Guest contributor
James Shwe
The speeches delivered at the U.N. High-Level Conference on the Rohingya crisis were more than just diplomatic formalities; they were a resounding chorus of international condemnation against Myanmar’s military junta.
For the people of Myanmar and their vibrant resistance movement, the message from the world was unambiguous: the junta has no legitimacy, and its planned sham elections will be rejected.
This is a crucial victory, but the conference also exposed the complex internal challenges the resistance must overcome to build the future it is fighting for.
The unified front against the junta was powerful. U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk warned that the junta’s elections would only “fuel more violence.”
The European Union stressed that Myanmar “must return to a democratic path.” Most directly, the United States declared, “We reject these elections under current conditions.”
This global alignment provides the National Unity Government (NUG) and the entire resistance movement with immense diplomatic leverage, effectively walling off the junta from international recognition.
Myanmar’s own legitimate representative at the U.N., Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun, powerfully reinforced this, identifying the junta as the “sole culprit and the root cause to the destruction of Myanmar’s peace and security.”
However, beyond this unity lies a more complicated landscape that requires honest acknowledgment. The most telling nuance came from the U.S., which was the only party to explicitly call on “all armed actors – including the military regime and the Arakha Army – to protect civilians.”
This acknowledgment reflects the reality that civilian suffering in Rakhine State is not exclusively the work of the junta, and that accountability for protecting civilians must be universal.
Notably absent from the major international speeches was any direct mention of Rohingya armed groups or the troubling reports that some have, in certain instances, aligned themselves with the junta against the Arakan Army.
This diplomatic omission is understandable—mentioning such groups could complicate humanitarian access and peace processes—but it also means that a crucial aspect of the conflict’s complexity remains unaddressed in official international discourse.
As the International Crisis Group documented in June 2025, some Rohingya armed factions have found themselves in the uncomfortable position of tactical alignment with their former oppressors against a common enemy, the AA. This development highlights how the conflict has evolved beyond simple binary narratives.
For the resistance to truly succeed, it must grapple with these uncomfortable realities while maintaining its moral clarity. Ambassador Kyaw Moe Tun’s approach at the conference offers a model: focus on the primary enemy—the military dictatorship—while building a unifying vision of federal democracy that can accommodate all of Myanmar’s peoples.
The path forward requires several strategic adjustments:
Embrace universal accountability: The resistance must adopt the standard set by the U.S. and hold all armed groups accountable for their conduct. This is not about moral equivalence—the junta remains the primary perpetrator—but about establishing consistent principles that will serve as the foundation for a future democratic Myanmar.
Navigate complex realities: The resistance must acknowledge that in Rakhine State, the Arakan Army is now the de facto authority. While this does not excuse any abuses, it means that any sustainable solution must involve dialogue with the AA. The alternative—continued conflict and civilian suffering—serves no one’s interests except the junta’s.
Learn from international wisdom: The E.U.’s focus on addressing root causes like “statelessness, denial of citizenship, and systemic discrimination” offers the most promising path forward. These are not separate issues but core components of building the inclusive, federal democracy that all are fighting for.
Build bridges, not walls: While accountability for abuses must never be compromised, the resistance must also recognize that some actors who have committed wrongs may also be potential partners in building a post-junta future. The art of successful movements lies in holding multiple truths: demanding justice while keeping the door open for dialogue and reconciliation.
The testimonies of survivors and activists at the conference, including those who have experienced the worst of this conflict, remind us why this struggle matters. Their voices must be heard, their suffering acknowledged, and their call for justice never ignored. At the same time, the movement must channel this righteous anger into strategies that actually advance the cause of freedom and dignity for all of Myanmar’s people.
The international community has done its part by drawing a clear line against the junta. Now, the people of Myanmar and their leaders must look inward—not to find fault with one another, but to find the wisdom, pragmatism, and unifying spirit needed to build the democratic future they are fighting for. This is the challenge of victory: moving from opposing a common enemy to building a common future.
James Shwe is a Myanmar democracy activist in the U.S. and is a member of the advocacy groups Free Myanmar and the Los Angeles Myanmar Movement. He has been trying to organize and motivate the Myanmar diaspora to advocate for democracy in Myanmar.
DVB publishes a diversity of opinions that does not reflect DVB editorial policy. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our stories: [email protected]
