4. Principle Findings and Lessons Learned
With ongoing violence against vulnerable minorities, inter-communal relationships remains fragile. With the
resources that have been devoted to Myanmar in recent times there are important lessons that will be relevant
in other contexts. From this perspective, three lessons of Myanmar’s complex and incomplete transition will be
especially relevant to policy-makers:
• A tentative democratization has led to new social strife, especially of a religious nature. Buddhist
extremists have taken to targeting Muslims. As a result communal distrust is high, with anxieties among
minorities, especially Muslims, continuing to rise. The freedoms that are so welcomed by Myanmar’s
people and the international community have been used to undermine some of the progress that could
be made.
• In this context compromises between ethnic and religious groups are clearly required, yet they
prove elusive. The deliberate efforts to exclude the Rohingya from institutionalized political discussions
undermine their chances of ever playing a significant role in Myanmar’s politics. With no adequate
representation in the country’s emerging legislative system, especially at the local level in Rakhine
State, the Rohingya are being forced to look elsewhere for political support. Even if Myanmar
becomes a full democracy, with adequately robust institutions for the peaceful transfer of power, it will
likely still face a deficit of compromise. The sense that politics requires complete victory has infected all
levels of society and could prove destructive in the context of unresolved ethnic and religious enmities.
• Contradictory trends introduce profound ambiguities and complexity. For Myanmar there is clearly
no single or simple story of social cohesion. There is clearly more participation in politics for some, but
not all, of Myanmar’s peoples. There is also some peace, some war, and something in between. This
complexity requires a more subtle calibration of policy, for the diversity of contexts that are in play.
There is no single solution to the challenges facing Myanmar at this pivotal time in the country’s history.
Page | 7
With wise leadership and the articulation of a culturally astute vision, Myanmar could become a beacon
of religious and ethnic inclusion. It can draw on histories of co-existence and plurality: in its languages,
cultures and religions. In theory, the goal of a peaceful multi-ethnic and multi-religious society can be
achieved by making some relatively small changes to the national story of “union spirit”. By gradually
including Rohingya and Chinese among the country’s “national races”, and by accepting the need for
a more fluid style of multiculturalism, Myanmar would set an example far beyond its own borders. For
now such an inclusive vision is a distant mirage. For interested international actors there is a clear need
to identify Myanmar partners who are similarly concerned about the violent potential of future inter-ethnic
and inter-religious tension. The changes required to safeguard against even more violent outbreaks will
not come quickly or easily. The sustainability of Myanmar’s transformation to a more democratic system of
government will only be possible where capacity is built at every level, and across the prevailing ethnic
divides. To work cooperatively with different factions in Myanmar will be a profound test of the concepts of
peace building and conflict resolution. Yet given Myanmar’s history of bloodshed and trauma, creating a
society that is cohesive or even harmonious is a goal worth pursuing.