Arakan, a tiny coastal
land fenced in by the Arakan Yoma mountain range to the east and neighboured by
Bangladesh and the Bay of Bengal to the west, is on fragile political ground
due to conflict between the Myanmar armed forces and the Arakan Army. As of between December 1, 2019
and April 15, 2020, prominent side effects of the hostilities include more than
160,000 people displaced (IDPs), 406 injured and 336 deaths in Arakan and Chin
states, according to the local NGO Burma Monitor. Other tangible consequences
include a lingering internet shutdown, restrictions on domestic and
international media and humanitarian assistance, governance breakdowns and
travel limitations, while intangible repercussions are numerous, from the growth
of hatred and distrust toward the government and military to feelings of
insecurity, and uncertain futures politically, economically, and societally.
Arakan has long lived under different tyrannical regimes, since the 1962 military coup by General Ne Win and arguably through President U Thein Sein’s military-backed administration (2011-16). Successive governments wielded despotic powers unheeding of the rule of law, and procedural and substantive accountability. Today both State and non-State actors (the latter being primarily the Arakan Army) compete for power over populations and territories in Arakan State, particularly in the northern half of the region.
The Functions of State
In his 2004 book “State-Building,” the prominent political scientist Francis Fukuyama breaks down the two dimensions of the State, calling them ‘Strength of the State’ and ‘Scope of the State,’ while the latter is further divided into three sub-sectors of functionality: 1) minimal functions 2) intermediate functions and 3) activist functions. In Fukuyama’s view, the three categories of State functions are as follows:
Arakan has long lived under different tyrannical regimes, since the 1962 military coup by General Ne Win and arguably through President U Thein Sein’s military-backed administration (2011-16). Successive governments wielded despotic powers unheeding of the rule of law, and procedural and substantive accountability. Today both State and non-State actors (the latter being primarily the Arakan Army) compete for power over populations and territories in Arakan State, particularly in the northern half of the region.
The Functions of State
In his 2004 book “State-Building,” the prominent political scientist Francis Fukuyama breaks down the two dimensions of the State, calling them ‘Strength of the State’ and ‘Scope of the State,’ while the latter is further divided into three sub-sectors of functionality: 1) minimal functions 2) intermediate functions and 3) activist functions. In Fukuyama’s view, the three categories of State functions are as follows:
Minimal functions:
Functions
|
Intermediate
Functions
|
Activist
|
1. Providing pure public goods policy
2. Defense, law and order distribution
3. Property rights
4. Macroeconomic management
5. Public health
6. Improving equality
7. Protecting the poor
|
1) Addressing externalities
2) Education, Environment
3) Regulating monopoly
4) Social insurance
5) Insurance, financial regulation
6) Overcoming imperfect education
|
1) Industrial
2) Wealth
|
Myanmar (then Burma) may have had a large State scope under the Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP) government (1962-88), but its scope was trimmed back under the two decades of military rule that followed (1988-2010). The post-2010 governments are still trying to address State deficiencies in all three sectors. More importantly, the strength of the State in Myanmar is comparatively faint. Even the main law-enforcing actor, the Myanmar Army, is able to master just 50% of the territory ostensibly under its domain.
Being the second-poorest region in Myanmar after the contiguous Chin State, with nearly 70% of the population living in poverty, the people of Arakan harbour resentment toward the Nay Pyi Taw government. Two consecutive general election victories for Arakan State’s leading ethnic political party were followed by a rejection of their claim to have earned the right to form the state government. Historical grievances are made more galling by material poverty, with all these factors boosting the Arakan Army and the nationalist revolution it has vowed to shepherd by waging a war that is now more than 18 months old.
Since Myanmar is a
weak State, it is more susceptible to being substituted in reality or in
people’s minds by the likes of the Arakan Authority, an interim governance body
forged by the AA’s political wing, the United League of Arakan (ULA). On June
19, Arakan News published a story about the AA-affiliated Authority settling a
land dispute issue in Ponnagyun Township between two brothers. The case was
worked out within a week and the two parties seemed to be satisfied with the
resolution proposed by the Arakan Authority, according to the report.
A day earlier, on June 18, a local monk from Mrauk-U told RFA: “As far as I see and hear, the public does not go to the police for their criminal cases and I am told that AA is solving the cases. So, I find only AA and Myanmar military governance while the NLD government is nearly invisible. This started to happen soon after the AA announcement to install a governing mechanism.”
Drug rehabilitation programmes administered by the AA are also appreciated by local populations, the RFA story added.
The NLD administration, meanwhile, is seeking to rehabilitate the governing mechanism while the military is calling for more effective rule, possibly a form of martial law in Arakan. On the ground, however, the power of State to non-State actors is increasingly shifting to the latter. Still, it is difficult to know to what extent the Arakan Authority is acting in a manner befitting of the abovementioned Fukuyama chart on State scope and strength.
AA Revolution and the Muslim community in Arakan
It is interesting to consider how the Muslim community in Arakan State has reacted to the AA’s armed revolution and the changing political calculations in Arakan. Due to the 2017 “clearance operations” by the Myanmar military, around 700,000 Muslims fled to Bangladesh, a majority of them also stateless. With Myanmar facing a lawsuit under the Genocide Convention before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2019, State Counsellor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi described the AA movement as such:
A day earlier, on June 18, a local monk from Mrauk-U told RFA: “As far as I see and hear, the public does not go to the police for their criminal cases and I am told that AA is solving the cases. So, I find only AA and Myanmar military governance while the NLD government is nearly invisible. This started to happen soon after the AA announcement to install a governing mechanism.”
Drug rehabilitation programmes administered by the AA are also appreciated by local populations, the RFA story added.
The NLD administration, meanwhile, is seeking to rehabilitate the governing mechanism while the military is calling for more effective rule, possibly a form of martial law in Arakan. On the ground, however, the power of State to non-State actors is increasingly shifting to the latter. Still, it is difficult to know to what extent the Arakan Authority is acting in a manner befitting of the abovementioned Fukuyama chart on State scope and strength.
AA Revolution and the Muslim community in Arakan
It is interesting to consider how the Muslim community in Arakan State has reacted to the AA’s armed revolution and the changing political calculations in Arakan. Due to the 2017 “clearance operations” by the Myanmar military, around 700,000 Muslims fled to Bangladesh, a majority of them also stateless. With Myanmar facing a lawsuit under the Genocide Convention before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2019, State Counsellor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi described the AA movement as such:
