Wednesday
February 19, 2025

Why is Myanmar a destabilised Democracy?

Featured in:

By: Saziya Asgar & Shubh Gupta

Myanmar: source Internet

In the last quarter of 20th century, the third wave of democratisationoccurred which has shaped geopolitical landscape in a tremendous way. Similarly, after Covid-19, there has been a trend of rise of authoritarianism across the world. Several nations are shifting towards authoritarian regimes, Myanmar being the latest one. In 2020 elections were held in Myanmar which resulted into the National League for Democracy (NLD) getting the second term but Myanmar’s military, the Tatmadaw refused to accept the results of election and this was followed by a coup in Myanmar.

Achieving a successful transition to democracy necessitates the establishment of effective civilian-led institutions to oversee the military, a task made more challenging in nations with a deep-seated tradition of militarism and where the military holds significant political and institutional power. Given the military activism of Tatmadaw, it seems less likely that Myanmar will witness democratic transition. Despite the strides made by the NLD in instituting democratic procedures in Myanmar, the military coup of February 2021 exposed the government’s inability to assert civilian authority over the junta. This coup has propelled the nation and its trajectory into unfamiliar terrain. Yet we can be hopeful that, international mediation could be helpful in this instance. Many countries came forward and put economic sanctions against Myanmar after the coup. Since the coup, the country’s former coloniser UK, too has now sanctioned several individuals and entitiesspecifically targeting those responsible for the coups. “We must not allow Myanmar to become a forgotten crisis,” declared the UK representative Barbara Woodward. He further underscored the need of appointing an UN Special Envoy to Myanmar.

According to Human Rights watch, “Myanmar’s Junta Benefits from Weak International Response”.  Many countries like China and Russia have blocked the effect of sanctions on Myanmar. They have emerged as one of the most potent enablers of military junta. They have also blocked any substantive action against Myanmar’s military at United Nations Security Council and the UN has failed to address this humanitarian crisis.

Introduction

“Myanmar is at risk of breaking apart”.These are not the words of an international media outlet but the words of Myanmar’s President himself. Even after 7 decades of Independence, the country of “The Land of Golden Pagodas” has not been able to unite and now it’s more fragmented than ever. According to Reuters, Myint Swe, the president of the State Administration Council, told a National Defence and Security Council meeting, “If the government does not effectively manage the incidents happening in the border region, the country will be split into various parts”.

The statement comes at a point, when in the east, The Rebel Brotherhood Alliance comprising of three ethnic armies are driving Junta out of power in Shan Province of Myanmar, and on the western front the Chin are fiercely fighting the Junta resulting in Junta forces fleeing to neighbouring countries such as India. In this paper, we shall examine the story of this Golden Land and why it has failed to transition to a stable democratic system, what are the factors behind this fragile socio-political scenario and what can the world learn from Myanmar’s experience.

Historical Context

Myanmar is a country in Southeast Asia. Right since it’s very independence the country has been struggling for democracy and human rights. However, despite this Civil War-like situations have continued to prevail in the country and any dissent is brutally crushed by its military rulers. Like most of its Asian neighbours, Myanmar too became prey to British colonialism after the three Anglo-Burmese wars. The Britishers were later ousted by the Japanese during the time of the First World War. It was during this time that an effective Burmese Movement was formed.

Myanmar is a diverse country with more than 130 ethnicities. In these ethnicities, the majority is that of the Bamar people. This group constitutes 2/3rd of the country’s entire population. The group enjoys a superior position and majority representation in both civilian and Military government.  Thus, after the country’s independence, several ethnic and armed insurgents have fought for greater autonomy.

After the end of 2nd World War, the Local Army with the support of the “Allied Forces gained control over Myanmar. This local army was led by Aung San who is also revered as the Father of the Nation. In 1947, General Aung San led the Burma delegation to London to negotiate for the country’s independence. He along with leaders of other ethnic groups namely Chin, Shan, And Kachin, signed the PANGLONG Agreement, which was primarily an agreement on the transnational arrangements emerging after World War II.  The agreement aimed to make Burma a federal state and to give autonomy to non-Barman ethnic groups.

In 1948, Like most other countries in the region, the Union of Burma became a parliamentary democracy. However, the representative democracy only lasted till 1962 when General Na Win led a military coup and seized power. The state was run by URC or the United Revolutionary Council. It implemented the Burmese way of Socialism. This was followed by the nationalisation of all major industries. Consequently, a parallel economy emerged because of these harsh government restrictions. The economic situation deteriorated with massive poverty food and widespread corruption. This was accompanied by food shortages. On August 08, 1988, the country saw the biggest pro-democracy protests in its history which too was brutally crushed by the army. The “8888” uprising ultimately ended with the death of at least 3 thousand civilians and displacing of thousands more.

By this movement, Burmese politics took an unexpected turn as the Nationalist leader Aung San Suu Kui, the daughter of Aung Sang rose to prominence. After the Junta’s massive crackdown on innocent civilians, Sui and her supporters formed a political party known as the National League for Democracy, or NLD in short.

Suu finished her graduation from India and married a British National. Suu was deeply influenced by the non-violent struggle of Indian Independence leader Mahatma Gandhi. By the late 2000s, under domestic and international pressure Myanmar’s Junta began to loosen its grip on power. However, as noted by the “Human Rights Watch” even the new constitution of 2008 was designed to perpetuate military control in Burma and obstruct any steps toward a meaningful multiparty democracy that upholds human rights. The constitution reserved 25% of seats for the military in the “Pyidaungsu Hluttaw,” Myanmar’s Parliament. According to the new constitution, any amendment in the constitution would require more than 75% of Votes, thus ensuring an effective de facto veto for the Military.

Today Suu is perceived as a force of democratisation and modernisation. She won the 2015 elections and became the de facto ruler of Myanmar. However, American Journalist Kurlantzick notes that “she failed to strengthen democracy and to create democratic bulwarks.” Her international image further took a hit when she defended the military on the international platforms on the issue of the Rohingya Genocide. However, she has also been an outspoken critic of the Military’s influence in Myanmar’s politics. NLD promised to establish internal peace, redress ethnic grievances, sustainable development, and further democratisation. Her push for the deepening of democracy further made the Junta insecure about its power. In 2020 NLD won a landslide victory but the Military Generals refused to accept the results arguing that the elections were fraudulent.

In February 2021, the Military citing its constitutional authority declared National Emergency and seized power. Since then, the Military has been ruthlessly consolidating power.

Ethnic Diversity

As discussed above Myanmar is full of diversity very much like it’s neighbors such as India on the west and Singapore on its east. However, Myanmar has not been able to manage these diversities in a manner that satisfies both regional aspirations of the Minorites and it’s National Interests. It’s interesting to note that, India on the other hand has been able to ensure movement and mingling of people through set of diverse policies encompassing inter-state coordination, central government services coupled with affirmative actions, anti-discriminative law, creation of all India services. Such feats are yet to be achieved by the Myanmar’s administrative apparatus.

On the other side, we have Singapore, a small island nation whose history is marred by a series of ethnic clashes with the most violent ones occurring in the 1960s is now a first world country. So, the obvious question that one might want to ponder is why countries like Singapore and India were able to ensure harmony, despite the history of a bloody and brutal violence that followed during post-independence times.

Phenomenon of Ghettoization

The answer to such questions can be understood by applying the phenomenon of Ghettoization. According to the United States holocaust memorial museum the term “Ghetto” originated from the name of a Jewish quarter in Venice. The jews over here were restricted to live and thus segregated from other people. Merriam Webster defines a ghetto is a part of a city in which members of a minority group live, especially as a result of political, social, legal, environmental or economic pressure. The process that results in such a phenomenon is known as Ghettoization. Such Ghettos are prevalent in Myanmar, consequently this has led to strengthening of regional and ethnic identities. However, it’s important to note that this Ghettoization is natural rather than enforced.

One of the main reasons that why this phenomenon is predominant is perhaps that people belonging to certain ethnicities find comfort in living in close-knit communities. If we look at the sociological theories explaining Ghettoization, the most suited explanations in context of Myanmar can be understood by applying a mix socio-psychological theory.

Application of Socio-Psychological Theories in Myanmar

 First is the Social Identity Theory. The theory was proposed by Tajfel and Turner in 1970s. The theory examines about the social identity of an individual, the theory tells us that in addition to our own individual identity we also possess a social identity, this social identity may be derived from nationality, religion and ethnicity. The latter will be our focus while examining the question of Ethnic Diversity in Myanmar and how has it led to fragile political conditions in the country. The theory delves into the human nature of maintaining a positive self-esteem.

In order to achieve this, individuals often tend view their groups as better and more civilized as compared to other groups and this results in people developing a bias against other communities. This leads to categorization of categories, when this categorization of territories is coupled with other factors such as perceived threat from the dominant/ rival groups, this can further lead to a sense of insecurity among a particular group. These fears coupled with in group favouritism may often manifest as ethnic conflicts. 

Many of these biases have been the cause of ethnic tensions in Myanmar, few examples are:  Bamar people often view Shan people as less educated and lazy. This is based on the presumption that most Shan people tend to live in the countryside and have no or little access to education. However, this is far from reality. Many Shan people are equally if not more educated than the dominant Bamar community. Additionally, these people are also viewed as criminals and drug smugglers, since most of the drug trade happens in Shan state of Myanmar. However, many Shan people strongly oppose drugs and besides they are not the only ones involved in drug trade.

Another example can be of Kachin people, who are viewed as violent and aggressive, partially due to the fact that Kachin people have a warrior culture and many of them are Christians rather Buddhists. In reality while Kachin people do have a warrior culture, they are also known for their hospitality and caring nature. On the other hand, it’s also important to note that 25% to 27% of Kachin people are non-Christians.

Such in-group biases further strengthen the existing stereotypes and this manifests in discriminations and ultimately leads to ethnic tensions. While social identity theory is useful to understand how social identity may play a role in creating animosities between two groups, it fails to solve our problem in a holistic manner, i.e. why is it that few societies are able to deal with ethnic tensions while others can’t.

 The Contact Hypothesis

 A solution to deal with these intergroup conflicts was provided by Gordon Allport in his “Theories of Intergroup Relations.” In this work he gave his famous “Contact Hypothesis,” the contact hypothesis he maintains that positive intergroup contact can lead to better relations between different groups. For such a positive intergroup contact to occur, he mentions few basic conditions. Let’s apply them in the context of Myanmar.

Equal status: The contacting groups should have more or less equal status. This was never achieved in Myanmar as Panglong agreement was never implemented in it’s true spirt, consequently the ethnicities were not devolved powers and were not given the autonomy that they hoped for. The central leadership was dominated by Bamar people and other ethnicities hardly got any representation there.

Common Goals & Intergroup cooperations: The contacting groups have certain degree of converging interests. In the initial days of independence, there was a convergence of interests for Myanmar’s independence, these shared interests was no longer there after independence. What’s interesting to note is that, these groups are once again coming together, as we have noted in the formation of rebel alliance. The longing for democracy is what’s binding Myanmar once again fostering a good bond and understanding between different ethnicities. Additionally, the rebels have shown remarkable degree of cooperation and consequently have exceeded Junta’s expectations. The coordinated attacks are a proof that inter group cooperation between different Ethnic groups is possible.

Support from authorities: Support from authorities is the crucial for any nation to blur ethnic distinctions and cherish it’s diversity. This state support was quite visible in Singapore. The Singaporean authorities actively took steps to ensure the same through a series of policy measures such as EIP (Ethnic Integration Policy) which ensured that people living in government housing were from a variety of ethnicities. Additionally, government also provide financial incentives for couples to engage in inter-racial marriages such as providing education subsidies to their children.

In contrast, the Myanmar’s junta has done the opposite. Subedi and Garnett in their 2020 paper has clearly highlighted how the state’s portrayal of diversity is often contradictory and hypocritical. While it does acknowledge the diversity, the state often suppresses the ethnic diversity in name of national unity and integration. Additionally, the Military has also taken specific policies to ensure that ethnic harmony is never forged, this has been done through a series of measures including control of state media, education boards and systematically fabricating stories. One such example is “Muslim Plot” narrative of 2016, where the Military fabricated a story that Muslim groups in Myanmar were planning to oust the government and establish an “Islamic State of Myanmar”, the majority of the Myanmar’s citizens became victims to this narrative, and it ultimately resulted in ethnic genocide of Rohingyas. Similarly, many of these artificially created ethnic tensions have been used as an excuse by Junta to maintain its group of power.

Military Activism of the Junta

Myanmar’s military has been the most powerful institution since the independence from Britain in 1948. This is due to a combination of factors largely structural and economic. Myanmar’s Military is involved in several profitable businesses such as Mining, Timber and Construction activities. Economic power has allowed Junta to procure new weapon systems including fighter jets, armored vehicles and helicopters. This factor has resulted in Tatmadaw becoming one of the most powerful militaries in the South East Asian region.

This raises the question that “What should be the ideal model of Civil-Military relations in a democratic setting.” According to Huntington in his book “The Soldier and The State”, the most desirable form of civil military relation in a democracy is “objective Civilian Control over Military.” This model suggests that the optimal means of asserting control over the armed forces is to professionalize them and at the same time by giving them professional autonomy in their internal affairs. The model also mentions about simultaneously maximizing military subordination and Military fighting power. To sum up the model advocates for the separation of civil-military institutions and non-involvement of Military in domestic politics and clear distribution of power between military and civilian government by explicitly stating legal and institutional frameworks.

Huntington also talks about another model of civil-military relations i.e. subjective civilian control. It suggests to maximize civilian power by both civilizing and politicizing military and therefore making it politically dependent and denying any military professionalism. This ensures that military is directly integrated into the civilian state, while this would mean that military will be more directly accountable to the people in the latter case, it could also result in politicization of the army and at the same time the civilian interference may affect military’s decision-making process and this may lead to serious lapses in national security.

On applying the model of Objective civilian control, we find there is little evidence to suggest that Myanmar has democratic civil-military relations. Tatmadaw operates virtually without any parliamentary oversight. We don’t find any objective control since there is no clear distinction of power distribution between the military and civilian government. The government is not permitted to interfere in the appointment and promotion of Military personnel.

Tatmadaw directly controls three ministerial portfolios i.e. Defense, Home Affairs and Border Area Affairs. The other avenues through which Tatmadaw can exercise its influence is National Defense and Security Council (NDSC) where commander in chief of Junta controls six out of eleven members and thereby giving him a majority in the NDSC.

However, it’s important to note that military control has become a common phenomenon in many of the post-colonial states of the third world. Including Pakistan and Bangladesh. In this regard a country like Myanmar can learn from India where by the 1970s, Indian armed forces were rendered coup proof by comprehensive system of checks and balances. Myanmar too could have achieved this by diversifying ethnic composition, a strategy that was also used by the Mongols, recasting the order of precedence between civilian and military authorities and disallowing army officials from making public statement. However, this model was never implemented in Myanmar due to strong hold of military since independence from Britain. After all, it was the father of the nation that formed the Burmese National Army in 1940s with Japan’s support. And therefore, even after his death people continued to view military as liberating force and so the military enjoyed unchecked power from the very beginning. For this reason, renowned Burmese historian Thant-Myunt-u in his book the “Hidden history of Burma” notes that the modern state of Burma was born as a military occupation.

The military activism of Junta is further sustained in its propaganda machinery.

Propaganda of Tatmadaw

After coup of 2021 and brutal crackdown on popular resistance, military has become country’s most hated institution. But Tatmadaw with its use of legitimation strategies is still maintaining its authority both domestically and internationally and somehow managed to stay in power.

To understand the role of Propaganda in legitimising Junta’s role we can apply different theories. One such theory given by Noam Chomsky is Manufacture of Consent Theory which suggests that powerful institutions including military use propaganda to manipulate public opinion and then take control over the flow of public information. This theory can be used to describe the efforts of Myanmar’s Military to maintain control over the country and its people. For this military has engaged in a variety of methods and has systematically suppressed dissent.  The Gramscian idea of cultural hegemony or soft power can also be applied to our case study of Junta’s rule. Tatmadaw has patronised cultural and art institutions promoting nationalistic narratives and portraying itself as the Guardian of Myanmar’s traditions.

Another such strategy is the control over the media. The Military junta has used constitutional amendments and legal framework to exert it’s control over the media. In 2011 military junta stepped in and initiated democratisation. Government undertook several policy measures like abolishing restrictions like pre-publication censorship, removed restrictions on the content of newspapers, etc. But in 2021 when the coup was staged, media restrictions were formalised and integrated into legal system through numerous amendments to the existing criminal laws. Myanmar’s State Administration Council [SAC] established by the military after 2021 coup, has approved a series of changes that criminalise peaceful demonstration. Article 38[d] and [e] impose criminal penalties for accessing unauthorised online content. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has described Myanmar as the third worst country when it comes to jailing journalists. Similarly, Internet service providers have begun to restrict access to specific websites and social media such as Facebook and VPNs that can bypass internet filtering.

Impacting Mass Psychology

In the aftermath of coup, the Junta came with a perfect candidate to mass brainwash the civilians. Chit Naing, a social psychologist was appointed as Minister of Information. State owned print media such as Myawaddy and Ngwe-tar-yi in addition with pro-military newspapers such as Pydaungsu play a prominent role in spreading Junta’s propaganda.  In order to seek support from various ethnic parties the Junta also tried to popularise slogans such as “Eternal Peace” and “Unity is Strength”.

The propaganda is not just limited to print media but is also entrenched in television and radio networks such as MRTV. These television networks try to portray the Junta as the saviour of the Burmese people. The channels play clips of Junta’s Senior officials engaged in charitable works and donations to Monks, Nuns, Monasteries and Pagodas. However, in this age of digital revolution, propaganda on social media was essential to Junta’s soft power strategy. For this purpose, Junta pushed it’s propaganda through Facebook pages such as “Tatmadaw True News Information TV” and “People Media.” The Reuters reported that more than 200 personal accounts of Military personnels on various social media platforms including YouTube, Facebook and Tik-Tok have been used to allege that the 2020 elections were fraudulent.

News outlets such as Kyemon (The Mirror) have continued to justify Myanmar’s Junta’s role in National politics as a patriotic actor to ensure stability in Myanmar.

Websites of Ethnic armed organisations such as KNU also document Junta’s historic role in perpetuating the discourse of National Unity and justifying suppression of Karen people under its name. Similarly, on the international front, the Military reiterated that there won’t be any change in foreign policy and the Military will continue to pursue friendly relations with all its partners. Narratives such as “When there is discipline, there is progress” were repeatedly evoked to convey that Myanmar’s Junta was committed to serving the nation.

Role of International Community & the way ahead

In an era of globalisation where the entire world is dependent on one another, international actors can play a very important role in shaping the direction of any conflict. In this section, we shall examine the role of international actors in shaping the conflict and its outcomes. Further, we shall conclude our article by suggesting a way ahead in navigating the conflict.

To begin with, let us focus on the reaction of the two major poles in the international system, which is increasingly becoming bipolar. Both China and the USA claim to stand with the people of Myanmar, however, both have different and even contrasting approaches to the conflict. While the USA has strongly condemned the military coup and has imposed numerous sanctions, China on the other hand is heavily investing in Myanmar and is providing a cover to Junta on a global level. This investment is visible through projects such as the rail-road-Indian Ocean Route, a trade route connecting Southwest China with Myanmar and neighbouring countries. While most countries such as India and the ASEAN nations, paused and some even terminated their investment, China continues to invest in the military lead Myanmar. However, considering that China as an ally of Tatmadaw, may not show us the full picture, while China initially distanced itself from the coup, and later supported Junta, it has also maintained friendly ties with the ethnic armed groups. This was visible in Operation 1027 by the Northern Alliance in Shan state which was allegedly conducted with China’s involvement and approval.

This approach makes China an important player in the conflict. This has allowed China to play the role of a good mediator to broker cease-fire agreements from time to time. For instance, under the recent agreement between the two warring parties, the Military, and the resistance forces, two sides have decided to withdraw their forces from the forefront in Northern Shan state to protect the Chinese investments in the region.

If we put our focus on the Western Powers such as the USA, they have frozen accounts of Burmese Banks such as Myanmar Foreign Trade Bank (MFTB) and Myanmar Investment and Commercial Bank (MICB). This has significantly impacted the regime’s ability to profit from natural resources available in the country as mentioned in the fourth section of the paper. This has limited Tatmadaw’s access to foreign currency reserves. Consequently, Myanmar’s FDI inflow declined in 8 months of FY 2023-24. This shows a lack of investor confidence and the Junta’s inability to convince the world about its capability to consolidate power like it once had.

Other powers such as Russia continue to provide cushion to Myanmar’s Junta by delivering it with Military supplies which are crucial to maintain the Areial power of the Junta. This support is further visible by the high-level visits between Russian officials and the Myanmar junta, as well as the conferment of an honorary doctorate upon Junta Military Chief Min Aung Hlaing. Coming to the ASEAN nation Laos, which also happens to be Myanmar’s immediate neighbour, has appointed a special envoy to Myanmar, signaling a change from previous approaches. Coming to Singapore, a small yet powerful nation has taken a significant step by notifying Myanmar banks that it would limit their access to funds and would only allow transactions between UOB accounts. Following the US footsteps, Bangladesh too has severed its financial ties with Myanmar’s Junta by freezing MFTB and MICB accounts. Relations between the two states were already soured after the Rohingya crisis and now they have deteriorated even further.

Coming to India, we have traditionally engaged with Myanmar’s ruling powers, prioritizing security. However, the current situation demands a recalibration as joint India-Myanmar projects such as the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project are now controlled by Ethnic armed forces such as the Arakan Army. Further, it may also be noted that India cannot simply ignore the Myanmar Crisis because if the Crisis worsens India may see a huge influx of refugees which will be detrimental to the nation’s security. Due to such apprehensions, India has also suspended the free movement regime with Myanmar.

The above analysis clearly points out the challenges of navigating through this complex conflict in Myanmar. Similar to any tricky situation, the first step to be taken involves having an open and frank conversation with the parties involved for any possible solution to take hold. There should be increased support from, the international community. The world must play a more active role in facilitating discussions between all stakeholders.

The bottom line is that unless the crisis in Myanmar receives renewed attention, progress towards a solution will remain elusive. Open communication serves as the foundation for resolving any dispute. In conclusion, the adage “For a problem to be solved, it must be talked upon” applies perfectly to the situation in Myanmar.

2 COMMENTS

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
us news logo
us news logo
19 days ago

Your blog post was the highlight of my day. Thank you for brightening my inbox with your thoughtful insights.

national news companies
national news companies
19 days ago

Your blog post was exactly what I needed to hear today. Thank you for the gentle reminder to practice self-care.

Find us on

Latest articles

Related articles

Amidst Contracts, Global Aircraft Engine Manufacturers Dominate Aero India...

By: Suman Sharma As India’s aerospace public sector unit – Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) faced flak over the...

DRDO unveils India’s indigenous ‘Iron Dome’ at Aero India...

By: Suman Sharma At the 15th edition of the Bengaluru-based biennial airshow- Aero India, India’s govt-run defence agency...

HAL’s Mk-1A enthralls Spectators at Aero India 2025

By: Suman Sharma India’s indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Mk-1A, manufactured by the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) made...

US-Canada relations under Donald Trump 2.0

By: Jai Verma, Research Analyst, GSDN The United States are now officially in a Trade War, as new...

‘Asian NATO’ in Cold Storage: But what about an...

By: Rishya Dharmani, Research Analyst, GSDN The Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar outrightly rejected calls for an...
Ads Blocker Image Powered by Code Help Pro

Ads Blocker Detected!!!

We have detected that you are using extensions to block ads. Please support us by disabling these ads blocker.

Powered By
100% Free SEO Tools - Tool Kits PRO