Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 完全專制化的抵抗策略研究: 以「2021年緬甸軍事政變後的抵抗運動」為例
Resistance Strategies in Full Autocratization : A Case Study of the Resistance Movement Following the 2021 Myanmar Military Coup作者 李仕祥
Lee, Shih-Xiang貢獻者 李佳怡
Lee, Chia-Yi
李仕祥
Lee, Shih-Xiang關鍵詞 緬甸
軍事政變
專制化
抵抗策略
武裝抵抗
Myanmar
Military Coup
Autocratization
Resistance Strategies
Armed Resistance日期 2025 上傳時間 1-Sep-2025 16:45:11 (UTC+8) 摘要 對抗專制化是當代全球政治中的重要課題，特別是在完全專制體制下，抵抗運動如何生存、演化與發揮作用，亟需深入探討。本研究以2021年緬甸軍事政變後的抵抗運動為案例，分析在高壓統治下多元抗爭策略的運作方式與成效。 緬甸在政變後迅速專制化，軍政府透過武力鎮壓、法律控制與資訊封鎖鞏固統治。然而，民眾展現了前所未見的抗爭韌性，涵蓋公民不服從、罷工、數位動員與武裝反抗。特別值得注意的是，緬族Z世代因成長於民主轉型期間，擁有強烈民主意識與數位動員能力，成為街頭與網路抗爭的中堅；老一輩則帶著對軍政的不滿與記憶，世代共鳴成為抵抗動力。少數民族武裝組織（EAOs）藉此重新取得政治機會，與緬族力量並肩對抗軍方，實現史無前例的族群合作。 本研究採用專制化與社會運動理論，結合學術文獻、國際報導、社群數據與NGO資料，指出抵抗效能來自策略多樣性與空間靈活性，包括對經濟、象徵、政治與武力的全面挑戰；同時強調地理嵌入、網路空間與國際尺度的延展作用。 緬甸案例證明，在完全專制壓迫下，結合社會基層動員、數位科技、跨族群聯盟與國際支持的綜合抗爭模式，具備高度持久性與動員力。其經驗為理解極權體制下社會運動提供重要啟示。
Confronting authoritarianism is a key challenge in contemporary global politics, especially in fully authoritarian regimes where resistance strategies, spatial dynamics, and effectiveness require deeper academic exploration. This study examines Myanmar’s post-2021 coup resistance movement as a case to analyze how diverse forms of resistance operate and persist under extreme repression. Following the coup, Myanmar rapidly transformed into a fully authoritarian regime. The military junta consolidated power through violent crackdowns, legal repression, and information control. Despite this, the public demonstrated unprecedented resilience through a wide array of resistance tactics—ranging from civil disobedience and strikes to digital mobilization and armed resistance. Notably, a new generation of ethnic Bamar youth (Gen Z), raised during the country's democratic transition, emerged as the core force in street and online protests due to their strong democratic consciousness and digital capabilities. Meanwhile, older generations, driven by long-standing grievances, joined the movement, creating a powerful intergenerational resonance. Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) seized the opportunity to reassert their political agency by aligning with Burmaeseled resistance forces, forming an unprecedented cross-ethnic alliance against the junta. This study draws on theories of authoritarianism and social movements, utilizing academic literature, international media, social media data, and NGO reports. It finds that the effectiveness of Myanmar’s resistance stems from its strategic diversity and spatial adaptability—challenging the regime across economic, symbolic, political, and military dimensions. Territorial embeddedness, digital networks, and international scaling further strengthen the movement’s resilience. The Myanmar case demonstrates that, even under fully authoritarian conditions, a resistance model that integrates grassroots mobilization, digital technology, cross-ethnic alliances, and international support can be both durable and impactful. It offers critical insights for understanding social movements under authoritarian regimes.參考文獻 一、中文文獻 李向陽（2015）。佛教在緬甸社會中的角色與影響。《世界宗教研究》，6，56–72。 趙中麒（2021）。以「捍衛憲法」為名的緬甸政變？《台灣東南亞學刊》，16(1)，25–34。 司徒宇（2021）。2021緬甸軍事政變成因剖析。《台灣東南亞學刊》，16(1)，5–14。 林佾靜（2024）。緬甸軍事政變及內戰情勢發展：民族武裝團體的角色。《遠景基金會季刊》，25(3)。 賴怡靜（2023）。緬甸政治體制變遷：民主化動因分析（1948–2022）（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學東亞學系。 施欣妤（2018）。緬甸的族群衝突與管理之分析：以克欽族為例（1994～2015）（碩士論文）。國立政治大學政治學系研究所。 司徒宇。（2023）。緬甸本土「抗議藝術」與反軍政府運動。《台灣東南亞學刊》，18(1)，37–72。 二、英文期刊論文 Calhoun, C. (2013). Occupy Wall Street in perspective. British Journal of Sociology, 64(1), 26–38. Corrales, J. (2020). Democratic erosion in Venezuela. Comparative Politics, 52(3), 379–402. Coppel, N., & Chang, L. Y. C. (2021). Myanmar’s digital coup. Australia Myanmar Institute; Deakin Cyber Research and Innovation Centre, Deakin University. Della Porta, D. (2018). Contentious politics and social movements. In The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology (pp. 463–477). Florea, A. (2017). Rebel governance in de facto states. European Journal of International Relations, 23(2), 386–408. Frydenlund, I., Hayward, S., & Strefford, P. (2022). Religious responses to the military coup in Myanmar. Politics, Religion & Ideology, 23(4), 517–523. Ganesan, N. (2023). Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, its impact on domestic politics, and a revolutionary road to democratization? Asian Journal of Peacebuilding, 11(2), 311–329. Guntrum, L. G. (2022). Keyboard fighters: The use of ICTs by activists in times of military coup in Myanmar. Science and Technology for Peace and Security (PEASEC), Technical University of Darmstadt. Hess, D., & Martin, B. (2006). Repression, backfire, and the theory of transformative events. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 11(2), 249–267. Holliday, I. (2021). Myanmar’s military and politics: From transition to coup. Journal of Contemporary Southeast Asian Studies, 42(3), 245–267. Human Rights Watch. (2021). Myanmar: Post-coup crackdown intensifies. Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press. Kyed, H. M., & Lynn, A. (2024). Soldier defection as a revolutionary strategy in Myanmar. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 54(5), 824–845. Mang, P. Z. (2017). Religion, ethnicity, and nationalism in Burma. Journal of Church and State, 59(4), 626–648. <https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/csx063> Mustasilta, K., & Svensson, I. (2023). The path to arms: From civil resistance to armed rebellion. Journal of Peace Research. Pearlman, W. (2011). Violence, nonviolence, and the Palestinian national movement. Cambridge University Press. Prasse-Freeman, E., & Kabya, K. (2021). Revolutionary responses to the Myanmar coup. Anthropology Today. Rogers, R. A., Liew, W. C., & Sidhu, J. S. (2024). The United States’ Myanmar policy after the 2021 military coup and its prospects under China–US strategic competition. Asian Affairs: An American Review. Thawnghmung, A. M., & Hlaing, Y. T. (2024). Movement escalation and mobilization for resistance: From anti-coup protest to ‘People's War’ in Myanmar. Political Geography, 114, 103165. Thawnghmung, A. M. (2018). The “Rohingya Crisis” in context: Statelessness, security, and ethnic identity. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs. Thida, H. M. (2021). People’s perception of the role of foreign power in Myanmar: A case study of the 2021 military coup. Korea Institute for International Economic Policy Forum on Peace and Reconciliation. Wolford, W. (2010). This land is ours now: Social mobilization and the meanings of land in Brazil. Duke University Press. Jang, J. (2022). The regression to military authoritarianism of Myanmar: Dynamics of the military coup in perspective of civil-military relations. The Korean History Education Review, (161), 29–63. Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2024). BTI 2024: Myanmar country report. BTI Transformation Index. <https://bti-project.org/en/reports/country-report/MMR> Chin Association of Maryland. (2021, October). After the 2021 military coup in Myanmar/Burma: Challenges for internally displaced persons and refugees. Chin Association of Maryland, Inc. Maung Aung Myoe. (2009). Building the Tatmadaw: Myanmar armed forces since 1948. ISEAS. McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241. (p. 1217) Selth, A. (2002). Burma's Armed Forces: Power Without Glory. EastBridge. Selth, A. (2001). Burma's Security Forces: Performing, Reforming or Transforming? Griffith Asia Institute. Hlaing, K. Y. (2005). In M. Alagappa (Ed.), Coercion and Governance. Stanford University Press. Kim, S. J. (2014). North Korea's totalitarian system. Asian Perspective, 38(2), 165–186. Katz, N. (2009). Myanmar’s political trajectory: From socialist republic to military junta. Journal of Asian Studies, 68(4), 1123–1141. McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241. Taylor, R. H. (2021). Economic challenges and military power in Myanmar. International Affairs Review, 58(4), 89–110. Jordt, I., Than, T., & Lin, S. Y. (2021). How Generation Z galvanized a revolutionary movement against Myanmar’s 2021 military coup. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 52(3), 445–467. Stokke, K., & Kyaw, N. N. (2024). Revolutionary resistance against full autocratization: Actors and strategies of resistance after the 2021 military coup in Myanmar. Political Geography, 108, 103011. H. Ye, “The root causes of Myanmar’s coup go deeper,” Wilson Center, March 2022. Ganesan, N. (2023). Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, its impact on domestic politics, and a revolutionary road to democratization? Asian Journal of Peacebuilding, 11(2), 311–329. Jang, J. (2022). The regression to military authoritarianism of Myanmar: Dynamics of the military coup in perspective of civil-military relations. The Korean History Education Review, (161), 29–63. Chao, D. (2024). Resistance from overseas: US diasporic and transnational activism in response to the 2021 Myanmar military coup. Asian American Research Journal, 4(0). University of California, Berkeley. 三、英文專書 Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business. Acharya, A. (1998). Culture, security, multilateralism: The "ASEAN way" and regional order. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 20(1), 55–84. Chenoweth, E., & Stephan, M. J. (2011). Why civil resistance works: The strategic logic of nonviolent conflict. Columbia University Press. Curtis, M. (1981). Totalitarianism. Transaction Publishers. Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age (p. 22). Polity Press. Dalton, D. (1993). Mahatma Gandhi: Nonviolent power in action. Columbia University Press. D. I. Steinberg, The military in Burma/Myanmar: On the longevity of Tatmadaw rule and influence (Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, 2021), 1–37. Friedrich, C. J., & Brzezinski, Z. (1965). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press. p. 17. Arendt, H. (1951). The origins of totalitarianism. Harcourt, Brace & Company. p. 324. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. Lynne Rienner Publishers. p. 55. Pipes, R. (1995). Russia under the Bolshevik regime. Vintage Books. pp. 270–280. Conquest, R. (1991). The great terror: A reassessment. Oxford University Press. pp. 120–135. Tilly, C. (2006). Regimes and repertoires (pp. 15–18). University of Chicago Press. Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why men rebel (pp. 3–7). Princeton University Press. Diamond, L. (2002). Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 21–35. Erdogan, R. T. (2018). Turkey’s authoritarian drift. Foreign Affairs, 97(6), 130–139. Friedrich, C. J., & Brzezinski, Z. K. (1965). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy. Harvard University Press. Gandhi, M. K. (1993). An autobiography: The story of my experiments with truth. Beacon Press. Gerschewski, J. (2013). The three pillars of stability: Legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes. Democratization, 20(1), 13–15. Goodwin, J., Jasper, J. M., & Polletta, F. (2001). Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements. University of Chicago Press. Hroub, K. (2006). Hamas: A beginner’s guide (pp. 45–47). Pluto Press. Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Democracy's fourth wave?: Digital media and the Arab Spring. Oxford University Press. Kuru, A. T. (2019). Islam, authoritarianism, and underdevelopment. Cambridge University Press. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge University Press. Linz, J. J. (1975). An authoritarian regime: Spain. Government and Opposition, 10(4), 291–310. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. Lynne Rienner Publishers. MacFarquhar, R., & Schoenhals, M. (2006). Mao's last revolution. Harvard University Press. Mandela, N. (1995). Long walk to freedom: The autobiography of Nelson Mandela. Little, Brown and Company. Scott, J. C. (1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press. Scott, J. C. (1990). Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts. Yale University Press. Shambaugh, D. (2008). China’s communist party: Atrophy and adaptation. University of California Press. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217. Tarrow, S. (1998). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge University Press. Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Addison-Wesley. Sharp, G. (1973). The Politics of Nonviolent Action. Porter Sargent Publishers. Maung Aung Myoe. (2011). Myanmar’s China Policy since 1948. ISEAS. Steinberg, D. I. (2021). The military in Burma/Myanmar: On the longevity of Tatmadaw rule and influence (pp. 1–37). Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute. Maung Aung Myoe. (2011). Myanmar’s China Policy since 1948. Singapore: ISEAS. Selth, A. (2002). Burma's Armed Forces: Power Without Glory (pp. 45–47). EastBridge. Selth, A. (2001). Burma's Security Forces: Performing, Reforming or Transforming? Griffith Asia Institute. Kyaw Yin Hlaing. (2005). In M. Alagappa (Ed.), Coercion and Governance. Stanford University Press. International Institute for Strategic Studies. (2002–2024). The Military Balance. London: Routledge. 四、網路資料 Amnesty International. (2021, May 5). Myanmar: Global civil society statement on Myanmar. <https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa16/4077/2021/en/> BBC News. (2023, September 11). A turning point in Myanmar as army suffers big losses. <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-67305690> European Union External Action Service. (2021, March 22). EU sanctions in response to the military coup in Myanmar/Burma. <https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/myanmarburma-eu-sanctions-response-military-coup_en> Freedom House. (2024). Freedom in the world report. <https://freedomhouse.org> Human Rights Watch. (2021). Myanmar: Post-coup crackdown intensifies. <https://www.hrw.org> Butler, G. (2023, October 9). Myanmar ranked second most repressive country for internet freedom. Myanmar Now. <https://myanmar-now.org/en/news/myanmar-ranked-second-most-repressive-country-for-internet-freedom/> Strangio, S. (2024, October 17). Military-ruled Myanmar falls to bottom of internet freedom ranking. The Diplomat. <https://thediplomat.com/2024/10/military-ruled-myanmar-falls-to-bottom-of-internet-freedom-ranking/> United Nations Human Rights Council. (2022). Report on the situation in Myanmar. <https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/country-reports/ahrc5221-situation-human-rights-myanmar-1-february-2022-report-united> Myo Aung. (2022). The International Crisis Group (Conflict & Crisis) Myanmar Update 17 Feb 2022. International Crisis Group. Human Rights Watch. (2022). The Role of Ethnic Armed Organizations in Myanmar’s Crisis. <https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/myanmar> BBC News. (2023, September 11). A turning point in Myanmar as army suffers big losses. <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-67305690> The Diplomat. (2022, January 14). How Myanmar’s coup has reshaped its ethnic conflicts.<https://thediplomat.com/2022/01/how-myanmars-coup-has-reshaped-its-ethnic-conflicts/> Reuters. (2022, February 1). U.S., Britain, Canada issue new Myanmar sanctions one year after coup. <https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-issues-myanmar-related-sanctions-treasury-website-2022-01-31/> Amnesty International. (2021, May 5). Myanmar: Global Civil Society Statement on Myanmar.<https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa16/4077/2021/en/> ASEAN Secretariat. (2021). ASEAN response to Myanmar crisis. Wongcha-um, P., & Johnson, K. (2021). ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus on Myanmar. Reuters. UN News. (2021). UN Security Council discusses Myanmar crisis. <https://news.un.org> Selth, A. (2021). Myanmar's military mindset. Lowy Institute. Abnett, K. (2021). Myanmar’s military coup and China’s silent backing. Reuters. <https://www.reuters.com/> Acharya, A. (1998). Culture, security, multilateralism: The "ASEAN Way" and regional order. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 20(1), 55–84. International Crisis Group. (2021). Responding to the Myanmar coup. <https://www.crisisgroup.org> International Crisis Group. (2022). The dangerous stalemate in post-coup Myanmar. <https://www.crisisgroup.org> The Economist. (2021, September 25). Myanmar’s resistance movement is turning violent.<https://www.economist.com/asia/2021/09/25/myanmars-resistance-movement-is-turning-violent> SIPRI Arms Transfers Database (1990s–2020s). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. IISS. (2002–2024). The Military Balance. Routledge. Defense Intelligence Agency. (2004). Military Power of Burma (Declassified Briefing). Special Advisory Council for Myanmar. (2024). Effective control in Myanmar: 2024 update [PDF]. <https://specialadvisorycouncil.org/reports/SAC-M-Effective-Control-in-Myanmar-2024-Update-ENGLISH.pdf> ACLED. (2024). Myanmar Conflict Tracker: Drone Warfare and Battlefield Trends. <https://acleddata.com> DW. (2024, November 12). Myanmar resistance ramps up drone strikes as war escalates. Deutsche Welle. <https://www.dw.com/en/myanmar-drones> Thant, S. M. (2024). War from the sky: Drones and the Myanmar resistance. Left Renewal. <https://leftrenewal.org/articles-en/su-mon-war-from-the-sky> Radio Free Asia. (2025, March 15). Myanmar’s junta seeks to regain air edge with foreign night vision drones. <https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-drones> International Crisis Group. (2021). The Cost of the coup: Myanmar Edges Toward State Collapse <https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/cost-coup-myanmar-edges-toward-state-collapse-0> Thant, S. M. (2021, December). In the wake of the coup: How Myanmar youth arose to fight for the nation [E-paper]. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. Pongsudhirak, T. (2024, May 16). Revolution leaves Myanmar up for grabs. Bangkok Post. The Irrawaddy. (2025, March 8). What we know about the Myanmar junta’s promise ofelections.<https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/politics/what-we-know-about-the-myanmar-juntas-promise-of-elections> Ye, M. H. (2022, March). The root causes of Myanmar’s coup go deeper. Wilson Center. <https://www.wilsoncenter.org> Myers, L. (2024). The Myanmar junta under siege. Wilson Center. <https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/myanmar-junta-under-siege> S. Hmung. (2021, June 10). New friends, old enemies: Politics of ethnic armed organisations after the Myanmar coup (Policy Briefing–SEARBO). Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Australian National University. ACLED, International Crisis Group, & Transnational Institute. (2023). Special Advisory Council for Myanmar. (2024). Effective Control in Myanmar: 2024 Update.<https://specialadvisorycouncil.org/reports/SAC-M-Effective-Control-in-Myanmar-2024-Update-ENGLISH.pdf> ACLED. (2024). Myanmar Conflict Tracker: Drone Warfare and Battlefield Trends. <https://acleddata.com> Deutsche Welle. (2024, November 12). Myanmar resistance ramps up drone strikes as war escalates.<https://www.dw.com/en/myanmar-drones> Su Mon Thant. (2024). War from the sky: Drones and the Myanmar resistance. Left Renewal. <https://leftrenewal.org/articles-en/su-mon-war-from-the-sky> Radio Free Asia. (2025, March 15). Myanmar’s junta seeks to regain air edge with foreign night vision drones. <https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-drones> Burma News International. (n.d.). Myanmar Peace Monitor – English news archive. Retrieved July 17, 2025. <https://mmpeacemonitor.org/en/category/en-news/> The Diplomat. (2022, January 14). How Myanmar’s coup has reshaped its ethnic conflicts.<https://thediplomat.com/2022/01/how-myanmars-coup-has-reshaped-its-ethnic-conflicts/> Myo Aung. (2022, February 17). Myanmar update. International Crisis Group. Human Rights Watch. (2024). The role of ethnic armed organizations in Myanmar’s crisis.<https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/myanmar> SIPRI Arms Transfers Database. (1990s–2020s). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Defense Intelligence Agency. (2004). Military Power of Burma (Declassified Briefing). Hnin Nu Nu Naing, & Htun, Y. (2025). Navigating coup dynamics in Myanmar’s digital era: The responsibilities of private companies in managing state digital assets. Technical University of Darmstadt, Science and Technology for Peace and Security (PEASEC). Retrieved February 7, 2025, <https://spp.cmu.ac.th/> U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2021, February 11). Treasury sanctions leaders of Burma’s military coup under Executive Order 14014. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0024 Reuters. (2022, February 1). U.S., Britain, Canada issue new Myanmar sanctions one year after coup. Reuters. <https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-issues-myanmar-related-sanctions-treasury-website-2022-01-31/> UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office. (2021, March 25). UK sanctions military-linked businesses in Myanmar. <https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-sanctions-military-linked-businesses-in-myanmar> United States Congress. (2021). Protecting Democracy in Burma Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117–31. United States Congress. (2022). Rohingya Genocide Determination Act of 2022, Pub. L. No. 117–346. United States Congress. (2022). Burma Act of 2022, Division AA of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Pub. L. No. 117–328. International Crisis Group. (2021). China’s role in Myanmar’s internal conflicts (Asia Report No. 312). <https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/312-chinas-role-myanmars-internal-conflicts> Sun, Y. (2021, February). China and the Myanmar coup. Brookings Institution. <https://www.brookings.edu/articles/china-and-the-myanmar-coup/> International Crisis Group. (2022). Myanmar’s military struggles to control the north (Asia Briefing No. 178). <https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/b178-myanmars-military-struggles-control-north> The Irrawaddy. (2021, June 29). Belt and road projects in Myanmar. <https://www.irrawaddy.com/specials/burma-briefing/belt-and-road-projects-in-myanmar.html> ASEAN Secretariat. (2021, April 24). Chairman’s statement on the ASEAN leaders’ meeting. <https://asean.org/> Moe Thuzar. (2022). ASEAN’s Myanmar crisis: Deadlock, division, and diplomacy. ISEAS Perspective.< https://www.iseas.edu.sg/> Wongcha-um, P., & Johnson, K. (2021, April 24). ASEAN’s five-point consensus on Myanmar. Reuters. <https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/aseans-five-point-consensus-myanmar-2021-04-24/> 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班
112922020資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112922020 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 李佳怡 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Lee, Chia-Yi en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 李仕祥 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lee, Shih-Xiang en_US dc.creator (作者) 李仕祥 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Lee, Shih-Xiang en_US dc.date (日期) 2025 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2025 16:45:11 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2025 16:45:11 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2025 16:45:11 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0112922020 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159367 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 112922020 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 對抗專制化是當代全球政治中的重要課題，特別是在完全專制體制下，抵抗運動如何生存、演化與發揮作用，亟需深入探討。本研究以2021年緬甸軍事政變後的抵抗運動為案例，分析在高壓統治下多元抗爭策略的運作方式與成效。 緬甸在政變後迅速專制化，軍政府透過武力鎮壓、法律控制與資訊封鎖鞏固統治。然而，民眾展現了前所未見的抗爭韌性，涵蓋公民不服從、罷工、數位動員與武裝反抗。特別值得注意的是，緬族Z世代因成長於民主轉型期間，擁有強烈民主意識與數位動員能力，成為街頭與網路抗爭的中堅；老一輩則帶著對軍政的不滿與記憶，世代共鳴成為抵抗動力。少數民族武裝組織（EAOs）藉此重新取得政治機會，與緬族力量並肩對抗軍方，實現史無前例的族群合作。 本研究採用專制化與社會運動理論，結合學術文獻、國際報導、社群數據與NGO資料，指出抵抗效能來自策略多樣性與空間靈活性，包括對經濟、象徵、政治與武力的全面挑戰；同時強調地理嵌入、網路空間與國際尺度的延展作用。 緬甸案例證明，在完全專制壓迫下，結合社會基層動員、數位科技、跨族群聯盟與國際支持的綜合抗爭模式，具備高度持久性與動員力。其經驗為理解極權體制下社會運動提供重要啟示。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Confronting authoritarianism is a key challenge in contemporary global politics, especially in fully authoritarian regimes where resistance strategies, spatial dynamics, and effectiveness require deeper academic exploration. This study examines Myanmar’s post-2021 coup resistance movement as a case to analyze how diverse forms of resistance operate and persist under extreme repression. Following the coup, Myanmar rapidly transformed into a fully authoritarian regime. The military junta consolidated power through violent crackdowns, legal repression, and information control. Despite this, the public demonstrated unprecedented resilience through a wide array of resistance tactics—ranging from civil disobedience and strikes to digital mobilization and armed resistance. Notably, a new generation of ethnic Bamar youth (Gen Z), raised during the country's democratic transition, emerged as the core force in street and online protests due to their strong democratic consciousness and digital capabilities. Meanwhile, older generations, driven by long-standing grievances, joined the movement, creating a powerful intergenerational resonance. Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) seized the opportunity to reassert their political agency by aligning with Burmaeseled resistance forces, forming an unprecedented cross-ethnic alliance against the junta. This study draws on theories of authoritarianism and social movements, utilizing academic literature, international media, social media data, and NGO reports. It finds that the effectiveness of Myanmar’s resistance stems from its strategic diversity and spatial adaptability—challenging the regime across economic, symbolic, political, and military dimensions. Territorial embeddedness, digital networks, and international scaling further strengthen the movement’s resilience. The Myanmar case demonstrates that, even under fully authoritarian conditions, a resistance model that integrates grassroots mobilization, digital technology, cross-ethnic alliances, and international support can be both durable and impactful. It offers critical insights for understanding social movements under authoritarian regimes. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 摘要 II 表次 IX 圖次 XI 第壹章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究問題與目的 3 第三節 研究途徑與範圍限制 4 第四節 結構總覽 6 第貳章 文獻回顧 11 第一節 完全專制化與社會運動 12 第二節 抵抗理論與抵抗策略 21 第三節 緬甸政變的歷史脈絡 27 第四節 小結 33 第參章 反政變抗議和全面內戰升級的原因 35 第一節 2021年軍事政變的成因 35 第二節 抵抗運動升級全面武裝衝突 38 第三節 人民防衛軍與民族武裝結盟的競合關係 45 第四節 小結 54 第肆章 全國武裝抵抗的擴散效應 57 第一節 影響武裝抵抗的內外部因素 57 第二節 全國民族武裝抵抗的成效分析 64 第三節 軍政府與全國民族團結政府的戰情分析 67 第四節 小結 77 第伍章 抵抗策略的應用分析 79 第一節 城鄉抵抗之策略應用 79 第二節 武裝革命之領土控制 83 第三節 數位科技之網路空間 86 第四節 尺度策略之國際效應 89 第五節 小結 98 第陸章 結論 101 第一節 研究發現 101 第二節 研究總結 110 參考文獻 113 zh_TW dc.format.extent 13088307 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112922020 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 緬甸 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 軍事政變 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專制化 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 抵抗策略 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 武裝抵抗 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Myanmar en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Military Coup en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Autocratization en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Resistance Strategies en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Armed Resistance en_US dc.title (題名) 完全專制化的抵抗策略研究: 以「2021年緬甸軍事政變後的抵抗運動」為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Resistance Strategies in Full Autocratization : A Case Study of the Resistance Movement Following the 2021 Myanmar Military Coup en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻 李向陽（2015）。佛教在緬甸社會中的角色與影響。《世界宗教研究》，6，56–72。 趙中麒（2021）。以「捍衛憲法」為名的緬甸政變？《台灣東南亞學刊》，16(1)，25–34。 司徒宇（2021）。2021緬甸軍事政變成因剖析。《台灣東南亞學刊》，16(1)，5–14。 林佾靜（2024）。緬甸軍事政變及內戰情勢發展：民族武裝團體的角色。《遠景基金會季刊》，25(3)。 賴怡靜（2023）。緬甸政治體制變遷：民主化動因分析（1948–2022）（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學東亞學系。 施欣妤（2018）。緬甸的族群衝突與管理之分析：以克欽族為例（1994～2015）（碩士論文）。國立政治大學政治學系研究所。 司徒宇。（2023）。緬甸本土「抗議藝術」與反軍政府運動。《台灣東南亞學刊》，18(1)，37–72。 二、英文期刊論文 Calhoun, C. (2013). Occupy Wall Street in perspective. British Journal of Sociology, 64(1), 26–38. Corrales, J. (2020). Democratic erosion in Venezuela. Comparative Politics, 52(3), 379–402. Coppel, N., & Chang, L. Y. C. (2021). Myanmar’s digital coup. Australia Myanmar Institute; Deakin Cyber Research and Innovation Centre, Deakin University. Della Porta, D. (2018). Contentious politics and social movements. In The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology (pp. 463–477). Florea, A. (2017). Rebel governance in de facto states. European Journal of International Relations, 23(2), 386–408. Frydenlund, I., Hayward, S., & Strefford, P. (2022). Religious responses to the military coup in Myanmar. Politics, Religion & Ideology, 23(4), 517–523. Ganesan, N. (2023). Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, its impact on domestic politics, and a revolutionary road to democratization? Asian Journal of Peacebuilding, 11(2), 311–329. Guntrum, L. G. (2022). Keyboard fighters: The use of ICTs by activists in times of military coup in Myanmar. Science and Technology for Peace and Security (PEASEC), Technical University of Darmstadt. Hess, D., & Martin, B. (2006). Repression, backfire, and the theory of transformative events. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 11(2), 249–267. Holliday, I. (2021). Myanmar’s military and politics: From transition to coup. Journal of Contemporary Southeast Asian Studies, 42(3), 245–267. Human Rights Watch. (2021). Myanmar: Post-coup crackdown intensifies. Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press. Kyed, H. M., & Lynn, A. (2024). Soldier defection as a revolutionary strategy in Myanmar. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 54(5), 824–845. Mang, P. Z. (2017). Religion, ethnicity, and nationalism in Burma. Journal of Church and State, 59(4), 626–648. <https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/csx063> Mustasilta, K., & Svensson, I. (2023). The path to arms: From civil resistance to armed rebellion. Journal of Peace Research. Pearlman, W. (2011). Violence, nonviolence, and the Palestinian national movement. Cambridge University Press. Prasse-Freeman, E., & Kabya, K. (2021). Revolutionary responses to the Myanmar coup. Anthropology Today. Rogers, R. A., Liew, W. C., & Sidhu, J. S. (2024). The United States’ Myanmar policy after the 2021 military coup and its prospects under China–US strategic competition. Asian Affairs: An American Review. Thawnghmung, A. M., & Hlaing, Y. T. (2024). Movement escalation and mobilization for resistance: From anti-coup protest to ‘People's War’ in Myanmar. Political Geography, 114, 103165. Thawnghmung, A. M. (2018). The “Rohingya Crisis” in context: Statelessness, security, and ethnic identity. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs. Thida, H. M. (2021). People’s perception of the role of foreign power in Myanmar: A case study of the 2021 military coup. Korea Institute for International Economic Policy Forum on Peace and Reconciliation. Wolford, W. (2010). This land is ours now: Social mobilization and the meanings of land in Brazil. Duke University Press. Jang, J. (2022). The regression to military authoritarianism of Myanmar: Dynamics of the military coup in perspective of civil-military relations. The Korean History Education Review, (161), 29–63. Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2024). BTI 2024: Myanmar country report. BTI Transformation Index. <https://bti-project.org/en/reports/country-report/MMR> Chin Association of Maryland. (2021, October). After the 2021 military coup in Myanmar/Burma: Challenges for internally displaced persons and refugees. Chin Association of Maryland, Inc. Maung Aung Myoe. (2009). Building the Tatmadaw: Myanmar armed forces since 1948. ISEAS. McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241. (p. 1217) Selth, A. (2002). Burma's Armed Forces: Power Without Glory. EastBridge. Selth, A. (2001). Burma's Security Forces: Performing, Reforming or Transforming? Griffith Asia Institute. Hlaing, K. Y. (2005). In M. Alagappa (Ed.), Coercion and Governance. Stanford University Press. Kim, S. J. (2014). North Korea's totalitarian system. Asian Perspective, 38(2), 165–186. Katz, N. (2009). Myanmar’s political trajectory: From socialist republic to military junta. Journal of Asian Studies, 68(4), 1123–1141. McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82(6), 1212–1241. Taylor, R. H. (2021). Economic challenges and military power in Myanmar. International Affairs Review, 58(4), 89–110. Jordt, I., Than, T., & Lin, S. Y. (2021). How Generation Z galvanized a revolutionary movement against Myanmar’s 2021 military coup. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 52(3), 445–467. Stokke, K., & Kyaw, N. N. (2024). Revolutionary resistance against full autocratization: Actors and strategies of resistance after the 2021 military coup in Myanmar. Political Geography, 108, 103011. H. Ye, “The root causes of Myanmar’s coup go deeper,” Wilson Center, March 2022. Ganesan, N. (2023). Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, its impact on domestic politics, and a revolutionary road to democratization? Asian Journal of Peacebuilding, 11(2), 311–329. Jang, J. (2022). The regression to military authoritarianism of Myanmar: Dynamics of the military coup in perspective of civil-military relations. The Korean History Education Review, (161), 29–63. Chao, D. (2024). Resistance from overseas: US diasporic and transnational activism in response to the 2021 Myanmar military coup. Asian American Research Journal, 4(0). University of California, Berkeley. 三、英文專書 Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business. Acharya, A. (1998). Culture, security, multilateralism: The "ASEAN way" and regional order. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 20(1), 55–84. Chenoweth, E., & Stephan, M. J. (2011). Why civil resistance works: The strategic logic of nonviolent conflict. Columbia University Press. Curtis, M. (1981). Totalitarianism. Transaction Publishers. Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age (p. 22). Polity Press. Dalton, D. (1993). Mahatma Gandhi: Nonviolent power in action. Columbia University Press. D. I. Steinberg, The military in Burma/Myanmar: On the longevity of Tatmadaw rule and influence (Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, 2021), 1–37. Friedrich, C. J., & Brzezinski, Z. (1965). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press. p. 17. Arendt, H. (1951). The origins of totalitarianism. Harcourt, Brace & Company. p. 324. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. Lynne Rienner Publishers. p. 55. Pipes, R. (1995). Russia under the Bolshevik regime. Vintage Books. pp. 270–280. Conquest, R. (1991). The great terror: A reassessment. Oxford University Press. pp. 120–135. Tilly, C. (2006). Regimes and repertoires (pp. 15–18). University of Chicago Press. Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why men rebel (pp. 3–7). Princeton University Press. Diamond, L. (2002). Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 21–35. Erdogan, R. T. (2018). Turkey’s authoritarian drift. Foreign Affairs, 97(6), 130–139. Friedrich, C. J., & Brzezinski, Z. K. (1965). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy. Harvard University Press. Gandhi, M. K. (1993). An autobiography: The story of my experiments with truth. Beacon Press. Gerschewski, J. (2013). The three pillars of stability: Legitimation, repression, and co-optation in autocratic regimes. Democratization, 20(1), 13–15. Goodwin, J., Jasper, J. M., & Polletta, F. (2001). Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements. University of Chicago Press. Hroub, K. (2006). Hamas: A beginner’s guide (pp. 45–47). Pluto Press. Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Democracy's fourth wave?: Digital media and the Arab Spring. Oxford University Press. Kuru, A. T. (2019). Islam, authoritarianism, and underdevelopment. Cambridge University Press. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge University Press. Linz, J. J. (1975). An authoritarian regime: Spain. Government and Opposition, 10(4), 291–310. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. Lynne Rienner Publishers. MacFarquhar, R., & Schoenhals, M. (2006). Mao's last revolution. Harvard University Press. Mandela, N. (1995). Long walk to freedom: The autobiography of Nelson Mandela. Little, Brown and Company. Scott, J. C. (1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press. Scott, J. C. (1990). Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts. Yale University Press. Shambaugh, D. (2008). China’s communist party: Atrophy and adaptation. University of California Press. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217. Tarrow, S. (1998). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge University Press. Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Addison-Wesley. Sharp, G. (1973). The Politics of Nonviolent Action. Porter Sargent Publishers. Maung Aung Myoe. (2011). Myanmar’s China Policy since 1948. ISEAS. Steinberg, D. I. (2021). The military in Burma/Myanmar: On the longevity of Tatmadaw rule and influence (pp. 1–37). Singapore: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute. Maung Aung Myoe. (2011). Myanmar’s China Policy since 1948. Singapore: ISEAS. Selth, A. (2002). Burma's Armed Forces: Power Without Glory (pp. 45–47). EastBridge. Selth, A. (2001). Burma's Security Forces: Performing, Reforming or Transforming? Griffith Asia Institute. Kyaw Yin Hlaing. (2005). In M. Alagappa (Ed.), Coercion and Governance. Stanford University Press. International Institute for Strategic Studies. (2002–2024). The Military Balance. London: Routledge. 四、網路資料 Amnesty International. (2021, May 5). Myanmar: Global civil society statement on Myanmar. <https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa16/4077/2021/en/> BBC News. (2023, September 11). A turning point in Myanmar as army suffers big losses. <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-67305690> European Union External Action Service. (2021, March 22). EU sanctions in response to the military coup in Myanmar/Burma. <https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/myanmarburma-eu-sanctions-response-military-coup_en> Freedom House. (2024). Freedom in the world report. <https://freedomhouse.org> Human Rights Watch. (2021). Myanmar: Post-coup crackdown intensifies. <https://www.hrw.org> Butler, G. (2023, October 9). Myanmar ranked second most repressive country for internet freedom. Myanmar Now. <https://myanmar-now.org/en/news/myanmar-ranked-second-most-repressive-country-for-internet-freedom/> Strangio, S. (2024, October 17). Military-ruled Myanmar falls to bottom of internet freedom ranking. The Diplomat. <https://thediplomat.com/2024/10/military-ruled-myanmar-falls-to-bottom-of-internet-freedom-ranking/> United Nations Human Rights Council. (2022). Report on the situation in Myanmar. <https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/country-reports/ahrc5221-situation-human-rights-myanmar-1-february-2022-report-united> Myo Aung. (2022). The International Crisis Group (Conflict & Crisis) Myanmar Update 17 Feb 2022. International Crisis Group. Human Rights Watch. (2022). The Role of Ethnic Armed Organizations in Myanmar’s Crisis. <https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/myanmar> BBC News. (2023, September 11). A turning point in Myanmar as army suffers big losses. <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-67305690> The Diplomat. (2022, January 14). How Myanmar’s coup has reshaped its ethnic conflicts.<https://thediplomat.com/2022/01/how-myanmars-coup-has-reshaped-its-ethnic-conflicts/> Reuters. (2022, February 1). U.S., Britain, Canada issue new Myanmar sanctions one year after coup. <https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-issues-myanmar-related-sanctions-treasury-website-2022-01-31/> Amnesty International. (2021, May 5). Myanmar: Global Civil Society Statement on Myanmar.<https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa16/4077/2021/en/> ASEAN Secretariat. (2021). ASEAN response to Myanmar crisis. Wongcha-um, P., & Johnson, K. (2021). ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus on Myanmar. Reuters. UN News. (2021). UN Security Council discusses Myanmar crisis. <https://news.un.org> Selth, A. (2021). Myanmar's military mindset. Lowy Institute. Abnett, K. (2021). Myanmar’s military coup and China’s silent backing. Reuters. <https://www.reuters.com/> Acharya, A. (1998). Culture, security, multilateralism: The "ASEAN Way" and regional order. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 20(1), 55–84. International Crisis Group. (2021). Responding to the Myanmar coup. <https://www.crisisgroup.org> International Crisis Group. (2022). The dangerous stalemate in post-coup Myanmar. <https://www.crisisgroup.org> The Economist. (2021, September 25). Myanmar’s resistance movement is turning violent.<https://www.economist.com/asia/2021/09/25/myanmars-resistance-movement-is-turning-violent> SIPRI Arms Transfers Database (1990s–2020s). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. IISS. (2002–2024). The Military Balance. Routledge. Defense Intelligence Agency. (2004). Military Power of Burma (Declassified Briefing). Special Advisory Council for Myanmar. (2024). Effective control in Myanmar: 2024 update [PDF]. <https://specialadvisorycouncil.org/reports/SAC-M-Effective-Control-in-Myanmar-2024-Update-ENGLISH.pdf> ACLED. (2024). Myanmar Conflict Tracker: Drone Warfare and Battlefield Trends. <https://acleddata.com> DW. (2024, November 12). Myanmar resistance ramps up drone strikes as war escalates. Deutsche Welle. <https://www.dw.com/en/myanmar-drones> Thant, S. M. (2024). War from the sky: Drones and the Myanmar resistance. Left Renewal. <https://leftrenewal.org/articles-en/su-mon-war-from-the-sky> Radio Free Asia. (2025, March 15). Myanmar’s junta seeks to regain air edge with foreign night vision drones. <https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-drones> International Crisis Group. (2021). The Cost of the coup: Myanmar Edges Toward State Collapse <https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/cost-coup-myanmar-edges-toward-state-collapse-0> Thant, S. M. (2021, December). In the wake of the coup: How Myanmar youth arose to fight for the nation [E-paper]. Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung. Pongsudhirak, T. (2024, May 16). Revolution leaves Myanmar up for grabs. Bangkok Post. The Irrawaddy. (2025, March 8). What we know about the Myanmar junta’s promise ofelections.<https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/politics/what-we-know-about-the-myanmar-juntas-promise-of-elections> Ye, M. H. (2022, March). The root causes of Myanmar’s coup go deeper. Wilson Center. <https://www.wilsoncenter.org> Myers, L. (2024). The Myanmar junta under siege. Wilson Center. <https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/myanmar-junta-under-siege> S. Hmung. (2021, June 10). New friends, old enemies: Politics of ethnic armed organisations after the Myanmar coup (Policy Briefing–SEARBO). Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, Australian National University. ACLED, International Crisis Group, & Transnational Institute. (2023). Special Advisory Council for Myanmar. (2024). Effective Control in Myanmar: 2024 Update.<https://specialadvisorycouncil.org/reports/SAC-M-Effective-Control-in-Myanmar-2024-Update-ENGLISH.pdf> ACLED. (2024). Myanmar Conflict Tracker: Drone Warfare and Battlefield Trends. <https://acleddata.com> Deutsche Welle. (2024, November 12). Myanmar resistance ramps up drone strikes as war escalates.<https://www.dw.com/en/myanmar-drones> Su Mon Thant. (2024). War from the sky: Drones and the Myanmar resistance. Left Renewal. <https://leftrenewal.org/articles-en/su-mon-war-from-the-sky> Radio Free Asia. (2025, March 15). Myanmar’s junta seeks to regain air edge with foreign night vision drones. <https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-drones> Burma News International. (n.d.). Myanmar Peace Monitor – English news archive. Retrieved July 17, 2025. <https://mmpeacemonitor.org/en/category/en-news/> The Diplomat. (2022, January 14). How Myanmar’s coup has reshaped its ethnic conflicts.<https://thediplomat.com/2022/01/how-myanmars-coup-has-reshaped-its-ethnic-conflicts/> Myo Aung. (2022, February 17). Myanmar update. International Crisis Group. Human Rights Watch. (2024). The role of ethnic armed organizations in Myanmar’s crisis.<https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/myanmar> SIPRI Arms Transfers Database. (1990s–2020s). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Defense Intelligence Agency. (2004). Military Power of Burma (Declassified Briefing). Hnin Nu Nu Naing, & Htun, Y. (2025). Navigating coup dynamics in Myanmar’s digital era: The responsibilities of private companies in managing state digital assets. Technical University of Darmstadt, Science and Technology for Peace and Security (PEASEC). Retrieved February 7, 2025, <https://spp.cmu.ac.th/> U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2021, February 11). Treasury sanctions leaders of Burma’s military coup under Executive Order 14014. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0024 Reuters. (2022, February 1). U.S., Britain, Canada issue new Myanmar sanctions one year after coup. Reuters. <https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-issues-myanmar-related-sanctions-treasury-website-2022-01-31/> UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office. (2021, March 25). UK sanctions military-linked businesses in Myanmar. <https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-sanctions-military-linked-businesses-in-myanmar> United States Congress. (2021). Protecting Democracy in Burma Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117–31. United States Congress. (2022). Rohingya Genocide Determination Act of 2022, Pub. L. No. 117–346. United States Congress. (2022). Burma Act of 2022, Division AA of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Pub. L. No. 117–328. International Crisis Group. (2021). China’s role in Myanmar’s internal conflicts (Asia Report No. 312). <https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/312-chinas-role-myanmars-internal-conflicts> Sun, Y. (2021, February). China and the Myanmar coup. Brookings Institution. <https://www.brookings.edu/articles/china-and-the-myanmar-coup/> International Crisis Group. (2022). Myanmar’s military struggles to control the north (Asia Briefing No. 178). <https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/b178-myanmars-military-struggles-control-north> The Irrawaddy. (2021, June 29). Belt and road projects in Myanmar. <https://www.irrawaddy.com/specials/burma-briefing/belt-and-road-projects-in-myanmar.html> ASEAN Secretariat. (2021, April 24). Chairman’s statement on the ASEAN leaders’ meeting. <https://asean.org/> Moe Thuzar. (2022). ASEAN’s Myanmar crisis: Deadlock, division, and diplomacy. ISEAS Perspective.< https://www.iseas.edu.sg/> Wongcha-um, P., & Johnson, K. (2021, April 24). ASEAN’s five-point consensus on Myanmar. Reuters. <https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/aseans-five-point-consensus-myanmar-2021-04-24/> zh_TW
