Beneath the Quake, the Quiet Violence in Myanmar

Illustration by Swetha Prabakaran

The Myanmar Earthquake: A Disaster Beyond Nature

On March 28, BBC reported a devastating 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck Myanmar, killing over 1,600 people—according to figures released by the internationally sanctioned military regime (junta) that has ruled since the 2021 coup. Families clawed through rubble with their bare hands, searching for loved ones while awaiting aid—aid that, in many anti-junta areas, never came. Instead, these same areas were met with airstrikes.

Disasters, as Theodore Bestor, Professor of Anthropology and Japanese Studies at Harvard University, writes recounting the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami—acquire a life of their own. He says, disasters are shaped by the histories and politics into which they crash. The Myanmar earthquake is not only shaped by tectonics, but also the political and historical terrain they rupture. The actions of the military junta after the earthquake are a culmination of decades of authoritarianism, systemic vulnerability and international complicity. Thus, the disaster and its aftermath must be contextualised. 

We must question why we know what we know about Myanmar—a country under military regime that has been struck with a deadly earthquake; instead of unanimously providing humanitarian aid to its population, the military has not just blocked aid, it has also launched airstrikes on areas with opposition—areas that do not support the military junta. More importantly, however, we need to better understand how these conditions came into existence and how they are sustained.

Beyond a single event—the military airstrike during the earthquake—what is beneath the political debris that weighs on the anti-junta population of Myanmar?

What histories led to the multi-ethnic, anti-junta population of Myanmar being reduced to a single imagination of being anti-junta? Opposing the military junta is not just central to their imagination in our brains but also dictates their chance of surviving the aftermath of an earthquake. Their political aspirations take precedence over the people’s basic right to survive the earthquake. For the anti-junta population, surviving a natural disaster is no longer determined by nature alone.

This necessitates a question of who wrote this fate of people so intertwined in politics and history. It’s also a broad question that needs a subsequent series of questions: Who constructs the politics that shape disasters and their aftermaths? Is a single force at play? The answer to all these questions is a beginning for greater questions—a deconstruction—of the victims of the earthquake.

We begin with a single frame of reference: the actions of the military government after the earthquake. They reveal so much more than we would like to digest.

Disasters are powerful in shaping perception, often presented as affecting everyone equally However, within these natural disasters lie layered injustices of unnatural disasters. Once we think differently about the crisis which is the aftermath of the earthquake, we can identify the different structures contributing to the crisis.  

Disasters as Catalysts for Paradigm Shifts

The image of families clawing through rubble while awaiting aid—aid that never arrived—is not merely a tragic snapshot of natural disaster. It is the image of a political failure: the state’s inability—and unwillingness—to care for its people. But is the state the only actor that bears responsibility?

Traditional understandings of power often center the state as its sole vessel. Yet history shows how corporations, international actors, and economic networks operating far beyond national borders shape the lives and deaths of people. In the case of Myanmar, it is not only the junta that sustains authoritarianism, but also the international actors who fund and legitimize it.

The Myanmar earthquake is a moment that demands introspection. When, in the midst of disaster recovery, the junta launches airstrikes on opposition regions, we must ask: what does this signal—not only about the regime’s values but about the complicity of the global order? Is an assault on a life that is already struggling to survive less grievous, or simply less visible?

It is disturbing that the fact we may never know the real death toll sits well with the international community. Disasters reveal not only what societies value, but what kind of society exists. Myanmar’s catastrophe demands that we interrogate how the junta imagines its people and how we, as the international community, imagine the people of Myanmar. Are they victims of a single, shared tragedy? Or are they differentially abandoned? The time for awakening is now and it is not unprecedented.

Robert Yeats, professor emeritus in geology at Oregon State University, reflected on the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake and the Age of Enlightenment, noting that natural catastrophes often generate social and political upheaval. Myanmar’s earthquake, and the junta’s silencing of its aftermath through airstrikes and aid obstruction, represents a deeper, man-made disaster. It reveals a political crisis with roots long predating the tectonic shift.

Thus, the catastrophe in Myanmar cannot be explained by geophysics alone and needs context.

A Brief History of Myanmar as We Know It

Lindsay Maizland, senior editor at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, provides a concise summary of Myanmar’s turbulent history in “Myanmar’s Troubled History: Coups, Military Rule, and Ethnic Conflict.” After gaining independence from British rule in 1948, Myanmar experimented briefly with democracy until a 1962 coup entrenched military dictatorship.

Social divisions—particularly between Buddhist majorities and ethnic minorities such as the Rohingya—worsened under authoritarian rule, eventually culminating in the Rohingya genocide in 2016. Priyanka Boghani, writing for Frontline, details how these divisions were ignored when the U.S. lifted sanctions prematurely, despite warnings of systemic abuse.

But who is responsible for sustaining these divisions? Who imposed a neoliberal, democratic vision on Myanmar without attending to its unresolved political wounds? More importantly, why was this untimely fate forced upon Myanmar?

The Unfateful Liberalization and Its Impact

When the U.S. lifted sanctions in 2016, Human Rights Watch’s Asia Advocacy Director, John Sifton called the decision “the diplomatic equivalent of burning money,” citing ongoing human rights abuses that were ignored in the rush to liberalize. These warnings were prophetic: the junta’s genocidal violence against the Rohingya only worsened.

Nevertheless, international optimism about Myanmar’s economic prospects flourished. The Asian Development Bank projected steady growth for 2019, ignoring the mounting atrocities. This disconnect between economic opportunity and humanitarian crisis highlights the false binary between development and dignity.

Myanmar’s growth—channeled through elite-dominated sectors with high FDI inflows—propped up the very systems of oppression that prevented genuine democracy. After the 2021 coup, the military reasserted total control. Since then, it has imported over $1 billion USD in arms and manufacturing materials, according to a 2023 report by UN Special Rapporteur Thomas Andrews. Justice For Myanmar (JFM) reports that the largest suppliers for arms to Myanmar are: Russia, China, and India.

The Economics and Trade Behind Military Rule

The political economy of Myanmar is as opaque and violent as its politics. That is why  JFM, a covert civil society group, released a 2024 report titled Mines Against Humanity, exposing military ties to extractive industries.

Among the implicated is Valentis Group, backed by Australian investors and run by brothers La Min Win and Nay Min Win—nephews of the junta’s retired Brigadier General. Their mining company, Kipling Resources, is 62% Australian-owned, with its parent company based in Singapore.

Despite international condemnation, these entities remain active after the coup, working on controversial mining projects. According to JFM, their revenues have directly supported junta offensives against opposition groups. Valentis COO Michael Phin denied these claims in written comments to Voice of America (VOA), though the report cites his visit to a junta-linked coal project post-coup.

This is just one of many such entanglements. Myanmar’s mining economy—rife with military ownership and secretive trade—is a vital artery of authoritarian survival.

The entanglements and obscurity are not just at the level of corporations but also supply chains and data reporting in trade networks such as that of sand and other resources in Myanmar. “Southeast Asia's Dynamic Sand Trade and the Need for Better Data,” a paper published in The Extractive Industries and Society journal concludes that Myanmar is one of the major sand exporters in Southeast Asia. Among sectors like oil and gas, the sand mining industry is a key hotspot of international trade and complicity, with disastrous consequences for both the environment and local communities. 

While Singapore is the largest importer of sand in the region, as reported by Reuters as well, there are conflicting accounts of the same in other available data. Records by Volza, an import and export big data company, show that most of the sand exports from Myanmar are actually directed to Vietnam, Costa Rica, and India. 

Temporal gaps in data not only persist but also make it hard to determine who is responsible for the exploitation of these resources and thus hold them accountable. These intricate trade systems continue despite sanctions, sustained by shadow networks and enabled through foreign complicity.

Authoritarian Endurance

Theodore Bestor’s idea of a disaster taking on “a life of its own” finds new meaning in Myanmar. Here, the aftermath is driven not only by the failure to respond to a natural event, but by entrenched political and economic systems that render devastation inevitable.

As the International Organization for Migration (IOM) noted, even before the earthquake, nearly 20 million people in Myanmar (one third of the population) needed humanitarian aid, because of conflict, hunger, curtailed access to public services, and economic upheaval. It sought $17.3 million to support communities hit hardest by the Myanmar Earthquake and these hardest-hit communities were not just grappling with seismic differences.   

But is the junta alone to blame for this inevitable devastation?  From where does it secure its weaponry to bomb earthquake-affected regions? When political violence supersedes humanitarian recovery, the calamity we must examine is no longer natural alone.

According to VOA, despite Myanmar’s economy shrinking to 10% below its 2019 level, the junta continues to fund violent crackdowns. This endurance is partly attributed to foreign revenue from illicit international enterprises. Yet, the Myanmar crisis is still largely viewed through a state-centric lens, ignoring how global economics and political recognition reinforce authoritarianism.

Understanding the junta’s legitimacy in global trade and diplomacy reveals the deep entanglement between economic actors and systems of violence. Thus, the military junta is not the sole creator of the circumstances imposed on the anti-junta population. 

Where from Here?

These arguments challenge prevailing assumptions: that disaster response is separate from politics, that trade is neutral, and that violence is confined to militaries. In reality, the line between perpetrator and sustainer of injustice is blurred.

Myanmar’s earthquake is a warning bell. In an age where environmental collapse meets unchecked authoritarianism, disasters will land hardest where state failure has already been normalized. And yet, the world’s diplomatic and trade systems often look away.

The tragedy in Myanmar is not only the earthquake—it is the complicity that makes the silence possible. Rehumanizing victims means refusing to reduce them to numbers. It means asking not only how they died, but why they were left to.

Only from there can we begin to confront the roles that our systems of trade, aid, and silence have played in allowing it all to happen.

Edited by Thenthamizh SS and Vansh Yadav

Zahra Khalid (she/her) is a columnist at Political Pandora and a student of International Peace Studies at Trinity College Dublin. She is interested in power dynamics, violence, and the resilience of those resisting both. Zahra’s research focuses on genocide analysis and its aftermath, particularly the challenges faced by divided societies and the complex, often non-linear impacts of migration.

---

Disclaimer

Any facts, views or opinions are not intended to malign, criticise and/or disrespect any religion, group, club, organisation, company, or individual.

This article published on this website is solely representative of the author. Neither the editorial staff nor the organisation (Political Pandora) are responsible for the content.

All illustrations in this piece are original works created exclusively by the Design Department of Political Pandora.

These illustrations are protected and are not available for replication, reproduction, or redistribution in any form without explicit written consent from Political Pandora. Unauthorized use, including but not limited to copying, modifying, or redistributing, is strictly prohibited.

Photographs in this particular article are taken from external sources and are not a property of Political Pandora. The use of these images are not meant for commercial purposes.

While we strive to present only reliable and accurate information, should you believe that any information present is incorrect or needs to be edited, please feel free to contact us.

---

References:

• Asian Development Bank. "Foreign Investment, Policy Reforms to Boost Myanmar's Growth in 2019 and 2020." Asian Development Bank, 3 Apr. 2019. Accessed 6 Apr. 2025.

• Bestor, Theodore. "Disasters, Natural and Unnatural: Reflections on March 11, 2011, and Its Aftermath." The Journal of Asian Studies, vol. 72, no. 2, 2013, pp. 263–282. Accessed 2 Apr. 2025.

• Boghani, Priyanka. "As Obama Eased Myanmar Sanctions, Some Saw Warnings of a Massacre." PBS FRONTLINE, 10 May 2018. Accessed 6 Apr. 2025.

• Butler, Gemma. "How Aid Becomes a Weapon in Myanmar's War Zone." BBC News, 2 Apr. 2025.  Accessed 4 Apr. 2025.

• BBC Burmese. "Myanmar Quake Toll Passes 1,600 as People Dig for Survivors with Bare Hands." BBC Burmese, 29 Mar. 2025. Accessed 1 Apr. 2025.

• International Organization for Migration. "IOM Urgently Seeks USD 17.3 Million to Support Communities Hit Hardest by Myanmar Earthquake." International Organization for Migration, 3 Apr. 2025, Accessed 10 Apr. 2025.

• Justice for Myanmar. "India Aiding and Abetting Myanmar Junta Atrocities through Continued Transfers of Military Equipment." Justice for Myanmar, 27 Mar. 2024. Accessed 5 Apr. 2025.

• Justice for Myanmar. Mines against Humanity: Unearthing the Australian Companies, Executives, and Investors in Myanmar's Mining Sector under the Illegal Military Junta. Justice for Myanmar, 2024. Accessed 4 Apr. 2025.

• Lau, Ben. "Aid Blocks and Bombs in Myanmar." Human Rights Watch, 1 Apr. 2025. Accessed 5 Apr. 2025.

• Maizland, Lindsay. "Myanmar’s Troubled History: Coups, Military Rule, and Ethnic Conflict." Council on Foreign Relations, 10 Feb. 2021. Accessed 29 March. 2025.

• Moon, Sam Aung, John Geddie, and Poppy McPherson. "As Myanmar Farmers Lose Their Land, Sand Mining for Singapore Is Blamed." Reuters, 3 July 2018, Accessed 10 April. 2025.

• United Nations Human Rights Council. The Billion Dollar Death Trade: The International Arms Networks that Enable Human Rights Violations in Myanmar. Conference room paper of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, 17 May 2023, 53rd session, United Nations Human Rights Council, 19 June-14 July. Accessed 9 Apr 2025.

• Sand Exports from Myanmar - Market Size & Demand Based on Export Trade Data." Volza. Accessed 10 Apr. 2025.

• Walker, Tom. "Australia-Linked Mining Companies Funding Myanmar Junta, Report Says." Voice of America, 29 Jan. 2024. Accessed 2 Apr. 2025. 

• Yeats, Robert. "Age of Enlightenment and the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake." Earthquake Time Bombs, Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp. 158–163. Accessed 2 Apr. 2025.

• Yuen, Kai Wan, Diganta Das, Dung Duc Tran, and Edward Park. "Southeast Asia's Dynamic Sand Trade and the Need for Better Data." The Extractive Industries and Society, vol. 18, 2024, article no. 101452. Elsevier.

Keywords: Myanmar Earthquake 2025, Military Junta Myanmar, Myanmar Disaster Response, Political Violence in Natural Disasters, Humanitarian Crisis in Myanmar, Myanmar Airstrikes During Earthquake, Authoritarianism in Myanmar, International Complicity Myanmar, Myanmar Coup 2021, Extractive Industries Myanmar, Foreign Investment in Myanmar Junta, Myanmar Sand Mining Exports, Southeast Asia Sand Trade, Rohingya Genocide Aftermath, Structural Violence in Disasters.