This is an ends-justifying-the-means problem. Local organizations, usually committed volunteers, need funding to support the most vulnerable in Myanmar. International organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and international non-government organizations (INGOs) have this funding but don’t have access or capacity to manage a lot of projects. This appears to be a symbiotic or win-win relationship. However, what if the international organization is registered with the junta? Here lies the moral conundrum. Civil society organizations (CSOs) need to know the consequences of working with these organizations and few do.
The fact that the international organizations unintentionally offer legitimacy to the junta by registering, signing MoUs and having propaganda photos taken has been widely criticized, as has the fact that the UN has very limited access to those in need and virtually none in resistance areas. However, there are other reasons why CSOs should reconsider working with the UN and INGOs and should do due diligence before signing contracts.
International organizations have to provide regular certified audit statements to the junta every six months and also respond to all ad hoc inquiries from the junta. This and the requirement to name leadership of projects can put Myanmar nationals and their families at risk.
Basically, anyone operating in Myanmar has to pay income tax, VAT etc. and if they let their registration expire, they have to pay penalties to renew it. This is money into the junta coffers to use as they wish. Even worse, these organizations have to pay the junta at the junta’s fixed exchange rate. The exchange rate is 3,000 kyats to the US dollar but the official rate is 2,100. The junta’s fixed exchange rate allows it to exploit the floating exchange rate through black market transactions in dollars to procure such things as helicopters and aircraft. The tax is then literally funding war crimes. To renew their registration most contractors with a team of 30 or more will be paying approximately US$100,000 in fines in addition to fees for late income tax, VAT etc. However, apparently, USAID, and likely other donors, will reimburse this, so perhaps the INGOs are not so concerned. The bottom line is that any dollars going into Myanmar are allowing the junta to expand its foreign reserves and conduct more air strikes. The donors seem to have a suspension of disbelief or very perverse logic to be able to allow this.
Local organizations need to question their potential funders about the above to be able to make an informed decision. These international organizations have made their decision for their own reasons (one is tempted to say self-interest) but local organizations need to weigh up the pros and cons and make their decisions on whether to work with these international organizations.
In Myanmar the contractors such as INGOs and the UN are hedging their bets at the moment. Their priority is preserving their forward market. They are concerned about legitimizing the regime, but if it means missing future donor contracts, they will renew their MoUs. Unfortunately, donors such as USAID have not taken a strong stance on this. While the consensus seems to be that international organizations risk even more scrutiny if they don’t register with the junta, the real question is, do they really need to be in the country at all?
Ideally donors should be fully aware of this and seek alternative avenues of funding such as the NUG, ethnic revolutionary organizations (EROs) and CSOs, as stipulated in the “Burma Act” passed by the US Congress. Unfortunately, many donors have surprisingly limited knowledge of the situation in Myanmar, so blindly fund through the UN, which is also easier for them. There obviously needs to be independent analysis of the cost versus impact of funding through the UN in Myanmar and the junta’s exploitation of it, but in the meantime CSOs need to ask the right questions and make their own informed decisions.
Paul Greening is an ex-UN senior staff member with over 20 years’ experience in six Asian countries working for six UN agencies and four INGOs. He worked in Sittwe, Rakhine State for the International Organization for Migration from 2017 to 2020 and since then has been involved in advocacy against the illegal attempted coup and supporting those who have suffered from it.
