With your kind permission, this post originally appeared on Pacific Forum. Read the original around.
Myanmar’s ongoing armed struggle against the military junta, or State Administration Council ( SAC ), has seen significant territorial gains by ethnic armed organizations ( EAOs ) and People’s Defense Forces ( PDFs ). These newly emerging lands “liberated” by opposition forces underscore the government’s weakening placement in governance.
Following two months of fighting, the Arakan Army ( AA )’s seizure of a strategic junta hilltop base in Mae Taung near the Western Military Command headquarters in Ann Township of Rakhine State, along with the joint forces of the Kachin Independence Army (KIA ) and PDFs ‘ capture of the crucial Pinlebu township in Sagaing Region, offers renewed hope to those who are restraining military rule.
However, these extraordinary martial victories and regional victories present new difficulties for the resistance groups in terms of how to govern these newly liberated regions and how to establish new governance structures in the face of diversity, inclusivity, and lack of experience.
New possibilities and challenges ,
Establishing practical governments in these freed areas is crucial for maintaining balance and bolstering the broader opposition movement, even though Myanmar’s pro-democracy movement celebrates the release of junta-controlled territories. Setting up leadership buildings is a new and challenging task for some EAOs and Files.
In Chin State, members of the Chin National Front and Chinland Defense Forces guide the formation of local governments using a “bottom-up strategy” reflecting cultural practices, involving tribal elders in the decision-making approach at the town, sub-township, and community levels.
However, some places follow military-established limitations, resulting in scattered leadership models. Internal conflicts in the Chin criticism, which has gained more common support than the Interim Chin National Consultative Council, further complicating things. Establishing practical state governance and essential public services are the immediate challenges facing these organizations.
Sagaing’s weight management adds a third layer of complexity. Region, a crucial battleground in northern Myanmar, has seen Files take control of remote places. In these locations, Women’s Administrative Bodies, supported by local communities and welfare groups, along with Pa Ka Ha, which mostly functions as regional security militias, have emerged as key management actors.
These systems arrange the provision of education, health care, and righteousness, often in partnership with striking civil servants involved in the legal disobedience activity. Sagaing’s PDFs also created taxation systems that collected money through checkpoints along intercity roads. While this practice has faced criticism for a lack of transparency, local governance has become more coordinated over time, with revenue supporting health care, education, and defense.
In other regions of Myanmar, things have changed. Working with the Karenni Army in Karenni ( Kayah ) State, the Arakan Army ( AA ) and the Karenni Nationalities Defense Force ( Kayah ) State expand their administrative reach as they establish new frontiers. Meanwhile, the Kachin Independence Army and Karen National Liberation Army are expanding governance systems into liberated territories in Kachin, Karen, Bago, and Sagaing.
In Shan State, the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army ( MNDAA ) and Ta’ang National Liberation Army ( TNLA ) are also establishing local governance structures within their territories.
In Myanmar’s liberated areas, including those with deep ethnic diversity, establishing inclusive and accountable governance is a significant challenge. Because many of these regions’ ethnic tensions have existed for a long time, it is crucial that new governance structures reflect the needs and rights of all ethnic groups.
For instance, the Arakan Army ( AA )’s past treatment of the Rohingya community in Rakhine State has drawn significant criticism. Fears that the AA’s leadership may marginalize them have been fueled by reports of anti-Rohingya rhetoric and alleged attacks on Rohingya civilians.
Despite these concerns, some initiatives spearheaded by the AA’s political branch, the United League of Arakan, point to potential change. In Rakhine State, the ULA has begun to work with its administrative structures to include Rohingya representation.
Although this is a welcome step toward inclusivity, it is still important to ensure that these efforts result in meaningful participation and the protection of the rights of the Rohingya community in AA-administered areas. The AA’s ability to transition from the “armed resistance organization” to a more accountable governing body is crucial for the achievement of the” Arakan Dream.”
In other regions, there are encouraging examples of inclusivity and accountability. In order to promote inclusive governance, particularly in the education and health sectors, the KNU and KIO have long worked with civil society.
Both operate non-state educational systems that emphasize mother tongue instruction while pursuing inclusion of other racial and ethnic groups in heterogeneous communities and providing essential healthcare services there. Recently, the KIO supported the establishment of private schools for minority groups within its territory, demonstrating a commitment to diverse governance.
However, the road to fully inclusive governance remains challenging, particularly in areas where ethnic tensions have persisted for decades. Resistance leaders must ensure that these systems serve both the diverse populations they govern and as new governance structures continue to form.
Role for the United States
The US has a unique opportunity to build trust with the pro-democracy movement as a result of the establishment of local and state governments in Myanmar’s liberated regions.
While the BURMA Act of 2022 allowed for non-lethal support to resistance actors, further concrete action is needed. The newly formed Congressional Burma Caucus, co-chaired by Bill Huizenga (R-Michigan ) and Betty McCollum (D-Minnesota ), is positioned to rally bipartisan support in addressing Myanmar’s crisis.
With US support, these emerging governments could become more professional and stable, making them more able to satisfy their citizens ‘ needs and promote inclusive, democratic governance.
In addition to the crucial services that many EAOs and PDFs are already providing to varying degrees, this could include support for strengthening governance structures in areas like education, health care, justice, and land rights.
Congress ‘ leaders can increase the demand for more US aid, including by creating a steering group to decide how to allocate roughly US$ 1 billion in frozen Myanmar assets held by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since the coup.
This funding could support resistance governance efforts in education, health care, and justice in liberated areas, helping stabilize these regions. By offering technical assistance and engaging with resistance actors and local civil society, the US can promote transparency, inclusivity, and accountability in these new governance structures, reinforcing its commitment to Myanmar’s democratic future.
Path to inclusive governance
As Myanmar’s resistance forces continue to liberate territory from military regime’s control, they face the monumental task of building governance systems that are inclusive, accountable and functional.
The NUG and various EAOs are determined to establish a new autonomous state/local governments, which will have a significant impact on the development of Myanmar’s federal system. However, this effort remains incomplete without the participation of some major EAOs, including the AA, TNLA, MNDAA, among others.
They will need to be considered in any negotiations involving the creation of a new federal democratic republic in Myanmar because they control a sizable portion of the country. The current dispersion of the resistance forces highlights the difficulties awaiting in the development of a common political framework and the need for a political pact between these various groups through meaningful dialogue.
By providing technical assistance and advice, the US has the opportunity to help lay the groundwork for a future democratic Myanmar. However, the path to a new federal democratic Myanmar will require cooperation among all resistance actors, the resolution of ethnic tensions, and a commitment to inclusive governance.
Myanmar’s resistance forces can only hope to see the country’s future as a democracy when they address these issues.
Aung Thura Ko Ko ( aung@pacforum .org ) is a resident Vasey Fellow at the Pacific Forum and an East-West Center affiliate scholar. The University of Oxford awarded him the Master of Public Policy.