Myanmar Spring Chronicle – January 4 Perspective
Moemaka, January 5, 2025
Diverging Views Between Domestic and Overseas Myanmars’ Perspectives
In recent days, discussions have emerged in the media about the “seven-point agreement” from Ngwe Saung gathering proposed in the latest negotiations. These seven points have sparked criticism, particularly among some political groups, analysts, and observers living abroad. They describe the agreement as a capitulation and criticize its failure to explicitly confront the military regime.
The discourse surrounding this issue appears fragmented. Media outlets have not fully covered it, nor have they provided balanced or comprehensive analyses. Instead, they have reported piecemeal opinions and critiques, presenting isolated perspectives rather than a holistic view.
To understand these discussions, it is helpful to categorize the political factions into three general groups based on their geographic and situational context:
-
Those living inside Myanmar:
This group includes individuals residing in urban areas such as Yangon, Mandalay, Taunggyi, Pathein, Mawlamyine, and Bago. These individuals, often politicians, writers, journalists, civil society activists, and human rights advocates, live under the military regime’s control. Despite repression, they oppose the coup and strive to contribute to political change and justice. They are considered largest population in Myanmar. -
Those in resistance-controlled areas:
These are individuals living in territories controlled by ethnic armed organizations (EAOs), the National Unity Government (NUG), or the People’s Defense Forces (PDF). The population in these areas is relatively small compared to the other groups, as these regions often face ongoing military clashes and airstrikes. -
Myanmar citizens abroad:
This group includes politicians, activists, and members of international organizations residing in countries like Thailand, Western Europe, and the United States. They are the 2nd largest group after those living inside Myanmar and often vocal in supporting armed resistance. However, they are sometimes critical of domestic political factions, accusing them of lacking decisiveness or clarity.
Diverging Perspectives
The “seven-point agreement” has faced criticism from many abroad for omitting demands for the military to withdraw entirely from politics and for failing to explicitly condemn atrocities committed by the junta. Some have accused the agreement of being too accommodating to the military, emphasizing the need for structural change while neglecting immediate justice for the victims of war crimes and massacres.
Domestically, however, individuals living under direct military control or in precarious environments have expressed a more pragmatic outlook. These groups often prioritize survival and gradual progress, viewing political change as a long-term process requiring resilience and compromise.
Challenges to Unified Action
While armed resistance is widely seen as a necessary tool against the military regime, the fragmentation among armed groups and the lack of coordinated political and military strategies present significant obstacles. The inability to unite under a single vision delays efforts to dismantle the military dictatorship and establish a federal democratic union.
The seven-point agreement has been criticized for not explicitly addressing the junta’s planned elections, focusing instead on transitional justice, federal democracy, and reconciliation. The lack of concrete steps for the military’s complete removal from power has left many feeling it falls short of expectations.
The Importance of Unity
Myanmar’s Spring Revolution requires a shared understanding of its ultimate goal: the establishment of a federal democratic union. Removing the military dictatorship and its associated systems is essential to achieving this vision. All factions, both domestic and abroad, must recognize and respect each other’s perspectives and contributions, working together toward a common goal.
Rather than emphasizing division or criticizing one another, it is crucial to support efforts that align with the broader interests of the people, ensuring that no single group’s actions undermine the collective struggle for freedom and justice.