Myanmar: The Raw Deal Returns or Never Trust the Military
What happened?
Briefly, the army (and one may assume with the blessing if not the rest of the military/Tatmadaw) in Myanmar has carried out
a coup, overturning November 2020’s elections on the basis that they deem the election
results fraudulent. The Tatmadaw answers to the National Defence and
Security Council (NDSC), the head of which is Myanmar’s President, currently
Win Mynt.
The ramifications of the coup in Myanmar are more troubling
than the casual eye might observe. Min Aung Hlaing, the commander-in-chief of
the Burmese army, was supposed to retire last summer and has now placed himself
at the head of government. Aung San Suu Kyi and President Win Mynt have both
been detained with up to 45 other people.
It was obvious a week ago that the military was not going to
accept the election results, but the largely resounding question is why? Since
the enactment of democratic reforms over the past five years, Myanmar seemed to
have put the military rule behind them and in this last election, millions
braved the COVID-19 pandemic to vote overwhelmingly for Aung San Suu Kyi’s National
League for Democracy (NLD) party.
As with most dictatorships, the endgame is simply to remain
in power and one can assume safely that is General Hlaing’s idea. However, it
draws out some broader questions that provoke a deeper look. Since the reforms
enacted in 2011 beginning with the release of Suu Kyi, the general understanding
is that the military would still have a seat at the table. To be sure, this was
the best-case solution to a worst-case scenario. Nevertheless, while the military’s
continued presence in governance has proved contradictory, if not compromising
(see the continued oppression of the Rohingya and Karen peoples, among others), it felt that Burma, as Myanmar is also known, was waking from a fifty-year
nightmare.
While I agree with Gerard McCarthy that
"the current system is tremendously beneficial for the army: it has
complete command autonomy, sizeable international investment in its commercial
interests and political cover from civilians for war crimes", it still
begs the question of why they would want to extend their control any further.
Even with a sizeable majority in office, it has been said that it would be
unlikely that the NLD would amend the constitution to exclude the military. As
he also pointed out, even if the military occupation is “only for a year”
(Hlaing has said he may revoke parts of the 2008 constitution and hold
elections in a year), it is bound to exacerbate tensions and provoke civil
unrest, if not national destabilization.
What this means for the Burmese
“Waking up to learn your world has been completely turned
upside down overnight was not a new feeling, but a feeling that I thought that
we had moved on from, and one that I never thought we'd be forced to feel again”
– unnamed woman in
Yangon
Forbes’
Sebastien Roblin is more hopeful than I about how this is going to play
out. He may be right that, after years of partial democracy and civilian rule,
the military may of necessity step back in the face of popular backlash and
protests. Even with the internet and telecommunications locked down, this is
such a tired (and ultimately ineffective) strategy, that it may only galvanize the
people to organize more rapidly and assertively.
You hear the weariness in the woman’s voice quoted above but
my suspicion is that while it is going to take some time to frame an organized
resistance that can effectively protest the military, this may happen sooner
than later. I suspect that the military is underestimating what the civilian
population is going to accept and likewise the ease with which the Tatmadaw thinks
it can control the populace. However, while I agree with Roblin that resistance
may come quickly, I am uneasy about the suppression by force likely to be the
response.
Additionally, one wonders what this means for the various ethnic
groups in Myanmar, particularly the Karen and Rohingya peoples who have been
historically persecuted by the military. Actually, no. I don’t wonder. In June of
2019, the military ordered a crackdown on the internet in the Kachine and Chin
states and those remained in place through the November 2020 elections. It is
obvious that the military wishes to continue the oppression/disenfranchisement
of minority ethnic populations. The military persecution of the Rohingya is
well documented (on this
blog, as well), and there are no representatives from that population
serving in the government at all.
From “Myanmar:
Election Fundamentally Flawed” Human Rights Watch report of October 5, 2020:
“Decades of armed conflict has led to over 230,000 people
living in long-term displacement camps nationwide and hundreds of thousands
living as refugees across Myanmar’s border. An additional 200,000 have been
displaced since January 2019 due to fighting in Rakhine and Chin States,
according to estimates from local groups. Election rules require internal
migrants to provide certification that verifies that they have lived in current
residence for a minimum of 90 days. This will affect the participation of many
Rakhine Buddhists, Chin, and Mro people.
People in parts of Kachin, Karen, and Shan States are
unlikely to be able to vote. No voting will take place in Wa State, an
autonomous region. The Union Election Commission has said that any necessary
partial or whole-constituency cancellations will be made in October, based on
recommendations from the military.”
Regional considerations
China, thus far, has taken a hands-off approach. The only
statement I have read has been that China suggests all parties work to resolve
the matter. Cambodia, Thailand, and the Philippines have issued statements to
the effect that this is an internal matter. I am coming to the conclusion that the
ASEAN nations, then, are taking a path of non-interference and that might be
for purely pragmatic reasons, as well as – and there is no other way to put
this – apathy. Historically, the region’s nations have remained a distance to
conflict and turmoil in Burma (and not without reason since in some cases, they
themselves were in the throes of conflict).
This hands-off approach may well change if unrest in Myanmar begins to threaten the region's stability.
China, however, is worth keeping an eye on, since there is a
heightened awareness of the PRC’s use of soft power in the region (Nepal, parts
of Myanmar, and elsewhere) and its occasional muscle-flexing in disputed areas with
India. There is heavy investment by China in the Tatmadaw and the military’s
control over the nation ensures that China would not have to deal with a
democratically elected government that might not be on board with China’s aims
in the country.
I would not go so far to suggest that the Tatmadaw is
responding to pressure from Beijing, though. They may well simply want to exert
power, profit as much as possible from Chinese backing and continue ruling in
perpetuity.
Outside Asia
The United States and the UK have issued warnings and there
is popular pressure, as well, to
resume sanctions on Myanmar. For the U.S., this coup stings deeper than
perhaps it might otherwise, owing to the claim from supporters of the former
president that the election results were fraudulent. That said, in the past
year, there have been five disputed/controversial
elections and it is tempting to derive a pattern from this. However, not
all disputed elections were settled by military takeover (and therefore, not
necessarily coups.)
That said, the world is left with – for the moment – a Myanmar
once again under the power of an unchecked military whose long-term goals are
anyone’s guess. The threats to free speech, civilian communication and democratic
rule are real, and that the precarious nature of indigenous ethnic populations is
now more dangerous than ever.
It’s worth keeping abreast on what’s happening in Myanmar
because it is a frightening turn in a country that has been trying to pull, and
appeared to have pulled, away from military dictatorship. As troubling as this
coup is, it is a mirror of what happens elsewhere when elections are deemed
“stolen” by a faction unhappy with the results. While all such societal
tragedies are important and deserve our attention, it’s important to bear in
mind that they are quite often cautionary.
If you want to stay apprised of actions you can take, please
consider signing up for reports and updates from the U.S. Campaign for Burma,
follow them on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/uscampaignforburma/.
Reference/For further reading:
BBC
News. "Myanmar coup: Aung San Suu Kyi detained as military seizes
control". February 1, 2021.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55882489
BBC
News. "Myanmar coup: Min Aung Hlaing, the general who seized power".
February 1, 2021. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55892489
Cuddy,
Alice. "Myanmar military coup: 'Our world turned upside down
overnight'". BBC News. February 1, 2021.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55893736
Doubek,
James. "Myanmar's Army Stages Coup, Detaining Aung Sang Suu Kyi,
Others". NPR. January 31, 2021.
https://www.npr.org/2021/01/31/962652693/myanmars-army-stages-coup-detaining-aung-sang-suu-kyi-others
Feffer, John and
Steinberg, David I. "Myanmar, Minorities, and the Military". Foreign
Policy in Focus. October 10, 2007.
https://fpif.org/myanmar_minorities_and_the_military/
Human
Rights Watch. "Myanmar: Election Fundamentally Flawed". October 5,
2020. https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/10/05/myanmar-election-fundamentally-flawed
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/myanmar-coup-suu-kyi-military/2021/02/01/57ffbe8a-6431-11eb-bab8-707f8769d785_story.html
Roblin,
Sebastien. "History May Not Repeat Itself In Myanmar Military Coup".
Forbes. February 1, 2021.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastienroblin/2021/02/01/is-history-repeating-itself-in-myanmar-military-coup/?sh=43295faf7f6c
Teller
Report. "Burma: Min Aung Hlaing, heir to the military junta".
February 1, 2021.
https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2021-02-01-%0A---burma--min-aung-hlaing--heir-to-the-military-junta%0A--.rylEFG6rlO.html
Tepperman,
Jonathan. "Why This Wasn't a Coup". Foreign Policy. January 6, 2021.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/why-this-wasnt-a-coup-capitol-2020-election-trump/
UN
News. "Arrests, military control ‘a serious blow’ to democratic reforms in
Myanmar: UN chief". February 1, 2021.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/02/1083442
Wikipedia.
"List of controversial elections". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversial_elections
Wintour,
Patrick and Borger, Julian. "Myanmar coup: Biden threatens to resume
sanctions". The Guardian. February 1, 2021.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/01/myanmar-coup-us-and-china-divided-in-response-to-army-takeover-aung-san-suu-kyi
Comments
Post a Comment