Myanmar election: ASEAN faces a choice between principles and pragmatism, expert says

Myanmar Election Analysis: A Post-Coup Landscape

Key Concepts:

• Coup d'état (Coup): The sudden, illegal seizure of a government, typically by the military.
• Legitimacy (Formal & Real): Formal legitimacy refers to legal recognition, while real legitimacy stems from public acceptance and support.
• USDP (Union Solidarity and Development Party): The military-backed political party in Myanmar.
• NLD (National League for Democracy): The previously ruling party led by Aung San Suu Kyi, overthrown in the 2021 coup.
• ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations): A regional intergovernmental organization aiming to promote cooperation and stability.
• Five-Point Consensus: ASEAN’s plan for resolving the Myanmar crisis, focusing on ending violence and initiating dialogue.
• Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs): Armed groups representing various ethnic minorities within Myanmar, often engaged in conflict with the central government.
• Pariah Status: The state of being ostracized or avoided by others, often due to political actions.

I. Election Context & International Response

The recent election in Myanmar, concluding after a month-long process, has resulted in a landslide victory for the military-backed USDP. This outcome is widely viewed internationally as lacking credibility, drawing criticism from human rights organizations and Western nations. However, the military leadership appears to be strategically leveraging the current geopolitical landscape – specifically, tensions involving Ukraine and Gaza – hoping that some countries will adjust their positions. While Western criticism remains firm, nations like Russia, China, and North Korea have already signaled a willingness to re-engage with Myanmar. The junta presents the election as a step towards restoring civilian administration, but this is largely viewed with skepticism.

II. The Illusion of Civilian Rule & Power Dynamics

Professor Simon T. explains that Myanmar operates with two types of legitimacy: formal/legal and real/on-the-ground. He anticipates that Min Aung Hlaing, the current military commander, will transition into a civilian role (removing his uniform) to become the new leader, a move permissible under the constitution. He emphasizes that Myanmar has experienced prolonged periods of military influence, even during the NLD’s time in power, and that the “golden years” of democratic opening are likely over.

Despite the election results, the military does not have complete control across the country, particularly in border areas. However, military experts suggest the military currently holds a strategic advantage. The situation is framed as a clash between principles and realism, with concerns that Myanmar could descend into a state of collapse like Syria, a scenario that neighboring countries like China and Thailand want to avoid. A key condition for stability, according to the professor, is the cessation of violence against citizens.

III. Election Validity & Public Sentiment

The election process itself is questioned, with the month-long duration and limited scope (held primarily in areas under military control) raising concerns about its fairness. Participation rates have demonstrably declined. The professor questions what has genuinely changed in the past five years, given the NLD’s previous landslide victory. He suggests many citizens participated out of a lack of choice, indicating a lack of genuine legitimacy.

He notes a widespread sense of exhaustion and suffering among the Myanmar population, with normal life significantly deteriorating and some facing starvation. This has led to a degree of resignation, with people willing to accept the military’s dominance in the hope of some improvement.

IV. ASEAN’s Role & Regional Implications

ASEAN’s five-point consensus, which does not include a call for elections, focuses on ending violence and initiating dialogue with all parties. The professor highlights that ASEAN has historically engaged constructively with Myanmar, even after coups. He suggests ASEAN must be pragmatic, recognizing the potential for Myanmar to drift towards closer ties with China and Russia if it is further isolated.

The election is also seen as a means for Myanmar to shape engagement with ASEAN and key regional players. China, in particular, is primarily interested in maintaining stability and continuing its economic investments, regardless of the ruling party. Thailand, with its own upcoming elections, is adopting a cautious approach, seeking improvement rather than perpetual military rule.

V. International Influence & Myanmar’s History

The professor argues that Myanmar and its economy have become accustomed to a “pariah status” due to long-standing sanctions. He points out that the international community’s criticism, including the genocide case before the ICJ, is often viewed as nationalistic by Myanmar citizens, even those who oppose the military. The military is gambling that a few countries will shift their stance if it can deliver some level of stability.

He references a previous flawed election where the military won without NLD participation, but later allowed Aung San Suu Kyi to participate, suggesting a potential for future shifts. However, he acknowledges the significant breakdown of trust and the loss of ten years of reform.

VI. Looking Ahead: Dialogue & Stability

The professor emphasizes the importance of observing the military’s next steps. If they use their victory to initiate dialogue with ethnic armed organizations and the remnants of the NLD, and improve the lives of ordinary citizens, it would represent a positive outcome. He stresses that ending violence is the primary requirement, not necessarily immediate democracy or elections.

Notable Quote:

“Sometimes there are real differences in papering over and this is more papering over the fact that it’s taken a month to do it.” – Professor Simon T., commenting on the superficial nature of the election.

Data/Statistics:

• Participation rates in the election have “markedly” declined.
• Normal lives have deteriorated to the point where some are on the “borderline of starvation.”

Conclusion:

The Myanmar election represents a strategic maneuver by the military to consolidate power and potentially reshape international engagement. While widely condemned for its lack of credibility, the outcome may open doors for closer ties with countries like Russia and China. The future of Myanmar hinges on the military’s willingness to engage in dialogue, end violence, and improve the lives of its citizens. ASEAN’s role will be crucial in navigating this complex situation, balancing principles with the need for regional stability. The election is less about domestic reconciliation and more about influencing the geopolitical landscape surrounding Myanmar.