Read on Twitter
This is a thread about the foreign Myanmar observer/analyst community and some things we should be wary of. As reluctant as I am to wade into the topic, I feel compelled to discuss.
(Disclaimer: this is not directed at Myanmar people) 1/
(Disclaimer: this is not directed at Myanmar people) 1/
Already we're witnessing a growing chorus of "we told you so" takes. Many decry aspects of the int'l community's last decade of engagement with the peace process and democratization initiatives. While not wrong per se, I'm sorry to say that not all takes are made in good faith 2/
The fact is that there exists an "old guard" of Burma watchers who fancy themselves the protectors of true understanding and knowledge about Myanmar. You will see the "we told you so" takes coming from some in this crowd. 3/
(As an aside: One person mocked a journalist for not being in-country long enough. Efforts to confer intellectual ownership over Myanmar's story are deeply orientalist. Remarkably, the very people crying neo-colonialism are the ones who do this most) 3.5/
The 'old guard' began to lose its voice and unfettered access to funding around 2012 (you'll also see reference to this date). What emerged was a battle for relevance and money between old-timers and newcomers. 4/
The coup in Myanmar is a golden opportunity for some. As donors and governments reassess their commitments, "we told you so" will be weaponized to regain control of resources and influence. 5/
The danger is that there will be an incentive for some to ignore the gains of the past 10 years in favor of the most pessimistic and cynical outlooks. This is already happening and, alarmingly, being praised by people who ought to know better 6/
The most egregious example of misrepresenting the past 5-10 years is the claim that hundreds or even thousands were killed under the watch of the JMC and wider NCA process. 7/
Whether you like it or not, the NCA has succeeded in drastically reducing harm to civilians in areas where it is in place. It is grossly irresponsible to suggest that this is not the case. 8/
Nearly every peace process involves trade-offs. The paradigm example is the 1995 Dayton Accords which, by partitioning Bosnia, entrenched ethnic divisions but at the same time ended the worst violence in Europe since WW2. This is basic stuff. 9/
So yes, the NCA and JMC have problems. No one argues differently. But to act like they did no good is not a fair representation of the trade-offs that were involved, and will not push us toward better analysis and policy. 10/
The 2nd major problem is the tendency to over-inflate the role of the int'l community in the peace process. Myanmar is not an international intervention. There is no PK mission there. It is a homegrown peace process, with critical elements envisioned & implemented by locals 11/
Again, perverse incentives explain this over-emphasis on the foreigner's role. Critics must act like the peace process is a donor project because admitting that it's homegrown would mean that they are trashing and ignoring the many Myanmar voices that play a role 12/
Case in point: The Feb 2 statement from the PPST which unambiguously states "We stand firm on the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement". 13/
When people call the peace process a total farce, they are devaluing the countless ethnic leaders who say otherwise. When they say the peace process is driven only by greed, they slander people who walked the route of violence but are now trying to stay on the path of peace 14/
And the argument that the military is taking EAOs for a ride is also orientalist. Ethnic leaders well understand the power dynamics at play, much more than us. That some actors don't behave in good faith does not preclude peace process, it necessitates it. 15/
What needs to be understood, and of course is well understood internationally, is that peace and democratization takes experimentation, and experimentation is a painful process that takes decades or more. Not 5 or 10 years. 16/
The recent coup is a setback in Myanmar's peace & democracy experiment. Yes, many things were done incorrectly. Mistakes were made that should not have been. And everyone involved needs to do some soul-searching about what went wrong 16/
But it is an insult to Myanmar people everywhere to suggest that funding their best and most earnest efforts was a waste of time. And let me be clear--wholesale tirades about donors do just that--they devalue the work of many Myanmar people. 17/
There were tremendous gains in the past 5 years. Some of them are being reversed now, but the lessons learnt cannot be undone. Acting like that did not happen because your vision for Myanmar was not carried out is irresponsible and petty, so please do not do that 18/
To conclude, infighting and competition for influence is detrimental to the cause. Profanity and insult-ridden rants cheapen analysis. Finger-pointing makes this about us. But this is not about us.
Let your analysis do the talking, and we can all debate in good faith. End/
Let your analysis do the talking, and we can all debate in good faith. End/
