Legend: Cover of file R 8 43 at the UK National Archives in London. This research presents three issues, which relate to current events in contemporary Burma and the way in which these events are reflected internationally : (1) the question of the identity of 'Rohingya' Muslims, (2) inter-ethnic relations in Arakan on a historical scale, and (3) the conceptualisation of regional conflicts. It is not surprising, a priori, that these issues are largely open to debate, except for the resistance to them by a plethora of reductive but popular and influential public discourses. Indeed, after 2012, the only widely disseminated international discourse on Burma was that of democratisation, political and economic openness, rights and justice. Its syntax and vocabulary also became the dominant language in the representation of the Rakhine State, filling the near-emptiness created by the absence of social science research. This hegemonic discourse is posed in relation to nations, human rights and international relations. However, the parameters and the framework of the historical research conducted at the EFEO Centre in Yangon are the border, interaction at the level of the cross-border region, complementarity and exchanges, and the impact of the colonial regime on the demographic regime. If the current perception of the Rohingyas is dominated by the reduction of contemporary Burma to the post-1962 military regime, the question at the centre of J. Leider's research is the long-term future of the Muslim communities along the coast. As for inter-ethnic relations, historical research opens up the view of complex developments that the media perspective reduces to issues of racism and nationalism. Finally, the way in which many conflicts are frozen in a binary representation (state versus ethnic minority; victimisation) blocks more nuanced analyses including the mutual constitution of conflicts, the variation and diversity of actors. The result, on a practical level of research and its dissemination, is the need not only for rigorous work, but also for sensitivity and constant attention to the frameworks of explanation, as well as a differentiated communication effort according to the academic audiences addressed and requiring a higher level of explanation beforehand. |