Episode #286: “Some people during the so-called transition, people in Yangon, were like, 'The military is changing!' Like, no, they're not; they're changing the way they talk to you, to elites, but they're not changing on the ground. And if you spent as much time speaking to survivors of military violence, you'll notice that they torture and kill basically for sport. There's no logic behind it, other than, ‘We can get away with this.’”
David Mathieson, a longtime advocate, activist, and scholar focused on human rights in Myanmar, addresses the military's entrenched behavior and the country's complex socio-political landscape. He discusses the regime’s arrogance, sense of entitlement, and institutional cruelty, which he describes as a “culture of recreational sadism.” He emphasizes that while the generals attempted to appear reformist to elites in previous years, its actions on the ground have always remained brutal and unchanged.
Mathieson delves into Myanmar’s cycles of oppression, resistance, and the military’s failure to innovate in governance or counterinsurgency. He cites the 2017 Rohingya crisis as an example of brutal tactics leading to increased international condemnation and isolation.
He also critiques oversimplified international narratives, urging the importance of local perspectives and understanding the complexities of both the military and ethnic armed groups like the Karen National Union and Arakan Army. Mathieson highlights the failure of peace processes such as the 2015 Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement, attributing it to the military's refusal to engage meaningfully with ethnic minorities, and with the added the complicity of international supporters who endorsed the agreement, thereby legitimizing a flawed peace process.
Ultimately, Mathieson paints Myanmar as a country trapped under an irrational military enforcing fear while insisting on its own necessity. He concludes with a stark view of the military's strategy: a deliberate use of overwhelming violence to enforce submission, reflecting a “deplorable, disgusting” policy that has persisted for decades.
