Myanmar: Why It Matters
Robert Cole
Without a shot fired, the government of Myanmar was overthrown in the early hours of February first, replaced by an interim military dictatorship. The incident came on the heels of the nation's second free election since the end of military rule in 2010, which saw Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung Sang Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy Party (NLD) win more than 80% of seats in the nation’s legislative assembly, soundly defeating the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party. Based on statements made by military chief Min Aung Hliang after the election indicate that the military is likely to repeal the 2008 constitution under which the country has been operating. Given the country’s small size and seemingly constant turmoil, the event may not appear worthy of much consideration. Yet its timing, along with Myanmar’s geopolitical positioning, are likely to make it an area of critical importance to leaders across the world, particularly in Washington, Beijing, and New Delhi.
Its strategic position between India and China is particularly relevant given the recent violence along contested portions of the Sino-Indian border, which have contributed to rising tensions between the two regional powers. In addition, both nations have their eyes on the Sittwe region of southwestern Myanmar, an area with abundant natural gas resources and strategically valuable port facilities. The Indian government also has particularly close relations with the Burmese military, a mutual hedge against Chinese aggression that neither partner is interested in abandoning. China, for its part, will be interested in maintaining stability in a fragile southern neighbor that it wishes to import a steady supply of oil, timber, and minerals from. As such, it is unrealistic to expect a strong objection to the coup from either country.
The United States is just coming out of its own election cycle, with a new president whose State Department has not had time to reach full staffing. This presents a potential obstacle when planning a strategy for contending with Myanmar, but the White House has already issued a statement expressing dismay and labeling the incident a coup, a step not taken by either China or India. With Suu Kyi and her government ousted, the US’s already scant influence in the country is likely gone. President Biden has threatened a resumption of punitive sanctions against the country, but the limited volume of trade between the two means that this is unlikely to have a very dramatic effect. Nor does America seem to have many allies in the region interested in supporting its pro-democracy position in anything other than name. Japan in particular was slow to respond to the news, and is unlikely to take punitive measures, since it too is vying for economic influence in Myanmar. Given the high level of tension between Washington and Beijing, it is likely both sides will pause before committing to a new policy stance, taking time to size up the new military junta and whatever opposition to it may coalesce.
In the end, ongoing events in Myanmar matter because they are so representative of ongoing trends in global politics. From Belarus to Sudan, younger generations are tiring of living under aging militarist despots and are increasingly empowered by the internet to resist. The role of China as a major player in global diplomacy is also clearly visible, and will be critical as the situation in Myanmar unfolds. The success or failure of this coup in the long term will likely serve as a strong indicator of global trends toward democracy or despotism more broadly, and deserves attention as such.