Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

An ASEAN way to resolve the Myanmar crisis

Reading Time: 5 mins
Foreign ministers and representatives of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are seen on a screen during an informal meeting, 2 March 2021 (Photo: Malaysian Foreign Ministry Handout via Reuters).

In Brief

ASEAN has prided itself on being one of the world’s most successful regional organisations, with an impressive record in its handling of both economic and political affairs. But the Myanmar coup of 1 February has jeopardised the 10-member bloc’s dream of being one big, happy family of 655 million: 55 million people are now living under threat of gunfire and arrests throughout Myanmar.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

From the 1990s to the 2010s ASEAN protected the previous Myanmar junta and shielded the country from international isolation and sanctions. The bloc used to be confident that member countries could solve their own domestic problems as they arose. Myanmar joined ASEAN in 1997, despite Western opposition to its long dictatorial rule. When reforms began in 2011, the world stood taken aback: few had expected that the military would voluntarily loosen their grip on power. ASEAN was vindicated, but not for long.

With Myanmar under military rule again, ASEAN faces the same dilemma of whether the whole ASEAN family should stake its reputation to support an errant member.

It seems from the ASEAN Chair’s statement of 2 March that ASEAN is no longer murmuring platitudes about the crisis. Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore have condemned the junta’s heavy-handed approach and urged it to desist from using force and to restore normalcy. Comments from other ASEAN members have been more subdued. Despite the mixed rhetoric, they have agreed to leave the door open to engagement with the generals.

The Myanmar junta has used all possible means to quell the protests and civil disobedience movement. More than 200 persons have been killed, and the casualties are expected to rise. A strategy to bear down on the junta must be developed urgently, with top priority given to securing a ceasefire. Channels of communication between the military leaders and key ASEAN members remain open at this juncture. An initiative needs to be propelled by ASEAN and in cooperation with key strategic international players.

It is not possible at this point for the conflicting parties within Myanmar to sit down and negotiate. This reality ASEAN accepts. Some ASEAN members have suggested informal meetings that bring together official and non-official representatives of the main stakeholders, from both inside and outside the country. This would include the Tatmadaw (the military), the National League for Democracy, ethnic groups, civil society and the private sector. The United Nations, ASEAN and key international dialogue partners could be brought in to provide support and mediate.

A meeting like this would provide the opportunity to develop an action plan and create a conducive atmosphere for conflicting parties to negotiate. It would need to have no fixed agenda.

The coup took place under the threat of COVID-19 and with most of Myanmar’s population — well over 60 per cent — living under US$1.90 a day. Any prolonged stalemate on the ground only worsens the plight of the people of Myanmar.

Rising above the heightened tensions in their bilateral relations, the US–China meeting in Anchorage, Alaska this weekend will be important in sending a strong and constructive signal to parties in Myanmar that reinforces the UN Security Council’s call for a solution and the important role that ASEAN can play in finding it. Despite its cautious approach, ASEAN has a track record of finding durable solutions — from the Cambodia conflict to the rehabilitation of Irrawaddy Delta after Cyclone Nargis.

In the six weeks since the coup Western countries have shown restraint and imposed only targeted sanctions against specific military leaders and their financial networks. They’ve learned lessons that broad sanctions inflict the greatest harm on ordinary people, particularly during a pandemic. This may explain why ASEAN’s dialogue partners, including Japan, China, India, the United States and others, are backing the bloc’s ongoing efforts. Recent statements from the UN Security Council and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue have strongly supported the role of ASEAN in resolving the crisis.

ASEAN may not tolerate the junta’s continuing its violent crackdown against the protesters. In private, ASEAN leaders have pressed this point. Though the ASEAN Charter does not have any provisions for expulsion of a member, member countries have the moral authority to pressure the junta if it fails to comply with the principles enshrined in the Charter. Enough pressure could see Myanmar voluntarily suspend its membership. This would have precedent. In 2006, after continued ASEAN peer pressure, Myanmar passed up its scheduled chairmanship of the group.

The military regime is planning an elaborate commemoration of Armed Forces Day on 27 March. Given the current carnage and brutality, nobody knows what to expect. The approach of Armed Forces Day might partially explain the severity of the military’s crackdown as it strives to ensure complete control. And the regime’s ultimate plan for the country may be revealed soon.

ASEAN understands full well that if the Myanmar imbroglio continues down its current path, it will only corrode its centrality and widen division within the group. The crisis is a test that will determine whether the group gives in to brutality, or puts people first and foremost.

Kavi Chongkittavorn is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Security and International Studies, Chulalongkorn University, and a veteran journalist on regional affairs for the Bangkok Post.

3 responses to “An ASEAN way to resolve the Myanmar crisis”

  1. The premise that ASEAN has been successful in any way has to be challenged. The Myanmar crisis is not the first test but yet another example of the disparate group’s ineffectiveness whatever the issue, from natural disasters to economic downturns to human rights abuses. ‘ASEAN may not tolerate the junta’s continuing its violent crackdown against the protesters’ is an observation empty of any hope for change.

    ASEAN was conceived as an anti-Communist bloc during the Soeharto regime – now we have two members – Vietnam and Laos – which are basically Marxist-Lenninist authoritarian states. Two – Thailand and Brunei are absolute miltary-backed monarchies. None are truly democratic. ASEAN has long passed its use-by date and that’s sad because it could help fix regional strife if given inspirational leadership. So far no-one has demanded the Myanmar military pull back or the country will be isolated by fellow members and condemned openly and furiously.

  2. Reinforcing the author’s comments in the Nikkei Asia a couple of weeks earlier Khun Kavi makes the point that ASEAN as a whole is being damaged by the actions of the military clique. What we do not know is the cohesiveness of the junta. In 1988-1990 elements of the Tatmadaw ousted one dictator (Ne Win) and replaced him with another (Tan Shwee). Three questions:
    1. How can ASEAN, or rather elements of ASEAN, encourage an internal putsch putting in place generals willing to compromise? Call in ex-Indonesian president Yodhoyono to mediate?
    2. Should not non-recognition of the junta – and recognition of the CRPH – as the legitimate government be a serious option? This would not limit back channel contacts.
    3. What can the EU do to get across the message you make that ASEAN as a whole has been sullied and its “centrality” threatened? Would suspending, or putting on hold, the EU-ASEAN SPA be a worthwhile option?

  3. It is positive that Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore as leading members of ASEAN have condemned the Tatmadaw’s brutal and confrontational approach. However, Vietnam has sided with China, India and Russia in toning down a similar Resolution of the UN Security Council, eventually settling for a Resolution encouraging member states to impose ‘hugely strong measures’. The EU as from 22 March, has approved a first round of sanctions against officials, their economic interests and the family of General Min Aung Hlaing; the UK has issued sanctions against six military officials and Canada nine plus preventing intellectual property exchanges. There is now a unique opportunity for ASEAN to form a grand coalition with the UN, EU, US, Canada and UK to exert moral, financial, goods and services and personal in imposing sanctions on the Myanmar regime. Myanmar is clearly in breach of the Charter of ASEAN which states Art. 1 that the people ‘live in peace …in a just democratic and harmonious environment….democracy is to be strengthened, good governance enhanced, human rights protected. In Art. 2 the Charter reiterates the ‘renunciation of aggression and the threat of the use of force’. It exhorts members states to uphold the UN Charter and international law. If ASEAN is to remain a credible international entity, it cannot allow its Charter to be rubbished by the egregiously errant behaviour of one of its member states. The UK has recently announced a new post-Brexit international policy review called ‘Global Britain’ in which it aims to achieve a tilt towards the Indo-Pacific region, including ASEAN and the Trans-Pacific trade deal. It is likely to think twice about it if ASEAN tolerates undemocratic, cruel and violent governance among a key member.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.