Context

• Myanmar, often referred to as the sick man of Southeast Asia, continues to suffer the consequences of the military coup that took place on February 1, 2021.
• Four years later, the country is deeply fragmented, with ongoing conflicts between the military junta and resistance forces.
• Therefore, it is crucial to explore the ongoing turmoil in Myanmar by analysing the military conflict, the role of regional organisations like ASEAN, and the involvement of neighbouring countries.

The Military Conflict and Its Consequences

• Since the coup, Myanmar has been involved in an intense civil conflict between the ruling military and various resistance groups, including ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) and people’s defence forces (PDFs).
• The unrecognised National Unity Government (NUG) loosely coordinates these resistance groups, but the war remains chaotic and fragmented.
• The cost of the conflict has been devastating: as of January 2025, over 28,000 people have been arrested, more than 6,200 have been killed, and around 3.3 million have been internally displaced.
• The military junta has responded with brutal force, employing indiscriminate attacks and unlawful killings that have been widely condemned by human rights organisations.
• At the same time, the resistance forces, though persistent, have been unable to claim outright victory.
• Instead, the country is now divided into three distinct zones: the central region, which remains under military control; the peripheral areas, controlled by resistance forces; and contested civilian regions that frequently experience aerial bombardments and military offensives.

The Role of ASEAN and Reason Behind ASEAN’s Limited Influence

• The Role of ASEAN
  • The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was expected to play a leading role in resolving the crisis.
  • However, its diplomatic efforts have largely failed.
  • After the coup, ASEAN attempted to mediate the situation through its Five-Point Consensus (5PC), which called for an end to violence, dialogue between conflicting parties, and humanitarian assistance.
  • However, the military junta has ignored these demands, and ASEAN’s diplomatic efforts have proven ineffective.
• Reason Behind ASEAN’s Limited Influence
  • A major reason for ASEAN’s failure is the lack of unity among its member states.
  • While some countries advocate for strong action against the junta, others prioritise economic and strategic ties with Myanmar’s military rulers.
  • Recently, ASEAN foreign ministers advised the military government to prioritise dialogue over holding elections, but the junta dismissed these suggestions.
  • The inability of ASEAN to enforce its own resolutions has rendered it powerless in the face of Myanmar’s crisis.

The Role of Neighbouring Countries: Limited Influence and Conflicting Interests

• China’s Expanding Influence
  • Since the coup, China has emerged as the most influential external power in Myanmar.
  • Unlike Western nations that have largely distanced themselves from Myanmar’s military rulers, China has maintained diplomatic ties with the junta while simultaneously engaging with resistance groups along the border.
  • China’s interests in Myanmar are primarily economic and strategic.
  • Myanmar plays a crucial role in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), providing access to the Indian Ocean through the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC).
  • This corridor includes key infrastructure projects such as the Kyaukpyu deep-sea port and an oil and gas pipeline that connects Myanmar’s west coast to China’s Yunnan province.
  • These projects allow China to reduce its reliance on the Malacca Strait for energy imports, making Myanmar a vital component of its regional strategy.
• India’s Dilemma: Balancing Security and Democracy
  • On one hand, India has traditionally supported democracy in Myanmar and has maintained good relations with Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD).
  • On the other hand, India has security concerns along its northeastern border, which it shares with Myanmar.
  • Several insurgent groups operating in India’s northeastern states, such as the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) and the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), have historically used Myanmar’s territory as a safe haven.
  • This has made New Delhi reluctant to completely sever ties with Myanmar’s military rulers, as the junta has occasionally cooperated in cracking down on these insurgents.
  • Additionally, India has strategic and economic interests in Myanmar, particularly through projects like the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, which aims to connect India’s northeastern states to Myanmar’s Sittwe port.
  • However, with large parts of Myanmar now controlled by resistance groups, India’s access to these projects is increasingly uncertain.
• Thailand: A Key Player with Limited Influence
  • As Myanmar’s western neighbour and a member of ASEAN, Thailand is uniquely positioned to play a significant role in the crisis.
  • It shares a long border with Myanmar and has a history of economic and security cooperation with the country.
  • Additionally, Thailand has been directly affected by Myanmar’s instability, as refugees continue to cross into Thai territory to escape the violence.
  • Despite these factors, Thailand’s influence over Myanmar is constrained by its own political dynamics.
• Bangladesh and Laos: Limited Leverage
  • Unlike China, India, or Thailand, Bangladesh lacks significant economic or strategic leverage over Myanmar.
  • It has engaged in diplomatic talks with the junta but has been unable to secure meaningful commitments regarding the Rohingya issue.
  • Moreover, the recent conflicts in Myanmar’s Rakhine State have raised concerns that more Rohingya refugees may flee to Bangladesh, further exacerbating the crisis.
  • Laos, Myanmar’s least influential neighbour, has largely remained on the sidelines.
  • As a small, landlocked country with limited regional influence, Laos has neither the political nor economic power to impact Myanmar’s internal affairs.
  • Its response has been in line with ASEAN’s broader approach, which has so far been ineffective.

Conclusion

• As the world turns its attention to other global crises, Myanmar’s suffering continues largely unnoticed.
• If their leaders, both within the military and the resistance, fail to engage in meaningful dialogue, the country will remain trapped in a cycle of violence and instability.
• Ultimately, the only way forward for Myanmar lies in internal reconciliation, rather than relying on foreign actors who have repeatedly shown their inability or unwillingness to help.