Transcript: Episode #194: Presumed Guilty (Bonus Shorts)
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 0:25
If this is your first time listening to our podcast, welcome. Our programming brings a diversity of voices connected to Myanmar to share their perspectives, thoughts and reflections about what has been happening there since the military coup in 2021. All of our guests share one thing in common, a deep personal stake in the ongoing crisis. And it is an honor for us to be able to bring their voices into your ear buds. But however difficult it may be to hear some of their stories, we hope that you will come away with a deeper and more nuanced understanding of what is happening there.
Host 2:12
And welcome back. My guest today is going to be helping us look at a number of different dimensions of the deteriorating situation with the Myanmar both since the coup but also with a bit of a view to the past and a bit of the view to the future as well. But before we get into the many, many different topics that we're going to be covering today, I'd like to invite you to introduce yourself for our guests, Manny, thank you for coming.
Manny Maung 2:37
Thank you. My name is Manny Maung. I'm the Myanmar researcher with Human Rights Watch.
Host 2:43
Excellent. And in that capacity, what do you really do? How do you get your information?
Manny Maung 2:52
That's a really good question. So you know, at the moment, there are many challenges, because obviously, Myanmar is no longer considered an open country, it's fairly closed, in that there's rolling internet outages, communications shutdowns, like mobile phones not working in many areas. And it's really not easy to be able to travel from one place to another anymore. So really, we rely on, obviously, our own contacts. But a lot of the work now has moved towards digital verification processes, but also testimony, which is the bread and butter of my work.
Host 3:41
Okay, so you would say you'd be getting a lot of firs-thand accounts and information from people within the country?
Manny Maung 3:51
Yeah, definitely. My sole purpose really is to make sure that I'm getting interviews with people who've been affected by the coup, any survivors from attacks, first-hand witnesses, all of this combined, creates a picture that we can then disseminate.
Host 4:17
Let's start with a major dimension of this, and that is the changes that have been made within the legal framework itself. What is the experience of people going through the legal process, such as it is today under the military, compared to going through the legal process under regular policing prior to the coup?
Manny Maung 4:39
So many parts of the country are under martial law, which changes of course, the way in which, people accused or civilians accused of committing crimes are tried. What it means is that the military is then trying or determining cases about civilians in a very closed court, that's not open for scrutiny. And the defendants are unable to get access to fair trial rights, for example., they don't even have a lawyer who can represent them. So a lot of it is arbitrary. And along with these types of changes to the way in which civilians are tried in a court, they're often also tried in prisons in these makeshift courts called special courts. And there's very few lawyers who are able to go inside these prisons and act on their defense. So basically, everything in Myanmar is now really determined by the junta's decision, either in a military capacity or with their decisions that are being made in civilian courts. Can't really say that that's fair, and aligned with international standards of due jurisprudence.
Host 6:09
So let's look into that a little bit more specifically. So the Burmese legal system, the system of justice, I presume, as it would be the case in most former colonies would have been heavily based on on the British system of justice. So our view as Westerners or Anglo Saxon Westerners is typically that we're looking at a system where you have access to pro bono legal counsel, if you're not able to afford counsel, you're you have access to a lawyer, if you want one present during questioning and to advocate for you during your trial. And you have a trial by jury which is open to the public. How much of that is accurate for the Myanmar legal system prior to the coup?
Manny Maung 6:53
So Myanmar never had a jury, it's always been adjudicated by a judge. That hasn't changed. We still have also a colonial-era penal code in effect, and that's still applied under the legal structures. But what is different is that some of these punishments under the Penal Code have been extended. And since the coup, the military has also made a lot of changes to the laws. And they've bypassed parliamentary processes and ignored their own rules under the Constitution in which to enact laws by arbitrarily approving them. And this all comes down to one person who finds a way and it's Min Aung Hlaing. So he is using the 2008 constitution as an excuse to arbitrarily enforce the laws which, deem to legitimize the junta.
Host 8:02
It's very difficult to evaluate this in terms of normal international standards of law, because we're so outside of the bounds of normal international practices for a legal system that it's difficult to even find a reference point for comparison....
Manny Maung 8:27
I think we have to stop trying to compare. I mean basically, the military authorities are imposing these systematic obstacles for both lawyers and the defendants who are accused of committing crimes, and the sole purpose of that is just to fast track politically sensitive cases. So it's clear that these courts and these laws that they are introducing violate all the things that we're used to, like fair trial rights and due process, but I think we've got to stop comparing what the military is doing, in terms of the usual rights that we enjoy, just because none of this is happening in Myanmar! And I hate to say it, because I, you know, I really think this term is a bit over coined, overused, but really, the rule of law has collapsed in Myanmar. The institutions that were holding them up and developing it so that it could continue on its path for Democracy has been dismantled. There are some very heroic lawyers who are trying to push back and maintain the rights that they know that Myanmar people deserve. But when you see the systematic obstacles of the structures being attacked, and then the lawyers themselves also being harassed, detained, tortured and killed just like everybody else, I think we can say that it doesn't exist anymore.
Host 10:09
Okay, so then not framing this in terms of contrast to a standard legal system, let's just look at a hypothetical; Let's say, we have a person who has been detained off the street by military or paramilitary or police or whatever it is this week, and an allegation has been made that this person is in some way connected to the people's Defence Force. What steps can this person anticipate? And what protections can this person rely upon?
Manny Maung 10:42
So it would firstly depend on where this person has been picked up, and also where this person has been accused of committing the crime. If either of those places happen to be under martial law, then that person can expect to be taken into a military detention center and face a military tribunal. Without access to a lawyer and without access to any type of defense. We have no visibility on what goes on in those military tribunals. And they are the ones that are responsible for determining life sentences and death sentences. So for example., in areas like Shwepyitha in Yangon, all of Chin State, parts of Sagaing Region you can expect to be taken by military authorities and then face a military tribunal. Now, if you're picked up in other parts of Yangon or Mandalay, where there are no martial law restrictions in place, then you may just be taken to a normal prison facility. But depending on the conditions, and depending on whether the courts or the normal civilian courts are in operation, you can also expect to be tried in the prison in a makeshift courtroom. You may be allowed to see your lawyer once before your trial for 15 minutes, but you don't have any ability to see them one on one without someone else in the room listening to your conversation. And what I'm being told is quite often the lawyers are not even able to see their clients until the day of the trial, if at all. So even now, from when I wrote my report in June looking into this, many of the rules have changed again. And I'm hearing that it's getting even more difficult for lawyers to access the courtroom to defend their person on the day of the trial.
Wow! So an individual could be expected to attempt to defend themselves, pro se, with no legal training at all?
I don't think they would be given the opportunity to be honest with you. So generally speaking, the lawyers who I've spoken to say that they're not allowed to present a defense because it can be seen as contempt of court if they're challenging the adjudicating judge. And so what ends up happening is they're bartering or asking for clemency on the conviction that their client may receive. Now that it's getting even harder for lawyers to go into the courtroom, I think the defendants can expect to get the strongest sentencing possible for whatever they're accused of.
Host 14:01
It is just the absurdity of the concept of barring a lawyer from a courtroom!
Manny Maung 14:10
Well, it's not so different from what happened under the Than Swe government. So in the 60s, when there was the first military, well some would say second, but when Than Swe took over, it's not so different. They dismantled the existing courts, they arrested the judges and the Supreme Court judges, and then they began to instill their own people into these positions. And so, historically, the legal profession in Myanmar has never been very respected because it has always seemed to be in the mouth of the military. And so since the changes that were taking place from about 2010, there's been real effort to develop and train many of the lawyers who were Myanmar to understand more about the international standards, and bring the laws into line with international standards. And, of course, this included judges as well, but what we're seeing now is really a reversal of all the developments that have been happening in the last decade. And in some cases what I found to be happening to the legal system, and to lawyers now, again, in the 80s, as well, and in the 90s, this is not unusual. So the special courts or these makeshift courts that are in the prisons, I think they used to call them people's courts, and that was in the 90s, they did this as well; the way that they've attacked the legal systems, and the way that they're removing fair trial rights, it's all just circular and happening again.
Host 16:23
But it's still kind of depressing, like, Than Swe or Nay Win, these should not be the yardstick of justice. It's kind of sad if we have to say, oh, yeah, but it's just like that time.
Manny Maung 16:37
But It's the same military that is perpetuating these crimes so I'm not so surprised.
Host 16:44
Yeah. So you mentioned martial law and this distinction between areas that are under martial law and areas that are not under martial law. Now, you also said that the major cities are not under martial law. So how has that evolved? Because I do recall, in March of 2021, or possibly April of 2021, they imposed martial law in six of the townships of Yangon, and I think also in six of the townships of Mandalay. Have those been lifted since?
Manny Maung 17:17
No, so it's part of the major cities that are under martial law and in Yangon, I think there are still six, but actually, in Mandalay region, they've been lifted. So ultimately, it doesn't really make any difference, because if you're going to get picked up and held in military detention, you really don't know what's going to happen to you. And even with these prisoner amnesties, and things that the military likes to make a show of every few months, there are people who have been released from prisons in those amnesties who tell me they have no idea why they were released. And they have no idea why they would have been even put there in the first place. So it's all fairly arbitrary, and again, the decision making processe is not sensible. It's just the military acting in a way that is meant to chill the dissent or any anti-coup activities. The way they do this is by being really unpredictable.
Host 18:42
And so what is the basis legally speaking for martial law? Is that them just making a declaration or is there at least some notional right to impose martial law by the military?
Manny Maung 18:56
Well, they're using the Constitution as an excuse, basically, under that clause for Min Aung Hlaing is allowed to enforce a state of emergency. And what he's done is every six months extend that state of emergency. Although I'm also told, and other people will know this better than me, but the state of emergency clause is only there to be renewed two times, and then there must be a general election. But now we've seen it be extended for a fourth time. And that's basically the clause that is being used to justify all of this. So under the state of emergency the military can enforce martial law. It's really interesting to note that they are very adamant to use the portrayal or the imaging of using legal parameters to justify what they do. And I think it goes to show that they do think of them seriously, they want to be taken seriously. Trying to even pretend that there's like a veneer of something legal to their actions is indicative of how desperate they are to be seen as credible in the eyes of the international community.
Host 20:20
I definitely want to move on to that in a little bit, because I want to talk about these sham elections and why they're so obsessed with it. But just on the legal stuff before we move on, a couple of things that I think are important to clarify, one being habeas corpus. Is there any system like if you are picked up currently in Myanmar, does anyone know where you are or have you effectively fallen into a black hole?
Manny Maung 20:54
Yes, in most cases, and we we know that at least there have been 24,000 people arrested since the coup. There's an NGO called the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners who has been trying to monitor arrests and convictions. But again, this is at least, so we assume that the numbers are far higher of people who have either slipped through the network or haven't been recorded or have been, in some cases, disappeared. So really, NGOs like the AAPP that are tracking arrests and detentions really rely on family members and people within the community to let them know if their loved one is missing or has been arrested or was seen in police custody the last time they were seen publicly. I think it's fair to say that these numbers are not indicative of the true numbers of people who've been arrested and taken away.
Host 22:14
I know from when we spoke previously that the lawyers have, although you've just said that the lawyers have historically been viewed by Myanmar society as puppets of the regime, that post coup, the lawyers have been essential as a conduit between the victims of what we can very euphemistically referred to as a legal system and their friends and the families on the outside. How have the lawyers as a community been faring under military rule?
Manny Maung 22:46
That's a really good question and I'm really glad you asked that, because people don't tend to think of lawyers as human beings who are under a lot of stress and pressure right now. I don't think that they're faring well at all, part of my research found that lawyers themselves are being harassed, surveilled, their families are being harassed and surveilled. If you are defending people who have been accused of crimes like sedition or treason or terrorism, then the military basically views you as being somehow implicated in the crimes that the defendant is being accused of. So in some cases, we found that these advocates or High Court lawyers who are able to defend clients, they themselves were being arrested as they left the courtrooms and their crime would have been to defend, possibly, a high ranking member of parliament or a member of the National League for Democracy. It's pretty clear that the military sees them also as part of this anti-coup movement.
Host 24:16
Okay, so it's not just that the military have made it difficult for lawyers to be able to advocate for their clients mechanically by barring them from access and barring them from the courtroom, but it's also trying to impose a chilling effect by targeting lawyers who do try to stand up and defend their clients.
Manny Maung 24:37
Exactly, and it's very difficult for lawyers to operate under these conditions as it is, but then added to that are the challenges of having to go into a prison setting to defend your client, having guns pointed at you as you go to your work every day, it's been extremely taxing on them.
Host 25:08
That's horrific. So let's look at a very unusual and atypical case here. Very recently, we were told that Aung San Suu Kyi and President Win Myint had the charges, although not charges amounting to a particularly significant number of years of incarceration compared to all the rest, but had a number of charges dropped against them. Also that Aung San Suu Kyi had been moved to house arrest. Previously Aung San Suu Kyi's lawyers were a very important conduit between her and the outside world, the military clamped down on that. And we've heard little from Aung San Suu Kyi just because the military have kept her on the wraps. I know, this calls for conjecture, but do you think that Aung San Suu Kyi is going to be in a position to be able to address the public anytime soon or will she continue to be kept under lock and key?
Manny Maung 26:03
I doubt she will be given the opportunity to speak to anyone. I don't think it's very likely that she'll be making public speeches considering that she's also been kept away from daily communications with just other people who might be coming and going. The shaving of the convictions shouldn't be mistaken for any real change to the human rights situation in Myanmar. I think Aung San Suu Kyi had like six years shaved from her 33 year conviction, and President Win Myint had just four years shaved off his 12 year convictions. The convictions were also completely bogus. I just don't see that as any real change towards the human rights situation in Myanmar at all. It's unlikely that the military would allow her to speak publicly, because what they want to do is avoid any groundswell or morale that could be gained from it for the people of Myanmar.
Host 27:25
This seems to be so emblematic. For those who are not familiar for a very long time Myanmar had this practice of annual waves of amnesties for prisoners, where sentences would be reduced or some people would be released, typically not political prisoners, but a lot of other prisoners. And there is a big push on the part of the military to look good. Like this is a subject of countless Burmese memes, very similar to the people who sell sparrows for people to release for good karma only for those same people to go out and then recapture those sparrows so that they can sell those sparrows again. It's a performative act of releasing, while then going around behind the scenes and recapturing people achieving nothing. Why does the military keep up this pretense when everyone can see through it?
Manny Maung 28:23
Yeah, it is very cynical, and I guess my cynical response is that they release all these people so that they can make room for more people to be arrested. I mean, what we see generally is the amnesties are usually timed around key dates of Buddhist holidays. Sometimes the junta has said that the releases are based on humanitarian grounds. And I think when they shaved the sentences off Aung San Suu Kyi and Win Myint, they also cited humanitarian grounds for doing so. They also released about 8000 other prisoners, the same time of the announcement in early August, but what we found is that most of these prisoners were due for release already. So they had already spent the majority of their convictions in prison anyway. And the data suggests that basically only a small fraction of those released are political prisoners. When we think about the number of prisoners right now who have been detained since the coup, over 24,000, I would consider all of them political prisoners, because they have all pretty much been arrested due to their anti-coup activities.
Host 30:01
It's unsuprising, but it's at the same time does the military hope that this is actually going to buy them some positive PR, either domestically or abroad?
Manny Maung 30:13
I think it does in some circles. And I think it's just a ruse that they can say, look at what we did andhere is an example of a small act of kindness. Basically, the day after Min Aung Hlaing extended the six months state of emergency, they announced the reduced sentences of Aung San Suu Kyi and Win Myint the next day, and they released these prisoners. It's just an act to deflect any international scrutiny, particularly from the regional partners, ASEAN partner countries, who may have wanted to have a strong word with them. It's just a way to deflate the negative feedback that they might get. So it is a ruse, it does seem to work sometimes. And this is the problem, because again and again, I think that we give far too much store to the small acts, and there just isn't unified and coordinated pressure from the regional countries; they keep buying into this and they keep allowing it to be excuses.
Host 31:48
And like on that same sort of note, the election, which you mentioned has been put off. Do you have any insight into what the military is hoping to accomplish with these elections? Because these elections are, under the rules that the military have put out, laughable. You can't register as a political party unless you put a significant donation into the military's pocket, and unless you open and maintain officers in very unstable and unsafe townships and all these absurd things. No one in the country would take this election seriously, and no one internationally would take it seriously. It's already been preemptively condemned by a large number of countries abroad. Why is the military continuing with this ruse?
Manny Maung 32:41
Unfortunately, I disagree with you there. I do think that there are some countries that are willing to take it seriously. I'll answer your first question about why they want to extend the the state of emergency. It's because they don't have a grips on stability yet. There's still a lot of popular dissent and obviously resistance and armed resistance against the military. So I think what they wanting to do is have another six months to really go hard, increase their air and ground attacks and try to force stability in regions that are not stable. So parts of Sagaing, and parts of Chin State, parts of the southeast in Myanmar. Then I think what they're going to do is really focused on the parts of Myanmar where they do have more of a grip. So you know, the parts of Yangon, Mandalay, even parts of Rakhine, where they've traditionally had a really strong grip. I just don't see that it's going to be easy for them. However, I am really concerned about other countries like Japan, India, China, who are supporting the military's rhetoric to go ahead with these elections. We know that India has provided some technology to start collecting biometric data. The military has started to apparently collect its own census and pilot trials. And it has digitized a lot of the personal details of Myanmar's voting public from the previous census. So all of this, in a way, moving towards increased surveillance, increased digital surveillance, and also questions around the citizenship rights of minority groups. If we're really concerned about things like statelessness of the Rohingya, and the lack of ability under Myanmar laws to gain citizenship, I think it's going to further exacerbate those concerns. But also, it's really worrying, I've been told from some ASEAN countries, that should Myanmar decide to hold elections, they would send short and long term election observers to monitor and provide some kind of support. So unfortunately, I don't think it's universal that everyone would see these sham elections to be just another act of the military trying to regain power.
Host 36:09
I definitely take your point and I absolutely share the concerns when it comes to countries specifically the ASEAN countries and India and China. I get the feeling that these countries are looking for an excuse to legitimize a regime that they know is unlawful, but beneficial to them.
Manny Maung 36:30
Yeah exactly, and regionally we are seeing a rise in authoritarianism, and why would they be motivated to criticize the military when many of these countries have themselves not had exactly democratic transitions from one power to another. So it's a way to deflect scrutiny on themselves as well. What we're seeing is that they are more reluctant than other countries to be vocal about their criticism.
Host 37:06
This just leads me to a topic that I've spent a lot of time pondering since the coup, and forgive me if this is far too abstract and philosophical, but what is the essence of legitimacy? What makes something legitimate if the elections were to be held as false as we know ahead of time that they would be? If these elections were accepted by the regional community as though they were real, does that effectively legitimize the military dictatorship? Is there any way to supersede the opinions of these countries and these governments and forced their hand to say you can't acknowledge an election that you know was carried out fraudulently?
Manny Maung 37:53
That's a really hard question, because as I said that there has been a rise of authoritarianism in Asia. But under the current circumstances there's no way that, under the junta and junta's elections, could we say any of that was free or fair or at least credible. We need real participation from the public, we need real participation from a myriad of political parties, and I will take it seriously if the military returns Myanmar to civilian democratic rule. If they want to hold new elections, and they allow it to be under a civilian democratic process, then I will take that seriously. But if the junta is going to organize the elections, collect the census data, collect the voter registration data, and run the whole thing by themselves, then of course not. Ultimately this whole political parties registration law is a way to remove any real competition. They, in effect, want to install their own single state party, so to speak. Any of these parties that are running right now are either proxy parties for the junta or in cohort with them. So I don't see that it's a real competitive process in anyway.
Host 39:33
Unfortunately, that is already the model that we see in Laos and that we see in Vietnam and we see in Cambodia. So a lot of friends in the area. This broadens up the topic of discussion to the international duty and the international responsibility here. We both seem to be of the view that ASEAN, India and China, for their part are not particularly interested in decisively unseating a military dictatorship in Myanmar. They actually positively see some advantage to that. And even those within ASEAN who have more democratic leanings, the Malaysian foreign minister Saifuddin Abdullah, back before he his party lost power, did a lot within ASEAN to advocate for genuine democracy and a genuine return to the rule of law. But they just seem to be drowned out by a culture within ASEAN of not rocking the boat, and not directly interfering in other nation's affairs. And I know this is such a broad, blank-slate question to ask, but what is the international community's responsibility? Who should be stepping up, if anyone? And what is it that they should be doing, if anything?
Manny Maung 40:54
That's a really good question, again. Some people would say that international pressures such as sanctions are not working and I would say that targeted sanctions were never meant to be a silver bullet they're just another tool that we can use to create more pressure. A really good example of that are the sanctions imposed by the United States on the two of the state banks in Myanmar. What that means is, those banks are no longer allowed to receive or transfer revenue in US dollars anymore. That has really spooked countries like Singapore, who have mainly provided the backing for many of the banks in Myanmar. It's had a knock-on effect that's been positive, and it's forced Singapore to respond with its own restrictions where it has frozen the accounts that are suspected to be in use for military. It has restricted transactions of those individuals in Myanmar, who may be some way involved with business ties to the military as well. So I think we are slowly seeing those effects, but there are other things like the sanctioning of Myanmar oil and gas enterprise that we haven't seen, which would cut billions of dollars in revenue to the military. It would really restrict their ability to purchase weapons from countries like China and India and Russia. We've seen recently again, by the United States, restrictions on aviation fuel, but Canada is the only other country to have full restrictions on the purchasing and supply of aviation fuel. So again, we just need to see those restrictions being tightened, strengthened and supported by other countries like the European Union block, the UK, Australia, India and Japan. It may be naive to think that a lot of these countries will come and join the sanctions, but I think that the more the pressure builds, the military is really going to feel the heat. Ultimately, what we're trying to do is cripple their ability to purchase goods that are then used to attacked their own civilian populations. I'm actually not as cynical about this. I think that eventually it'll work. It's just a question of how long can people in Myanmar hold out. There are very real world concerns about the ability for Myanmar people to have access to livelihoods, have access to food, we have a quarter of the population who are facing real food shortages, and I think something like 18 million people in need of humanitarian aid. So the longer that other countries and other governments continue to hesitate, the longer it works in the favor of the military. That is what we're trying to stop. We're trying to shorten the amount of time that it takes for governments to pressure the military.
Host 44:51
So I'm glad that you're not pessimistic when it comes to sanctions, mostly because I am so I'd like to hear a bit more about a potential path to success for sanctions. Because we've interviewed people with regards to jet fuel, we've interviewed people with regards to MOGE (Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise) and petrochemical supplies. It seems to be the case that as far as Myanmar is concerned, things like MOGE, even if it were sanctioned, it wouldn't necessarily achieve much because the majority of the revenue from MOGE is coming from places like Thailand. When it comes to sanctions, I think of North Korea. I remember this interview with a former North Korean agent who basically said that, 'well, you know, I can be sanctioned, but I can just legally change my name'. Companies can be can be dissolved and can be founded, and new legal entities can exist outside of sanctions. When we have these highly targeted sanctions, I always think that sanction busting and sanctions skirting doesn't seem to be that difficult. We did an interview recently about illegal teak exports, and how easy it was for people trading in teak to effectively launder a very large physical commodity with a manifest and say, 'Oh, no, this is not Myanmar teak or this is not post-coup teak. This is some totally different teak that comes from some mythical other country that has a massive teak export business'. And people will buy it, people will believe it. So this is my question, what do you think is the pathway for sanctions imposed by Western countries to be effective in shutting the military off from its revenue streams?
Manny Maung 46:43
Yeah, at the end of it I don't think targeted sanctions are the only way. It's a tool that we can add on to create pressure and ultimately, what this shows is that there's a lack of enforcement. There's a lack of coordination, you're absolutely right. The European Union can put in, and has done for many years, sanctions in place for Myanmar hardwood, but we also know that the EU is possibly the second or third largest export target for Myanmar teak. The reason why is because the European Union may announced the sanctions, but it's up to those member states to enforce that law. And that's where we're finding the gaps and the loopholes that people can circumnavigate around. Just to be clear, sanctions circumventing is a massive crime and there are individuals who've been persecuted for it. At the end of the day, it's making it as difficult as possible for the exchange of monies and revenues, and escalating that risk for financial partners who are doing business with Myanmar. It's really an exercise to isolate the Myanmar military and their business partners as much as possible. I don't think that we have really used all the tools that we have; we haven't seen the UN Security Council put in a global arms embargo, which is enforceable, we haven't seen them even refer the Myanmar's situation to the International Criminal Court. Why, I don't know. We haven't seen these sanctions on MOGE as we would like to. And I think that at least that would send a very strong message to the banks, and the insurers who provide things like insurance for aviation cargo fuel. Coordinated effort from the international governments is not being done in a way that creates that maximum pressure on Myanmar right now. It's a bit too slow, but I don't think that it's impossible to get there and I don't think it's too late to adopt measures that will work. We've got the G20 coming up, ASEAN Summit coming up, and there needs to be some tough conversations about what they're going to do to hold Myanmar accountable.
Host 49:34
I want to go back because you mentioned the United Nations. I don't know whether your expertise extends to the United Nations, mine definitely does not, but my understanding is that as a result of Russia and China, both being permanent members of the Security Council, the United Nations is hamstrung.
Manny Maung 49:59
Yeah, if there are any referrals for Myanmar to have a resolution where there is a huge global arms embargo on dual-use of arms, this would make a significant difference to the way that the military can respond to the anti-coup movement. We do know that the military is producing a lot of their own weapons, and jerry-rigging a lot of the manufacturing parts that got into Myanmar legitimately and using against civilians. There's no one magic solution that's going to solve this. We have a really despotic leadership in the military where, if you've removed Min Aung Hlaing from that equation, there is somebody else to step into his place. We're going to have a similar, if not worse situation, because they've been building and cultivating this entity to be a dictatorial rulership. So we need to respond in kind, I don't think just getting rid of Min Aung Hlaing will fix everything. I think there's somebody else in place who can come in and create even more of a crisis. It's about making sure that the military cannot keep on succeeding in keeping Myanmar people oppressed and prevent them from gaining what they want, which is a democracy. That's all people in Myanmar have ever asked for and that has been consistently denied to them by subsequent military leadership.
Host 52:06
Absolutely! This is a very hot button issue so I'd understand if you don't have an opinion or if you don't want to comment on this, but do you have a view on the potential value of sending what's being termed "lethal aid" to the resistance movement?
Manny Maung 52:24
I can't support that, and Human Rights Watch doesn't support or not support armed resistance. It's more about the fact that would these people who are receiving that type of aid, understand the laws of war? If they're going to take up arms, are they abiding by the principles under international humanitarian law? Are they ensuring that they're not committing crimes themselves? That's the key so I don't believe it's a panacea, and we have to be really careful with the way we treat that.
Host 53:12
I think that's very fair and a very measured attitude to take to it. Although, I do find it the way that you phrased it, like," if they take up arms" to which my response is to say, you would be aware of this as well, that many of them already have taken up arms.
Manny Maung 53:34
And many haven't and there are other ways to have resistance too.
Host 53:39
Yeah! I think that's fair. Talking about the deterioration of the situation across the country, and you've mentioned previously that it's a question of how long can the people hold on, let's turn to one of the more dire examples of this. The Rohingya community have been famously hard hit. This Myanmar military, apparently, since its inception, have had a particular hatred of the Rohingya, and we saw six years ago a massive migration of people out of the country sheerly for survival. How has the fate of the Rohingya and the circumstances of the people changed since the coup? Has there been any amelioration of their plight?
Manny Maung 54:36
Unfortunately, I think it's a pretty bleak future for for Rohingya who are in both Bangladesh and Myanmar. We still have a million people in camps in Bangladesh who are unable to go home and living in semi-permanent housing that was meant to last only a year or two. It's been six years already where very little has been done in the way of recognizing their right to citizenship in Myanmar, and certainly the situation now doesn't help improve the conditions for Rohingya who are also in the country. We've determined that they're living in apartheid conditions in Myanmar and if any Rohingya who are forced or coerced or choose to come back to Myanmar, would be returning to those apartheid conditions. It's clear that they're trapped on both sides, and there really hasn't been any justice done for their plight. So we failed them, and it's even worse for Rohingya because they are stateless. I think that the coup obviously, we all saw, some recognition from parties that the Rohingya really unnecessarily suffered, and that the denial of their existence was made worse in Myanmar, by people refusing to acknowledge that they're part of the community and the fabric. I think this is the mistake that we can ameliorate, we can have a progression where Myanmar is returned to the people and have a democracy. That doesn't include 25% seats to the Myanmar military in Parliament. I think there's more of a willingness to engage, particularly with the younger generations, about the abuses and the crimes that they may have unwittingly being complicit to. And I think that is a really good starting point for healing and accessing justice, but also making sure that it's a much more inclusive society.
Host 57:18
That's, to use a poetic turn of phrase, the Promised Land, as it were, that everyone wants to move towards. Do you have in your mind, a pathway from where the country is now to stable democratic country governed by the rule of law, and the respect for different ethnic groups, different religious groups and different cultural groups? How do you envision that process occurring, if you have any idea of how it's likely to happen?
Manny Maung 58:03
I don't think I'm the right person to talk about that. You'd need someone who has been fighting the fight much longer. Perhaps it's someone who's part of an ethnic group in Myanmar, or one of the women's rights groups in Myanmar. Having left the country when I was a very small child, I returned as an adult and chose to live there. I got there when it was at a point where there was a lot of hope. And there was a lot of treasures that people could access; educational development, finally be connected with the international communities because they've been isolated for so long. And I think that I hold on to that, because I've got there at a time when people have forgotten about Myanmar. People had forgotten about this place in Southeast Asia that everyone just assumed would be a draconian military dictatorship forevermore. But it was just such a time of vision, and I think that we can get there again, so I'm not willing to let that go completely yet. Myanmar will have a lot of problems. You have a generation now that is very used to extreme violence, let alone talk about the trauma and the types of violence that they've been exposed to. But there's also some hope in starting from the beginning, again. Perhaps if we can actually move towards somewhere that doesn't have the military as part of that underlying fabric of society, I think we can get to a better place.
Host 1:00:16
Do you think this is something that can happen in Myanmar in isolation? Or is this something that really needs to happen regionally?
Manny Maung 1:00:28
I think regionally, we need the support and we need that political will to help push out the military from those governance structures. But at the same time, I think that the Myanmar people can do it on their own, they are doing it on their own, and they've shown that they're willing to keep going on their own. So they just need that help to get there.
Host 1:00:56
I think it's a very uplifting note to be on.
Manny Maung 1:01:03
I can't do my job if I'm completely pessimistic all the time, and I won't lie, it gets really dark some days. But I know that there are people still in Myanmar who are continuing to fight for something that they believe in, which is to just be able to enjoy their freedoms. And I think we all have the responsibility to at least share some of that and ensure that we're doing what we can so that they can get there.
Host 1:01:39
I agree with that wholeheartedly. I agree that it can get dark, the depths of depravity that the military can visit on the civilian population is shocking. I'm sure you've been exposed to far worse than I have in your work, but I agree, it's that motivation to do something for those people who are trying to live without having to pay an existence tax a dictatorship that sees them as slaves. And I think it's very commendable. We've covered a lot of different topics, the conflict and potential prospects for the future, and I want to thank you for discussing those. By convention, we finish our episodes by inviting the guests to share with the listeners thoughts or some message that you would like the listeners to take to heart and mull over as they go on about their days. So if there's any particular message that you would like everyone to ponder, I'd like to invite you to share that with them now.
Manny Maung 1:02:55
That was a nice surprise that you just launched there on me. I guess, don't take your rights lightly. Express your rights in the way of civil disobedience. If a government or if a political party tells you it has to be one way and you wholeheartedly disagree, then make sure you've voiced that. I think that Australians sometimes have a very good lifestyle and tend to not want to take part in civic duties, but really, those rights can be taken away from you at any given moment, and I don't think you should take them for granted. So just make sure to take part in it because people are dying just for the right to have that.
Host 1:03:57
After today's discussion, it should be clear to everyone just how dire the current situation is in Myanmar. We're doing our best to shine a light on the ongoing crisis, and we thank you for taking the time to listen. If you found today's talk of value, please consider passing it along to friends in your network. And please also consider letting them know that there is now a way to give the support to the most vulnerable and to those who are especially impacted by the military's organized state terror. Any donations given to our nonprofit mission Better Burma will go to the vulnerable communities being impacted by the coup. If you would like to join in 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 to support a wide range of humanitarian and media missions, aiding those local communities who need it most. 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, and the donation you give on our Insight Myanmar website is directed towards this fund. Alternatively, you can also visit the Better Burma website betterburma.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/betterburma. 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@betterburma.org. That's One word, spelled betterburma.org. If you'd like to give it 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 alokacrafts.com Any purchase will not only support these artists and communities, but also our nonprofits wider mission. That's spelled one word at alokacrafts.com Thank you so much for your kind consideration and support.