Ignoring Minorities’ History in Education Weakens Peace Building & Social Cohesion
SRIc Insights By Hnin Eaindra Khine
Ethnocentric education curriculum strengthens Burmanisation, leading to the failure of social cohesion and peace building.
Key Takeaways:
Myanmar is a culturally rich and diverse country, experiencing social ethnic conflicts for over 60 years.
Ethnocentric education and majority-centred curriculum designs are detrimental to the country’s peace-building efforts.
Decentralised and localised education, including mandatory civic education, might be a solution to save a fragile country like Myanmar.
Myanmar is a diverse and multicultural country with 144 ethnic groups, according to the 1973 census, residing within its borders. The dominant group is the Bamar, which comprises two-thirds of the country’s population. Since gaining independence from the British colony in 1948, the country has faced a prolonged civil war. Shortly after independence, Myanmar experienced ethnic insurgencies, including the Bamar Communist Party. Following the first military coup in 1962, the coup led to the formation of many ethnic armed organisations.
The Myanmar military has used its power to manipulate and restrict the rights of ethnic minorities. Ethnic groups were marginalised and persecuted since before the 1962 coup, but it got worse under the military rule after the 1962 coup. The military regime only promoted Buddhism, the religion practised by the majority of the Bamar, and prioritised culture, tradition, and language of the Bamar majority, leading to Burmanisation, which has weakened social cohesion and obstructed peace-building efforts.
Several factors have contributed to the breakdown of social cohesion and peace-building in Myanmar. The key causes are the centralised Burmanisation policies of the military government, the exploitation of resources from ethnic areas with little or no benefit for local communities, the cultural dominance of the Bamar majority, and the exclusive educational design, including the medium of instruction and curriculum design. In this article, I will focus particularly on how the design of the history curriculum plays a pivotal role in shaping social cohesion and building peace with ethnic minorities.
Background of Myanmar in the Secondary Curriculum
Myanmar’s origins are often traced to the ancient Pyu cities. Still, it rose to prominence as a kingdom during the reign of King Anawrahta in the early 11th century, during the Bagan era. In the basic education history curriculum, students begin learning early Myanmar history from Grade 6 under the new education system (or Grade 5 under the old system). In the first year of middle school, the history curriculum focuses on the Bagan dynasty, highlighting its cultural development and connections with the Mon kingdoms during the reign of King Anawrahta. In the early 11th century, King Anawrahta conquered Thaton, the capital of the Mon kingdom. He introduced Theravada Buddhism from the Mon kingdom to the Bagan dynasty, along with Mon culture, art, and tradition, which significantly accelerated the development of Bagan’s civilisation.
In the history of Myanmar, the Mon and Arakan (Rakhine) can be assumed to be the earliest civilisations in terms of culture, religion, and literature, rather than the Bamar. The Mon kingdom of Thaton is said to have emerged as early as the 6th century BCE. And the Arakanese kingdom of Dhanyawaddy developed in the mid-4th century CE. The Arakan kingdom benefited from the expansion of maritime trade routes from Asia to the Mediterranean, and the Mahamuni Buddha Statute was also constructed during this era. During this time, Bagan was still a small village and had not yet become a centre of civilisation. It was only in the 11th century, under King Anawrahta, that Bagan rose to prosperity and became a significant cultural and political power1.
In the secondary-level history curricula, the focus is primarily on the Bamar dynasties such as Bagan, Ava, Taungoo, Nyaungyan, and Konbaung. By contrast, the earliest civilizations, such as Suvannabhumi, the Mon kingdom, and the parallel Mon kingdoms of Hanthawaddy2, the Arakanese kingdoms of Dhanyawaddy and Vesali, and the Maw Shan polities3 that became powerful at the fall of the Bagan dynasty, are not highlighted.
Mrauk-U in Arakan was a parallel kingdom alongside the Konbaung Bamar Kingdom. The Bamar kingdom conquered it during the reign of King Bodawpaya4. About forty years later, the Bamar king ceded Arakan and Tanintharyi to the British during the First Anglo-Burmese War, as per the Treaty of Yandabo. Before its conquest, Arakan was an independent kingdom, and even after the conquest, it maintained only around forty years of direct connection with the Bamar before being handed over to British rule till the time of independence.
The history curriculum is centred on the Bamar majority despite ethnic groups possessing their own rich and longstanding histories.
Ugly Incidents of Barmanisation
During the era of parliamentary democracy following Burma’s independence from the British colony, Arakan and Mon did not receive recognition as separate states. Rakhine was incorporated as a division within the Union of Burma, rather than as an independent state, and Mon was included as part of the Tanintharyi Division, rather than having its own localised administration. From the Bagan dynasty through the post-independence period, the history curriculum primarily focused on Bamar kings, heroes, and revolutionary leaders, such as General Aung San. This neglect of ethnic heroes, cultures, and histories contributed to the Burmanization.
The impact of Burmanisation is evident in the NLD government's attempt to name the Chaung Sone Bridge in 2017 after General Aung San, a Burmese politician and the father of modern Burma. The bridge is located in Chaung Sone township, Mon State, and its naming caused resentment among the local Mon people. The local Mon community protested, preferring names such as Chaung Sone Bridge, or honouring notable Mon figures like Queen Shin Saw Pu, King Yarzardirit, or Mon Hero Ae Mon Tra. Eventually, the dispute was brought to the Pyithu Hluttaw, the lower house, and decided by a voting system. The motion to name General Aung San was approved with a majority vote from Bamar Hluttaw representatives.
In 2019, a similar issue arose in Loikaw, Kayah (Karenni) State. At Gandar Hay Won Park, the NLD government installed a bronze statue of General Aung San as an honorific monument. Honorific statues symbolise the identity, history, and values of a nation or an ethnic group. The Karenni people considered it disrespectful to the Karenni state, as it had never been under direct British colonial rule. Hence, they protested against the General Aung San Statute. However, despite their opposition, the statue was initially installed, though it was later relocated after widespread demonstrations by the Karenni community. However, six young activists who led the protest were prosecuted for causing political unrest and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labour by the Loikaw court, which was under the control of the NLD-led state government. Both the Chaung Sone Bridge confrontation and the Karenni Bogyoke incident highlighted the failure of many Bamar people to stand in solidarity with ethnic minorities facing marginalisation and racial bullying.
Moreover, in the Student Councils of secondary schools, there are five teams named after Bamar kings, such as Anawrahta, Bayint Naung, Kyansittha, Alaungpaya, and Commander Maha Bandula. Throughout Burmese history, from the Bagan period to the post-independence era, national recognition has primarily been limited to the Bamar kings, such as Anawrahta, Bayinnaung, and Alaungpaya, as well as independence heroes like General Aung San. Obviously, monarchs like Razadirit or heroes such as La Gon Eain and Banyar Dala are omitted. Furthermore, other fallen martyrs, together with General Aung San, for independence, who sacrificed their lives, such as Burmese Muslim cabinet minister U Razak, Karen minister Man Ba Khine, and Shan minister Sao San Tun, have not been similarly acknowledged as national heroes. This selective recognition, rooted in ignorance of the whole history, is a significant cause of Burmanisation.
Civic Education in the Post-Civil War Context
The federal education system allows ethnic states and regions to design parts of their own curriculum that reflect their local histories, cultures, and heroes, which could be a solution. Otherwise, to increase reconciliation among all ethnic groups, including both Bamar and non-Bamar, implementing civic education is also required. Following the education system reform in the 2017-2018 academic year under the NLD government, updates and reforms have been implemented for the civic education curriculum. In the traditional education system, the civic education curriculum primarily emphasised moral values. But in the new system, the civic education curriculum includes morality, human rights, citizenship responsibilities, and peace-building. Nevertheless, civic education should not remain just in the textbook. Its values must be deeply understood and practiced by every citizen, and taught from the basic education level.
In teaching civic education, it is crucial to involve ethnic intellectuals and social and political activists in designing the curriculum to address their challenges. As Matthew D. Nelsen, the author of ‘The Color of Civics,’ advised, “ Civic learning should include critical categories of knowledge that highlight how marginalised groups have challenged the dominant sociopolitical system and should enable young people to explore the deep historical roots of local and national political challenges. To do this, civic learning must be meaningfully embedded in the local context and connected to the lives and experiences of students,” in his book.
To conclude, as educational policy makers and social scientists play a critical role, educators and teachers should also have a deep understanding of civic education. The role of teachers in promoting civic knowledge is pivotal, as their attitudes and lived experiences directly influence the implementation of more empowering civic learning environments. In the future of Myanmar, a non-ethnocentric curriculum that embraces decentralisation and avoids an ethnocentric approach may foster sustaining peace and social cohesion between all ethnicities, including Bamar and non-Bamar communities, on an equal basis.
Footnotes
Pamela Gutman, Burma’s Lost Kingdoms: Splendours of Arakan, (Orchid Press, 2001), p 7.
Naing Pan Hla, Razadirit Ayedawbon, (Third edn, Myawaddy Publication, 2011)
Dr.Than Tun, Studies In Burmese History, ( Maha Dagon Publication, 1969), p 277.
Nyo Mya, Konbaung Sharponedaw, ( 7th edn, Yarpyae Publication, 2003), p 126.
Hnin Eaindra Khine is a Junior Research Fellow at the Sustainability Lab of the Shwetaungthagathu Reform Initiative Centre (SRIc). She is also currently interning at RecyGlo Myanmar, where she supports various environmental sustainability projects.
“Advocating Sustainability, Shaping Our Future”
Help Sustain The Sabai Times - Myanmar’s Voice for Sustainable Development Support The Sabai Times