By MICHAEL AUSLIN
Myanmar’s military staged a coup on Monday, taking power in the capital of Naypyidaw, declaring a state of emergency, and detaining Aung San Suu Kyi, the country’s de facto leader. Since the landmark 2015 election in Burma that ended over half a century of military rule starting in 1962, and brought Suu Kyi to power, much of the world has assumed that democracy in the nation of 54 million people was fully established in the country. The reality has been far different. The military has never fully been brought under civilian control. Nor has it been excluded from sharing in governing in Parliament, where it controls a quarter of the seats, or controlling crucial ministries. Even worse, Suu Kyi herself became increasingly controversial for anti-democratic policies, not least of which was the continuing oppression of the Rohingya minority. The International Court of Justice is investigating whether the Nobel Peace Prize winner and her government have taken part in a genocide against the Rohingya.
Much like in neighboring Thailand, where the military took power (for the twelfth time) in a 2014 coup, and only partially democratized in early 2019, Burmese politicians have not been able to create a stable coexistence with the Burmese military, which gave up some of its power in 2011 and later agreed to the 2015 open election but continues to see itself as the only legitimate power center. The military, known as the Tatmadaw, was spurred to move today after months of contention resulting from last November’s parliamentary election, where the party it backs lost heavily to Suu Kyi’s governing National League for Democracy. The military claimed fraud and demanded a new vote. Now, with the civilian government under detention, and a state of emergency that could be extended indefinitely, Myanmar joins the list of nations where democracy is on the backfoot, a particularly ill omen in Asia. Roughly five years of semi-democracy, since the 2015 elections, is not a particularly long period of time for democratic values to take root, so it’s unclear what type of social reaction will result in response to the coup.
Secondarily, the coup in Myanmar presents the Biden administration with its second Asian crisis, just two weeks in, the first being increased Chinese military pressure on Taiwan. (As a side note, the Biden team should watch out for a move by North Korea, which would make a hat trick of crises in just the first month.) Calls by the White House for the release of detained officials and a return to democratic mechanisms are likely to fall on deaf ears. Vague threats that the U.S. will “take action against those responsible” probably refer to sanctions, but a clearer set of responses will be necessary, not least to attempt to form some sort of regional or even global coalition to pressure the military. Much of this response, and the need to form an international coalition, will fall on the White House’s new coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs, Kurt Campbell. Campbell was assistant secretary of state for East Asia during the first Obama administration, and was involved in efforts to get the Burmese military to surrender some of its power in 2011. If Biden decides to name a special envoy for Myanmar, a logical choice would be Derek Mitchell, who was the first U.S. ambassador to Myanmar after a hiatus of more than two decades. Mitchell is currently the head of the National Democratic Institute, and that organization should consider some type of partnering with the International Republican Institute (both are partially funded by the U.S. government) to show a bipartisan front and to work with other civil-society groups in Asia and beyond. The Association of South East Asian Nations, of which Myanmar has been a member since 1997, has released a statement calling for a “return to normalcy,” but without a firmer response, the organization risks being irrelevant, as it has been for the decade-plus of the Rohingya crisis.
There are significant geopolitical implications of the Myanmar crisis. As a harbinger of a less liberal, less democratic Asia, the coup in Myanmar is particularly worrisome. Any encouragement of authoritarianism and military rule will put pressure on democratic nations, including those like the Philippines and Malaysia that have been growing closer to China. Beijing’s influence in the Mekong Valley region, which links South Asia with East Asia, could also benefit from the relapse of Myanmar into authoritarianism. Xi Jinping has made clear his intention to promote the PRC’s version of illiberal rule wherever it can, and has become emboldened enough to increase his military intimidation of Taiwan and the Philippines. Gaining a new ally in the strategically located Myanmar, which sits astride almost the entire eastern side of the Bay of Bengal, could help restore some of the influence Beijing lost there during the last decade. This would worry India, particularly if Xi were able to increase China’s military presence through new agreements with the junta. Given the continuing Sino-Indian face-off on their Himalayan border, including military confrontations last year, anything that ratcheted up pressure on India’s maritime frontiers would stoke regional tensions.
Events will be in flux for some time, but a few things to watch for include:
Whether large-scale demonstrations erupt in Myanmar, showing lack of support for the military
How the military responds to any social unrest, including the use of force, shutting down the Internet and other communications systems, and suppressing civil society
How the military restructures Myanmar’s democratic mechanisms and courts, possibly making them less representative
Possible refugee movements to neighboring nations, including Thailand, India, Laos, and even China; and how those nations respond
Moves by China to give aid and support to the military junta, including weaponry
Support for Myanmar by other illiberal regimes in Asia, including China, Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, and North Korea
Increased Chinese military presence along strategic Bay of Bengal coast, tied to aid or diplomatic agreements
Myanmar may seem far away and of little consequence to America. But it has been a symbol of the continuing global competition between democracy and authoritarianism, and remains a geopolitically important nation. The coup and current crisis cannot be ignored by the United States, even if Washington’s options for influencing what happens in Naypyidaw remain limited. At a minimum, it demands a clear and unified front by America, Europe, and Asia’s democracies, with a willingness to isolate the new regime, provide aid for any refugees, and confront those nations that abet Myanmar’s descent into illiberalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment