ASEAN needs to reject Myanmar election outcome, says expert

Myanmar General Elections: A Detailed Analysis

Key Concepts:

• USDP (Union Solidarity and Development Party): The military-backed political party dominating the elections.
• SAC-M (Special Advisory Council for Myanmar): An organization providing analysis and advocacy regarding the Myanmar crisis.
• Five-Point Consensus: ASEAN’s plan for resolving the Myanmar crisis, including an end to violence and dialogue.
• National Unity Government (NUG): A parallel government formed by pro-democracy forces opposing the military junta.
• Boycott: Widespread refusal to participate in the elections as a form of protest.
• Disenfranchisement: The denial of the right to vote to a segment of the population.

I. Election Overview & First Phase Results

Myanmar is currently conducting its first general election since the 2021 coup, unfolding in three phases across 12 states and regions, encompassing over 100 townships. The first phase, held on December 28th, covered 102 of Myanmar’s 330 townships and saw the USDP achieve widespread victories. The current phase involves townships in Yangon, Mandalay, and Shan State, with a final phase scheduled for two weeks later. However, the election is deeply controversial, facing widespread criticism due to its lack of transparency and the exclusion of major political parties. Preliminary results from the first phase indicate a sweeping victory for the military-backed USDP.

II. Low Turnout & Public Rejection of the Junta

The first phase of the election was marked by a significantly low voter turnout of approximately 52%, largely attributed to widespread boycotts by the Myanmar population. Ben Lee, Executive Director at the Special Advisory Council for Myanmar (SAC-M), emphasized that this low turnout demonstrates the “courage, conviction and the depth of their rejection of the military hunter,” despite the junta’s extensive efforts to legitimize the process. He framed this as a “showcase of democracy at a time of global democratic retreat.”

III. Illegitimacy & Disenfranchisement Concerns

Lee strongly asserted that the election is “entirely undemocratic,” highlighting the barring of major political parties and the continued imprisonment of democratically elected leaders, including President Win Myint and State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, alongside 23,000 other political prisoners. Furthermore, he pointed out the practical limitations of the election, noting that the military controls less than 40% of the country’s territory and the election will only reach 265 out of 330 townships, effectively disenfranchising 7.5 million people.

IV. International Recognition & Potential Outcomes

The interview addressed the likelihood of international recognition of the election results. Lee expressed confidence that the international community would largely “reject” the polls and the military junta, with only “brutal regimes” offering support. He advocated for strengthened sanctions, including targeted financial sanctions and weapons embargos, from the international community. He also called on ASEAN to implement “escalating punitive steps” against the junta if it continues to disregard the Five-Point Consensus.

V. ASEAN’s Role & Potential Actions

The discussion focused on ASEAN’s divided approach to the Myanmar crisis. Lee acknowledged differing opinions among ASEAN members but highlighted their recent agreement that conditions are not conducive to a legitimate election. He proposed a strong ASEAN response, including refusing to recognize or engage with the military junta, barring its participation in ASEAN summits, limiting cooperation, and significantly increasing support for legitimate pro-democracy actors, such as ethnic organizations, the National Unity Government (NUG), and Myanmar civil society. He emphasized the need to strengthen existing consultative platforms to support these actors in building an inclusive federal democracy.

VI. Regional Security Implications & Neighboring Countries

The interview addressed concerns about Myanmar’s escalating conflict and its impact on regional security. Lee attributed the security concerns to the military junta’s actions, including the forced displacement of millions of people and cross-border airstrikes. He argued that Myanmar’s neighbors have a vested interest in supporting a normalization process led by genuine democratic and ethnic actors, rather than continuing to support the military junta, which he characterized as a “bad bet” that has no genuine interest in stabilization. He advocated for reinvesting support in ethnic and genuine actors.

VII. Notable Quotes

• Ben Lee: “The real hallmark of the first phase two weeks ago was large-scale boycotts and very low voter turnout…the Myanmar people have shown their courage, their conviction and the depth of their rejection of the military hunter.”
• Ben Lee: “It’s an entirely undemocratic process…in no way is this legitimate.”
• Ben Lee: “The military hunter has been a bad bet for Myanmar’s neighbors ever since it launched its coup 5 years ago.”

Conclusion:

The Myanmar general election is widely viewed as a sham process designed to legitimize the military junta’s rule. The low voter turnout and widespread boycotts demonstrate the strong opposition to the junta. The international community, particularly ASEAN, faces a critical juncture in deciding whether to recognize the election results or to impose further pressure on the military regime. A failure by ASEAN to take decisive action could embolden other authoritarian regimes in the region and exacerbate the ongoing humanitarian and security crisis in Myanmar. Supporting genuine pro-democracy actors and prioritizing regional security through a democratic and inclusive process are crucial steps towards a stable and peaceful future for Myanmar.