Myanmar: The Politics of Rakhine State is another weighty and welcome ICG report, released in the middle of last week. The opening sentence of the executive summary (on page i) leaves no doubt about the gravity of the issue it addresses: “The situation in Rakhine State contains a toxic mixture of historical centre-periphery tensions, serious intercommunal and inter-religious conflict with minority Muslim communities, and extreme poverty and under-development.” Consistently the report makes a point of insisting that “no easy fixes or quick solutions” (page 31) are available. Throughout it argues for a political solution to the Rakhine crisis, while also noting that developing it could take a very long time. This is all to the good.

Also valuable is the detailed contextual analysis provided in the report. The broad demographics show that the state is roughly 60% Rakhine Buddhist, 30% Muslim (including Rohingya), and 10% Chin. Other minorities are very small. The historical record is deeply divisive. Contemporary challenges include pervasive poverty and exclusion, violent conflict, the contested status of Muslim populations, and the grave humanitarian situation. Layered on top of all this are lengthy explorations of Rakhine Buddhist and Muslim perspectives, plus regional and international concerns.

The main policy prescriptions are based on the realistic assumption that full reconciliation of competing demands may not be possible. They therefore focus on ensuring that fundamental rights and freedoms are protected across the state, on finding ways to ease Rakhine fears (of, for instance, population trends that could place them in a minority position), and on bringing perpetrators of violence swiftly to justice.

All in all, little of this is new. Having it said one more time in such an authoritative manner is nevertheless valuable, and will hopefully serve to focus attention across a congested and discordant political spectrum.

Erika Berg is seeking crowdfunding through Kickstarter to help publish her book Forced to Flee: Visual Stories by Refugee Youth from Burma. In it, she presents more than 200 narrative images gathered at a series of visual storytelling workshops held in Mae Sot on the Thai-Myanmar border. “In this book,” she says, “refugee youth harness the power of narrative art to personalize human rights issues and promote a just and inclusive peace in Burma.” For publication to go ahead, Erika needs to receive total pledges of $12,000 by November 27. As of today, she has secured $7500 from 56 backers. It looks like a worthwhile project.

Myanmar: Regressed, Stalled, or Moving Forward? is the latest report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. Drawing on a six-day, four-city, fact-finding mission conducted in mid-August, it provides, in just 13 pages of text, an excellent overview of where things stand with Myanmar’s transition.

The greatest concerns listed in the report are “a horrible humanitarian catastrophe and a paralyzed political crisis” in Rakhine State, Buddhist-on-Muslim violence far beyond that state, land grabs in many parts of the country, and the recent crackdown on journalists. The core components of transitional momentum are said to be peace negotiations, elections, economic development, education and health.

At a time when there’s a tendency to bemoan the long shadow cast by next year’s general election, I found this a sensible comment (on page 2): “Though national elections in November 2015 are still more than a year away, the delegation was impressed that the electoral season is already in full swing and has become the central prism driving parties’ behavior as well as popular expectations.” The report also fairly acknowledges recent successes. This is from page 8: “Over the past three years, there has been significant progress in health.” To close, US policymakers, praised as “skilled, innovative, and careful”, are advised to stick to their chosen “middle path”.

All in all, this is a very solid brief analysis, highly recommended to anyone seeking a snapshot of transitional progress. To the question posed in the title, “The short answer is all of the above”.

On the DVB website, Ashley South this week published a neat, informative and persuasive article on Norwegian government engagement with a hydropower project in Kyauk Kyi Township, eastern Bago Region. Should it go ahead, the project will result in a dam being built, lives and livelihoods being affected, and a very precious environment being impacted. The point of the pre-feasibility study in which Ashley participated was to trigger a process of finding out what local people think about this – in response to an invitation from the Karen National Union’s 3rd Brigade. There was therefore widespread consultation and, in the course of it, a discernible shift in community attitudes from considerable hostility to wary collaboration. Ashley writes: “In terms of peacebuilding, I found it extraordinary to see the Myanmar government, the KNU (and its armed wings, the KNLA and KNDO), Karen CBOs and local communities discussing together in a spirit of friendship and cooperation – albeit with some understandable caution and concerns on the part of local people.” Following half a century of armed conflict, then, “multi-stakeholder participation in peacebuilding” is starting to flourish in some parts of Myanmar. As Ashley notes, it needs to become routine practice in other parts where, at present, government and donor agendas are frequently decisive – usually to the detriment of local interests.

We had a great first night at Banned in Burma, with the show looking fabulous in its warehouse space and more than 100 people in attendance. Myint San Myint did a performance piece comprising three songs and a video produced specially for the show. San Minn recreated a censored installation from the 2000s. Michael Nock was a generous and gracious host. Melissa was tireless in rolling out the guided tour for friends and strangers. Ko Pyay was all smiles, as ever. Two HKU Master of Journalism students filmed just about everything – thanks Pei-Hua for that. And me – just grateful to be part of a wonderful event.

Banned in Burma, surveying painting under censorship, opens today at Unit 16A, 40 Wong Chuk Hang Road. It will run for three weeks before transferring at the end of November to Central for a three-day residency at Hong Kong Visual Arts Centre, 7A Kennedy Road. Full details are on our Facebook page. My friends Melissa Carlson in Hong Kong and Pyay Way in Yangon have been perfect partners in launching this exhibition – thanks so much, especially to Melissa who has been tireless in pulling everything together. Thanks too to Kylie Knott for writing a terrific full-page feature in Monday’s South China Morning Post. Other media coverage is promised – we’ll post anything we can on Facebook. If you’re in Hong Kong, please visit the show either in Wong Chuk Hang in the next couple of weeks or, perhaps better still, in Central at the end of next month.

The Irrawaddy recently carried an interview with The Maw Naing, debut director of new movie The Monk. It looks really good, and I certainly hope to see it soon. In the article, the last question put is this: “What will your next film be about?” The core of the answer: “The main character in the film will be a woman who searches for truth and ultimately fails. But she has sowed the seed of a thirst for truth in the minds of people, and then many follow in her footsteps.” It thus looks like another Aung San Suu Kyi movie is in the works – allegorical this time, and potentially controversial. It’s a pity Luc Besson has already used The Lady – that would be an ideal matching title for The Maw Naing’s second film.

At the start of this month, the photographer Moises Saman spent a weekend documenting Hong Kong’s protests for the New Yorker. His slide show contains a dozen images, few of which, it seems to me, quite capture the essence of what’s been taking place in the city. Alongside them, though, is a brief commentary focusing very adroitly on what makes Hong Kong 2014 so special. “My experience in Hong Kong could not have been more different than in Cairo, Tunis, Tripoli, and Hama… In Hong Kong, I observed astounding restraint by both the police and the protesters.” To conclude: “I do not know if the civil nature of Hong Kong’s protest will last. But I am left wondering what allows this society to exercise such restraint while other societies have been so quick to turn to violence.”

Two weeks on, Hong Kong has witnessed some targeted thuggery and police brutality. Still, though, Saman’s point holds – why no rapid descent into violence? The main part of an explanation must surely be found in the intrinsic decency of Hong Kong people, which for decades since Tiananmen 1989 has generated quite astoundingly peaceful political protest. But that can’t be a full explanation, for just two decades before Tiananmen, in 1967, the city was convulsed by leftist riots that saw 51 people killed, including five police officers. So political violence can happen.

What else, then, is going on here? My sense is that another factor, alongside the mutual loathing now felt on both sides of Hong Kong’s polarized politics, is fear. Among protesters lies a pervasive awareness of what an authoritarian state is capable of doing if really pushed. Within the establishment is found a parallel fear of unleashing the full might of an autocratic sovereign, and thereby stepping over a line not yet crossed in the Special Administrative Region.

Hong Kong’s non-violent politics is a thing of beauty much to be treasured. The fear that increasingly underpins it is an ugly feature of this very unusual society and near-unique political setting. Sadly, it appears unlikely to dissipate for some time to come.

I’m interested in opera, and intrigued by Michael Cooper’s current New York Times article exploring the politics of an upcoming show. The Death of Klinghoffer was written by John Adams in 1991, and since then has been produced by several major companies. However, its arrival on the world’s greatest stage, at New York’s Metropolitan Opera, will not take place until Monday. For months, the Met production has been swathed in controversy triggered by Adams’ portrayal of a terrorist act related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I won’t go into detail – everything is very well explained by Cooper. Rather, I want to focus on a contextual issue mentioned in his piece.

In 2011, Klinghoffer was performed by the Opera Theatre of Saint Louis – and linked to it were some interfaith dialogues. Rabbi Howard Kaplansky, chair of the Newmark Institute, posted online about them on June 15 and 17, 2011. This is part of what he wrote: “While the mission statement of the Newmark Institute does not include the promotion of the arts, per se, we are ‘dedicated to advancing pluralism by organizing, supporting and promoting programs and activities that foster good human relations between people of diverse backgrounds … through dialogue and other means.’ Therefore, we accepted an invitation to collaborate with Opera Theatre to form a steering committee, drawn from the Christian, Jewish and Muslim communities, as well as representatives of Opera Theatre, to promote education and dialogue in regard to the opera. Our goal was community building.”

In Myanmar, the need for interfaith dialogue is also pressing. Whilst some already takes place, a lot more could be done to bring together Buddhists and Muslims in particular. I guess opera is unlikely to be the right vehicle in a country lacking that tradition. But finding other ways to stage shows that might foster debate across sectarian lines would be very welcome. It won’t be easy, but it does need to be done.

There’s another reason for holding that umbrella revolution is not an appropriate term for what’s taking place in Hong Kong at the moment – there’s no convulsive social change sweeping the entire society. Thinking of truly great modern revolutions such as France 1789, Russia 1917 and China 1949, each witnessed a fundamental repudiation and overthrow of the old order. True, in some respects daily existence carried on as before – a point Michael Oakeshott liked to make. Nevertheless, in key ways the life of every member of each nation was turned upside down. That’s not the case at all in Hong Kong at present.

Indeed, what’s striking during the protests is how much life proceeds as usual pretty much everywhere other than at the three main sites in Admiralty, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok. Walking around Central – right next to the core of the movement in Admiralty – you find that established routines are somewhat affected. Roads are blocked off, buses are rerouted, traffic is notably bad. That apart, life goes on largely as it always has done – so much so that it’s often hard to believe there’s so much drama taking place just down the street. In this sense, then, the Occupy movement and broader democracy protests cannot be described as revolutionary – they simply fall short of any reasonable understanding of the term.

And what about the protest areas themselves? In another indication of how much the city is functioning fairly normally, on Monday evening I hopped on the MTR (Hong Kong’s fabulous subway system) to visit all three prime locations. This was just before the current wave of police clearances began to take place, and in fact a time when protesters were mixing cement to reinforce their barricades. Certainly it was surreal, and even inspiring, to find major thoroughfares – Harcourt Road, Hennessy Road, Nathan Road – taken over by mobile democracy classrooms, tent villages and a vast array of street art and debate. In Admiralty, the celebrated student study sessions were in full swing. In Causeway Bay, someone was giving a physics class. In Mong Kok, a vibrant speakers’ corner was ticking over right in the middle of a major road junction. Even in these places, though, daily life had reasserted itself with shops open and some people passing through on mundane errands.

Hong Kong in the time of Occupy is an amazing sight – none of us could ever have dreamt this would come to pass. But when so much of the city continues to go about its regular business, it’s hard to say there’s a revolution happening here. This also makes me wonder, in a Myanmar context, how deeply the events of 1988 and 2007 affected the wider society. Extensively in the case of 8-8-88 and not very much at all in the case of the saffron uprising? Again, we really need detailed documentation while it’s still possible to gather it.