The Anti-Politics Machine
aid & politics in Burma
Many thanks to those who got in touch about yesterday’s blog. Your emails much appreciated.
Tony Waters says I should say more about The Anti-Politics Machine. This in relation to my comment regarding ‘sharp-elbowed INGOs’.
The aid industry often acts on sites or issues of conflict, aiming to transform these into development problems - which can be addressed through the application of foreign aid (advised by ‘foreign experts’, like me). To oversimplify a bit, the approach sometimes seems to be ‘peace at any price’. However, I’m with those who say - ‘no peace without justice’. We can’t get rid of politics – especially in Burma.
The Anti-politics Machine concept comes from James Ferguson’s (1990) book about Lesotho and southern Africa. He argued that development aid can de-politicise contentious issues, by framing these as amenable to technical solutions implemented by government in partnership with aid professionals, rather than sites of necessary political struggle. This ‘liberal peacebuilding’ approach was much apparent in Myanmar before the coup, where donors were keen to strengthen a state lacking capacity and reach, rolling out market-friendly, good governance policies, while largely ignoring legitimate political grievances and aspirations – delivering the ‘anti-politics machine’. With some important exceptions, the mainstream donor approach failed to address the inherently political drivers of peace and conflict in Myanmar, instead mostly supporting centralized development initiatives - or ‘peace dividends’ – which secured state control.
Since the ceasefires of the 2010s (the previous peace process), limited donor funding to Ethnic Armed Organisation service delivery systems has been provided through their line-departments (although levels of international donor support are presently collapsing). In the process, Ethnic Armed Organisations’ health and education departments may be incorrectly viewed as ‘national NGOs’ - rather than as revolutionary bodies. This distortion of Ethnic Armed Organisation political mandates risks de-politicising long-standing struggles for justice and self-determination. Another example of the anti-politics machine at work.
In the post–coup context, it is vital to support independent local aid and political actors in Myanmar. As well as their political legitimacy, Ethnic Armed Organisations and CSOs are the only groups with access to the most vulnerable civilian populations.
Yes, peace and justice are under armed assault, and need to be defended with armed force. I am careful to label ethnic administrations as Ethnic Homeland Governments, since armed defense is only one of their functions, between education, health care, law enforcement, and others. I think it helps legitimize them as worthy recipients of international support. The UN, ASEAN, and others love to portray the ethnics as simply parties to a multi-sided domestic conflict without moral distinctions among them. It is up to the principals, and to people like us, to correct that mis-characterization.
I agree there can be no peace without justice!
Unfortunately the military junta would rather destroy the beautiful country of Burma (Myanmar) and rule by force than to give the citizens peace and justice!. The generals must be banished especially Min Aung Hlaing