Historic Myanmar elections in 2015 and the installation of an NLD government led by Aung San Suu Kyi in 2016 contrast with ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in 2017. One critical question that now confronts the 50 million people of this Southeast Asian nation is whether the push for greater democracy is strong enough to prevail over a powerful military machine and undercurrents of intolerance. What are the prospects for liberal democracy in Myanmar? This bookaddresses this question by examining historical conditions, constitutionalism, democracy, major political actors, ethnic conflict, and transitional justice. It presents a rich array of evidence focusedon 88 in-depth interviews and three waves of surveys and experiments conducted in 2014-18. The analysis culminates in the concept of limited liberalism, which reflects a blend of liberal and illiberal attitudes. The book concludes that a weakening of liberal commitments among politicians and citizens alike, allied with spreading limited liberal attitudes, casts doubt on the prospects for liberal democracy in Myanmar.

Abstract: Myanmar is in the midst of a major political/economic transition. After years of repressive rule under a harsh military regime, the country is moving towards liberalism. At the behest of the domestic and foreign liberal pressure, the foundations of liberalism including the rule of law, democracy, and open markets are taking shape in Myanmar. This paper demonstrates the lack of agency that Myanmar, both as a state and for the citizens within the state, maintains during this transition. This lack of agency is due, in part, to the neoliberal interpretation of liberalism and its founding tenets. Utilizing Roberto Unger and Susan Marks's theories of "False Necessity" and "False Contingency,"I will demonstrate how international institutions and ideologies are propagated and forced on Myanmar. The belief in these ideologies and institutions creates pressures and imposes limitations on the systems that they influence in Myanmar. These pressures and limits, in turn, create a lack of true agency in the transition that Myanmar and its people are experiencing. I begin by first exploring the general liberal thought in regards to transition. I then demonstrate the false contingencies that a neoliberal understanding on the liberal tenets reflects. I apply this dynamic to actual circumstances in Myanmar as a case. The thesis concludes with the exploration of the concept of false contingency on Myanmar's transition to democratization, neoliberalizing markets, and its embrace of human rights.

Nishikawa explores how international norms have been adopted in the local context in Myanmar to project a certain international image, while in fact the authorities are exploiting these norms to protect their own interests. In the liberal international world order promoted since the end of the Cold War, democracy, rule of law and human rights have become key components in state and peace-building around the world. Many donor governments and international organisations have promoted them in their aid and assistance. However, the promotion of these international norms is based on a flawed understanding of sovereignty and the world. For this reason, the enforcement of these international norms in Myanmar not only fails to protect vulnerable people but also, in some instances, exacerbates the situation, thereby generating critical insecurity to the most vulnerable people. A vital resource for scholars of Myanmar’s politics, as well as a valuable case study for International Relations scholars more broadly.

This book analyses what Myanmar's struggle for democracy has signified to Burmese activists and democratic leaders, and to their international allies. In doing so, it explores how understanding contested meanings of democracy helps make sense of the country's tortuous path since Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy won historic elections in 2015. Using Burmese and English language sources, Narrating Democracy in Myanmar reveals how the country's ongoing struggles for democracy exist not only in opposition to Burmese military elites, but also within networks of local activists and democratic leaders, and international aid workers.

" ... Revisiting political developments in Myanmar, this paper draws attention to the unintended consequences of a "politically correct" contemporary practice, raising questions not about the values of democracy per se, but rather about the practice of intervention in that very name, irrespective of indigenous conditions. Equally, it dwells not on the technicality of "humanitarian intervention" that falls within the purview of the UN mandate, but instead, the paper challenges the use of that concept as a foreign policy tool without giving sufficient consideration to its socio-economic consequences in another country. The paper argues that without taking into account its history, ethnic complexity, and socio-economic conditions, any policy-making toward Myanmar is likely to remain irrelevant to what is going on inside the country. Finally, the relative fading of rhetoric concerning "building democracy" from foreign policy speeches in the new U.S. Administration under President Obama is eye-opening, and being watched closely by the international community to determine how the change will materialize in policy-making toward Myanmar."--Executive summary.

Citizenship is a critical component of statebuilding and peacebuilding efforts in conflict affected states, yet it is also the most neglected. Taking a critical realist, ethnographic case study approach, this thesis investigates the problem of state fragility in conflict-affected, postcolonial Myanmar from the lenses of state formation and youth citizenship. From the photo-elicitation interviews with twenty young Myanmar citizens and an analysis of the country’s citizenship laws, the study found that contra liberal conceptions of citizenship, citizenship (i.e., the political) and identities (i.e., the social) in Myanmar are intertwined. Young people’s social identities affect and are affected by their political identity as Myanmar citizens. Furthermore, the everyday sites of citizenship that construct young people’s identities as citizens are simultaneously private and public. Young people’s agency in their volunteerism and attitudes towards social norms reflects the same entanglement between the social and the political, as well as the private and the public. This thesis argues that the liberal notion of a social contract, which imagines a political society of free-standing individuals who possess their own subjectivities, is misaligned to the socio-political realities of citizenship in Myanmar’s hybrid political order. Rather than forcefit postcolonial states such as Myanmar into the liberal democratic model, I propose that the notions of relationality and agonistic democracy offer the means of indigenizing democracy and bringing peace to conflict-affected, postcolonial states. Overall, this thesis provides a valuable opportunity to advance understandings of the relationship between democracy and peace from the lenses of state formation and citizenship and to contribute to the discussion about what democratic citizenship in present-day Myanmar is and should entail. It responds to calls by Southeast Asian scholars to study citizenship ‘from below’ and to pay attention to the particular forms that democratic citizenship takes in postcolonial states. In doing so, this thesis seeks to provoke civil society actors and international non-governmental organizations advocating for democracy into a rethinking of what democratic participation and deliberation might look like in a postcolonial state.

An ambitious account of the corrosion of liberal democracy in rich and poor countries alike, arguing that antidemocratic sentiment reflects fear of material and cultural loss, not a critique of liberalism’s failure to deliver equality, and suggesting possible ways out. The retreat of liberal democracy in the twenty-first century has been impossible to ignore. From Wisconsin to Warsaw, Budapest to Bangalore, the public is turning against pluralism and liberal institutions and instead professing unapologetic nationalism and majoritarianism. Critics of inequality argue that this is a predictable response to failures of capitalism and liberalism, but Pranab Bardhan, a development economist, sees things differently. The problem is not inequality but insecurity—financial and cultural. Bardhan notes that antidemocratic movements have taken root globally in a wide range of demographic and socioeconomic groups. In the United States, older, less-educated, rural populations have withdrawn from democracy. But in India, the prevailing Hindu Nationalists enjoy the support of educated, aspirational urban youth. And in Europe, antidemocratic populists firmly back the welfare state (but for nonimmigrants). What is consistent among antidemocrats is fear of losing what they have. That could be money but is most often national pride and culture and the comfort of tradition. A World of Insecurity argues for context-sensitive responses. Some, like universal basic income schemes, are better suited to poor countries. Others, like worker empowerment and international coordination, have broader appeal. But improving material security won’t be enough to sustain democracy. Nor, Bardhan writes, should we be tempted by the ultimately hollow lure of China’s authoritarian model. He urges liberals to adopt at least a grudging respect for fellow citizens’ local attachments. By affirming civic forms of community pride, we might hope to temper cultural anxieties before they become pathological.