By Leo Deng
On February 1st, 2021, news from the corner of Southeast Asia shocked the world. Myanmar, a state that had just gained its status as a democracy 10 years ago, was thrown into autocracy again. The de facto civil leader Aung San Suu Kyi was said to be deposed by the generals. Residents of Naypyidaw, Myanmar’s capital, and Yangon, its largest city, woke on February 1st to find soldiers in the streets and martial music blaring from their radios. Representatives of the National League for Democracy(NLD) were being put under house arrest overnight.
Though the event may be striking for many westerners, the path toward democracy has always been painstaking and unsteady in Myanmar, a country long being rigged by junta rulers. When Myanmar first gained its independence from the British Raj in 1948, it was immediately subject to constant rebellions, ranging from Communist uprisings to Chinese Nationalist incursions. It was no wonder that the army, known as Tatmadaw, established itself as the supreme ruler of the country. Tatmadaw continued to stay in power for the rest of the century, after crushing an elected government in 1962. However capable the generals were of staying in power, their decades-long governance resulted only in economic catastrophe. Political and economic isolation coupled with the disastrous program of Burmese Way to Socialism brought the country a place in the United Nations’ list of Least Developed Countries(LDCs).
Given the junta’s appalling record of governance, there was reason for optimism when in 2011, the generals relinquished their grip on the nation by making way for a civil government. The exact motives behind the decision could be difficult to ascertain, but the main reason was that they believed they could do it without losing power. The 2008 constitution of Myanmar, still in effect today, was a carefully assembled one to fit the interests of the military. In this new constitution of a “discipline-flourishing democracy”, the commander-in-chief of the Tatmadaw would appoint the minister of defense as well as the interior and border control. This gives the army de facto control of the national security apparatus. Moreover, 25% of parliament’s seats are to be reserved for the army, and any changes to the constitution need approval from more than 75% of the parliament. Thus the generals could wield their veto power over any unsatisfactory amendments.
With the puppet constitution in place, the army finally agreed to a general election. The 2015 Myanmar General Election was widely hailed as the fairest, most transparent election seen in the country in decades. NLD, led by Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, won a landslide victory over Union Solidarity and Development Party(USDP), the army’s proxy party.
The fact that Ms. Aung did not use her new-gained power and reputation very well surely gave the generals consolation. With 25% of the seats in parliament occupied by his loyal officers, Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing hoped that an improved showing of USDP could bring him into office in the 2020 General Election. It didn’t go as planned. The 2020 Election saw USDP win only 33 of the 476 available seats, while NLD won 396. And just as they did after the 2015 Election, the generals alleged voter fraud. With the election commission issuing its rejection of such claims, the military staged a coup on Feb 1st, resulting in the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi and other NLD leaders.
These actions by Tatmadaw, however it may seem, are justified on constitutional grounds. According to the 2008 constitution, the military can take control of the country in situations that could lead to the “disintegration of the Union and the loss of sovereign power.” Min Aung Hlaing and his officers argued that election fraud fit that description. They also pledged for another general election one year later.
Protests have been widespread since February, with hundreds of deaths. On March 20th, despite the imposition of martial law in Yangon, Myanmar’s largest city, protests persisted. However, whether the generals will keep their words remains unclear, so does the future of this country.
Sources:
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2021/02/06/myanmars-coup-turns-the-clock-back-a-decade
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2021-02-01/myanmars-coup-was-chronicle-foretold
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/myanmar-history-coup-military-rule-ethnic-conflict-rohingya