Myanmar caught in her own trap

The article talks about how the UN’s Fact-Finding Missoin (FFM) criticised Myanmar for its behaviour in the Rohingya Crisis, and called the military “the main perpetrator of serious human rights violations and crimes under international law in KAchin, Rakhine and Shan States”. This event is directly responsible for Aung San Suu Kyi’s fall from grace in her international reputation, as international actors expected her to speak up against the military, as a democratic icon. Nonetheless, Aung San Suu Kyi’s silence should not be seen as undemocratic, as reconciliation with the military has always been her grand strategy towards the democratisation of Myanmar. However, her march to become democratic have led to the condoning of what the West calls a “genocide” of the Rohingya Muslims, which puts Myanmar democracy further away from its course towards achieving democracy.

Aptly named, the tile of the article “Myanmar caught in her own trap” gives us a glimpse into the paradox that Myanmar faces. Aung San Suu Kyi has always been the face of Myanmar and represented democratic hopes in the face of martial law in the nation. Now that Aung San Suu Kyi is an unmoveable chess entangled in its trap of facing further ciritisim either from the West or the military government, Tatmadaw, what does it mean for the people of Myanmar, or for Myanmar’s political crisis itself? Would there be an emergence of another personality cult to heed democratic progress in Myanmar, or is it the end for Myanmar? The issue with the Rohingya problem is that it infringes on modern values of human rights and international support system, often in alignment with democratic values, to aid in the freedom of people. Ideas of modernity from the international sphere has hence put pressure on the domestic realm, which refutes Myanmar’s historical view of the Rohingya muslims as alien people living on its Northen border, that justifies the military government’s behaviour. Democracy for Myanmar thus seems to be a case of a delicate balance between the historical and political contestation.