Beware the Myanmar Junta’s ‘Whataboutism’

By Matthew B. Arnold 15 March 2022

The world must be clear about what is occurring in Myanmar. Because the battle within the nation continues, there’s a creeping tendency in some quarters to border it in phrases that diminish the dimensions and frequency of the atrocities being dedicated by the junta. A small however persuasive group of Myanmar and worldwide coverage analysts affect worldwide views on the nation. Discreet and outdoors of public view, some undertake “whataboutism” that inherently favors the junta. Whataboutism is a time period that has emerged in recent times, pushed by the partisan politics of the US and facilitated by social media, however more and more used the world over. Merely put, it’s the approach or follow of responding to an accusation or troublesome query by making a counter-accusation or elevating a unique concern.

Day after day, the atrocities dedicated by junta forces accumulate. On this context of power, large-scale atrocities by one establishment, whataboutism serves to dilute the importance of those atrocities or shift blame for them. There are two significantly odious themes for whataboutism relating to the present state of affairs within the nation.

The primary kind of whataboutism is the emphasis positioned on generalized notions of “all sides are committing violence.” This theme goals to undermine Myanmar’s democratic resistance by highlighting restricted numbers of particular person incidents to conjure ethical equivalence with the junta. The messaging is refined: “All people is committing atrocities…. (so are junta forces actually that unhealthy?).” Allow us to be clear: One facet is violating all legal guidelines of warfare as Commonplace Working Process. I’ve personally catalogued nearly 10,000 battle incidents because the coup. The variety of these that could possibly be seen as extreme by resistance actors is a small fraction of the overall, most likely lower than 1-2 %. There’s a clear actuality in Myanmar; it doesn’t want obfuscation. Gratuitous atrocities are dedicated by junta forces day after day. There may be large-scale armed resistance towards the coup. Describing it as “violence” and stating that it’s by all, diminishes the truth that one facet is the aggressor and bears sole accountability for the disaster that has unfolded within the nation. Contemplating the barbarity of the junta, by any goal normal, the armed resistance in Myanmar is remarkably disciplined. There’s a normative level to utilizing the time period “armed resistance” fairly than “violence”. One facet is clearly defending itself.

In a associated method, whataboutism favoring the junta has latched on to the time period “retributive”. The standard formulation is to explain junta forces attacking PDFs, after which argue that “retributive violence” is occurring by all sides. That is disingenuous on a number of ranges. First, it’s simply empirically improper. Violence towards communities, and people, is overwhelmingly dedicated by junta forces. Second, this framing tries to provide the impression that junta assaults on the inhabitants are secondary fairly than the primary effort and intent. The underlying argument is that they solely happen as a result of PDFs launch assaults within the first place. This might not be farther from the reality. Assaults on civilians are usually not the results of assaults by PDFs. They’re assaults in themselves, core to the junta’s entire army technique and demonstrated over a long time of brutal follow. This messaging mirrors that used to defend the atrocities dedicated towards the Rohingya, as an illustration. Third, retributive means “directed solely at wrongdoing.” In fact, giving it a reputation like retributive is less complicated than calling it what it’s—atrocity, warfare crime, barbarity, and so on. Highlighting this level isn’t simply semantics. It will get to a wider concern: how the army is pushed by an ideology of supremacy. The techniques being utilized by the junta are by no means justifiable, even when communities are supportive of the resistance.

The second kind of whataboutism is extra refined, however very efficient within the theater of worldwide relations. This whataboutism performs off notions of Myanmar descending into “Balkanization” or violence of “all towards all”. This has been a very poisonous pressure of argument put forth by the “Tatmadaw” over a long time however nonetheless pushed within the present disaster—that it’s essential to hold the nation from falling aside. That is perpetuated by coverage analysts who describe violence unfolding in areas in very generalized phrases, as if it had been uncontrolled mayhem fairly than deliberate methods of committing atrocities by the junta. The whataboutism is simple, requiring easy obfuscation of a state of affairs that isn’t that advanced. They don’t deny junta atrocities, they simply saturate the broader dialog with a lot of cherry-picked examples of ostensible abuses by resistance forces to obscure the dimensions and singularity of junta atrocities driving violence throughout the nation. The results of this whataboutism is defeatism amongst the worldwide neighborhood, i.e., that Myanmar is a “misplaced trigger” and “possibly having a junta isn’t such a nasty factor”. This whataboutism is poisonous as a result of it drives international apathy and fatalism that nothing may be accomplished. Absolutist arguments that the army completely can’t be defeated underneath any circumstances are improper. The junta is the issue. It’ll at all times be the issue except it’s defeated, and a brand new army created for the nation.

After a 12 months of continuous atrocities, two issues must be crystal clear to the worldwide neighborhood. The primary is that there’s not a “army” in Myanmar. What was generally known as the “Tatmadaw” shouldn’t be referred to as a army. A army is outlined as “the armed forces of a rustic.” The present battle must be understood as a “nationwide rebellion” fairly than a “civil warfare”. When a complete nation rises towards a army, can the latter nonetheless be thought-about a army? No, after all not. It has misplaced the importance and legitimacy conferred by the time period, irrespective of how a lot it’s certified. Utilizing this time period makes it too comfy for different nations to disregard the junta’s atrocities underneath a façade of sovereignty. As main human rights teams have argued, the junta and its forces are a terrorist group committing mass atrocities. With atrocities escalating week by week, this must be apparent to the world however sadly the masquerade of a army current is maintained, underpinned by facile notions that it’s needed and finally should be negotiated with.

The whataboutism over junta atrocities is poisonous. These making the arguments have grow to be de facto cheerleaders for defeatism and fatalism, forming a vanguard persuading the world to do little or no to assist Myanmar’s democratic resistance. The truth is evident: The junta is committing systematic atrocities. That is the inspiration of their technique to consolidate management. Junta atrocities shouldn’t be confused for army operations. Systematic atrocities by the junta are solely going to worsen as long as different nations fidget with their response to the disaster in Myanmar. Throughout this period of world upheaval, the clearest method to finish the atrocities in Myanmar is to assist the proper facet of historical past. Which means the democratic resistance, i.e., the individuals of Myanmar.

Matthew Arnold is an unbiased coverage analyst. He has been researching Myanmar’s politics and governance since 2012.

You might also like these tales:

Myanmar’s Democratic Resistance Can Win—the World Must Help It

The sixtieth Anniversary of the Myanmar Navy’s First Coup is a Unhappy and Singular Event

Myanmar Junta Denies Medical Remedy to Political Prisoners