Myanmar’s Enemy Within: The Illusion of Diversity and the Spread of Fear

Myanmar's Enemy Within: Buddhist Violence and the Making of a Muslim 'Other' - Asian Arguments (Paperback)by Francis Wade, August, 2017

Publisher: Zed Books Ltd
ISBN: 9781783605279
Number of pages: 304

[Manufacturing the ‘other’ sound like Sri Lanka, anyone? Ed/]

Book review from South China Morning Post here.

From the Prologue:

…These communal fissures weren’t entirely new, but to man outside observers, they were unknowns.  And before a deeper analysis of their causes began to arrive, they had caught many off guard.  Certain aspects of what unfolded after the first wave of violence in the middle of 2012 didn’t seem to add up: the bulk of attacks were coming from Buddhists, but it was surely impossible that they, and particularly the venerated monks with their gospel of peace, , could support of even perpetrate such acts of violence; or that the passage from authoritarian rule to democracy could emerge as the site of efforts to exclude an entire religious community from the country.  And what about democracy itself, a term so synonymous with the movements for change hat had come and gone throughout the decades of military rule in Myanmar?  Perhaps it wasn’t a step in the direction of f equality, but instead the pursuit of an ideal nation, arbitrarily defined but so delicate a conception that any obstacles in the way of it needed removing…

There were echoes from ethno-religious conflicts elsewhere in the world, where fears bout the resilience of identities and belief systems had been whipped up into bloody fury, with profound consequences.  And there were lessons to be learned for other diverse societies undergoing rapid change.  But what was unfolding in Myanmar felt particularly perplexing because the violence seems to go so heavily against the grain of the country and its majority faith.  Why was Buddhism in such need of protection?  Why in the changing landscape of Myanmar, had there emerged actors so fierce in their fervor that they would build a fence with their bones, or that they would, contrary to his words, seek to kill off whatever threat to their religion lurked amidst them?  The violence that had erupted in towns across Myanmar after 2012 had been vicious and terrifying – heads were severed by machete in broad daylight, on corners of streets in busy towns; young Muslim students were massacred.  I’d wanted to understand how that turn to violence could occur…

“This country was founded with the Buddhist ideology.  And if the Buddhist cultures vanish, Yangon will become like Saudi and Mecca.  Then, there wouldn’t be the influence of peace and truth.  There will be more discrimination and violence.”

What would happen then, to him, his home – everything?

“It can be the fall of Yangon.  It can also be the fall of Buddhism.  And our race will be eliminated.”…

In the tumult of the transition, broader demarcations of “us” and “them,” outsiders and sons of the soil, were forming.  For a large cross-section of the Buddhist population, the Muslims of Myanmar had come to be seen as the outsiders bent on bringing the nation, and its majority Buddhist belief system, to ruin.

—-

Exclusive extract from new book by Francis Wade exploring the persecution of Myanmar’s religious minorities 

Not so long ago, a visitor to an immigration office in Myanmar will have encountered a signboard on the wall, its inscription rendered in bold lettering, that warned of a particular peril facing the country: “The Earth will not swallow a race to extinction but another race will.” It had become the slogan of the Ministry of Immigration during the long years of military rule, when the country retreated inwards, walling itself off from the outside world. Like much of the rhetoric of that age, it was abrupt and deliberately stark, and the message it contained was simple: save for strong borders and the vigilant offices of the state, the country would be overrun by outsiders. In time, the national race might cease to exist.

I only learnt of the slogan some time after the signboards had begun, bit by bit, to be taken down. As the transition progressed, these remnants of military rule, though still present, appeared less frequently. Now, with hindsight, there seemed an eerie prescience to the slogan, a warning of what might, with the right forces awakened, happen when those vigilant offices came under new management and the society around them began to shift. The military may have stepped back, but the violence of 2012 and thereafter showed that the fears it encouraged did not depart with the men in green.

The junta that ruled Myanmar in various guises for nearly half a century did so with a particular vision in mind, taken from a motto used by the independence movement: “One voice, one blood, one nation.” On giant red bill- boards planted at intersections of busy roads it spoke of the “People’s Desire,” imploring loyal subjects to “Crush all internal and external destructive elements as the common enemy.” They implied that there was an undercurrent of existential anxiety running throughout the population, common to all the people. Or perhaps, where that anxiety wasn’t present, it could be cultivated. Fear has always been a powerful unifier, and if the authors of these slogans could sell the idea that a threat to the nation lurked just beyond its borders, or perhaps even within them, then the project to bring disparate peoples under one flag might bear fruit.

In the decades after the coup of 1962 that brought Ne Win to power, a narrative developed which saw the military not so much as nation builders but nation restorers. They would return Myanmar to its supposed pre-colonial glory, when a Buddhist order thrived, uncontaminated by foreign influence, and all subjects of the king enjoyed an abiding sense of national unity. It saw that past as a blueprint for the future, one that fed much of the propaganda circulated in the decades after the coup that carried an underlying warning of the dangers of cultural diversity. The billboards and signboards had a particular bluntness to them, not to be easily forgotten, but others were more lyrical. They evoked a fanciful picture of what had been, and what, with some work, could be.

“Moving about in the manner of whirlpools,” so began one passage in Minye Kaungbon, a text issued in the mid-1990s by the State Law and Order Restoration Council, the successor to Ne Win’s regime, “racial groups have assimilated to a large extent and just as one major [one] was about to emerge, Myanmar fell under imperialist rule. Some currents of water that had not yet completely assimilated with others were prevented from reaching the journey’s end and were left half way.”

The British sabotaged that project, so the story went, and drove a deep wedge between the different racial and religious groups of the country.

“They spread false tales of differences in race and in culture as if they were merely defending minority rights … Let all national groups have complete faith, trust and love among themselves. They are blood-brothers and let them be united just like water is united and indivisible.”

The quest the military embarked upon was to restore that sense of purity and homogeneity to the country. But of course it never existed. King Anawratha may have achieved a degree of unity of the valley peoples that none before him had managed, but after the fall of his dynasty, the country’s centre was embroiled in centuries of conflict between rival kingdoms, as the power of the Bamar kingdoms waxed and waned greatly.

There was, however, some truth to the accusations. Myanmar has always been a nation of innumerable porous and interchangeable identity groups, each with divergent loyalties. Yet Britain imported its obsession with racial classification, one that had been used to such deleterious effect in its colonies elsewhere in the world. Boundaries were drawn between peoples where they hadn’t previously existed, and over time, the human landscape in Myanmar began to change. Once fluid notions of ethnicity calcified into hard distinctions between groups. Myanmar emerged from colonial rule with an emboldened sense of diversity, but it was of a sort that was imposed, rather than having developed organically. The colonial administration’s carving up of the population meant that allegiances, and all that came with them – competition and conflict – were directed along ethnic lines, and for a military elite consisting almost solely of the Bamar Buddhist majority that sought to control every inch of the land, this posed a particular problem. It would be the job of the post-independence rulers to re-build the nation. They would construct from this mosaic of groups a single identity and bring together those currents of water as they headed towards the journey’s end. What began after the coup in 1962 was a process of forced assimilation of different identity groups into the ethnic majority sphere, and the banishing of those that would never conform to the ideal nation. In doing so, the dangers posed by other races, internal or external, to the “national race” would lessen, and the sense of unity and harmony that had been so disrupted by foreign rule would be finally returned to the country. Or so the logic went.

It is from this starting point, of illuminating the broader processes of statecraft in Myanmar over the past half century that have affected all communities, not just Muslims, that the violence of the transition is perhaps best understood. The mobs that began visiting Muslim neighbourhoods in 2012 may have done so long after these processes had started, but they signalled that the project of national unification was by no means finished.

Extract from ‘Chapter 3: The art of belonging: a peculiar transaction in Yangon’ in Myanmar’s Enemy Within: Buddhist Violence and the Making of a Muslim ‘Other’ by Francis Wade

Visit Zed Books here to buy a copy: https://www.zedbooks.net/shop/book/myanmars-enemy-within/.

http://www.the-platform.org.uk/2017/08/23/myanmars-enemy-within-the-illusion-of-diversity-and-the-spread-of-fear/


Leave a Reply

Comment Guilelines Critical is fine, but if you’re rude, we’ll delete your stuff. No personal attacks.

  • (will not be published)