Vulnerability

TBBC’s household surveys have found that military patrols and landmines are the greatest threat to the personal safety and security of civilians in rural areas of eastern Burma. These aspects of militarization, together with forced portering which is often linked with the imposition of sweeping for landmines, were reported as the fastest growing threats to safety and security since the first household survey was conducted in 2005.

When disaggregated by place type, these findings reaffirm previous assessments that primary perpetrators of violence and abuse in eastern Burma are the SPDC’s own troops and administrative authorities. The dangers of military patrols, landmines and artillery attacks particularly affect households in contested areas, where the Burmese Army does not distinguish between civilians and combatants. However, the risks of arbitrary arrest, detention, torture and forced portering are greatest in relocation sites and areas where the Burmese Army has a constant presence.

TBBC’s household surveys have consistently found that forced labour and restrictions on movement are the most pervasive threats to livelihoods across eastern Burma. The prevalence of restrictions on movement has increased dramatically during this period, which is indicative of the stronger controls exercised by the Burmese Army over the civilian population that have been facilitated by militarization.

When disaggregated by place type, the findings are consistent with TBBC’s previous documentation. The incidence of forced labour, restrictions on movement and extortion are highest amongst households living in close proximity to the Burmese Army. Conversely, destruction or confiscation of food supplies and the destruction of, or forced eviction from, housing primarily targeted villagers who were hiding from the Burmese Army in militarily contested areas. This reflects the predatory nature of the Burmese Army’s counter-insurgency strategy of targeting civilians through impoverishment and deprivation.

While there is no evidence of the Burmese Army issuing written orders for soldiers to perpetrate sexual violence, the impunity military personnel enjoy has undoubtedly contributed to the persistence of violence against women and girls.

Villagers surveyed in 2007 and again in 2009 perceived domestic violence as the most common form of violence committed against women in eastern Burma. Significant increases in perceptions of the prevalence of domestic violence, rape and sexual harassment were recorded during this period. Given that sexual violence has been a hidden issue in Burma until recently, these apparent increases may reflect widespread and deteriorating violence against women and/or greater community awareness of the risks. Regardless, in both years, villagers living in close proximity to Burmese Army troops reported significantly higher levels of violence committed against women than that reported from hiding sites and ceasefire areas.

While the majority of Burma’s child soldiers are in the Burmese Army, TBBC’s survey suggests that rural children in eastern Burma are more likely to be recruited as soldiers by non state armed groups. This is indicative of how the Burmese Army generally conscripts soldiers from urban areas, whereas the constituency of non state armed groups is in rural areas. Conversely, rural children are much more likely to be recruited by the Burmese Army for menial labour such as working in the kitchen, portering supplies, sending messages and providing massages. The findings reflect the widespread imposition of forced labour by the Burmese Army in general, as well as the belief amongst villagers that children will be ordered to do less tasks than adults. This is an example of coping strategies employed by adults inadvertently being detrimental to the best interests of children.

[Rev: Nov09]

Early warning signals of approaching troop patrols provide villagers in contested areas with vital hours in which to assess their security situation and respond accordingly. When villagers were surveyed in 2005, traders and other civilians were the main source of early warnings. This demonstrated the importance of social capital, or networks of trust, between local communities for the development of protective environments. However, the significance of traders and other civilians has decreased dramatically since then, which is consistent with reports of increased restrictions on movement. As a result of constraints on broader economic and social networks, villages have become more dependent on local security guards.

Non state armed groups also remain a significant source of information, especially in hiding sites and ethnic ceasefire areas. Conversely, warnings from the Burmese Army have consistently been reported as negligible. These findings confer legitimacy to claims by non state armed groups that, some of them at least, are genuine representatives of the people affected by conflict. Similarly, the results suggest that some non state armed groups have responsive administrative systems in place to protect their constituents.

Villagers in hiding sites store food supplies in various locations and prepare alternative hiding sites in case emergency evacuation is necessitated by approaching military patrols. Many of these households work in fields at night to avoid detection, indicating both fear of the threats but also the determination of villagers to survive and remain in their own land. Resources shared by neighbours, loans offered by traders and aid provided by community based organizations are key mechanisms by which communities affected by conflict cope with shocks to livelihoods. This underscores how maintaining strong relations between communities is fundamental to the viability of coping strategies.

[Rev: Nov09]

Given the Burmese government’s refusal to accept offers of humanitarian assistance for civilians in conflict affected areas, the aid provided under the junta’s radar by community based organisations is vital. Most of this assistance is channelled across the border and is primarily focused on emergency relief to reduce vulnerability and mitigate against displacement. However, household surveys indicate that aid has also had positive impacts on protection in regards to strengthening social and economic links across conflict lines and contributing to a decrease in human rights abuses. These far outweigh reported negative impacts relating to violent or abusive repercussions. Nonetheless, the protection dividend of food and cash assistance, health care and other relief programmes appears to have decreased since 2005. This does not necessarily reflect poorly on community based organisations, as aid is not a panacea for protracted conflict, violence and abuse.

The impunity with which abuses are perpetrated in Burma is widely documented, and the lack of judicial redress has been consistently represented in the findings of household surveys in eastern Burma. Villagers report that monitoring and documenting human rights violations has negligible impacts in terms of leading to the punishment of perpetrators. It is difficult to conceive how impunity could possibly be challenged without documentation of abuses, and yet the findings suggest that recriminations rather than justice is a more likely impact in the short term. Nonetheless there remains significant recognition that documentation is associated with human rights education initiatives at the grassroots level as well. Villagers recognize that promoting attitudinal change in this way is important to stop patterns of abuse in the long term.

In 2009, TBBC’s partners surveyed over 1,000 households to assess the connections and divisions between rural households and nearby towns in conflict affected areas of eastern Burma. This was conceived as a preliminary assessment tool for quantifying the constraints against, and opportunities for, peacebuilding at the grassroots level.

The obstacles to contacting nearby towns vary considerably depending on the Burmese Army’s degree of occupation and control. For villages hiding from the Burmese Army in forests and fields, the fear of harassment, lack of an official identity card and restrictions on trade or travel were fundamental security constraints. However, villagers in government controlled areas or those administered by ethnic ceasefire groups reported general poverty and the economic costs of travel as the primary impediment.

Despite these obstacles, villagers reported that significant networks remained across conflict lines. Economic linkages through trade and employment were found to be the strongest connections. Even remote communities who are hiding from the Burmese Army reported strong links with traders from nearby towns via unauthorised “jungle markets”. There is a relatively high degree of social interconnectedness, incorporating visits to family and friends, community events and social services. These responses from grassroots communities challenge the perception widely held by diplomats, bureaucrats and aid workers who are not allowed access to conflict-affected areas that those communities are disconnected from the rest of Burma.

The main concerns identified by villagers in areas of armed conflict were the lack of security and chronic displacement. Even in ceasefire areas, villagers highlighted the breakdown of trust, law and order as the most immediate obstacles to peace. These grassroots perspectives about the pervasive and ongoing implications of conflict reflect a low level of confidence that the Burmese government’s road map to democracy is leading to peace.

[Rev: Nov09]