Informing humanitarians worldwide 24/7 — a service provided by UN OCHA

Myanmar + 1 more

Conflict and Survival: Self-protection in south-east Burma (September 2010)

Ashley South with Malin Perhult and Nils Carstensen

Key points

• People living in armed conflict-affected south-east Burma have a detailed and sophisticated understanding of threats to their safety, livelihood options and general well-being. For ethnic Karen civilians, protection and livelihood concerns are deeply interconnected.

• People contribute to their own protection, through a number of often ingenious and brave activities. Vulnerable communities display high levels of solidarity and cohesion, with local leaders playing important roles in building trust and 'social capital'.

• The biggest contribution to people’s protection stems from their own activities. The impacts of internationally mandated protection and assistance agencies remain marginal for people in the conflict areas. Limited amounts of international aid are delivered by community-based organizations and local NGOs – which are often, but not always, associated with conflict actors.

• Assistance to refugees and internally displaced people is a significant factor in the political economy of armed conflict in south-east Burma. International agencies and donors should therefore exercise caution, and undertake continuous ‘do no harm’1 analysis, regarding the relationship between aid and conflict.

• Advocacy campaigns based on documenting and denouncing rights violations have a positive – if limited – impact on the safety and well-being of vulnerable people in south-east Burma. Such public advocacy is complemented by low-profile, profile, persuasive advocacy, undertaken by community leaders on the ground.

• The primary threat to civilians in armed conflict-affected south-east Burma comes from the militarized government and its proxies. Armed opposition groups also represent threats to civilian populations (among other reasons because insurgent activities provoke reprisals against civilian populations). In some cases, armed opposition groups offer a degree of protection to displaced and other vulnerable people.

• A range of armed groups position themselves as protectors of the Karen nation.
However, international humanitarian and human rights law do not recognize the protection roles of non-state armed groups. Whether civilian 'self-protection’ or the activities of armed opposition groups are considered appropriate and worthy of support depends on the legitimacy accorded to these actors.

• The manner in which international aid actors understand and support local agency is likely to become increasingly significant, given the shifting global balance of power, and associated decline in rights-based approaches to humanitarian intervention.

Read the full report on the Chatham House website.