Rare Earth Mining in Myanmar Under KIO Rule, What’s the Future Hold?

Highlights

• The KIO took over Myanmar’s largest rare earth mining region from a military-aligned Border Guard Force.
• Chinese mining operations were halted by the KIO.
• KIO promises environmentally sustainable policies and infrastructure development.
• KIO seeks to fund anti-junta activities.
• The region faces critical challenges of ecological destruction.
• Potential resource mismanagement is a concern.
• There is uncertain future mining governance in the region.

---

The recent takeover of Myanmar’s largest, rare earth mining region by the Kachin Independence Organization (opens in a new tab) (KIO) from a military-aligned Border Guard Force (BGF) marks a pivotal shift for the resource-rich area. Rare earth elements (REE), critical for global industries like renewable energy and electronics, have driven intensive and largely unregulated mining in northeastern Kachin State, predominantly by Chinese companies. However, this lucrative industry has brought devastating environmental consequences, including toxic waste, deforestation, and soil degradation.

What are some key developments?

Recently chronicled in Frontier Myanmar, (opens in a new tab) Emily Fishbein, Juaman Naw, Jaw Tu Hkawng, and Hpan Ja Brang report that the KIO’s armed wing, the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), seized the region previously controlled by the BGF and its militia.

China, a major stakeholder in Myanmar’s rare earth industry, closed border crossings, halting mining operations and creating economic ripples in the region.

Accumulating ecological/environmental and social troubles abound. Mining operations involve acid leaching, leading to water contamination and ecological destruction.  Moreover, workers often lack protective measures, and communities suffer from degraded resources without significant local benefits.

What’s happening with KIO?

The KIO, needing funds for its anti-junta activities, suspended mining operations and promised to implement environmentally sustainable and community-focused policies.

However, there are concerns the KIO may replicate past mismanagement of natural resources, as seen during its 1994-2011 ceasefire with the military.

But the KIO has pledged to introduce stricter regulations and develop infrastructure and public services in the region.

Meanwhile, Chinese companies have dominated the industry, and the KIO may leverage its position to attract diverse partnerships or renegotiate terms with existing stakeholders.

What are underlying assumptions and biases?

While the KIO has made public commitments to sustainable resource management, its past actions suggest a risk of prioritizing short-term financial gains over long-term benefits. 

The article assumes China’s interest aligns primarily with resource extraction and control, but it doesn’t fully explore how changing political dynamics may affect China’s role in the region.

On the environmental front**,** assertions about the KIO’s potential to clean up mining practices may overestimate the group’s capacity or willingness to prioritize environmental protections given financial and military pressures.  Rare Earth Exchanges remain extremely suspect of any such assumptions.

The situation reflects a critical juncture where the KIO could redefine resource governance for long-term regional benefit or perpetuate extractive practices that harm both the environment and local communities.