Vol. 8, No. 3 Smith & Smith: Use and Abuse of Social Media in Myanmar between… Discussion As discussed above, after nearly fifty years of military rule and isolationism, the Constitution of 2008 signalled the country’s opening up to the outside world.150 The period from 2010 to 2015 showed promise as the power was transferred from the military to a civilian government. This period resulted in the internationalisation of the telecommunications sector and the rapid take-up of social media, essentially Facebook. There was continuity under the government of Aung San Suu Kyi until the coup of 2021 when the military returned to run the country and imposed a brutal regime. During this period, there was one constant – the various administrations did little to limit hate speech, particularly when it related to Muslims, particularly the Rohingya. At the same time, they persecuted and prosecuted those who were critical of the regime. The reasons for this lack of respect for human dignity and human rights are complex. During the period of the National League for Democracy government: "the generals have made no major concessions to the NLD. All they have done—all they have had to do—has been to stick to their constitutionally guaranteed rights and privileges. The Tatmadaw remains Burma’s strongest political institution. The generals have given up nothing that matters to them. [. . .] The hard realities of Burmese politics are these: There has been no significant transfer of political power from the generals to elected civilians, and there will be no such transfer unless and until the Tatmadaw wants it to happen. In all respects that truly matter, the generals are still in charge. If they are to cede any influence or control, it will have to be voluntary. The only authority that can limit the military’s power is the military itself. At present, it is hard to see any compelling reason why the generals would want to reduce their own political clout." 151 The violence against the Rohingya was, and remains, a major humanitarian crisis, with violence fuelled by fake news on social media. In her role as State Counsellor, Aung San Suu Kyi who is de facto leader of Myanmar, showed little interest in resolving the issue. Fake news and hate speech continued to be posted on social media, as was reported by the United Nations Human Rights Council.152 One of the reasons for this could be a feeling of ethnic superiority. Many of the Buddhist Bamar majority view the Muslim Rohingya as outsiders who do not deserve to live in the country.153 It is even argued that during the NLD government, press freedom regressed and seemed more restrictive than that during the transition period of the Thein Sein government.154 150 See for instance, Maizland (2022). Barany (2018) at 6. 152 United Nations Human Rights Council. (2019b). 153 Kurlantzick. (2017a). This was apparent when the first author was undertaking a development project in Myanmar in 2015. One of his female staff was a Buddhist engineer from Rakhine State. Her demeanour was quiet and friendly. If the name “Rohingya” was mentioned she would become quite agitated and make clear her opinion that they did not belong in Myanmar. 154 Kurlantzick (2017b, 2 March 2019). 151 324 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4150894