Rhetorical analysis helped me to understand how to use different strategies to reach the targets that I wanted to say to the various audiences. I chose a social topic using academic and popular sources to analysis.

Rhetorical Analysis of Myanmar’s Military, Civilian government, and Rohingya

The Republic of the Union of Myanmar, also known as Burma, is one of the countries in the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), and bordered by India, China, Laos, Thailand, and Bangladesh. Myanmar used be the the richest country in South East Asia after the Second World War, but it all collapsed in 1962 since the military took power. Now, the country is civilian government, and still sharing the power with the military, which makes the country suffers with ethnic conflicts and poor standard of living. The paper is about applying different sources to analyze how the authors use different strategies to attain their targets, and discuss the connection between military, government, citizens, and the Rohingya.

An article titled “Myanmar’s Military Planned Rohingya Genocide, Rights Group says” was published in The New York Times Magazines, and written by Hannah Beech. She uses a serious tone to support her claim that Myanmar’s army arranged a military operation on the Rohingya using Fortify Rights’ report which is based on survivors, officials and workers. The author emphasizes on the meticulous campaign which made about 700,000 Rohingya Muslims flee to Bangladesh, and lists the process of how military planned for that. “Beginning in October 2016….military and local officials removed sharp tools, destroyed fence…, armed and trained ethnic Rakhine Buddhists, shut off the spigot…and more troops were sent to northern Rakhine State…”, the writer focuses on the time to support her claim more strongly. Then, the author compares the stories when Myanmar’s military and civilian government were condemned with “ethnic cleansing” and “the hallmarks of genocide” by international organizations, the Myanmar government defined that there was no ethnic cleansing and genocide in Myanmar, and it was a response to attacks by Rohingya militants. Even though this comparison addresses the conflict message to the readers, the author implies that when Myanmar is controlled by both civilian government and military, the sanctions placed by the United States and other western governments were lifted. Then, the author ends the article with the speech of Kerry Kennedy that challenges the Myanmar government’s response. She thought there should be more sanctions on the officers who Fortify Rights names. This made her argument stronger and easier for readers to believe.

Unlike Hannah Beech who chose to publish on The New York Times and wanted to make the audience believe that Myanmar’s military violated the Rohingya, Kevin Bi published in an academic journal “The Politics of Slaughter: Why Myanmar’s Military Targets the Rohingya” on Academic One File as his purpose is to establish and analyze the facts of how the Rohingya became the most vulnerable ethnic groups in Myanmar to the audience, who are familiar with the situation in Myanmar, with a subjective’s tone. He starts with how the Rohingya crisis became the world’s horror, and describes that around 6,700 Rohingya were slaughter in one month by the Tatmadaw, the Myanmar military, which points out to readers that this was not an ethnic conflict compared to other ethnic conflicts like the Kachin and Nokang in Myanmar. The author emphasizes the geopolitical motivation of the Tatmadaw, which led to unbalanced treatment and egregious violence on the Rohingya. First, he acknowledges that the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) and the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) which exports gold, amber, and jade to China, while the Kokang fled into China because of the conflict with the Myanmar central government. It is clear that both ethnic groups have had a relationship with China and did receive support from them. Then, he expresses why China supports the KIA and Kokang, which are both from northern Myanmar, but not Rohingya, which are from western Myanmar, due to geography. This achieved his purpose, then, he extends to the connection between Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the Myanmar democracy government, and the military. The writer characterizes how the religion of Rohingya, which is Muslim, affects the conflict, and ends the essay with they were the perfect target for the Tatmadaw to survive politically. 

An article “ How Myanmar’s Military Wields Power From The Shadows” was published by CFR ( Council on Foreign Relations). The interview was conducted and edited by Eleanor Albert in which the interviewee is Francis Wade, a journalist and author. In the article, the writer asks questions about the consequences after  Rohingya crisis, and narrates with a peaceful tone. Her purpose is to explain why Aung San Suu Kyi did not follow the ways of the international organizations expected, and emphasizes the government, and hoe the country’s neighbors and United States should focus and improve the situation. The author starts the first question with that since Aung San Suu Kyi and her government have been condemned for their response to the situation in Rakhine State, is this warranted? And, the answer is “Aung San Suu Kyi should not be the target of all blame… Min Aung Hlaing, the military chief, is the person to whom blame should be primary directed.” This points out to the audience who should be responsible for the Rakhine massacre between Aung San Suu Kyi, and the military. Then, the author explains the power-sharing agreement, which made Aung San Suu Kyi cooperate with the military, to attain her purpose successfully. The most highlighted part is the writer compares the sides of how the  international community and domestic citizens looked at the Rohingya; the former sees the Rohingya as the victims, while the natives see them as aggressors. Although Aung San Suu Kyi has been describes as a fallen icon by the outside world, it does not reflect that this is what the  domestic people want from her, and they still support her. Finally, the author ends the article with that the population should see the Rohingya as human beings, and provide, and safeguard them, and as the United States, and other governments, they should build diplomatic pressure to investigate, and to punish those who are responsible for the violence. Therefore, the author persuades  the readers with simple, interesting questions, and apply some keywords with large and colorful quotes to reach her target, and it succeeds. 

An article published on CNN News, titled “How Myanmar’s Buddhists actually feel about the Rohingya”, was written by Katie Hunt. The author uses a sharp tone in the article, but the tone contrasts with joyful and vibrant pictures of the domestic people, which differs with the interview article in which the author only addresses with peaceful, and cold pictures to set the tone. The author’s purpose is to inform the readers the real feelings of Myanmar residents about the Rohingya, and she expresses that most of the citizens were supporting Aung San Suu Kyi by watching the live speech, and she speaks English, which is not the primary language of Myanmar, to respond the Rohingya crisis. Then, the writer acknowledges with a travel agency dialogue: she strongly believes Aung San Suu Kyi can solve the problem, and emphasizes on “wrong information”, which means the international media were focused on the Rohingya while ignoring the situation of Rakhine Buddhists, and “they are terrorists to the native population”, said one noodle seller. This suggests to the audience about the prejudice of Myanmar Buddhists against the Rohingya, which leads to support the leader and the military. The author closes the article saying Aung San Suu Kyi does not have full control of the levers of power, which made the audience understand the actual feelings about Myanmar people and the Rohingya.

In conclusion, the authors use different strategies to attain their purposes, and various tones to persuade the audience. After reading the articles, the audience can receive a clear massage about the Rohingya conflicts happening in Myanmar.

References:

1. Hannah Beech. (2018, July 19). “Myanmar’s Military Planned Rohingya Genocide, Rights Group Says”. Retrieved from

2. Kevin Bi. (2018, Fall). “The Politics of Slaughter: Why Myanmar’s Military Targets the Rohingya”. Retrieved from

3. Eleanor Albert. (2017, October 2). “ How Myanmar’s Military Wields Power From The Shadows”. Retrieved from

4. Katie Hunt. (2017, September 20). “How Myanmar’s Buddhists actually feel about the Rohingya”. Retrieved from