Anushka Vis

For the past several years, Myanmar has been in an era of civil war under the shadow of the government-controlled military junta. In February 2021, the armed forces seized power from the fragile democratic transition to the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Myanmar’s long-time pro-democracy icon and Nobel Peace Prize recipient, Aung San Suu Kyi. The coup abruptly ended a decade of tentative reform, reinstating the same generals who had ruled the country for nearly fifty years. Since then, the junta has waged a campaign to suppress opposition and consolidate power, triggering widespread armed resistance. The conflict has forced over 3.4 million people from their homes inside Myanmar, while hundreds of thousands more have sought refuge across borders in Thailand, Bangladesh, and India. Recently, there have been an alarming number of attacks on schools and hospitals. In many regions, classrooms have become sites of airstrikes and medical facilities have been raided, even when clearly marked as civilian spaces. Alongside this, reliable channels of international aid directed towards the NLD have been consistently blocked and seized by the junta, contributing to growing mistrust among these donors. What began as political repression has evolved into a systematic denial of essential services such as food, healthcare, and education. These kinds of changes send a signal: Myanmar is becoming more isolated during a time where its public infrastructure is being dismantled and international help is needed the most.

Global Donor Fatigue and the Refocus on National Aid

The shift in international aid priorities has become sharply visible in connection to Myanmar, particularly with Sweden. It has has constantly been a significant donor to Myanmar’s democracy sectors, yet has announced that it will phase out all development cooperation with Myanmar by June 30th, 2026 citing the need to reallocate resources towards Ukraine.

This decision means that Sweden’s bilateral development assistance, which had included roughly $2.65 million per year for human-rights groups, will vanish. The Swedish government states that the conditions for development cooperation in Myanmar have “progressively worsened” since the February 2021 coup, making long-term rights-based development work less viable. With the withdrawal of this kind of funding, these sectors will face a critical funding gap during a time when they are under intensified pressure from the military regime.

In March 2025, the World Food Programme (WFP) announced that it would be forced to cut food assistance to more than one million people in Myanmar due to “critical funding shortfalls”. Many of those affected live in conflict-affected regions such as Sagang, Kachin, and Rakhine, where displacement and livelihood disruptions have eroded food security. These cuts coincide with an increase in military-imposed blockades that have been restricting the movement of food and supplies into contested areas. This is creating conditions where even small reductions in assistance can escalate hunger and malnutrition.

The contraction of food aid represents not only a resource setback, but a development with direct implications for long term security across Myanmar’s displaced population. With Sweden’s exit and the World Food Programme cutting food aid, there is a risk that no major donor fills the space, ultimately resulting in less monitoring, less transparency, and more room for the regime to control without oversight.

Why is this Happening?

This can be traced to the growing phenomenon of global donor fatigue. As multiple crises around the world compete for finite resources from international aid, funding has become diverted from certain conflicts. According to the OCHA, the global humanitarian funding gap reached a historic high in 2024, with just 35% of requested aid needs met worldwide. In such an environment, donors often prioritize high-visibility crises that have strong geopolitical stakes or international media attention. Lower-income countries experiencing protracted or complex conflicts like Myanmar are among the first to experience cuts because long-term development assistance is harder to justify politically than rapid-response emergency aid. The result is that Myanmar is now less prioritized in a crowded field of global emergencies.

Civilian Spaces Under Fire

As international support contracts, the practical effects are already visible. Reduced funding limits the capacity of local organizations to maintain schools, clinics, and food distribution networks in areas outside military control. Since the 2021 coup, many teachers have joined the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM), refusing to work under the administration. As a result, schools are turning into spaces of political resistance. Numerous rural schools have doubled as informal learning centers and shelters in areas controlled by anti-junta groups. This makes them especially vulnerable to strikes as attacks on schools and other civilian structures have increased across Myanmar. On May 12, 2025, an airstrike in Oe Htein Twin Village in Sagaing Region struck a local school, reportedly killing at least 20 students and two volunteer teachers, as well as injuring more than 100 people. More than 240 schools have been damaged or destroyed by airstrikes between January 2023 and May 2025. A similar incident occurred in September 2025 in Rakhine State, when airstrikes on two boarding schools in Thayet Thapin Village killed at least 18 students. The United Nations has noted that these incidents appear to reflect a broader pattern of military operations in civilian areas. These attacks undermine an important civic institution, discouraging youth participation in education and contributes to the widespread displacement and long-term disruption to the education system.

The withdrawal of development assistance marks a significant shift that implies a narrowing of feasible assistance in Myanmar and reflects a broader reluctance among international donors to invest in future-oriented infrastructure under current conditions.

At the same time, escalating violence in Myanmar has collided with shrinking humanitarian and development aid in a way that is unraveling the country’s foundational systems of education and health. The military continues to restrict humanitarian access to contested areas, limiting the ability of local and international organizations to deliver basic services. These overlapping pressures are reducing school enrollment, degrading physical infrastructure, and straining already limited medical facilities. This risks producing a “lost generation” youth with limited access to education, declining health outcomes, and fewer solutions to recovery.

Local Networks Filling the Gap

NGOs, cross-border aid networks, and regional refugee programs have become the main lifelines for millions of displaced civilians. In areas inaccessible to UN agencies, community-based organizations and civil society groups are quietly coordinating education, health care, and food delivery. In Thailand, NGOs such as the Mae Tao Clinic and Burma Children Medical Fund continue to provide free treatment and maternal care to thousands of refugees and internally displaced persons who cross the border each month. Meanwhile, informal learning networks supported by groups like the Myanmar Teachers’ Federation in Exile have established temporary schools in border areas and ethnic states, often relying on volunteer teachers and donated materials. These improvised systems attempt to preserve educational continuity for children who have been displaced or whose schools have been destroyed by conflict. Organizations such as UNICEF and Save the Children have encouraged donors to shift resources toward cross-border and local civil society networks, which continue to deliver education and health support in areas outside military control. Despite these efforts, their reach remains limited: the UN estimates that more than 18 million people now require humanitarian assistance. The direction international donors take now: whether to sustain or scale back these local channels will play a decisive role in determining whether Myanmar’s current crisis produces temporary disruption or a generational collapse.