Anti-Coup Protesters Launch Garbage Strike in Myanmar

Over 500 civilians have been killed since Myanmar’s Feb. 1 military coup. Protests and civil disobedience campaigns launched by pro-democracy activists are ongoing. 

On March 30, pro-democracy activists in Myanmar launched a civil disobedience campaign of throwing garbage into the streets at key intersections in protest of the country’s military rule and the frequent killing of civilians by security forces. At least 512 civilians have been killed since Myanmar’s Feb. 1 military coup. 

The military seized control of Myanmar two months ago, ousting democratically elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi of the National League for Democracy (NLD). After Suu Kyi’s landslide victory, the opposition began claiming widespread election fraud and demanded a recount of the votes. The military backed the opposing party’s claims of fraud, despite the election commission’s statement that there was no evidence to suggest the election had been tampered with. On Feb. 1, Parliament was scheduled for its first meeting since the Nov. 8 election, where it was expected to endorse the election results and approve the next government. The military detained Suu Kyi and the leaders of the NLD, arrested a number of writers and activists, and declared a yearlong state of emergency. 

The coup returned Myanmar to full military rule after the country’s decadelong quasi-democracy. Myanmar was under full military rule from 1962 to 2011, when the military implemented a parliamentary election system. Since the coup, Suu Kyi has been held in an undisclosed location and faces several charges, including violating the country’s official secrets act. 

Protests against the coup began immediately, and are some of the largest and most widespread protests in Myanmar since 2007, when thousands of monks spoke out against the military. A number of civil disobedience campaigns, like the current garbage strike, have been ongoing as well, paralyzing various sectors of the economy. The military’s response to protests escalated quickly, from imposing curfews and limits on gatherings to the use of rubber bullets and live ammunition. Hundreds of civilians have been killed by security forces. March 27 was Myanmar’s Armed Forces Day, and the deadliest day of the coup thus far, with 141 deaths resulting from the military’s attempt to stop protests. 

The current garbage strike reportedly began after loudspeaker announcements in some areas of Yangon, Myanmar’s largest city, urged residents to dispose of their garbage properly. Word of the protest circulated on social media alongside the message that anyone could join in protest against the military. Once the protest had started, photos of garbage piling up in the streets began to circulate. 

Also on March 30, a joint letter from the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, the Arakan Army and the Ta’ang National Liberation Army called for the government to stop killing protesters and to resolve political issues. 

Rachel Lynch

Rachel is a student at Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, NY currently taking a semester off. She plans to study Writing and Child Development. Rachel loves to travel and is inspired by the places she’s been and everywhere she wants to go. She hopes to educate people on social justice issues and the history and culture of travel destinations through her writing.

With Democracy on the Horizon, Uzbekistan Flirts with Freedom

Uzbekistan’s new attention to human rights and democratic ideals, along with the rapid boom in its tourism industry and steps toward religious tolerance, are potential signifiers of progress.

Tashkent, capital of Uzbekistan. Markus Biedermann. CC BY NC-ND 2.0.

Cradled between Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan lies at the heart of Central Asia. Uzbekistan’s population is predominantly Sunni Muslim, and adherents are considered the most devout in Central Asia. The capital, Tashkent, is full of signs of its rich Islamic heritage: historic mosques and mausoleums are scattered among Soviet-style towers.

The country’s complex and multifaceted history explains its diverse population. At the height of the Silk Road, cities located in present-day Uzbekistan such as Bukhara and Samarkand were trading hubs between the East and the West. It was through these centers that Arab traders brought Islam and a written alphabet to the region. After centuries of conquests and rivalry between Uzbek city-states, Russia swallowed up these states with the promise of protection in the early 19th century. It was established as the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic in 1924, where religion was suppressed and the population inflicted with forced collectivization. 

Ever since Uzbekistan’s independence in 1991, long-serving President Islam Karimov has largely avoided democratization while embracing diplomacy and investment from the global community. Despite his attempts to join the U.S. in its “war on terror,” Karimov was regularly criticized by the United Nations for his long record of human rights violations. His persecution of the large Muslim population in Uzbekistan could not be ignored by U.S. in light of the Andijan massacre, when at least 187 civilians were killed. After Karimov’s death in 2016, Uzbekistan seems to have emerged from three decades of isolation and autocratic rule.

Today, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s administration boasts of its progressive policies: Mirziyoyev advocates for freedom of the press, supports religious tolerance and disapproves of unjust imprisonment. Since the start of Mirziyoyev’s presidency in 2016, a few journalists have been spared incarceration, previously blocked media platforms were made accessible, and a number of political prisoners were released. These actions displayed Mirziyoyev’s ostensible devotion to human rights, which was bolstered by his emerging friendship with U.S. Rep. Trent Kelly, his interaction with nongovernmental organizations, and his government’s partnership with the Cotton Campaign, which combats unpaid cotton production in Uzbekistan. As a result, Uzbekistan was elected to the U.N. Human Rights Council for the first time in history this October. In an article found on the United Nations’ website, Uzbekistan is lauded for its “firm commitment to the purposes and principles of the U.N. Charter and the universal declaration of human rights.” Although members of the U.N. carefully watch Mirziyoyev to ensure the establishment of these democratic ideals, Uzbekistan is now regarded as a country working toward greater freedom. 

There are complications involved in Mirziyoyev’s steps toward democratization. Even though Mirziyoyev has been vocal about eliminating Uzbekistan’s forced cotton labor, advocacy group Uzbek Forum found that forced labor persists in the country. Rather than setting up an institutional stronghold on the cotton industry, the government privatized the cotton sector, which only decentralized government-enforced labor by a few degrees. 

Mirziyoyev’s efforts toward modernizing the Uzbek capital of Tashkent have resulted in mass displacement of the city’s original inhabitants. Through the demolition of its buildings and the restructuring of its neighborhoods, the government has carried out a wide-scale gentrification of the city. Tashkent is now considered a travel destination, full of shining skyscrapers and new hotel districts. In order to bolster Uzbekistan’s economy, Mirziyoyev allowed visa-free travel for 30 days for visitors from 65 countries, including the United States.

These markers of progress are met with a mixture of emotions—the U.N. is enthusiastic about Mirziyoyev’s commitment to human rights, while Human Rights Watch remains skeptical of the legitimacy of these policies. The new seemingly democratic leadership of Mirziyoyev creates suspicion among Uzbeks and foreigners alike. Pushed by economic motivations, the president’s attempts to abide by the universal guidelines of human rights stir up hopes among Uzbeks for a freer future. 

Heather Lim

recently earned her B.A. in Literatures in English from University of California, San Diego. She was editor of the Arts and Culture section of The Triton, a student-run newspaper. She plans on working in art criticism, which combines her love of visual art with her passion for journalism.




Evo Morales Returns in Triumph to Bolivia, Ending a Year in Exile

One year after he stepped down amid a contested election, the popular left-wing leader is back. Will he be content with his supporters’ love, or will he seek power as well?

Evo Morales waving the Wiphala, a symbol for South America’s Indigenous people. Brasil de Fato. CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.

Exiled leaders rarely return so triumphantly. Evo Morales, president of Bolivia for 14 years before fleeing the country in November 2019, greeted a jubilant crowd when he crossed the border from Argentina and trekked to his home province of Chapare. Many expected a more forceful return, perhaps a march to the seat of government in La Paz. Rather, Morales traveled to where he started his political career at the precise moment when that career seems set to either end or begin again. 

If Morales plans to kick-start a new phase in his political career, he reenters in a much better position than when he started. Born to a poor family in the Orinoca region in 1959, his family moved with countless other families from the highland altiplanos to work on lowland coca farms, which provided poor Bolivians the best shot at a livable wage. The young Evo became a union leader, fiercely advocating for the rights of farmers when the United States’ war on drugs demanded the Bolivian government slash its supply of coca, its most profitable crop. In Bolivia, people chew on it or brew tea, but one ton of leaves can be refined into two pounds of cocaine base paste. 

A farmer pruning coca. Erik Cleves Kristensen. CC BY 2.0.

Morales’ experiences there fostered a brand of politics staunchly devoted to the poor and Indigenous communities through the institution of socialism. He joined and soon transformed the Movement for Socialism party (MAS) and became a one-term congressman. After leading violent street altercations that forced two presidents to resign, his ambitions expanded to the national realm. In 2006, the Bolivian people voted him in as president, beginning a 14-year-long tenure which would prove revolutionary.

For one, he was the first Indigenous president since the country’s independence in 1825. In a nation that is 42% Indigenous, this seems strange, but centuries of colonization and racism led to a society of haves and have-nots. An ethnic Aymara, Morales expanded MAS’s appeal to all Indigenous people, chafing many Whites and Mestizos who supported MAS in far fewer numbers. Some Indigenous communities found Morales’ embrace of Indigenous peoples hollow; he allowed drilling in forest reserves and expanded the amount of land settlers could clear. 

Man without a plan. Alain Bachellier. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0. 

Most of all, however, he presided over what many view as an economic miracle. Morales’ government reduced by two-thirds the amount of people living on less than $1.90 a day, the World Bank’s definition of extreme poverty. The high price of petroleum, another of Bolivia’s largest exports, allowed his administration to invest heavily in innovation and modernization. The widespread prosperity led many to ignore Morales’ authoritarian streak. He would often jail critics and journalists while piling lawsuits on his political rivals.

But when Morales ran for a fourth term against constitutional term limits, opponents found it unforgivable. A pause in vote-counting led many to believe he planned to rig the election, so thousands stormed the streets to protest the election results. Clashes broke out between pro- and anti-Morales protesters; 36 people died amid the violence. Once the military “recommended” Morales step down, he boarded a plane to Mexico and left Bolivia in the hands of little-known senator Jeanine Anez. 

She was a right-wing politician with exactly the opposite views of Morales. Where he proudly represented Indigenous peoples, Anez called them “savages.” (In his triumphant return, Morales sarcastically quipped, “The Bolivian right and the global right should know: the savages are back in government.”) Anez presided over an economic slump due to political unrest and COVID-19. She governed for 11 months before the electorate put in office Morales’ own protege Luis Arce.

Morales’ protege Luis Arce. Casa de América. CC By-NC-ND 2.0.

A bland, uncharismatic technocrat, Arce won broad appeal precisely because he was Morales’ choice. He engineered the economy during Morales’ presidency, so he can take credit for much of Bolivia’s prosperity. His support from the former president may prove both a blessing and a curse, however. He will struggle to distance himself from a controversial figure who still holds strong sway over MAS. His primary responsibility will be to maintain distance from Morales to the greatest extent possible.

For the time being, however, Morales will enjoy his warm welcome home. Crowds gleefully waved the Wiphala, a colorful checkered flag representing Indigenous peoples. Supporters dressed in their finest, most colorful Indigenous attire to celebrate his homecoming. Luis Arce neither met him in Chapare nor sent him a word of greeting. So far they hold no communication. For the sake of Bolivia’s democracy, many hope it will stay that way. 

Michael McCarthy

Michael is an undergraduate student at Haverford College, dodging the pandemic by taking a gap year. He writes in a variety of genres, and his time in high school debate renders political writing an inevitable fascination. Writing at Catalyst and the Bi-Co News, a student-run newspaper, provides an outlet for this passion. In the future, he intends to keep writing in mediums both informative and creative.

Students Call for a Democratic Revolution in Thailand

2020 seems to be the year when students across the globe take part in changing their societies, no matter the cost.

Student protesters. Prachatai. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

In Thailand, student-run organizations have led the march that grew to be an all-out revolution in the busy streets of Bangkok. Thousands of protesters have congregated in the crowded commercial center, Ratchaprasong, chanting for the Thai government to listen to their demands. Protesters call for the removal of Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, the reduction of the monarchy’s budget so the king’s funds would be separated from crown assets, and the abolition of the strict lese majeste laws which ban the voicing of criticisms against the king. 

The unrest began in 2019 when the government banned the most vocal party opposing the power of Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha. Thai citizens are calling for his removal due to the potentially corrupt manner in which he came to power. In 2014 it is said that Prayut staged a coup that shifted his position from army chief to prime minister. The monarchy endorsed his premiership in 2019, allowing him to stay in power after elections which were controversially deemed “fair.” 

The Grand Palace in Bangkok. Tom Eversley. CC0

The protests were put on hold through the early part of the year due to COVID-19, but are now growing at a rapid rate. In early October, the government accused protesters of obstructing Queen Suthida’s motorcade during a mass gathering at the Government House to demand the removal of Prayut. Despite the government’s imposition of emergency measures such as banning the gatherings of five or more people, forbidding the  publication of news that could “harm national security” and deploying 15,000 police officers to quell the protesters, tens of thousands continually show up to stand for their rights.

Woman waving the Thai flag. The Global Panorama. CC BY-SA 2.0

According to Human Rights Watch, the new emergency measures are allowing officials to keep protesters for up to 30 days without bail or access to lawyers and family members. Human Rights Watch’s deputy director of the Asia Division, Phil Robertson, stated that, “Rights to freedom of speech and holding peaceful public assemblies are on the chopping block from a government that is now showing its truly dictatorial nature.”

University students seem to be at the core of the current demonstrations. The Free Youth Movement was behind the first major protest back in July, inspiring a group from Thammasat University to establish the United Front of Thammasat. Even high school students have joined the fray, identifying as the Bad Student Movement, as they call for education reform. Most of these kids are in their twenties, but they have attracted the attention and support of human rights leaders and lawyers like Arnon Nampa, who was arrested in October along with prominent youth leaders. 

Student protesters. Prachatai. CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Panupon Jadnok, a teenage protest leader, led a passionate speech during a rally: 

“Like dogs cornered, we are fighting till our deaths. We won't fall back. We won't run away. We won't go anywhere.”

Raising their hands in the iconic three-finger salute made popular by ”The Hunger Games,” protesters are shouting in the streets for the police to “release [their] friends” and to stop being “slaves of dictatorship.” They will continue to fight for what they believe is right until all of their demands have been met and their friends and country are free.

 

Yuliana Rocio

is currently a Literature/Writing major at the University of California San Diego. Yuliana likes to think of herself as a lover of words and a student of the world. She loves to read, swim, and paint in her free time. She spent her youth as part of a travel-loving family and has grown up seeking adventure. She hopes to develop her writing skills, creating work that reflects her voice and her fierce passion for activism.

Myanmar Government Blocks Website Exposing Military Corruption 

The website for Justice for Myanmar, which is dedicated to exposing military corruption, was blocked by the country’s government for spreading fake news. Over 200 websites have been blocked in the past year.

Screenshot of the Justice for Myanmar homepage.

On Aug. 27, all mobile operators and service providers in Myanmar received a directive from the government to block the Justice for Myanmar website for purportedly spreading fake news. Justice for Myanmar was launched on April 28 by an anonymous group of activists aiming to expose military corruption and advocate for federal democracy and peace. Campaigning for Myanmar’s Nov. 8 general elections began a week after the shutdown, raising concerns that the government was attempting to silence scrutiny and criticism of the elections. 

In May, Justice for Myanmar exposed that two top government officials were also directors of Myanmar Economic Holdings Company Limited, a military-owned company, leading to both officials’ resignations from its board. More recently, Justice for Myanmar revealed that a construction company under contract for the government has ties to Lt. Gen. Soe Htut. The site also published allegations that a medical company offering Food and Drug Administration approvals is owned by the family of Sr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing. 

The military controlled Myanmar for decades, until it was replaced by a civilian government in 2011. The current government is headed by Aung San Suu Kyi of the National League for Democracy (NLD), who serves as State Counsellor. She led the NLD to victory in 2015 during Myanmar’s first openly contested election in 25 years. Despite having a democratic ruler, Myanmar is not free from military rule. A 2008 constitutional provision still guarantees the military seats in parliament. One-quarter of parliamentary seats are held by the military, which also controls the country’s defense, border affairs and home affairs ministries.

Aung San Suu Kyi, once regarded as a prime example of a democratic leader, has been the target of international criticism in recent years for her handling of the Rohingya crisis and her persecution of media and activist groups. 

In the past year, Aung San Suu Kyi’s government has blocked over 200 websites for allegedly spreading fake news, using Section 77 of the Telecommunications Law. The section allows action to stop the spread of misinformation. Myanmar’s government received criticism earlier this year for limiting press freedom and the flow of information during the pandemic by blocking news sites. The government also imposed an internet blackout in nine townships in the Rakhine and Chin states and in April 2020 ordered a mass blocking of the websites of ethnic media organizations. These actions, as well as the shutdown of the Justice for Myanmar website just a week before campaigning for the general elections began, have been causes for concern from the media, community organizations and rights groups. 

Yadanar Maung, a Justice for Myanmar spokesperson, said in a recent press release that the group condemns “the Myanmar government’s attack on our right to freedom of expression and the people of Myanmar's right to information.” Telenor Myanmar, one of the service providers that received the directive to block the Justice for Myanmar site, has opened communication with the government to protest the blocking. A statement on Telenor Myanmar’s website urges the government “to increase transparency for the public” and asserts that the government’s directive does not respect the rights to freedom of expression or access to information. 

Many groups and individuals, including James Rodehaver of the U.N. Human Rights Office, have called for reform of the Telecommunications Law.

Rachel Lynch

is a student at Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, NY currently taking a semester off. She plans to study Writing and Child Development. Rachel loves to travel and is inspired by the places she’s been and everywhere she wants to go. She hopes to educate people on social justice issues and the history and culture of travel destinations through her writing.

Escalations in Violence in Hong Kong Could Prove Perilous to Human Rights

“A protestor wearing a Guy Fawkes mask in October 2019.” Honcques Laus. CC0.

Demonstrators have seemed to reach a stalemate against the government of Hong Kong, which refuses to accede to the demands of the protesters. Given the rapid escalations in violence and the willingness of the police to employ excessive force, a stalemate could have serious consequences for the state of human rights in Hong Kong.

Protests in Hong Kong began in late April 2019, in reaction to the raising of an extradition bill, which would have permitted the extradition of citizens of Hong Kong to mainland China. Pro-democracy protesters see the extradition bill as a significant acquiescence of Hong Konger’s sovereignty to mainland China, as Hong Kong remains a territory not technically under the direct purview of the Chinese government. The specific worry is that Beijing would use the extradition bill to suppress the growing pro-democracy sentiment among younger generations of Hong-Kongers by demanding that Hong Kong hand over its activists and successful con-China politicians. They represent a movement that has been developing since the late 1990s, focused on maintaining Hong Kong’s distance in relation to the Central People’s Republic in Beijing, with the eventual aim of bringing fully-democratic elections to Hong Kong. 

Presently, the citizens of Hong Kong are allowed free speech and rights to free assembly and association, as outlined in the Basic Law. The government and election structure of Hong Kong is quasi-representative. There are 1,200 electors who ostensibly select officials: representatives of various economic sectors, business interests, and the affluent of Hong Kong. However, the central mainland government exercises a great deal of control over the political proceedings of Hong Kong; the incumbent Chief Executive Carrie Lam was openly favored by China’s President, Xi Jinping. While the extradition bill was removed from the table following the outbreak of protests, the potential for democracy in Hong Kong seems to hang in the balance, as demonstrated in Executive Lam’s unwillingness to accede to the demands of the protesters, and in Beijing’s continued support for Lam. 

The protestors have issued a list of demands beyond the reneging of the proposed extradition bill, repealed in September, that includes investigation into police actions as well as amnesty for protesters in custody, complete universal suffrage, and Lam’s withdrawal from her post as Chief Executive of Hong Kong. The government of Hong Kong has issued a hardline stance, supported explicitly by Xi Jinping and the Central People’s Republic. In her refusal to acquiesce to demands, Lam pushes the protests in Hong Kong towards a path of greater uncertainty; given the perseverance demonstrated by the protesters, it seems that the situation will only continue to escalate. 

Consequently, the first weeks of November have seen significant escalations in the protests in Hong Kong: on November 7th, a university student died after he fell from the top of a parking deck during a skirmish with the police. Monday November 11th saw major instances of violence, in which a police officer shot a protester at close range, and a pro-China counter-protester was set on fire by a group of demonstrators. Protesters and police alike have exhibited violent tactics since the inception of the protests. Police have not shied away from tear gas and rubber bullets, as well as employing excessive physical force towards protesters and members of the press. Demonstrators have also used tactics such as vandalism and violence against those believed to be pro-China. 

However, equating police violence with the actions of the protesters carries dangerous human rights implications; the police act from a privileged position because of the backing they receive from both the government of Hong Kong as well as that of mainland China. The protesters have only the solidarity they experience among one another. Violence by protesters is the impetus of an individual working in conjunction with other individuals; excessive force against protesters by the police is a hit by the state in its entirety. 

In this way, escalating patterns of police violence prove pernicious, because they undermine the human rights of Hong Kongers, and breed complications for a hypothetical future peace process. Instances of excessive violence towards the press prove especially destabilizing, because the suppression of information perpetuates the murkiness that allows the police to continue to carry out extreme, and in many cases illegal acts of retribution against demonstrators. As it stands, the violence in Hong Kong will only continue its escalation should the government of Hong Kong maintain its staunch refusal of concessions. A stalemate could have alarming consequences for the state of human rights in Hong Kong, as the police have already turned to violent tactics involving excessive uses of force, and the demonstrators have, in turn, only increased their fervor in furthering their demands.

HALLIE GRIFFITHS is an undergraduate at the University of Virginia studying Foreign Affairs and Spanish. After graduation, she hopes to apply her passion for travel and social action toward a career in intelligence and policy analysis. Outside of the classroom, she can be found, quite literally, outside: backpacking, rock climbing, or skiing with her friends.