Transcript: Episode #203: Jack Myint, Part 2
Below is the complete transcript for this podcast episode. This transcript was generated using an AI transcription service and has not been reviewed by a human editor. As a result, certain words in the text may not accurately reflect the speaker's actual words. This is especially noticeable when speakers have strong accents, as AI transcription may introduce more errors in interpreting and transcribing their speech. Therefore, it is advisable not to reference this transcript in any article or document without cross-referencing the timestamp to ensure the accuracy of the guest's precise words.
Host 0:20
before we start today's interview please allow me a word or two about our podcast. Even as Myanmar plunges into a civil war because of the military's bloody coup. The international community and media organizations have all but turned their backs on the country and its people. But this humble platform is committed to staying the course. We conduct nuanced long form interviews with a variety of guests connected to Myanmar so our listeners can better understand the ongoing crisis thank you for choosing to spend the next couple of hours with us today.
Host 2:06
this episode of insight Myanmar podcast I'm back with Jack mute. This is the second part of our conversation. For those listeners who have not yet heard the first part, we definitely encourage you to go back and take a listen it was quite interesting. The first part left off where we were talking basically starting the story when Jack was just four or five, six years old, and he was practicing his English at Shwedagon Pagoda, and took it through his private school education through his experiences at the American Center, which both of which provided greater understanding and access to the world, looking at political rhetoric, and oratory, as well as his experiences with his monastic tutor and learning more about Burmese Buddhism, a lot of really good stuff in there. In this interview, we're going to kick it off from where we left off last time and look at what brought him to the US what he's been doing in the US, as well as starting to uncover and look a bit deeper into some of his perspectives with the transition period, along with what's happening in post coup Myanmar, and try to understand that better, there's a lot of good stuff coming in. And I really appreciate you jack for making time yet again, for us to have these conversations, I know how busy you are, and to take time out of your globe trotting schedule to come and sit down with us and share your voice to our audience. You have a lot of really valuable insights and perspectives to offer. And I just really thank you again for this time.
Jack Myint 3:37
Thank you, Joe, for having me back on the show, and more importantly, for bearing with my long winded pneus.
Host 3:45
Please be long winded again this time and let's get right to it. So we left off as you were discussing some of the access that the American Center was starting to provide you books you'd never read before conversations that could now satiate some of your curiosity. I don't know if there's more you want to pick off the bone of that experience, as well as what brought you to your first encounters and experiences with the West?
Jack Myint 4:10
Absolutely, no. I think that that's a great place to start. And perhaps I could go into what that experience exposed me to. And this was around 2008 2009 When an opportunity came up within the offered by the State Department program called the Southeast Asia youth leadership program Co Op, which is a precursor to many known now as why Seeley and other youth development initiatives, which really expanded under the Obama administration. But this was relatively new program and I was selected through recommendations and many engagements I've had at the American Center to participate in that program took me to the United States. For a month, and it was an eye opening experience opportunity to engage with various like minded youth leaders from across Southeast Asia as well as to engage with local American students, professors, just to some degree, US government officials think tankers and the likes. So the program took me for three weeks at the North Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois, and then a week in Washington, DC, where we took a few meetings with the East Asia Pacific Bureau, educational, cultural affairs, Bureau, etc, etc. So, this is my first time getting on an airplane, right? So it's the first time out to the United States. And I was just taught by the experience a whole thing. I mean, sitting in on college classrooms, for the first time and seeing the interactive nature of how students and teachers in America suppose it's like, it's a conversation, not so much as you digest whatever I tell you and regurgitate it back to me at the exam. I don't know, this was real conversation. This was debate, this was, you know, retort and at times argument, and they're all so comfortable in it. That that was the part that amazes me the most especially even in private school, you know, in Myanmar, there are certain cultural and social norms where you, you don't go one on one, and you certainly don't interrupt the professor, which I still think is it's bad, bad behavior. But, but now, your people were comfortable. And people just seemed, especially in a classroom, right? The free flow of ideas, Joe, I was hooked. That was it. I was like, this is where I want to come back. This is where I want to study. I knew then. And then, of course, we later I was in DC. And we met with several individuals within State Department. And we also met a few think tankers. And one one meeting particularly stood out in that the Asia Foundation hosted us and one of its leadership, gentleman named John Brandon, who is an alum of Northern Illinois University hosted this entire delegation of really high school students from Southeast Asia and, you know, spoke to us about his outlook towards Southeast Asia opportunities, how he got into, you know, the study of Southeast Asia, etc. And I remember during q&a, I raised my hand and I asked this question, I said, Well, what do I do if I want to sit where you're sitting 20 years from now. And, and he said, Learn to stay in touch, and learn to keep in touch. Because your, your net worth really comes down to your network. That stuck with me that that really stuck with me, I, from the time I came back, and I think it also is further exacerbated by my earlier experience of encountering so many friends, I would say as they become through many letters, we send each other and my pen pals, right with love from all across the globe. And like, Oh, I could do that. I actually quite liked doing that. And, and yeah, so you know, I kept the Rolodex is an exaggeration, but a small handful of business cards, I shouldn't say that I collected from that. And I, I just started writing to people on a regular basis, you know, just to keep them updated. Say hey, I'm begging Yangon. Now, you know, going into 10th grade doing this that and the other and it's not like you know, a sort of messages just like every Christmas you send them a note with a little update on what's new with you and inquiring them about their health and their families and you know, maybe at least half the people do right right back and now you have an email chain and a back and forth. And, and I was fortunate to have people who were kind enough to actually give a hoot what a 14 year old from Burma had to say, oh, what's going on in his life, right? But did make friends through that and stayed in touch with with the folks that I've met during that program, including the professors which were instrumental as I take the next step in my journey, education journey that is and you know, back in Myanmar, I went, I went back to public school to finish the matriculation exam, there was a bit of a reverse culture shock as you would say, because, you know, we you go from private school, which is Yes, the culture is there, but at least there's some degree of independence and free flow of thought, if you will. That is not as heavily scrutinized. And the I remember, first month in private school, sorry, in public school back in public school, the one of the fellow students from the American Center had a few printouts like sticker size printouts of pictures of dogs, and sushi and general on Sun together, sort of like with a caption that says, like, father, like daughter, and I thought that was so. And I wanted one of those. So I asked him for it. And I, you know, I loved it so much I, I perhaps stupidly uses it as a bookmark on in my books. What I had forgotten was a one of the textbooks that I was using, required showing your homework on the book itself. So I just submitted it to the teacher. And I remember being called in to the while at first, the teacher said, Well, that, you know, she found very problematic and illegal material in one of the textbooks, then could cause whoever owns it in huge trouble immediately, as soon as she said that, that that fear of Holy crap, am I going to end up in jail? Because yeah, I mean, it's, you know, technically, technically, doesn't matter if you're 14 or 40, a holding on to that material is punishable by up to seven years in prison, bar none or distribution of that material for that matter. And didn't reference what it was just said. You know, whoever did this knows, I know who you are, you know who you are. stay after class, and we'll talk and I swear to God, that Haute and that whole day I thought she she was gonna report me to the police or hand me over, but they kept kept my cool, by the end of the class very, you know, suddenly stuck around and went to her office. And she actually gave it back to me. And she said, Look, I know how you feel. I feel it too. But we're both here. We're both closely monitored. So don't do something stupid like that ever again, and figure out what to toss it. So she handed that back to me, she did not do it herself, which which is symbolic in itself, right? Like it's either, you know, she could have punished you could have showed, you know, or try to, you know, share the hunter's propaganda Spiel with me and, or a cheer dunk whatever she wanted. But it was in that moment that you realize that you're living in fear, but also bound by the same mutual respect that you have towards the needy. Yeah, that the junta can try all they want all they can to impose all kinds of draconian rules and laws. But this teacher could not did not have the heart to dispose of it herself. She just simply couldn't write. And she just very coyly slipped the book back to me and said, just just don't do that again. And that was so that I thought that was a you know, what the anecdote to share? I pretty much breezed through public school and that I was not a great student. But I was not a bad student, either very mediocre student, I finished my matriculation did not, you know, I kept my head down. Because the first month on the offset, you're getting a very, very clear reminder that, hey, you're not protected by the private school system anymore. You're in the system governed by this military, under their ministry of education. One wrong move. And who knows what can happen to you that awareness is there has always been there. So So you know, I didn't engage much I didn't, you know, push back that much, or nor did I engage in debate, because I had that outlet. I had that outlet, the American Center, or go there in the evenings after school and I and I can vent and I can talk about what I felt and asked questions that I wanted to know the answer to. When during my day during the day school, I just kept my mouth shut and kept my head down and finished matriculation. And right after matriculation was. What's next right? I got enough score to go into university most universities of choice except medical. I got into engineering school, all that but my mother knowing me and Knowing my, as she calls it my big mouth, she said, Well, you're going to either get killed or end up in jail. So you're getting out of the country one way or another. I don't know how you're going to do it, but you're going to do it. So and I've always wanted to I said, Well, I want to go to America, I told her and say, well, it's not cheap. So if you can figure out a way to do it yourself, by all means, right? As luck would have it, that was also around that time when there was so much internet outages across the country. And so I didn't have the usual you know, tools. Even the Common Application was a hit or miss really, it was more just books that you found at the American Center. And back then the internet connection to the American Center was one of the worst, because people kept using it for Google Talk and Vizio chat and all the earlier day, chat rooms. So it was very slow. And so I said, You know what, I'm just going to handwrite my applications. So I downloaded the Common Application, printed it out and got one of my merican set of teachers to write me a recommendation waiving that application fee. And, and I hand wrote all my applications to 23 colleges and universities. And I sent them and I mailed them out all them with my test scores and all that, of course, TOEFL SATs, etc, right? So the, I got into 18 of those colleges and universities. The source of where actually that front was, there was this old and it's a little bit outdated, says Princeton Review of best 373 colleges in the United States. That was really it, I just looked at the numbers, looked at what schools have strong programs, really even then it wasn't much information, you just sometimes just look at what does this sound good is really about what it comes down to. Right. I knew that through some of the teachers at American Center and liberal arts education, you know, gives you the option of choice, you're exposed to a breadth of education. Well, breadth of subjects and topics, which I like I like to, you know, have that option to be able to dabble before you decide, okay, I'm going to be this major. But I always knew that politics was going to be a part of it. But politics is so broad that it can be anything, it could be any specialty field that you pick, and then with an interlude in politics, you know, I I landed on my remaining four or five schools and the big and I got, you know, good scholarships, more than half covered, right? But then the big question is, even with more than half covered, I needed, I still needed money to make it work. Really what we're looking at is a full ride plus, right, because by then I took the English language test TOEFL and a yo Ts, and I remember, IoT is getting a band score of 8.5 out of nine, which is at that time, a bit of a rarity in the country. And now we have seen a lot more epi fives come out. Same thing with TOEFL very high score. So was able to market that a little bit and was starting to generate my own income going to teach, you know, other other fellow students or even people much older. Just how to ace the TOEFL or how to ace the IoT as both English language tests and and so I was making decent money at it more than a average entry level government worker for sure. So and that was one of the primary sources of income for household especially after my father developed a chronic condition neuromuscular disorder. And my mom, you know, his full time caretaker. So their retirement savings shaky as it is plus mine helped us going so it was a matter of, okay, well, if I go, this added this loss of income plus other costs, how that how we're gonna manage that was the big the big question mark. And there were five schools at the end of the 18th. I got into though I was negotiating, back and forth and back and forth it by until mid June, there was no clear picture of which school was going to, you know, go ahead and say, Okay, well, we'll take a chance on you come on over right. And then I was just so shoddy and I remember this is June, June 4. tene my birthday, I just thought it would be. It was getting frustrated and the connectivity was bad and emailing was bad. So I went to the nearest internet cafe, and I called up one of the colleges, just to this switchboard. And, and I said, I'm calling from Burma. What I wanted to say was, I would like to speak with the admissions office, please. But the operator didn't even skip a beat. As soon as I said, I'm calling from Burma do that. All right, hold on, and then transferred me and it ended up at the president's office. They said, you know, president's office, how can we recognize that? Well, if I'm if I'm on a call the president's office, you you lose 100% of the shots you don't take I said, Well, five minutes of our time, I'm an accepted student. And I like to speak with the President. And they're like, Okay, patching you through. So that, you know, that went through and I spent 30 minutes talking to the president of the college and appeal made an appeal to her and share with her my story and why I wanted to come outside to study and the various difficulties that facing in, in Myanmar regarding internet connectivity, as well as political freedom of thought, freedom of thought cetera, until it was a five minute conversation turned to be a 40 minute one, and I can tell you, my mother, not happy with that phone bill. But with her and the support of the international recruitment director who really really took a chance on me and went out of her way to convince the financial aid board and admission board, really all of the President and that admissions director boat, they really worked hard to, to make it possible. And, and by early July, he had to start school by August, September, right. So it was pretty close them everyone has even bought their, you know, air tickets, and I haven't even gotten my visa interview yet. And, and the letter came back in that, okay. Well, we'll cover all costs, on the condition that when you are here and have access to internet and all the resources that you will apply for supplemental private scholarships throughout your term at the college. And that was it. I was also given a part time job which allowed me to partially send back money home, which is important to my parents. And, and for my, for my own peace of mind, didn't want to just leave everything behind and go. And yeah, so I was in and after that, freshman year, that was when you know, I got there and I true to my word, I applied for college for Scott additional scholarships. And all three that I applied came through one with the State Department, one with the Open Society Foundation, and another one with prospect Burma Scholarship, which was established with funds from danza sushis Nobel peace prize fund. So when she won the prize, she didn't touch down with that money instead set up an Education Trust and prospect Burma received a chunk of that, that endowment, so it worked out in the end, but it was a, you know, a gut wrenching process. But and then I got here and the, I think, three to three months in, I heard about dogs and Soo Ji coming to the US. And as she was going to be in Washington receiving the Congressional Gold Medal. I didn't even think twice I didn't have an invitation, I didn't have any place to stay. I just hopped on the next Greyhound available to go to Washington in the hopes of getting a glimpse of you know, just and I was 17 by that point 70 I just got on a Greyhound. And as luck would have it I you know, my, my godfather is you may recall from part one and was monk leader was one of the invited guests. He was staying at a monastery. So, you know, he was kind enough to let me crash on the floor or the sofa. And then we went to you know, I accompanied him the next day and you just one point this invite only guests at one point he just grabbed my hand and said Alright, we're going in and then we went in the capitol rotunda and we said three lines away from where Senator McConnell, Speaker Boehner, Secretary Clinton, Leader Pelosi, all together came to honor dogs and sushi with the Congressional Gold Medal Award. It was a life changing event. And, you know, I've already been hooked to to the to the DC environment when I first got there we could go but this that this was next level, you can feel the the this atmosphere of change is this all happening so fast, you know, things ain't government reforms, all that happening. So the it was, let's just say it was I think a lot of the Myanmar, a lot of your most citizens share this sentiment, too. When when we look at dogs and sub G, which is why it's so hard at times to be able to be objective, when we analyze political floors, is, you look, and you see someone that looks just like you, you see someone of your kind being looked up to by the rest of the world. That doesn't happen as often for your average Burmese, you know, we're either looked at with pity. Or if you're on the other side of the spectrum, where you know, you're colluding with the junta. And it doesn't matter how rich you are, you're still looked at with disgust and disdain everywhere else in the world. Yeah, and I most certainly notice the look of Oh, poor you. And all in all the best intentions, I have no doubt. But that or you thing with her. That wasn't it with her. People wouldn't live up to her. They wanted to hear what she has. They wanted to draw their own sense of inspiration and her ideas into their way of life. That was the first time you see someone with your, you know, with Che or nationality being on top of the global stage. Yeah, that that was something that, you know, nothing and no one can compete with. That's why she has this, I think, almost, you know, unanimous appeal across the country? Well, with the exception of the military, of course. And they they resent it, I was involved in that case, you know, the source of their resentment is that everywhere they go, they're, you know, am I going to get to sit at the table? I'm not going to be told to wait outside. I mean, even within the ASEAN context, it's happening to this day, right? The military never got the level and degree of respect from the rest of the civilized world. That does. By none. Right. It's, it's not even a comparison. So, so I think that that I saw that and, you know, was, was very, it was encouraged to do more and do better and college and continue. And freshman year, I wanted to get a get come back to DC when I had the opportunity to work out the school had a scholarship that allows folks to work during the summer, there was a small grant available and but you know, as you know, a dc, dc internships are competitive, and no one wants to hire a freshman, especially not a freshman straight out of Burma. But you may recall, this gentleman who I asked that question, several years back at the Asia Foundation, I said, you know, what do I do if I want to sit in your chair and 20 years? Well, I called him up. And, and John, John Brandon was my first entry into my DC network. And to this day, the contacts he helped made have been proved have proved useful. And I asked him as just straight up asked him for well, you know, first there are any openings at the Asia Foundation, which is the only, you know, outside of US government organization that I knew in the in the DC Circuit. And he said, Well, maybe a little bit too young, but why don't I put you in touch with some people around DC and in DC, Southeast Asia policy circle as small as it is? So he put me in touch with several people and at the end of each meeting, and we had everybody wanted to talk to me, Mr. And it was also very new, so exciting. Everybody was kind enough to share their time. Whatever I conclude the meeting, first thing I asked him is, you know, if you don't mind, I would be grateful, if you would put me in touch with three people, at least three people who would be, you know, beneficial for me to speak with who, just like you, you know, active in this, in this Southeast Asia field across the US and Washington particular. And from that, it grew from three more three, more than three more and it grew. And eventually, by, by, by the time summer came around, I had two internship offers, which one of which I took with the US ASEAN Business Council.
Host 30:50
Right, so that's your journey to an American university, and then to DC and then to being able to find a way to stay in DC and to do more work there. And I want to get ahead into how that developed in to how you, you converted that and leverage that into your current situation. But before we do, though, I just want to go back to Aung San su chi, because it's really so valuable, what you're sharing. And I think that right now, Aung San su chi, and in to some degree, speaking in 2023, a word that comes to mind and thinking about or is indefensible. That may or may not be true, depending on what side of line you're on. But certainly, in the public sphere, wherever you're from, it's very hard to be a fervent Aung San su chi defender and supporter today, with the knowledge of the role that she would play after house arrest. And this is, and when I say indefensible, I'm talking this is more of a non Burmese view, obviously, this is these are those that are following the country from afar, people might make excuses or they might have justify some things. But there, there are certain parts of a record that are just really hard to get around. And I think that for those that haven't grown up there and known the suffocating sense of the, what the military has done, the pitting nature of when you go outside the country, how people look upon you. And that justifiable criticism of Aung San su chi today, negates who she was and how she was seen in the backdrop and the context of what was going on there and what she was coming from. And these are really hard things to pick apart. Because, you know, the the often the narrative, especially when it comes to Burma becomes much more simplistic black and white, you're this or you're that. And so to even start down a path today of admiring or appreciating certain among cities qualities, you're immediately walking into a dangerous zone of being labeled an apologist, because you are not leading with are underscoring her role in the Rohingya crisis, which should not be avoided and should definitely be something that is given his fair share. But people are complex situations and countries histories are also complex. And it does a service to be able to understand the nuance and the complexity of these things to a greater degree, even when we're looking at very hard and challenging situations to be able to understand that nuance and those particular sides, even when it might make us uncomfortable. And so I say all that because I think it's really valuable to get this fuller picture, not just of Aung San su chi, but kind of like what she represented and how people saw her and how and one thing that's been said about Aung San su chi, which I think is quite true, is that whether one was Burmese or foreign, many people seem to use her to tell the story they want to tell and to see in her what they wanted to see. And to to have her embody that which is when you know, she was under house arrest, and not speaking for herself that was quite easy to do. You can write whatever story you wanted of her and there really was not much else that can get out there. But I wonder if you could just go back into into describing what the figure of Aung San su chi represented in that environment and, and describing it in such a way that is able to educate a foreign audience knowing that there's a foreign audience listening, that is skeptical, distrustful, even betrayed by her later actions, which we're not taking away and we'll get into later in the conversation, but to balance that picture of her coming from the country and out into the world. What What was it that she represented? What was it that she she, she spoke in her image and Her example, how did that speak to you or ignites something in you?
Jack Myint 35:06
Right. Thank you for that very thoughtful question. And I think and I think I think you hit the nail right on the head with with this with your earlier assessment, it is it is true, she is a projection of what people envisions her to be right because she was not able to be out for so long. So she a woman's rights icon show is a freedom and democracy icon Sure. Prisoner of conscious may you can attach, attach any label to the person and and the reality is, and we've known this through history and time through time again, that the real version of a person will always disappoint the version you've built up in your head. That's, that's simple. And, you know, for for us permies. I think, as I mentioned earlier, there's, at least in our generation, there's no one like her. There's no one at that level of brilliance for sophistication, you know, worldliness and recognition, really just bringing and keeping Myanmar on the map, right, of a country that would have otherwise been forgotten. And to this day, I still get people question where and I have to bring out the madness a year, right between China, India, all that. So for that, as a person, she will always have my respect. And I apologize to no one about that, because no one will understand what that woman meant to many students, just many children, students, young adults, adults, even old people in Myanmar that have no one else. So I wouldn't have apologized for that. Now, in terms of her ability, as a politician, in terms of her maneuvers, and the policies that she said, are implemented, what she said was, she did not say all that we can scrutinize, and we can form various criticisms on and I, myself am one of those people who would openly say, Well, you know, this is just flat out wrong, this is just bad policy. That's okay. And what she did, as a politician, we can critique all day long, but as a person, what she represented to us, and what she, that that glimmer of hope, right, that she gave to us, that no one and I mean, no one can take that away from that, that's with that. Now, in terms of what she was able to accomplish. I agree, a lot of the expectations fall short in her inability to, to implement coalesce and, and also to, in her leaning too much on the personality politics, right? That That, to me, was a major flaw in the overall leadership, instead of spending enough time on building institutional power, focusing more on building personal power, or at least living off of that personal political capital, I thought was not long sighted. That said, they are various differences, right for her to be able to she's running on handicap, with the military still maintaining control of the parts of Parliament, as well as key ministries in the cabinet. So that those are facts that everyone knows already. So I won't go into the details. But imagine for a second, if you you're in that role, though, I don't think anyone could really imagine what it would be like to be in that role, locked up for 20 years and thrown back in the stage and given an illusion to lead and expect it to deliver the in the same degree as you know, what is determined a success by unclear and ever changing Western standards. So you'd look at that and oh, wow, okay, well, that's a tall order, you think. But, but, you know, number one, I what I see in her is a person who has deep trust issues, and rightfully so rightfully so. You don't know who to trust you don't know who to surround yourself with a leader is as only as effective as the people he or she surrounds herself herself himself with, you know, so, in this case, I think surrounding herself with people that she thought she could trust or, you know, trusting people that came up together with her in the Oval All movement, spent time together in prison cetera, all have established their allegiance and loyalty to the NLD pretty much giving their lives and freedom to to the party and the cause and are now out and equally committed, right? And the intention is there the hardest there. But when in practicality the performance falls short, what do you do? When the alternative, you know that the technocrats mostly ones that know how to do affiliated with the military regime, because in order to be able to know how to navigate the system, you have had to work with the regime for the past decades. So, you know, figuring out who to trust and who to surround yourself with what's happened was a challenge, and rightfully so. And then, you know, purging based on pure performance, I think there are various other considerations. Again, you know, of course, on paper in more theoretical aspect. Well, these individuals partook in political activity, they knew the risks, and they were willing to take those risks, therefore, no political political capture and and the time they spent in jail should not be used as a means to sort of cash in, if you will, when the former opposition now in power that is on paper. Yes, sure. Of course, that's how it should be. But in reality, for lack of a better alternative and also low D within racks, it was hard for her to be able to effectively lean on any individual group or groups of people then that's the main handicap those are I should say those are the main handicaps in progression that she was going in and leaning and the people that she did lean on you know when they were exaggerated reports or where they miss report misinterpret a situation for a you're one person you're not a demagogue, you know, can have an all seeing eye into every issue and problem and and I think that, you know, she she made the biggest mistake of her career in betting on the domestic, in, and that personal political capital. And the people who told her of the situation, and wrote out the political math for her in the domestic sense, all of those elements and her deciding, okay, that's the direction we're gonna go. You know, it was a risk she took was the choice she made. So and I'm sure she is the type of person that you know, when when make choices or take actions, she doesn't believe it. So that's something that she'll have to live with for the rest of her life. But the fact remains, it's not one person, right? It's not one person. It's not. All under the IRS. While it may have the illusion of governance, the NLD government was fighting an uphill battle from the get go. In really maneuvering the state mechanisms of power and the constant riffs with military coalition's that that mean, I can we can do an entire episode on that right. But bottom line was, she did not build an effective coalition should not have the chance to build an effective coalition. Not nor was she able to remove the person politics because in the short term, she needed to lean on that person politics to achieve what she thought took precedence. And in that process, institutions suffered as well as a clear plan mapping of new generation leaders that should have been cultivated with
Host 44:25
Yeah, I totally agree with you. This is something that you could spend an entire episode on. And more than that, even and I just have one follow up question and then we can move on with that I everything you're saying makes sense in terms of what she was up against, and how hard the, the, the how challenging it was to move into governing with the context of the military still having power and the problems the country is facing and everything else and I think that it's um One can be quite critical of what ended up happening. But there does need to be a closer look taken that doesn't necessarily excuse it and is not trying to be an apologist for it, but just flushes out how incredibly challenging that context was. But the one question I don't know if that really covers that that still remains is that decision of hers to, as you say, not build up an institution not look for young leaders, but to really make a cult of personality. And to really double down on it, I mean, to really invest in it, that there there are a lot of personal anecdotes from that time, from diplomats and others that have described in some detail, how she surrounded herself by by Yes, people how she was not wanting to tolerate really dissent, or you know, what, see, I mean, you yourself mentioned, one of the first things you did to start this interview off was how exciting it was to be in an environment, a classroom environment in the West, where not only could you disagree with the teacher who has the authority, you can also interrupt them and you can you can carry on these, these conversations with people far above your station, and that that critical dialogue is really appreciated here. And we see the exact, exact opposite of that dynamic where she is intentionally surrounding yourself by people who are not going to be in you know, behind closed doors or in a public setting, they're not going to offer dissenting views, which is really an example of civil discourse, kind of town hall style, taking place and open exchange of ideas. She really seem to move away from that. And to and there, it's also been reported that dirt, I mean, this is incredible. But during the NLD, period, there was more, I can't remember the exact statistic, I want to say what I read was that there were more arrests of journalists during the NLD period than during the military regime. Certainly there there was not really an opening of press like those would have wanted. And there were still many journalists and Institute and media organizations that were being persecuted during the NLD times and so you just kind of across the board, you don't see any kind of free exchange of information of civil discourse of different political ideas badly in and out, you see her really investing in wanting to, to build to to to equate loyalty and patriotism with a green with whatever she did whatever she said. And and I guess the question is, why did she do that? I mean, this is someone who is married to a, someone from England has spent time in substantial time in Western countries and Western academic institutions, fluent in English, fluent in ideas of Western democracy and everything else. This I think, is one of one of several of the things that really surprised and shocked people and what they were hoping or thought that she would be is this limitation of a free exchange of ideas and really investing and doubling down deep into, into, into following her and supporting her no matter what. So what's, what's your understanding of why she went that way?
Jack Myint 48:14
Well, at the end of the day, yeah. How do you define how do you explain how someone is as a person, as I said earlier, that the proof is in the pudding and our pudding had authoritarian tendencies? Yeah, and those are, let me just clarify here those are not qualities or degrees associated to any part of the world, I mean, they are authoritarian figures in the West as well, some of whom have been quite effective right. So have delivered on monumental developments that contributed to mankind you can go back to history and Logan's in the same way that a lot of people mentioned Lee Kuan Yew as an authoritarian leader in Singapore and the way that country and and also while building institutions with the cult of personality at the same time, right so it hasn't it can be done so you know, it's just a leadership style or it's just how you are as a person again, we never knew who she was as a person and the you know, you reflect a lot of what you would like to see or what you would like in the leader on a person and everyone has a different perspective of what you want to see in a leader and assertive authoritarian leader is not necessarily a bad thing in in our part of the world. Right. And as long as you know the doing good for our country component comes with it and litmus test of it is what? You know how the public responds because their decisions impacted the lives of their citizens. She she pleases A lot of the policy importance on her constituency and the base, the local Myanmar populace. And in the process, if it alienates her once avid supporters in the West, then so be it. That was her judgment call. I, I, I have my issues with that. And, you know, criticisms on how they could have been handled better. But everybody has their opinions on it. And in hindsight, it's, it makes sense. And but that's not at all. You know, my defense, this is not a defense of Dong Sensoji. Not at all. She made moves that were, you know, would be not what I would not like to see from a leader. No question about it. Right. And some of them some of those positions were unsound. Some of them were morally questionable. Yes. But, again, cannot inundate. And take away that, at our lowest point. There are few Burmese who was able to achieve as much as she did or capture the hope and imagination of an of entire generations the way that she did we have your general answer. We have Ghouta at the UN Secretary, as the UN Secretary General, and there simply is not a whole lot. Well, actually no one else who could play at that level, who could break through the, say, regional level into the global level? That that's the that's the part, right? I usually, you know, everyone else, it's pretty insignificant, if you think about it, in terms of their appeal, their standing their name, and the name that it brings the country together with, so that those two are and in my opinion should be kept separate, right, which we which could also give you a glimpse into the psyche of why so long Burmese are still fervent supporters of her. But the issue there becomes, if you love someone you love everything they do, in my case, that is that should not be the case. Right? And I don't look at it that way. You judge a politician based on the content and quality of their actions. Plain and simple. Yeah, yeah. And in bringing the personnel into it, it, you know, it messes with your objectivity. As a person, they'll hope and, you know, just the sheer momentum, oh, sorry. And just the sheer magnitude of her presence, what it gives us will always be there. As a politician, she did not make it to the mark of what one would expect by the matrix of a successful leader granted with all her handicaps and the limitations that were placed on her government, but that those two should be judged separately. The problem with most Burmese is once they love an individual, they're protective of everything that that individual does. And in that process, having trouble distinguishing the person from the action and vice versa?
Host 53:44
Well, I would say vice versa, in terms of that's the same problem The West has, I mean, that's really interesting. I haven't thought about it this way before, but just as Burmese might develop a protection of the person who they admire. I think the opposite problem is in the West, where the criticism and, and and frustration towards Aung San su T's actions have led many in the West to really be incapable of understanding why she was still a beacon for hope, personally, in terms of what she represented, because they've defined her by her political actions. And it's very hard for us in the West. And it kind of reeks of being an apologist for many people to be able to understand this beacon of hope that she represented in a place that, as you mentioned, one of three people with aunt and her father long song that that suggested of a nobility and it's hard for Westerners to appreciate why that still exists today when she was on the wrong side of a genocide. The other thing I'd add that, go ahead.
Jack Myint 54:50
Why Why would they take that edit leap of effort when you have so many other icons to choose from? We don't have any choice. This is the one Are we? Right? Whereas? Okay, well, ya know, so it's, you know, it's easy to cut and go when it's, you know, when you're not tied to it by nationality or by history or by the circumstances of hardship. It's easy to cut and ditch. That's an I don't know, how this is how human behavior works. And you know, it should not be blamed on it. Why would? And to be honest, right? Why would anyone spend all the additional unless if you're really, you know, of the academia, or if you are familiar with a country in one way or another, then you take the time and effort to figure out and learn the nuances. But honestly, why would it mean, they've got so many problems in this world, we're just a small speck of dust in a much bigger geopolitical theater. So it's natural, is natural for the general global audience perspective to shift that way. And the onus is not on the public of the West, or the populations that were previously supported, or the onus is on the individual to manage those various support bases and the political capital that they hold, you know, you want to win something, you gotta let go of something. And, you know, how do you balance those two? How do you keep keep your gains and losses in check? That's up to the person? Right, in my opinion, and we at the end of the day, you're, you know, you're in the field, you're playing politics, you're playing politics, well, you got to play that too. And that, and she knew that I didn't, I didn't doubt for a second that she was oblivious to that she knew that and she made the call. That was a choice.
Host 56:50
Yeah, the other thing I would add to this, that's quite interesting is when you're talking about Burmese names that on one hand, are, are radiating back a certain kind of nobility and, and an optimism and confidence among the people, while on the other hand, are attracting or are moving to a global stage and attracting a greater worldwide audience. You mentioned Aung San su chi Yong song and youth and looking outside the political realm and this is something I think does not get as much attention. I would also put some monastic names and names of anon monastic Burmese who taught meditation on there as well, I know this is a somewhat different topic because we're not talking about unifying the country, of course, the meaning non Buddhist ethnic minorities, that they're there. We're not talking about a vision of how a society can advance so it's somewhat different, but I think that when when one is talking about Myanmar on the international stage, often it is portrayed as do use your words in kind of pitting and and these poor people and that kind of viewpoint can limit to restrict the humanity. But the worldwide mindfulness movement this had its roots in Myanmar and when you're looking at teachers, like lady say it out who, as I mentioned before the interview today is the 100th anniversary of the death of Lady Seda. So it's a opportune time to be mentioning him but along with him Mahasi say at sai Juba, Kin, Blanca. Mogok Say it, say to Pandita some of these names of these giants in the field of of meditation and of Buddhism and monastics as well as in going his case, not only non monastic, but even a non Bomar and a non Buddhist, even. These are teachers, these are not these are not received. These are not people receiving pity or aid. These are some of the highest and most revered and respected. Teachers have an exported version of a meditation that has transformed the world and especially transformed the West when you look at what mindfulness is doing today, and how it's changing our society over here, and how it's from intensive meditation retreats to the far end, and then to the other end of the spectrum, just having mindfulness and major corporations in the military, and that can be argued about the ethical, ethical nature of that, but mine versions of mindfulness and stress reduction in so many different forms, and so much of that came from Burmese teachers. So this might be somewhat off the track because I know that you weren't exactly getting at. Well, you were you were looking more at at leaders of society and of the lay world and the political reality and such but I just feel I'd be remiss not to mention these giant names that both were a sign of nobility and and and and praise within the country and also being giant giants that were respected and not just respected but people came to learn under them outside the country, that I don't think it's really talked about enough in terms of the contribution that the Myanmar has made to the world. And it's also very personal to you, because your monastic tutor who you referenced is, is you had a personal relationship but with but he's also in contemporary Burma. This is a monastic leader that has just been doing unbelievable things on a national level, in terms of that aren't just related to his knowledge of the Buddhist teachings and his ability as a monastic teacher, but also when how he's able to look at how the Buddhist teachings aligned with a democratic and inclusive society. That is, is using his background as a monk and his knowledge of the Buddhist teachings to advocate for a better Myanmar. And in this particular case, your teacher is quite well known and famous within Myanmar. For those that know a lot about Myanmar, they also would have heard of him, not on a scale of some of those other teachers who really had foreign students that made a movement based on the these teachings. But But still, I think this is just something that that should be acknowledged in this conversation.
Jack Myint 1:01:04
Oh, absolutely. And and I think, you know, it warrants every mention and acknowledgement of what they did for Buddhism, globally. But I be, you know, I'd like to point out is that there are two categories here, right? What you're talking about in Bali is separate them into lagi which is of the material world right, which is of the immaterial what which is of the beyond the material world in which the, you know, the continuing attachments that we have to power, wealth, nationhood, nationality, all of that the individuals that you mentioned, their very philosophy and teachings were a rejection of all those attachments, all the material attachments of the lay world is, as you put it, and they that teaching that mentality spread throughout the matrix that, you know, would be because you can't ever you can't compare apples and oranges, right? It's the same way, the matrix that you use in determining what they have achieved and accomplished and the matrix that you use in it no more the real politic geostrategic spheres, cannot be put next to each other. I don't think because they are not playing this game. They're not playing the game that we are all, you know, interested in the same things that we are they interested in the Beyond and beyond just small matters of, you know, well, being day to day, needs and requirements that humans normally look at. So I think the rounds are different, honestly, Joe, and in how you look at it, and you pay Yes. 100% agree with you that their contributions and what they've done for Buddhism, and the spreading of its core philosophy worldwide, is something to be proud of, but because they rejected it, it's hard for us to attach the nationhood or nationality or something as ours to them, because the concept of ours the very notion that is the very notion that they reject to begin with, right? How do you claim their contributions as ours when they, when they themselves have rejected it? The sense of belonging and ownership to begin with? So just a thought.
Host 1:03:46
Yeah, I think there's some truth in that, but I think you'd have to go individually, I think when you're if you're looking at it, as far as I understand their biographies, some say someone like Mahasi, CSR, sn Goenka, you do see less engagement in the world and more of a focus on their meditative or Buddhist mission. But I think it's different if you I don't think anyone can make the argument that lady said it was renouncing the world or renouncing the the social issues of the day or even the things that he did how they were reforming Buddhist society Burmese society at the time, I think, say it it will Pandita definitely, I mean, say do Pandita suffered tremendously from the ways in which he would not legitimize or honor a military regime. Those were smaller acts than then really the level of engagement of a lady Seda. And then I don't know where you'd put your your monastic tutor and where he fit in. This is, as I understand it, this is not so much a meditation master meditation teaching monk, but someone who on one hand was I think you said that he was in charge of 20,000 students overall, but yet he was also doing a lot to promote different democratic values and inclusivity to the attempt that I believe he's still in prison today for the work he did. And so these things do spill over. And I think if there's one hope, or, or aspiration of what this platform has tried to do over the conversations we've had, is to say another way, I think that when Myanmar is understood outside of the country, and by different foreign actors, I think there can be a tendency to want to put things in categories and make firm, solid lines around, you know, this is the political thing. This is the religious aspect, and the clergy. And this is the meditative side. And here's the, you know, here's the ethnic minorities and to, to put things in these different categories. But I think that often, when you're you're looking at how things play out, often those categories break down, and the they become dotted lines and very amorphous. And so and so I think in the cases of some of those monks, I mentioned, I think, yes, for sure, they did not so much engage in the world. But I think there's other examples of monks who certainly they're not, they're not a great political figure, and they're not playing the political game. To the extent that a verified, you know, bonafide politician is. But I mean, also to quote what you said last time, the sharp elbows of monastic politics are much shrewder than than what you find in the beltway. And, and I do think that they're both on the more progressive and on the more nationalistic side, there are those monks that are playing that game, but they're playing it in robes? And maybe it's, you know, maybe you can't quite compare that across the board, as you say, but I don't know if I, if I feel that for some of those monks, that it's quite as extreme as apples and oranges that they are there in the game. And there the game has been played somewhat different differently because of their their hairstyle and choice of clothes, if you will, but yeah, they are.
Jack Myint 1:06:58
In, in, in the sense of a, you know, a powerful civil society organization with a religious bent, that's how you would tell you will categorize,
Host 1:07:07
right, so good to reference all this, let's tie a bow on that and move on with looking at the time we have available. And let's switch tracks. And go back to your story. Again, we took a bit of a detour to talk about Aung San su chi, which went into this discussion of some of the role of these monastic leaders. And let's go back to where we're at with your story where you had just found a way to spend a bit longer in DC through your connections and hard work. So pick up from there.
Jack Myint 1:07:37
Oh, yes. And so, you know, got my internship at US ASEAN Business Council. And it was a most exciting time, we had just brought a first ever US business delegation to Myanmar, composing of some 40 leading blue chip American companies to look at investment opportunities. There was two days after the initial lifting of sanctions in 2012, by then, and I was on that team I was on that team working was pretty junior staff slash intern. And it was I mean, the, the excitement, the enthusiasm. It was infectious. But back then. Don's answer to us in Parliament, and as the leader of the opposition thing, saying government was fixated on reforms and engaging with the international community, particularly the West and had promised that they would go through with free and fair elections in 2015, which there was still much skepticism over it. But in that opening, there was a desire interest to learn to learn everything about the country to be hopes, some want to seek opportunities, some wish to know what life's like 60 years closed off cut off from the world. It was a very exciting time. And in to me, I picked the investment trade trade angle, because I believe that it is through development, economic development, that we will be able to dig ourselves out of the hole that we've been dug into all these years, all these years of oppression and restriction of censorship have created a culture of fear hate and and just cut us out from the rest of the world. We couldn't compete at a global level, or even a regional level for that matter. And that was something that I I was most motivated to NIS I think I reflect the sentiment of my generation when I say we're most motivated to try to recapture. You know, we didn't want handouts, we didn't want aid at this point anymore. We teach, it's like the old saying, right, you can give a man a fish a day, or you can teach them how to fish. Always, in this case, we wanted to learn how to fish, we wanted to do our own thing, have the capacity to be able to do our own thing, be able to compete regionally and globally, and that desire, open markets and free competition was greater than anything else at that time. And the fast development of all international investments FDI, as a float in the country was a testament that, oh, this is very possible. And within reach, the telecommunications sector particularly was one that really that lit a spark. For me personally, when I was growing up, you needed a special permit, and license to have a cellular phone. And they also do a lottery system where if you, your name gets drawn and you want to sell a phone lottery, and then the markup on the black market is so high, it's like $2,000, you can sell that your contract back at a black market, if you don't know, if you don't take it for yourself with government rate. If you buy it on the black market, normally, these phones go for 2500 to $3,000, sometimes as high as $5,000. Earlier in the days when I was growing up. So from that to everyone having a smartphone or cell phone within a matter of months, months, just overnight, this change, right that, that that to me and of course with you know, with Facebook being very prevalent that time, every phone, auto install with Facebook and Internet availability, the connectivity, the fast pace of change that have taken place that was incredible, incredible to watch. And many other sectors following the banking sector opened up to include more private banks. And you know, people were before we were purely cash economy to everyone having their own debit cards and credit cards. It was such an exciting time and then 2015 rolled around. And you know, we we held our breads and watched as the NLD swept big win in a remarkable landslide. Then what will the military do? What will the insane guys do? Will they make a proper exit or they refuse me That was always the back of our heads, but transitional power did happen. They did leave and the NLD government came to power with an asterick next to power because, you know, as I said earlier, Parliament is still no matter if even if you win the entire parliament you can get the majority of military still controls 1/3 And then the the cabinet, the key cabinet positions still maintained by the military. So but Throughout it all, we figured out a way to engage and work with the NLD government and I was particularly fortunate that by the time I graduated college, and I NLD had just won and I went to work at a trade in Myanmar centric advisory firm called inlay advisory group where I helped a lot of businesses enter the market, look at you know, sanctions regime and advised on on ways forward. That way. If your mind needs to open it needs to truly open up by 26 tene, early 2016 When I joined the US ASEAN Business Council again this time as a full time staff for managing the Myanmar portfolio. They had lifted the Obama administration that lifted the remainder of sanctions previously in place and and by then, the uncensored US government had come to power and she had installed herself as the State Councillor of the country. That role equivalent, as she said, was above the president. So You know, I was fortunate that when she visited the country at stake counselor, I was already in this role. And she knew the importance of responsible global conglomerates, particularly Western, this case of American cooperates, and the role that they can play in helping shape emrc economic trajectory. So she's decided to spend an evening addressing that group. And being the only Burmese in the council at that time, I was fortunate to be able to spend some time with her. And I still remember this so vividly, I walked up to her and I told her that I was my education, my being here was made possible through her scholarship fund, and that if the timing and opportunity is right, that I would love to have the opportunity to serve in her government. Because at that time, all I wanted was to go back. I just wanted to go back, I wanted to be a part of that change. And she looked me right in the eye. And she said, for what? And what are you going to come back and contribute? If you come back? With an empty cup? You'll take more than you give? No, no, we need people who have much to give. You just finished college, you need to stay here get as much as you can. And you don't have to necessarily inside your country to help your country. I'll never forget that. She said that. And and it was true. I had just started my role. What would I have been able to offer? Back Becky? Myanmar? Yeah. But then she turned around, she said, but you can do one thing for me is that if any of the NLD youth at any of our local CSOs and activists come through town, you can offer them your wholehearted help and support and helping them navigate Washington and also connect them to the right people. member, you must pay it forward. And so that was that. And, you know, I, I stayed on for the next throughout the entirety of the NLD administration. And every year, I would go back home, at least twice to engage with herself and her government, and had the opportunity to just work with really brilliant people, brilliant people who went back with their cups full. Those are the kinds that she wanted. And she got many of them, many of them left high paying corporate jobs in the United States and elsewhere, to go back, you know, pretty much no salary really, or ministerial salaries, because they were interested in rebuilding that nation they so loved. And it was like I said it was infectious. You know, and I and I had the the unique privilege to work with many of them closely, especially on economic issues, the likes of global warming, and a comment by Hey, Sean turn now, longtime Australian advisor was one of them, to some degree winced, and so on and so forth, who were real visionaries, and Myanmar's economic reform process. And their efforts and their innovative thinking and approaches has placed it on the right path and didn't quite take a U turn, so to speak on because again, you have 5060 years of damage to repair. Right. So but they they tore down what needs to be torn down and try to build back a foundational ground. And, of course, you know, we all know how that got interrupted with the NLD second wind and and from there, the reversal of all the positive change that's been made the military seizing power and setting us back. God knows how long but at the very least a few decades.
Host 1:19:00
So what were your views on this transition period? This is something that was kind of a wild west as it was happening. And I think there were and there were also many different views even at the time on where this was going and and what was how much this was really an opening and how much this was just made perhaps helping only a certain number of privileged people and outlying territories of ethnic minorities and religious minorities. It was they were it was a very different story. And then with the transition period ending in the coup, many who were critical of this transition period, were very fast to have a kind of I told you so of this is proof that this was not legitimate, and this was troubled from the start and this is what I've been seeing the whole time. There have been others that have pointed to this assertion being unfair and looking and saying the transition wasn't perfect, but here are the things that it did. And again, pointing to these very difficult circumstances and contexts in which they were operating. You were someone very closely following and involved and trying to support this transition effort. As you look back on it now, from a position of post coup, Myanmar, how, how do you look at what this transition period was? What's your opinion on it? Well, I
Jack Myint 1:20:28
think the, you know, in order to be able to run, you need to know how to walk, and are to walk, ie to fall down a few times, before you can properly do so. Right? Is the same thing. Sure, was it perfect? Absolutely not. But how else are you going to make it work? And you can't, you know, from the get go get everything right, that is unrealistic. And the fact that entire sovereign nation needs to training wheels is preposterous, you know, you've got to learn, and you've got to learn from your trial and error. That that's how I've always seen it. I mean, you know, this is a very messy affair. And the way that things are structured, the way that the power bases are centered, and how the military is interwoven itself, and all major economic interests and the core power centers, that's very hard to dismantle, you know, and it is a problem in the day, it is uniquely a Myanmar problem that the citizens of Myanmar or ethnics races and religions will have to come together to solve. And I think, you know, the, the large, larger looming problem that the country shares, and I'll get into the ethnic and religion issue in a bit, but the larger domain was development challenge, we did not have enough capital, we did not have enough technology, skill and capacity to be where we wish to be economically. That's the biggest problem and common factor that everyone shared. And at that time, that in order for it to reach there, you needed a legitimacy and, I guess, global appeal of government with liver that and Don's answer to that time was there was no leader of her caliber to deliver that. And I as I said, you know, we can scrutinize and debate all day but what she got it right and when she got it wrong, but that time it was unanimous all across all groups and read races and ethnics group, ethnic groups and religions that there's no one else to deliver this mandate, simply put. Now, once she got in power, and how she handled ethnic affairs, how she handled religion affairs, and the rights of various groups to self determination and governance, that is a different story. And many folks will tell you that it was completely it was handled with a lot of flaws and a bad judgment and decision making. And to some degree in effect. I agree with that assessment, you know, especially if you're looking at traditionally or own ethnic, self government governed regions, where she will go on and appoint Bama leadership, private law, Chief Ministers, that sort of thing had a lot of blowback. And, and also, you know, it's in her overall effort to dealing with the problem was to take a page out of her father's book in convening the 21st century panglong agreement and finding ways to bring all the the ethnic groups together. And by that I mean that they arm organizations, of course, who are the source of power of the and their civilian arms, the force of soft power, and then the hard power, right. So bringing them all together, but the one thing that, you know, was was impossible from the get go because you're not negotiating at an even level, right? You're the civilian government, you convene this peace dialogue. Now you have various ethnic groups with their various demands, and the government so in question is What specifically are you talking to the civilian government? Are you talking the military because then government military are not on the same page? So is Have the ethnic groups doing their own thing, and making their own demands for the military, making its own counters, and sometimes it's getting up to leave the room. And then the civilian government most times playing mediator in between not knowing or having really a real say, right, if you're really talking about the core of a confrontation, that ground confrontation between two armed groups were what role specifically can the civilian government and with what authority can play other than being a goodwill mediator? Right. So those were the things that she encountered. And, and I think she performed poorly, at the end of, you know, if you do reassessment of it, in her dealings with ethnic groups, some of whom many of whom felt betrayed, by her overly Bomar centric approach at learning local government, governance matters as and a large part of it I attribute to the inability to trust. It's about the people that she knows that she can trust, who don't always deliver in terms of capability. But she continued trusting anyways. And that was a flaw in that. And that affected her ability to to deliver on some much needed wins for the country.
Host 1:26:27
Looking back on it now, do you think there's anything that she could have done better that could have possibly prevented a coup from taking place? Or do you think that was always in the cards?
Jack Myint 1:26:38
Yeah, I don't. I don't have a crystal ball. So I can't, you know, map out but a part of me wonders if she if she had done more to cultivate her own faction within the military, right. Within the military, if this could have been averted? I don't think she attempted that at all, to be honest, nor could she could have I mean, again, you know, the intricacies of real Naypyidaw power politics is limited to those who are exposed to it. And we, you know, from glimpse and some degree of access, we have, we can, you know, make assumptions and map things out all day long, but I don't think we'll ever capture the full picture. But yeah, the, you know, by doing more to engage parts of the military. And so some degree of division within them would have beat them at their own game kind of scenario would have been helpful, but I don't think it would have entirely averted it, to be honest. The the military on their part to mate may no attempt. Right? So, you know, it's both sides did little to try to avoid the situation, I think. And, of course, the victim here is the people of Myanmar. And and there's no question about it. And so the majority of the blame is, is with the perpetrator. That's the military. So that that fact is unquestioned. I I don't know what she could have done differently to avert a coup, honestly. But to it, from my perspective, right, just better governance on on the NLD leadership's pot would have been to be more stern, with the more problematic elements of the party's leadership should have been more tactical and skill and deliverable based than mere patronage and loyalty, or legit loyalty are based on personal power, personal personality politics, sorry. So I think that was the main flaw. And those became the main culprits, the problems that so a wider, wider divide between the military and the civilian government because, you know, power as a new ID, even when they were jailed activists that that protested against this very form of power from the beginning power as they knew it was from the military's playbook. So when they got into a position of power, they exercised exactly like the individuals that they protested against those words. There were some elements of that NLD leadership that she and her circle of elders, if you will, could have cast out early on. Yeah, I think that would have sent a you know, a stronger message But instead they protected them. And I think that's sold a lot of resentment and hatred among various stakeholders, which cannot have been helpful to the process.
Host 1:30:17
Now, another issue that was very important during the transition period was sanctions and investment, the releasing of sanctions to try to make a more investment friendly atmosphere and attracting investment, which, as we all know, was then derailed by not just the Rohingya crisis, but the way it was being handled. And the the outside views of of that just became untenable prior to the coup. But in looking at this issue on investment, this is something that I believe of everything happening during the transition, you were most involved in and and most had a stake in trying to play a role. So tell us what your views on at the time of investment opportunities were the challenges and perhaps even some successes, if if there's some things that that come to mind, as well as what you were doing during that period, as far as trying to attract investments was going?
Jack Myint 1:31:18
Yeah, no, absolutely, I was fortunate and honored to be part of various offering input on various legislation, including the new my investment law than you our company's law likes. And the key challenge was the transparency and policymaking right, which got really streamlined under the NLD, which, which we consider a very positive development. And, and another is capacity, of course, I mean, capacity of, you know, your, your average employee capacity of the government employees and their ability to carry out and enforce and all that corruption was entrenched and deeply rooted is as deeply rooted as the military as an institution in every walk of life. And, but not limited to, to the military personnel is across the board. Right. So dealing with that was another big challenge in itself. And another another would be the basic infrastructure elements, you know, just didn't have the baseline infrastructure, construction, bridges, you know, electricity, all of those were general challenges. But there were also positives, you know, we had had openings to offer input and direct advice with ministerial level position makers, right and emerging technology seen, particularly in the SME, small and medium enterprises, front and local entrepreneurs that have emerged, so there's always reason for hope.
Host 1:33:19
The sanctions were, were obviously very controversial in terms of whether to release them all, or have something more gradual or selective. And then once the sanctions were, in fact, all lifted, then there was a rush for investment, but there are many problems with with with attracting that investment, and then the ringing of crisis just kind of derailed all of that. And so the question is, is looking at at first your, your view and assessment of that period, as well as whatever involvement you had in it, what you were, what you were trying to do, and, and what your hope was with it?
Jack Myint 1:33:59
Well, okay, I can answer that. So, so sanctions as a tool of changing the behavior of a despotic regime, for instance, has never been helpful. And I'm a firm believer in that, and I know that, you know, there are arguments against it and, and I've read them all, but honestly, they have never been helpful, when in fact they end up doing is hurting the local economy, and the people and as someone who grew up seeing through many a pirated movie and CDs that what's out there and knowing that you don't have the same access and who hungered for it, and who want it to have what my, you know, fellow global citizens, the very least my fellow ASEAN citizens have, I can tell you that it was not a good feeling to grow up with. Okay, and anyone and you will notice that a lot of people pushing for sanctions grew up in mostly developed of Western countries and will have absolutely no idea the hardship that I'm talking about. So when, when it came the opportunity for me to advocate against sanctions I, I vehemently, sanction AB humanly argued against the use of sanctions, because of their impact. I mean, look, the military, especially in a resource rich country, like Yemen, people with power, and the military in this case, will always find a way to line their own pockets. They, the, the matrix in which they determine governance are different from how the rest of the see the world sees governance, they are willing to strip the economy to its core, survive on own agricultural produce and sell all resources, including gems and oil and Tekin. You name it, and continue to build up their security apparatus and their own network of worth routed around patronage at the cost of the entire population. They don't even think twice about. So the the notion that, you know, inability to access the outside services and utilities and in especially in the digital age, including software, cutting out the part of the mass population that really need it to grow is in fact counterproductive, in my opinion, that said, what else is there? Right, what else? Is there as an option? Really, I think, you know, our friends in the West, if they want to be effective in how they get involved. Of course, you know, you the word, okay. Really, our friends in the West, they look at sanctions as a tool to check a box that something is and has been done. As far as Myanmar is concerned. I don't necessarily see the impact of sanctions so much as a benefit to the average citizen, but more so as a policy checklist for for the rest of the developed world to say, Okay, well, here's we're doing our part, here's what we did. That's my frank and honest observation. Now, there are many things that are done in tandem with that approach, right? Because you're hurt, you want to hurt the junta and you want to help people, and the helping people part of that component coming in the form of development aid, education initiatives, funding for capacity building programs, all that stuff is positive and very welcome. But honestly, I don't think sanctions are the answer no has ever been.
Host 1:38:10
Right. So then once the sanctions were eventually removed, within the transition period, we started to see a real flow of investors looking for opportunities and Myanmar wanting to track investments. Tell us how that went from your vantage point.
Jack Myint 1:38:29
Uh, well, I mean, even if sanctions were lifted, you know, you still had that there weren't really there wasn't so much really a period where Myanmar was entirely sanctions free. So you you have this little window in early 2016. But then right around 2017 with the clearance operations in Rakhine, right. Then we went right back into global Magnitsky. And then, so the the reputation our overall risk index for companies operating in EMR hasn't changed and change. It's, you know, it's only the degree of how bad is it? And, you know, is it less bad or worse, right? There's no, there's never a time where it's compliance clear, so to speak, just because the various, you know, nefarious activities in the dragon J trade as well as in the humanitarian violations that continued through the nrds role in office, so that there was never a time where it was, you know, reputational risk free, at the very least. Right?
Host 1:39:40
Right. So this conversation is all leading us more towards the present moment of looking at the coup, which happened in 2021. And where we're at now, the stalemate that's currently going on the violence, the egregious violation of human rights that are happening on a near Daily level the and Yugi and the resistance forces that are on the ground trying to resist the military. That's a lot to cover. And a very complicated, messy situation. So where do you want to go with that and looking at we in sharding, this conversation we've had with you now moving, I think into the fourth hour of our talks together, finally getting in to contemporary times and the current crisis, everything we've been talking about before, as background leading up to this moment. In looking at the current crisis, where we're at where we're going, where do you want to take that? What do you what what stands out for you that you you'd like to leave the listeners with about this?
Jack Myint 1:40:44
Well, that's a that's a lot to unpack. But I'll try to, you know, keep it concise and to the point. First, I would look at the immediate future, right. So in the immediate future, what are we looking at? What are our options? The you are right, we are at a stalemate, and it doesn't seem like either side is going to compromise anytime soon, and talks of any kind seem far away at this time. But you know, amidst it all, I think we need to take a step back and and look at how the scope of of conflict in Myanmar proper has changed really, you know, the dissatisfaction towards the coup and the the fact of the fact that people's voice through their votes in the 2020 general elections were not honored was wide display of dissatisfaction in the form of protests, initially peaceful millions out on the streets expressing their dissent over the military's coup. And that went on for a while until the military responded with deadly attacks, and jailing and torture killing of an arm unarmed civilians, and, you know, quite different from the ad eight scenario is that this these images were all captured in the form of pictures, video and instantly shared across all media platforms, the, you know, the movement had more names, more stories to affiliate with and the lives of young children and immediately within a matter of minutes, right, matter of hours, days, just posted and shared across the country. So that, that really, the pain with this that came with this one is more profound, I think, on our younger generation, the military as much as they may think that they can play the same rulebook that was played throughout the 90s. But they need to, you need to understand that back then Myanmar was coming out of another dictatorship of new when, during the Cold War that similarly shielded the country from the rest of the Western world, and the degree of propaganda and, you know, misinformation that can be easily manipulated, where this technology age goes beyond what the military leadership or their henchmen are really capable of. And that that's the real problem, that that's what makes this so different from from the from the 88 revolution. So, you know, you look at that and you see the gradual transition of what initially was a protest a rejection of this return to isolation and authoritarianism through, you know, poetry and prose. That's how it started really, I mean, you have people singing out on the streets, right? sides with flowers with but when that was responded with such force, and the images of that response, so deeply entrenched, especially in the younger generation, that exploded, and now we're looking at the nature of the conflict and the nature of the protest turning the ball on that route, these younger generation folks picking up on and saying, Well, we'll have to, you know, in order to get respectable response, you have to speak the only language the military understands, that is force sheer force. I once had a conversation with a former diplomat, who was conveying to me a conversation he had with some military generals, and he said, military men how do you get a military men to your military men to change their mind? And that were you put a gun to their head? Sure. But that's the nice words and a gun to their head. And the as he finished his that anecdote, the another military man interrupted, and said, No, that doesn't cut it, you'd have to pull the trigger. That's the thinking right in mind, some of the more entrenched core military mindsets, it's a very do victory. Nothing else that sort of mentality. So the nature of this, what initially was a peaceful protest turning violent, and is well, you know, they, this is their own doing the military's own doing. By not taking people's voices and desires into account. I do worry that they know the mantra of our younger generation, in the solving problems, instead of coming together through a meeting, a melding of the minds would be a more violent oriented route. And that's something that we as a nation will have to figure out and cope with and heal together through all this trauma. So that that's in the post, you know, we're in the, I guess, the rebuilding of the nation period, to look at. And, but if it is the military's intention to roll the country back into a DPRK esque form of isolation, you know, strip it to the core agricultural products for survival and purchase of weapons for security, that simply won't work. You can't put the genie back in the bottle, right? The people have some semblance of freedom for the past five years, and there is nothing, nothing that can get in the way of them doing everything they can to try to get it back, including giving their own lives. And that's a fact. And that's a, that's a reality that the military needs to start, including in their overall political math. I think they realize it too, when they realize it, too. That's why, you know, they're trying to figure out ways to find a face saving off ramp that still protects their interests still protects their political power. Because they know that they've gone too far with this one. And right now, you know, no one's willing to get past the need for retribution in the negotiation. And that can be in the form of transnational transnational justice, if they are lucky, or, you know, a Qaddafi like ending where one punch from each individual at the town center, you know, barely recognize, right, so that they the outcomes are becoming less and less narrower, I would say narrower for the military with time. And, and the biggest deficit that they have right now is in the loss of their overall moral if there was ever one, but let's just say, ideological center, there is no longer a ideological base for military recruitment anymore, right, the whole rhetoric of defenders of the nation you know, saving the country from foreign interest, the xenophobia the that that doesn't fly as much anymore not when the military is so blatantly killing civilians, their own kind, including in central Myanmar and, and carpet bombing entire civilian towns, villages, that that generation of what would normally be new military recruits. Turning to PDFs are joining teaming up with ethnic armed groups, or if they don't want to go that route, simply just leaving the country, just the outflow of young Burmese in all our groups across Myanmar leaving the country to work fine education elsewhere, is astounding over the past three years, right? In Thailand low we get an influx of seven plus million immigrants.
Host 1:50:26
Do you see any, any indication that the military is looking for an off ramp and not just fully based on the mat accumulation and consolidation of power?
Jack Myint 1:50:40
They have no choice but to look at it enough. Because it can be in the form of elections. So correlations, and one of the predictions that I've heard was that they would, they would wait out the mandate of the 2020 elections, which is supposed to be five year term. So in 2025, they will convene a new elections, and but they would still, you know, be considered ineligible or will be considered. What's the town's Oh, sorry, they will still be considered illegitimate by every sense of the word. Right. So but they know that this is not sustainable in the long run? I think that's part of the overall map.
Host 1:51:29
Why do you think they know that? I, I certainly know, that's one interpretation. But there's also and that's definitely the way I think we rationally see at this time, but there, there also is a certain kind of power hungry madness that makes up being in the upper echelons of the military. To what degree do you think they're sharing the same analysis that we're discussing here?
Jack Myint 1:51:55
The military is not good at a lot of things. They don't know a lot of things, especially if it comes to warfare as technology or economics, as we've seen through time and time again, but the one thing that they do know, it's the military, they know their military. And they know that the deficit in recruitment deficit in the ideological propaganda that they spew not sticking with their core base anymore. That is their wake up call. Right? That is a reminder that okay, while this may work for now, this is not sustainable in the long run. We were looking at 10 years 20 years of, say, more deficit in recruitments. And what is, you know, you're also looking at what is the baseline for power, that, that you're incentivizing people with for their hold on power that you're incentivizing people with his ability right now is simply the ticket to, you know, rampage conduct any activities with impunity, illegal activities with impunity. And this is the darkness the darker side of a very, already very dark military, drugs, drugs among its own servicemen. Right, and the utilization of drugs market servicemen and to either continue to do what they do and or to simply function. Right. And then they become dependent and and need to be reliant on it to maintain it, they know that is not sustainable, because no one knows military more than the military itself. And that's why I think, you know, with time, you would, they would be looking at off ramps that does not continue in this same direction, way indirection. Another factor to consider, of course, it's also China, China is very important player here, with the hole that they have on various ethnic groups in the borders, especially their borders and, and their supply of, of weapons, ammunition and financial support to these organizations. So they have a lot of say in how they operate when they operate. So the think, you know, it started off during Well, it has been boiling since the SPDC era, but it really took off during the Clinton Administration is within the military itself, a discontentment towards being subservient towards the Chinese. And that that's always been been the parliamentary mantra and and we male line that shares that sentiment. And he has, you know, said publicly and I've heard from private anecdotes of people conveying that his His outlook towards Chinese is, you know, one that is shared among the military, which is they don't like being pushed around and like being bullied. And again, these are your to understand these, you know, tough Well, men acting tough with very fragile egos. And when, yeah, when they're being pushed around they are when they feel that they're being pushed around by the Chinese and appreciate it. So having to continue to do so you'll notice that during the pain scene era, you know, the stand up for setting up to cancel means so canceling lap around Coppermine all those major Chinese projects are as a signal that, hey, we don't take orders from you, we have the West to will balance you, you'll see that sort of thinking, which at that time gain tremendous support and popularity within the military. Well, that's how I, you know, look at this right? And probably why mainlines first call was in a strong man like Putin, even though it made little geo political strategic sense, as opposed to running straight to Xi or, you know, or any Chinese leadership for that matter, right. Because of that prevailing military sentiment. So depending on you know, how, how deep or how much they have to give away concessions to the Chinese politically and economically, they'll play a big factor and and the overall growth of the revolutionary forces, I don't see that dying down anytime soon. While things may have returned to a semblance of normalcy in the, you know, in the metro Paulus, such as Yangon and Mandalay Sunday, Navy has never been a metropolis, but Navy as a capital. So I'll include an API as well for what it's worth, and Naypyidaw. But you know, everywhere else, there are attacks ongoing every day this they are at least 400 to 500 attacks expected? Well, okay. There are at least 400 founder attacks that took place over this month alone, and it's the rainy season right now. So you can imagine, you know, with the capability and sophistication and agree of these revolutionary forces gaining ground, and then you have a declining morale and Ariella ideological center within the military, and it's all about, you know, well, a kleptocracy really is what it's turned into is take whatever you can what you have your power entirely. How are you going to keep that sustainable? It is, it seems obvious, because we're obviously you know, we were not supposed to the military, and we'd like to see Myanmar return to civilian. But think of it from a military strategic perspective to can, you know, they have, I have no doubt that they have internal estimates and calculations of how long they can sustain this n in line with that timeline, they will try to deliver on a face saving off ramp. That is my prediction.
Host 1:58:31
You seem cautiously hopeful.
Jack Myint 1:58:35
I have nothing but hoped, Joe. Because if nothing else, oh, sorry. If I don't have hope I have nothing else.
Host 1:58:45
Yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's, that's that's a lot to take in. And just one last question with that we're talking about the near future and how this will play out in a more short term scenario. One of the the common topics that have come in many of our interviews, whether we're talking with someone from the energy sector, education, the economy, investment, whatever it is, we're looking at, one of the whatever perspective people are coming in with, I've heard a very familiar refrain, consistent refrain. That's come and that's that this notion that even if the democracy were to come back tomorrow, and the military would go away, whatever this sector this perspective is we're looking at, we're not talking about suddenly magically going back to how things were in the transition, which this which as we know, we're not perfect to begin with. But in many of these sectors, people are expressing concern that what the coup has done what this this period of conflict has done, has set these things back decades, even a generation depending on what it is they're looking at. So yeah, You know, as we assuming that in some future year, the military does find its off ramp and we go through another version of the transition period. What can you say in a general way of the immense challenges that are going to be facing the country and the people? In terms of what extent this current period of conflict has just set everything back just decades, even perhaps in the last century? What what are those challenges that well, will, will have to be faced for the next leadership?
Jack Myint 2:00:36
I'll start that off by saying that never underestimate the resiliency of the Myanmar people survived mortgage, and what the rest of the calculating world would otherwise have written off as how do you recover from that, and we have? We've seen well, I don't think we've seen worse, but we've seen pretty bad stuff. And we've lived through it, and we've survived it. So number one, do not estimate that. Number two, every, you know, the transition, as it were, was unique based on the circumstances at that time, we're looking at a whole new variable of circumstances and levers of power in play in this in this current scenario, which is going to develop into a a new scenario, by the time that we'll be ready to speak. So it, I think it would be naive of me to imagine or talk about a future in which the military is no longer a major stakeholder at the table, that will always be the case. And as I said earlier, you know, you're not going to drive a 250 or whatever, 300,000 troops armed group into the Andaman Sea, that's not going to happen. So for what it's worth, and for better or worse, we got to figure out a way to coexist. And we got to figure out a way to coexist in a way that the military's future role does not have one of major political or economic prominence, the trade offs that you'd have to do including on Transnational justice, and you know, that will be a tough nut to crack especially because there's so much personal cost and, and emotion, myself included, right? I'm trying to be the, you know, trying to be the more pragmatic, rational voice. But even then, the personal toll and toll that this has taken on the broader populace is, it will be very difficult, be very difficult. To go back to that scenario where we can coexist, I don't think it'll be easy to, you know, forgive and forget, maybe forgive, but to forget, I mean, generations, it would be very different. That That said, all those that I'll tell you this, a lot of at the very opening a lot of Burmese, educated abroad, making good income and on a career trajectory that are promising it by international global standards, many dropped whatever they were doing and ran back home, to serve, to serve to be part of any opening capacity that they can. And it's despite how long you've been away, that that builds that is built into us, I think, and I still have faith in that base of young educated Burmese, who would much rather be utilizing the education and their know how for the development of their own country, as opposed to whichever is their, say adopted countries at this time. So for that I have hope in and as to how, you know, we carve out a role to coexist for the military for them to be able to coexist. Perhaps page out of, you know, Indonesia's playbook, I've always thought was something that we could learn from a day there is still some degree of political and economic power. But that doesn't interfere with the power mechanisms of the government in charge, right, that the civilian government is still in control of the military to some degree, that that's necessarily an important i i Right now. You know, I think only time will tell whether we can come to that degree of solution. I don't want to say compromise because it it means someone's giving up something. So I'd say solution, mutually beneficial solution, it is going to be very difficult, very difficult, teetering on the impossible. But, as I said earlier, if I don't have hope I have nothing. And at least in my lifetime, I think we'll, we will see a return to the promise that Myanmar once showed the world. Thank you.
Host 2:05:48
Thank you, thank you for sitting down with us for this time and sharing those views. There's a lot there and really appreciate being able to have this conversation with you.
Jack Myint 2:06:00
Likewise, thanks for making the time.
Host 2:06:25
Many listeners know that in addition to running these podcast episodes, we also run a nonprofit that are Burma, which carries out humanitarian projects across Myanmar. While we regularly post about current needs and proposals from groups on the ground, we also handle emergency requests, often in matters that are quite literally life or death. When those urgent requests come in, we have no time to conduct targeted fundraisers as these funds are often needed within hours. So please consider helping us to maintain this emergency fund. We want to stress that literally any amount you can give allows us to respond more flexibly and effectively when disaster strikes. If you would like to join our mission to support those in Myanmar who are being impacted by the military coup, we welcome your contribution in any form, currency or transfer method. Your donation will go on to support a wide range of humanitarian immediate missions, aiding those local communities post donations are directed to such causes as the Civil Disobedience movement CDM families of deceased victims, internally displaced person IDP camps, food for impoverished communities, military defection campaigns, undercover journalists, refugee camps, monasteries and nunneries education initiatives, the purchasing of protective equipment and medical supplies COVID relief and more. We also make sure that our donation Fund supports a diverse range of religious and ethnic groups across the country. We invite you to visit our website to learn more about past projects as well as upcoming needs. You can give a general donation or earmark your contribution to a specific activity or project you would like to support. Perhaps even something you heard about in this very episode. All of this humanitarian work is carried out by our nonprofit mission better Burma. Any donation you give on our insight Myanmar website is directed towards this fun. Alternatively, you can also visit the better Burma website better burma.org and donate directly there. In either case, your donation goes to the same cause in both websites except credit card. You can also give via PayPal by going to paypal.me/better Burma. Additionally, we can take donations through Patreon Venmo GoFundMe and Cash App. Simply search better Burma on each platform and you'll find our account. You can also visit either website for specific links to these respective accounts or email us at info at better burma.org. That's better Burma. One word spelled T T E R B URM a.org. If you'd like to get another way, please contact us. We also invite you to check out our range of handicrafts that are sourced from vulnerable artists and communities across Myanmar. Available at a local crafts.com Any purchase will not only support these artists and communities, but also our nonprofits wider mission. That's aloka crafts spelled A L O K A C R A F T S one word alokacrafts.com Thank you so much for your kind consideration and support.