection of the state and individual autonomy of the people. V. What are the basics of your theory? What does your theory think are the most important things to pay attention to in international relations? What is the role of the state in your theory? The state, which many realists consider as a unitary actor in an anarchic international system, is the fundamental emphasis of the international theory of realism. Realists understand human nature is intended to be malicious. Because there is no global police agency to enforce norms over all nations, realists argue that this encourages states to acquire as much power as possible. As a result, some theorists refer to this as the “security dilemma,” in which governments are constantly competing for relative gains. Thus, states may attempt to balance their strength either domestically through the proliferation of their own military power or internationally by optimizing their trade power and allying with other powerful states. However, realists believe that true global peace will never be achieved because states will be incapable of long-term cooperation. Ultimately, state relations rely on security and power, which is why it is an absolute imperative for states to possess militaries, strong economic presences, and multiple advantages. Such leverages will enable states to match the combat strengths of their enemies or even reciprocate the aid of their allies. As a result, states may strive to balance their strength either domestically or internationally. When it comes to politics, realists perceive international politics as an incentive to promote national interests that are reflected in foreign policy, both politically and culturally. This allows a state to obtain insight into the political arena after the fact. Furthermore, politics is unaffected by economic factors. As a result, these two counterparts diverge, adding to the objective ruling that a state would be governed by supporting the realist perspective. VI. What is the future of your topic? Currently, the situation in Burma has been moderately dissolved with the help of NGO’s, international recognition, relief aid, and the Burmese People’s Military who are all working collectively to diffuse and weaken the junta. With the increase of retention from bordering countries such as Thailand, the junta has been significantly hindered in their continuous attempts to pillage, murder, and obliterate the Burmese people. It is projected that their civil war will diffuse within one year due to mass media exposing the junta’s crimes. They are no longer able to conceal their crimes and torturous acts, now multiple organizations have stepped in to reprimand their actions. Though small progress has been propelled, it is progress nonetheless. Thousands will continue to protest just as thousands will also die. There will still be countless faceless victims of war, the rape, and the injustice. Despite these disastrous offenses, solidarity and the desire for freedom will always persevere. Hope fuels a nation and nation fuels change. Consistent political usurpism has been the cause for the imbalance of stability and the lack of peace in Myanmar. In the far future, it is possible that the ICC will hold a court hearing against the junta for their crimes against humanity, like the Nuremburg Trials in 1945–49. According to the article The Broken Promise of “Never Again”: Myanmar’s Genocide Analyzed Under the U.N. Genocide Convention and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s Interpretation of the Convention” by Mahnoor Khan discusses the future provisions Gambia has set upon Myanmar and Bangladesh’s’ current response to the influx of Burmese refugees. Gambia had ultimately proposed compellence upon Myanmar in hopes of hindering their persecution of the Rohingya. It was unprecedented that the genocide of the Rohingya and various ethnic minorities such as the Mon in Burma would have created an ethnonational movement whose effects rippled to Gambia. The genocide, as a result of the ICJ ruling in 2020, will continue without any true intervention unless the people of Myanmar will succeed in their revolt against the Tatmadaw. This intrastate war will prolong as long as the people are weak and external countries do nothing. The future of the human rights issues will depend on whether refugees are forced to evacuate or are pushed out of their country into Bangladesh. VII. Conclusion: The ongoing genocide and current civil war in the country of Myanmar has led to international lawsuits of Islamic persecution, humanitarian crimes, as well as international disputes and border conflicts rejecting the reception of Burmese refugees. The Tatmadaw has murdered thousands of civilians and this constant lack of injustice and corruption has lead to thousands revolting and protesting in solidarity against the authoritarian takeover. The UN has been hesitant to intervene as Gambia was the primary country to actually recognize the genocide of the Rohingya in 2019 and file a lawsuit through the ICJ which ruled that Burma should not violate Article II Genocide Convention. Furthermore, Bangladesh had declared opposition to the oncoming refugees in 2014 which had prevented thousands from escaping. NGOs’ and internal committees within Burma have been resurrected to combat the Tatmadaw and protect citizens and ethnic minorities from harassment and murder. There has been an increase in media attention to the conflict in Burma which has deterred the Tatmadaw from exercising extreme acts such as intense bombings on cities due to their fear of country intervention. The Myanmar Civil War is an intrastate conflict that will be resolved if other strong countries stepped in to defend the Burmese citizens, for they are too weak to fight alone and the Arakan Army is much too small to make a lasting impact that will end a civil war. It is not the strength of a country that cultivates democracy but the strength and integrity of its people. The Burmese will continue to fight for their rights to freedom and justice, and their efforts will result in effective action to restore their democracy.
Works Cited
“About Us.” Arakan Army, https://www.arakanarmy.net/about-us. Khan, Mahnoor.
“The Broken Promise of ‘Never Again’: Myanmar’s Genocide Analyzed Under the U.N. Genocide Convention and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s Interpretation of the Convention.” Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 53, no. 4, Winter 2021, pp. 799–838. EBSCOhost, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=152 879965&site=ehost-live.
Rael, Angelique. “Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar).” Tulane Journal of International & Comparative Law, vol. 29, no. 2, Spring 2021, pp. 377–90. EBSCOhost, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=151 411345&site=ehost-live.
Saunders, Paul C. “Can a Lawsuit Stop a Genocide?” Commonweal, vol. 147, no. 9, Oct. 2020, pp. 28–33. EBSCOhost, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=146 066638&site=ehost-live. URAZ, Onur.
“Uluslararasi Adalet Di̇vani’nin Gambi̇ya-Myanmar Davasinda Soykirim Suçunun Tespi̇ti̇ Bakimindan Karşilaşacaği Dört Temel Hukuki̇ Soruna Dai̇r Bi̇r Değerlendi̇rme.” Uluslararasi Suçlar ve Tarih, no. 22, Jan. 2021, pp. 29–73. EBSCOhost, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=a9h&AN=154 450999&site=ehost-live.
