Introduction
The purpose of this project is to analyse user sentiments in Burmese on TikTok and YouTube regarding two key military operations: Operation 1027, led by the Three Brotherhood Alliance in Shan State from October 2023, and the Myanmar military-led Yan Naing Min Operation, starting in early September in 2024. By conducting a sentiment analysis of Burmese comments and posts – translated for ease into English by our investigators – on these platforms, this project aims to understand how users express their opinions and emotions about these events and to reveal any patterns in the engagement between pro-military and anti-State Administration Council (SAC) actors across operations.
Year-on-year social media continues to be an important part of our daily lives and understanding online space’s sentiment is crucial because it reflects the public’s emotional and ideological stance on key events. In conflict settings, these sentiments can serve as early indicators of real-world impacts. This is incredibly relevant to Myanmar when we think about the way sentiments online shifted towards inflammatory content – advocating hatred, constituting incitement to violence, hostility and discrimination against the Rohingya – in the lead-up to and among the Rohingya crisis and ‘clearance operations’ in Rakhine State in 2017. For that reason, this study will explore how public sentiment around these operations is shaped online and how users’ reactions differ across platforms and between these events. In addition to providing insights into online discourse, this analysis seeks to uncover whether sentiment around the newest operation (Yan Naing Min) is more aggressive, especially from pro-military supporters, compared to sentiments expressed during Operation 1027. By identifying and comparing user reactions, this investigation offers a deeper understanding of the rhetoric used in support of or opposition to the military during these operations.
The investigation reveals that while sentiments were similarly supportive and aggressive for both Operation 1027 and Yan Naing Min, the latter operation recorded the most instances of hate speech showing overlapping sentiment lines with some differences. These differences emerged especially in the type of aggression and the actors involved. Pro-SAC aggressive comments were frequent across both operations but were notably more intense during Yan Naing Min and their negative comments against Operation 1027. For example, pro-SAC users showed frustration and incited levels of violence towards ethnic groups, a sentiment which was less prominent during Operation 1027.
While anti-SAC comments include dehumanising language in the majority of their aggressive sentiments towards the SAC – referring to them as ‘war dogs’, for example, they do not use language which calls for violent military actions that could affect civilians. This includes airstrikes or language of ethnic hostility which is prevalent in pro-SAC comments across both Operations. For example, pro-SAC comments such as ‘Kill them all and just keep that land’ illustrate a willingness to conduct indiscriminate violence that impacts civilians as well as combatants.
Additionally, it is important to note a distinction in the use of dehumanising language: pro-SAC rhetoric targets all anti-SAC actors indiscriminately, including civilians, whereas anti-SAC dehumanising language is more focused on combatants and military figures. This distinction is a key difference in the narratives, with pro-SAC discourse promoting the need for violence that includes civilians. At the same time, anti-SAC rhetoric focuses on hostility in military actions. The discourse surrounding the two operations reveals the growing polarisation and aggression in Myanmar’s online space. It also highlights that the sentiments expressed in this study are not only a reflection of public perception but also a key indicator of how online platforms in Myanmar intensify hostility, ethnic tensions, and militaristic rhetoric.
Recognition of these dynamics is crucial because it emphasises conflict escalation risks such as real-world hostilities, especially when combined with ethnic and nationalistic sentiments. In addition, it also adds extra measure on platform influence, for instance, this study focuses on TikTok and YouTube platforms and reveals how platform-specific dynamics shape public discourse. This indicates the need for accountability by social media platforms and interventions by civil society organisations.