In Myanmar, the idea of ‘indigeneity’ has been mobilised in two radically different ways. Ethnonationalist groups such as the Chin National Front and the Karen National Union have utilised the concept to lobby for increased autonomy in international forums such as the United Nations, while the Burmese state has used the idea of indigeneity (or native-ness, typically translated astaingyintharin Burmese) to exclude certain minorities — most prominently the Rohingya — by explicitly striking them from the official list of Myanmar's ‘national races’. To clarify how this definitional tension has developed, this article will situate the competing Burmese appeals to indigeneity within the history of international indigeneity politics, and compare the Burmese ‘Indigenous situation’ to other Asian countries that have addressed the question of who counts and does not count as Indigenous.

中文翻译：

---

土著、民族政治和taingyinthar：缅甸和全球土著人民运动

在缅甸，“本土性”的概念以两种截然不同的方式被激发出来。钦民族阵线和克伦民族联盟等民族主义团体利用这一概念游说在联合国等国际论坛上增加自治权，而缅甸政府则使用土著性（或本土性，通常翻译为廷因塔尔在缅甸）通过明确将其从缅甸“民族”的官方名单中剔除来排除某些少数民族——最突出的是罗兴亚人。为了阐明这种定义上的紧张关系是如何发展的，本文将把缅甸对土著性的竞争性诉求置于国际土著政治历史中，并将缅甸的“土著情况”与其他解决了谁重要和不重要问题的亚洲国家进行了比较。算作土著。