Ceasefires and Conflict Dynamics in Myanmar

When Myanmar’s military declared a four-month unilateral ceasefire covering the northern and eastern parts of the country on 21 December 2018, its goal was not to cease hostilities, but to narrow the focus of its campaign against the many ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) operating across Myanmar. The geographic scope of the ceasefire meant that while the military’s engagement in ceasefire-covered areas (Kachin and Shan states) decreased significantly, its engagement elsewhere – especially in northern Rakhine and southern Chin states – surged dramatically (see Figure 1). During this time, the military focused resources on weakening one EAO in particular, the Arakan Army (AA), an ethnic Rakhine armed group attempting to establish a base in Rakhine state. However, the AA’s alliance with more powerful EAOs based in ceasefire-covered areas has prevented the military from isolating its conflict with the AA from other conflicts around the country. This inter-EAO alliance has frustrated the Myanmar military’s preferred divide-and-rule approach to engagement with EAOs. Despite the military’s extension of the unilateral ceasefire for another two months, the prospects for peace on the military’s terms remain unlikely.

Conflicting Proposals for Peace

The current approach of the Myanmar military to achieving peace in the country rests on its insistence that all EAOs sign the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) before further formal negotiations can be held — an approach out of alignment with the EAOs currently fighting the military. After 2010, during the rule of the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), the military drafted the NCA, an agreement upholding six principles which the military deemed vital to peace, including adherence to the military-drafted 2008 constitution (Myanmar Times, 2 April 2015). The NCA was signed by eight groups in 2015; two more groups signed the agreement in early 2018. While many expected a different approach to peace when the National League for Democracy (NLD) came to power in 2016, the NLD has instead continued the military’s approach of pressing EAOs to sign the NCA.
The EAOs currently fighting against the military have refused to sign the NCA and instead formed the Federal Political Negotiation and Consultative Committee (FPNCC)[1] in 2017. Led by the United Wa State Army (UWSA), the largest EAO in the country, and with China’s backing, the FPNCC has gradually gained influence over discussions of peace in the country (United States Institute for Peace, 29 April 2019). The FPNCC has put forth alternative principles for negotiations that it expects to be considered before the member organizations would agree to sign the NCA (The Irrawaddy, 25 April 2019).
There is a fundamental disagreement between the military and the FPNCC groups...

Disorder During the Ceasefire

While the unilateral ceasefire was intended to allow the military to target a single group while limiting conflict in other parts of the country, a review of developments during the past four months shows three notable consequences of the ceasefire. Firstly, violence against civilians by state forces increased significantly in Rakhine state as the military targeted villagers perceived as supporting the AA; this targeting of civilians led the AA’s allies to denounce the military’s campaign in Rakhine state. Secondly, the military carried out operations in the Sagaing region in exchange for India preventing the AA from operating within its borders, thus opening another locus of conflict in the country. Finally, while attention was concentrated in Rakhine state, conflict between rival ethnic Shan groups, one a NCA signatory and one a FPNCC member, intensified in Shan state, reflecting to an extent the impact of the military’s peace plan on inter-ethnic unity. These three developments demonstrate the military’s inability to isolate and limit the multiple conflicts in the country.
The military’s focus on the AA during the ceasefire did not just take the form of battles against the group. Given the level of popular support for the AA in Rakhine state (International Crisis Group, 24 January 2019), the military has used this fact as a pretext for violence against civilians. While EAOs have also engaged in violence against civilians, state forces are responsible for most such events (see Figure 3). Both Rakhine and Rohingya communities have been affected...

Prospects for Peace

Near the end of April, fighting between the KIO/KIA and the military began to increase in northern Shan state (see Figure 5). Despite the fighting, the military and the Northern Alliance met for talks in Muse on 30 April with other FPNCC members present as observers. After the meeting, the military’s unilateral ceasefire was extended another two months; the ceasefire still excludes Rakhine state (The Irrawaddy, 1 May 2019).

Appendix 1: Ethnic Armed Organizations in Myanmar

[1] The FPNCC is a political alliance comprised of seven EAOs including the United Wa State Army (UWSA), Kachin Independence Organization/Kachin Independence Army (KIO/KIA), Arakan Army (AA), Palaung State Liberation Front/Ta’ang National Liberation Army (PSLF/TNLA), Shan State Progress Party/Shan State Army-North (SSPP/SSA-N), Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) and National Democratic Alliance Army (NDAA) (see Appendix 1).
[2] The Northern Alliance includes four members of the FPNCC: the Kachin Independence Organization/Kachin Independence Army (KIO/KIA), Arakan Army (AA), Palaung State Liberation Front/Ta’ang National Liberation Army (PSLF/TNLA) and Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA). The KIO/KIA has trained and supported the other three groups which have never signed bilateral ceasefires with the military. The Northern Alliance has recently held meetings with the government peace team with the other members of the FPNCC present as observers.