‘Russia cannot substantially change the dynamic of the liberation struggle’: a conversation with Igor Blaževič

In his mid-twenties, Igor Blaževič found himself living within range of snipers and artillery fire. His home, the city of Sarajevo in Bosnia, Southeastern Europe, became the epicenter of the Bosnian War, and his world was changed as his city fell under siege.As the war intensified following 1992, his friends went off to the frontline. Death became a daily reality. Living through this carnage changed him, setting him on a path to pursue humanitarian and human rights work. Using his lived experience from Bosnia, Blaževič chose to use his knowledge to support democratic transition in Myanmar through training the country’s civil society from 2011-2016. Blaževič's initial involvement in Myanmar is a story of international solidarity.After the Bosnian War, he was living in the Czech Republic, a country bearing the scars of Nazi and Soviet rule, with the last Soviet troops leaving in 1991. With this backdrop, fellow dissidents, including Václav Havel, the first democratically elected Czech president, were gripped by a moral duty to support others abroad who were still striving for their freedom.This drew Blaževič to the struggle against dictatorship in Myanmar, using documentary filmmaking as a medium to raise awareness. He founded One World, Europe's biggest human rights documentary film festival. His work has involved filming in locations from Myanmar, Thailand and Indonesia. Some projects have taken him as far afield as Iran and Turkey, both countries that have had their share of considerable political instability. More than 25 years after his initial involvement in Myanmar, Blaževič continues his work with local activists on the ground. Following the February 2021 coup, when many of his former students emerged as protest leaders, Blaževič doubled down on engaging with the movement, providing educational and organisational support, while raising awareness of Myanmar’s ongoing liberation struggle. He says that in this current moment, the world-order, once based on democracy and freedom, has been shaken in the wake of the current global political moment. Blaževič’s experience of authoritarianism, successful and failed transitions to democracy, and ethnic conflict is highly relevant. Knowing Russia and Myanmar intimately, he sat down to talk with Myanmar Now about Myanmar’s place in the face of changing global tectonics.MN: How did you first become politically engaged?Igor: I first became interested because of the war in my country. We didn’t manage our own transition to democracy well. When former Yugoslavia broke up, there were four really terrible wars.Probably the worst one was happening in my home country, Bosnia, and home city, Sarajevo. There were four terrible, devastating years and that really transformed me. My whole country was collapsing, we didn't know whether we would survive. After that, it made sense to try to help other people survive and struggle who were experiencing similar situations.That's how I became an activist. It’s also why today in Myanmar I'm so focused on warning people about the dangers of ethnocentric federalism, because this is exactly what brought about terrible ethnic cleansing in our country.MN: How did the Bosnian War shape your views on democracy and human rights in particular?Igor: It was not primarily about democracy and human rights, to tell you the truth. The war made me understand how political power, when it becomes extremely dictatorial, can become pure evil.Genocide happened in my country, mass rapes happened in my country. Like in Myanmar, whole villages have been intentionally burned to ashes and cities relentlessly bombed.After that you have another kind of sensibility for what's happening around the world, you recognise this thing and say: ‘No, I will not let these things happen.’ Even if I can do just a little.After the war in Bosnia, I started to organise the Human Rights Film Festival. It was not primarily about human rights, but about storytelling, showing the dignity of the people who found themselves in extreme situations. Igor Blaževič receiving an award on behalf of the filmmakers of “Myanmar Diaries” at the One Word film festival in 2022 (Photo: Supplied) MN: I can see that there really are strong parallels to Myanmar.Igor: Yes, in many ways. And because we are a very ethnically diverse country. This ethnic diversity has been part of our problem, not the only problem—the main problem was really Serbia, the fascist nationalist ideology—but even when you remove that, with this ethnic diversity it was not easy to agree.We know what we don't want. But it was not easy to agree on what we do want. For that reason, I think that I understand the complexities of Myanmar and I'm trying to help people look for compromises, because there is no other way.MN: Now it seems that war in Europe may be a possibility, and with the almost moral collapse of the US, authoritarianism may be on the rise. Are you reminded of your younger days?Igor: As somebody with understanding of collective memory and emotion in Central Europe, it is not just a question of being under Communist authoritarian rule, but the feeling of being occupied by the Russian Empire.Russian history is about imperialism. Soviet Russia was imperial and currently, Putin's Russia is imperial. You have small nations in Central Europe–like the Czech Republic– and on one side is huge Russia and on the other side is Germany. Both Russia and Nazi Germany have been genocidal imperial powers. They don't just occupy you, but destroy you as a nation, as a country.We as small countries in between have this deep fear. We don't want to be occupied by the imperial power again, we know what it means.After the end of communism, by becoming a member of the EU, of NATO, we finally felt safe. We still feel safe, because of these things. We felt that in Europe there is something profoundly right in the way that small nations and big nations are deciding in a collective manner. This is complicated, slow, messy, but it really gives one, especially as a small nation, a profound feeling of security.That's why in this turbulent time, we in Europe are sticking together so much better.If you look five, six, seven years ago, there has been a lot of skepticism in Europe, about Europe. But in this particular moment we are sticking together. We need to help Ukraine in order to protect this space in which you can be a small country and not be bullied by anybody who is powerful.MN: With European leaders moving towards rearmament, citing concerns about US reliability in global security, how do you see the future of Europe?Igor: These things are making Europe stronger, more committed to itself. It's making us better organise ourselves and also to continue to support Ukraine. The Nordic states, Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Baltic States and Poland, the countries closest to Russia. They are already seriously preparing themselves for a defensive war against Russia.Now the UK is back in Europe in terms of security. They’re ready to make serious commitments. France is also ready to offer its nuclear capacity. Germany has a huge industrial capacity which has so far not been activated for military purposes, that shift is already happening.We are in a very turbulent time. The global tectonics are changing. I’m not saying that we are safer, but we are determinedly increasing our own resilience.And the second thing to note is that Russia is weaker. Russia is very good at creating these ‘Potemkin villages’, (a construction whose purpose is to provide an external façade to a situation), but behind that is poverty, dysfunctionality, criminality.Russia is month by month getting weaker militarily and economically. Russia has still significant capacity to inflict huge damage on Ukraine, but Russia does not have a capacity at this moment to take on Europe militarily. Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) and Myanmar's military leader Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing (L) shake hands following their meeting at the Grand Kremlin Palace in Moscow, Russia, March 4, 2025. (Photo: EPA-EFE/PAVEL BEDNYAKOV /AP POOL / POOL POOL PHOTO) MN: Without the military support of the US, do you think that Russia is going to win the war in Ukraine?Igor: I really don't know, we are not in a situation to predict. We are now under the assault of narratives coming from Trump, but these narratives have been coming from Putin for a long time, saying Ukraine is alone and can just be defeated.Another narrative is, Putin will make a deal with Trump. But the reality is different from the narratives. So, I'm saying, let's not over-panic. Let's do what we can and see what will happen, because Ukraine is not falling and I don't think that it will fall.This is a little bit like Myanmar in February and March 2021. Every single smart Western observer was saying: ‘In three months, six months maximum, the Myanmar people will be defeated, the military is too powerful. We need to accept it and deal with them.’At that time, I was saying: ‘No, we have very strong people's resistance and we don't know. So let's not accept that victory.’ The military coup is not the only option.’ Four years later, we see that was not how reality developed. MN: The collapse of the military [may have been] imminent if it weren’t for the intervention of China in the conflict. Despite this, the junta does not have a good relationship with China, concerned that China was manipulating [it] through armed ethnic groups, such as the Wa and the Shan. In Russia, Putin has welcomed the junta leader and the two regimes recently signed a range of agreements. Do you think Myanmar is on a fast track to becoming a vessel state of Russia? Igor: I will separate Russia and China. These are two very different stories. Russia is capable of providing Min Aung Hlaing with weapons, oil and jet fuel, which the junta will pay for. Min Aung Hlaing can get helicopters and planes which Russia cannot use in Ukraine.So yes, this is bad for us. Russia can help Min Aung Hlaing in a limited way with drone warfare, this is probably the worst thing, they can sell drones to the Myanmar junta. That's pretty much all. Nothing else from all these economic deals is reality. These are all Potemkin villages. Russia at this moment does not have financial, technological capital and does not have a capacity to do these big projects in Myanmar, and Myanmar does not have the money to pay for that.But, it is an interest of both Min Aung Hlaing and Putin to make big impressions about big projects coming, because that is helping Min Aung Hlaing psychologically—to persuade his own side that ‘I'm in charge, I'm a winner.’ And that is helping Putin project power in Southeast Asia, saying ‘I'm the bigger guy and I'm controlling the future.’ In that sense, all these big economic projects are like the Wizard of Oz. You know, a small guy, sitting in Moscow and being very skillful in psychological and information warfare, creating this impression that he's a big, powerful wizard controlling the world.What is Russia really capable of doing for Min Aung Hlaing? It's capable of providing him with a certain amount of weapons and military training and to train junta soldiers in information warfare. It can sell oil, which Russia needs to sell anywhere to get cash for their war.The main thing what Russia does is basically helping Min Aung Hlaing look like somebody who has a powerful Big Brother who will help him prevail. Yes, this is helping him to a certain extent, but I will not over-dramatise it. Russia cannot substantially change the dynamic of the liberation struggle in Myanmar. Now, China has enough resources, enough power, and enough interest. Russia only has an interest to project that they are still a global power when they are not anymore. China is the single biggest factor which can help the junta to survive.And they're trying to do it. Survival of the junta means survival of the Myanmar military dominance over the Myanmar state, politics and economy. This is bad news, that China is actively helping the junta survive. But what I see as a kind of hope is that China is not trying to help the junta win this war. Surviving and winning are different. If China puts its whole weight behind the junta winning, the Myanmar liberation forces will be in real trouble. But China is trying to create this middle situation in which, basically, the junta will survive in part of the territory, but other parts of the territory will remain semi-autonomous, dependent on China. Because they don't trust Min Aung Hlaing or the military. They are trying to create a stable, but broken country with a weak military government in Naypyitaw dependent on China and Russia 100 percent, and keep other parts of Myanmar autonomous and primarily dependent on China, and then they will exploit the country.Whether China can succeed, I don't know. I think that the Myanmar revolutionary forces will continue in spite of all the pressures. If we have ongoing coordinated military and other pressure on the junta by the liberation forces, and if we have mutual trust and a minimum political agreement among them on how to manage the post-junta transition, I still think it's both possible and probable that the junta will collapse. At that moment, China would accept anybody who is controlling Naypyitaw as a new partner.In a very similar way, a week after Assad had fallen, Russia was ready to make a deal with the new Syrian government. Because Russia has an important Navy port in Syria.China will not help the revolution. China will try to undermine the revolution. But if the revolution wins, China will become as good a partner as it is now with the Myanmar military. Myanmar’s military has used fighter jets purchased from Russia to conduct airstrikes in resistance-held territories (Photo: EPA/EFE) MN: The US has historically been a major supporter of democratic movements worldwide. With that shifting, what impact will this have on pro-democracy efforts in Myanmar and beyond?Igor: We need to put it into the right proportions. The Myanmar democratic struggle did not exist because of the US supporting it.Historically, neither in 88’, nor in the first 1990 elections, nor in the Saffron Revolution, did things happen because the US was supporting democratic forces in Myanmar. It was genuinely domestically driven.Since the coup, the resistance in Myanmar, the liberation struggle of the ethnic nationalities and of the Bamar majority, did not happen because the US or anybody else was helping. It was fully homegrown, like the anti-apartheid movement, like the Solidarity movement in Poland, like the anti-colonial movements.All of us are grateful that the US has been doing more than any other country to provide limited assistance in the humanitarian field, and to civil society and independent media. Losing these things is a big loss, but these groups will not stop.China and Russia are basically giving weapons for the junta to wage war. Thailand is giving money to the junta and they will use that to wage war. The US is giving money for a little bit of humanitarian aid, documenting, reporting about crimes. But you don't win a war because you are documenting crimes. It's very important that we document crimes, but you are winning because of self defence—because you are fighting back.And people in Myanmar are fighting back because that's their decision. It’s their resources, their lives and their courage. Suspension of aid is a big loss, but it's not something which will stop the revolution. It will not stop the ethnic liberation struggle. It will not stop any dedicated person in a Myanmar strike committee, journalism, civil society, to continue to do the same things with less resources.MN: It seems that China, becoming more assertive, may be the biggest superpower in the coming decades? Igor: Since the Second World War, there was a long period of a so-called bipolar world order, which came with a certain global predictability and stability. Then with the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the third wave of democratisation we kind of moved to unipolar, US or Western hegemony.This previous world order is gone. Are we now in a multipolar polar world? No—we are now in a situation called an interregnum, which is full of instability, chaos, tension, and then after a certain period of time, you get a new equilibrium. There is no way to predict how things will develop. It's dangerous to live in such times, but we can't choose. So if we are living in hard times, we need to do all that we can to basically choose to stay in solidarity with other people. The second thing is to choose to work with others in defending the better ideas about the world, even if the evil, dangerous idea, looks more powerful. This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

‘Russia cannot substantially change the dynamic of the liberation struggle’: a conversation with Igor Blaževič

A recognised voice for human rights in Myanmar with firsthand experience of war in his own country, Igor Blaževič shares his insights on Myanmar’s relations with Russia, China, and the US amid global power shifts

Subscribe for full access

Explainer: Who are the companies and cronies backing Myanmar junta leader’s Thailand visit?

From palace stages to exile: A Myanmar dancer who chose conscience over ceremony

Her parents gone, a Myanmar student prays for the return of a father lost in conflict

Rakhine State floods put AA administration to its biggest test yet

Subscribe for full access

Related Articles

Words that dehumanise: The language behind anti-Rohingya hatred in Myanmar

Myanmar faces deepening crisis as global oil shock bites

Few people voted in Myanmar’s junta election—and history explains why

Advance votes and split ballots: Dr Aye Maung on how the election played out in Rakhine