A new research paper series, titled Myanmar’s Northern Borderlands, explores the changing nature of conflict and peace in northern Myanmar, helping foreign actors better understand the current challenges facing local populations and identifying priority areas for international assistance.

This article focuses on the humanitarian implications of the ongoing crisis in Kachin State, drawing on new data from a survey conducted amongst internally displaced populations in two adjacent urban centres, Myitkyina and Waingmaw. Communities in this area have been affected by conflict and instability for decades. But the current crisis, compounded by foreign aid reductions and internet blackouts, has led aid providers to prioritise short-term needs like food and shelter over longer-term development assistance. In a humanitarian environment already under pressure from years of conflict and internal displacement, Myanmar recently experienced a significant earthquake, displacing thousands more and further stretching the limited support that is available.

Myanmar’s humanitarian crisis

Levels of conflict in Myanmar sharply increased after the military coup in February 2021, fuelling unprecedented internal displacement and growing humanitarian needs. Before the devastating earthquake on 28 March 2025, an estimated 3.5 million people were displaced across the country. Over 15 million are now experiencing severe food insecurity, while access to education and healthcare is heavily disrupted. Millions also lack safe shelter and clean drinking water. International and national aid organisations have been explicitly targeted by the military regime, severely affecting humanitarian and development support. These impacts are multifaceted and manifold, from increasing challenges in accessing aid recipient communities, reductions in funding, and growing numbers of internally displaced people (IDPs) as the conflict continues.

In past decades, fighting between the Myanmar military and armed groups was often limited to rapid offensives and insurgent tactics, which kept the overall number of civilian casualties fairly low. However, since 2021, conflict has escalated at unprecedented levels across much of the country, with armed groups capturing town after town and establishing control over growing swathes of territory. In response, the Myanmar military has deployed unprecedented force, targeting civilians through airstrikes on schools, markets, religious buildings and hospitals.

An example of this occurred in Anang Pa in October 2022, when the Myanmar military launched airstrikes on a public concert where Kachin Independence Army (KIA) officers, civilians and artists were celebrating Kachin Revolutionary Day. More than 50 civilians were killed in the attack, and many more died as the Myanmar military subsequently prevented the evacuation of injured people from the area. The incident highlighted a new conflict norm for Kachin State in which the Myanmar military no longer discriminates between civilian and military targets. As a result of new levels of conflict, Myanmar is experiencing huge numbers of IDPs fleeing conflict zones and areas made uninhabitable through bombing. Since late 2024, the KIA’s battle to take control of Bhamo has triggered waves of people fleeing the city, with many ending up in Myitkyina.

Priority needs for a crisis-hit region

A telecoms blackout has cut off many parts of Kachin State from internet and phone connection since August 2024, including the state capital, Myitkyina. This has resulted in partial information blackouts, compounding the humanitarian crisis. Many international actors and analysts based in Yangon, neighbouring Thailand, or distant capitals receive insufficient data on humanitarian and development assistance needs in Kachin State. Significant sections of the Myanmar-China border in Kachin State, as well as the roads linking the border with towns and markets, have come under KIA control following an escalation of conflict since the large, coordinated offensive known as Operation 1027. Civilians fleeing to Myitkyina and surrounding urban areas to find safety join existing IDP communities whose displacement dates back to the breakdown of the Kachin ceasefire in 2011. With a lack of reporting on mainstream and social media, and amid rapidly changing conditions as the local armed groups make significant advances against the Myanmar military, there is a need to reexamine humanitarian response mechanisms on the ground.

Given these challenges, the Kachinland Research Centre deployed a rapid survey on the state of humanitarian and development aid since the 2021 military coup. KRC, a Myitkyina-based non-profit research organisation supported by the UK-funded XCEPT programme, focuses on human rights issues, education and media in the Kachin community. The rapid survey was designed to generate a snapshot of the situation in Kachin State, looking at the perspectives of both aid providers and recipients.

Data collection was undertaken over two weeks in November 2024. The field team contacted 100 respondents, comprising 20 aid providers and 80 aid recipients. The aid providers represent civil society organisations, international and local NGOs, the majority having worked in the sector since before the coup. Respondents were reached by phone in Puta-O, Bhamo, and Mohnyin, while in Myitkyina interviews took place in person. The aid recipients represent IDPs who were displaced from Waingmaw township (Maga Yang, Daw Hpung Yang, and Mali Yang villages) and Njang Yang township (Sut Ngai Yang and Lashi Yang villages). They were asked 22 questions about their experiences accessing humanitarian aid and development assistance, including what they received, what priorities and challenges they perceive, and what has changed since the 2021 military coup. Aid providers were asked twenty similar questions to establish comparisons and draw out diverging perspectives or experiences.

Amid limited aid, external shocks further reduce its reach

The majority of aid recipient respondents were women (67%), and they were mostly 36-50 years old. 85% of respondents were living in IDP camps, many of them since as far back as 2011, when a ceasefire between the Myanmar military and the KIA broke down. A few respondents were recently displaced, including several from Momauk township which saw fierce fighting between the Myanmar military and KIA in late 2024.

Official aid to IDPs in Myitkyina and Waingmaw is mostly provided by UN agencies, specifically the World Food Programme and UNHCR. Local actors such as the Kachin Baptist Church and the Kachin Humanitarian Development Department are key delivery partners. Very few new aid providers have emerged in Kachin State since 2021, with the humanitarian sector largely relying on longstanding local organisations supported by international donors.

Food and medicine ranked highest in priority for both recipients (85%) and providers (80%). The price of food has risen significantly compared to pre-2021 levels, which several respondents attributed to the high influx of IDPs in urban areas of Kachin State. This trend is likely to continue as the KIA and Myanmar military continue to fight on several fronts, forcing communities to move in search of safety. One third of both recipients and providers rated shelter and medicine as ‘most needed’, prioritising them above food, cash transfers and hygiene supplies.

Development assistance, meaning longer-term support toward individuals’ and households’ economic independence and self-sufficiency, was reported to have declined since the military coup in 2021. Respondents confirmed a reduction across three key areas: empowerment and skill training, basic infrastructure, and small grants for agriculture and livestock. This represents a greater decline than providers acknowledge. More than 71% of aid recipients consider small financial assistance crucial for starting livelihood initiatives. A clear gap exists in the perceived need for various livelihood skills training programs. While 48.75% of recipients identify these programs as a priority, only 10% of providers consider them a major area of intervention.

Both aid providers and recipients overwhelmingly listed ‘worsening conflict’ as the main factor contributing to reductions in humanitarian and development aid, followed by access challenges. A smaller number associated the reduction in aid with reduced funding, or challenges in the banking sector. 80% of respondents felt that the development support (training, small grants and infrastructure) they received was provided in a sustainable way. They highlighted guidance received from service providers, as well as systematic monitoring of the activities, as the main ways this was achieved. Few aid recipients, however, felt that the development assistance they received would enable them to overcome dependence on aid.

Sustainable approaches and self-sufficiency are critical

Overall, the analysis identifies several intractable challenges facing IDP communities in Kachin State.

• Access: Aid providers noted that medical items are held up at checkpoints and by other logistical obstacles, restricting availability during conflict.
• Prioritising new needs: Some providers noted that scaling up the emergency response for IDPs necessitated pivoting into new areas of support, including maternal and child health, which they were not providing before the coup. Recipients also noted a drastic reduction in the provision of monetary assistance and hygiene kits, and a moderate reduction in food and medical items.
• Investments in sustainability: Aid recipients’ perspectives on livelihoods training programmes suggest that development planning remains essential for long-term economic stability and self-sufficiency. Such initiatives were generally seen by aid providers as less important, demonstrating divergent priorities and challenges with sustaining long-term aid commitments.
• Contextual pressures: Aid providers pointed to the importance of building resilience to unintended shocks and crises, from rising commodity prices to communications blackouts, as key elements of aid sustainability in Kachin State. Increasing global cuts to development funds compound existing challenges, resulting in insufficient support for human capital development as a vital component of post-crisis recovery efforts.

The survey findings highlight the increasing precarity of the humanitarian landscape in Kachin State, shaped by ongoing conflict, limited access, increased displacement and diverging perceptions of need. While international agencies and local actors are adapting to changing humanitarian and conflict dynamics, the disconnect between what is provided and what is most needed—particularly in livelihoods and financial assistance—persists. Conflict in Kachin State since the end of the ceasefire in 2011 has led to a generation of IDPs, and their development needs remain alongside those created by new waves of fighting.

The survey findings also underscore the resilience of local communities and the pivotal role of local organisations, like the Kachin Baptist Church, which continue to support IDPs as international presence reduces. Sustainability and empowerment of local populations requires adequately resourced and participatory approaches to aid delivery which align provider strategies with recipient priorities and the required resources.

The priority needs of IDP communities in Kachin State continue to be food aid (considering the volatility of local commodity prices) and finding solutions for the accessibility of basic medicines amid significant fighting on crucial transport roads in the region. There is also a long-term need to identify cost-effective ways to support IDPs toward self-sufficiency in future, such as through the provision of cash payments, further investments in livelihoods skills training, and support to small businesses and entrepreneurialism. Amid ongoing fighting between armed actors in the region and limited outside support coming in from the outside, local communities seek ways to live independently and invest in their futures. Such initiatives will form a key part of post-conflict reconstruction efforts in the medium and long term.