Centre-Periphery Relations in Myanmar: Leverage and Solidarity after the 1 February Coup

• Building interethnic solidarity is crucial for the movement opposing the regime that took power in Myanmar’s 1 February 2021 coup. • Analysing the coup as primarily a crisis of democracy underestimates the centrality of ethnic conflict to the Tatmadaw’s role in Myanmar’s national politics. • In the context of Myanmar’s ethnic diversity, ethnic armed organizations may play a key role in harmonizing responses to the coup. Successive Myanmar governments have failed to meaningfully address ethnic conflict, thereby entrenching the Tatmadaw’s dominance. • Redressing the grievances of non-Bamar groups is crucial to ensuring national and regional stability. Conversely, strategies that mistakenly assume national unity will lead to short-term solutions may cycle back into violence and conflict. • There is little evidence that the Tatmadaw is willing to negotiate with ethnic armed organizations or the National Unity Government. These organizations require support in coordinating anti-coup efforts and material resources to enhance their leverage against the post-coup regime. • The anti-coup movement’s relationship with Myanmar’s ethnic groups has moved through three broad phases: (1) diversity without coordinated demands; (2) visions of a federal future; and (3) agitating for change. • The movement is at a critical juncture. Its success depends on its ability to transform existing centre-periphery relations. The role of