Instrumentalism or Commitment to Social Justice? Shifting Inter-Ethnic Solidarities in Post-Coup Myanmar

Abstract

The Bamar majority’s institutionalised dominance and the exclusion of other ethnic groups from the Bamar’s notion of national identity has been a cause of conflict in Myanmar. The 2021 coup has, however, underscored the need for co-operation between Bamar and ethnic forces against the military. Drawing on Graeber’s conceptualisation of revolutions as opportunities to disrupt “unequal structures of imaginative identification” and Walton’s consideration of Burman privilege akin to Whiteness, this article examines shifts in inter-ethnic dynamics. How have new forms of inter-ethnic solidarity demonstrated by the Bamar majority towards other ethnic groups challenged unequal structures of privilege since the coup? Through textual analysis of statements by Bamar revolutionary leaders and semi-structured interviews with members of ten ethnic communities, the article explores ethnic reactions to changing attitudes of Bamar elites and ordinary Bamar citizens. Findings suggest that Myanmar’s ongoing revolutionary situation has prompted the Bamar majority to reflect on their privilege. Yet, the quality of Bamar solidarity towards ethnic minorities varies among different Bamar socio-political groups, ranging from instrumental alliances to a shared vision for social justice. The article concludes that although inter-ethnic solidarity building remains a work in progress, some positive steps towards ethnic and class emancipation have been made.

Key Words:

• Bamar privilege
• Inter-ethnic racial and class emancipation
• Myanmar
• Revolutionary situation
• solidarity building

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Justine Chambers and Nick Cheesman for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. In addition, the authors are grateful for Tony Neil, Jonathon Crane and Ningly Hkawn’s valuable insights in the initial stages of the article. Anonymous reviewers offered comprehensive feedback, significantly enhancing the article. However, the perspectives presented here solely belong to the authors.

Disclosure statement

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Notes

1 For details on interviewees, see Appendix.

2 Although the Tavoyan are officially a Bamar sub-group, many see themselves as an ethnic group distinct from the majority.

3 Because the research for this study was conducted when the researchers were unaffiliated, no institutional ethics approval was obtained. Nevertheless, appropriate ethical standards were implemented and maintained throughout the research process. Given the situation in Myanmar, the researchers recognised and managed the risks associated with participation. Initially, participants were selected from individuals with whom the researchers have long-standing relationships. Additional participants were recruited through the researchers’ long-standing connections. The number of participants was kept low, with a total of 18 participants selected from existing networks and connections. The researchers sought informed and voluntary consent from participants in accordance with the guidelines outlined by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. That is, prior to each interview, participants were provided information both verbally and in writing, and through emails or messaging apps, to explain the scope of the research and its intended publication. Once participants expressed interest, the researchers organised the interviews, using an end-to-end encrypted app. At the beginning of each interview, the researchers discussed in English, Burmese, or Karen the potential risks and benefits of participation. The researchers also assured participants that they would remain anonymous in any subsequent publication and that the data collected would not expose their identities. In interviews with public figures, discussions on identifiability varied, with some agreeing to have their position revealed (such as the Karen spokesperson) while others requested that it be withheld (such as the Kachin politician). Finally, the researchers obtained verbal confirmation of the participants’ willingness to proceed, with the understanding that they could withdraw consent at any time. All participants provided consent.