Sebastian Strangio, a journalist specializing in Southeast Asia, prepared an analysis published by Foreign Affairs magazine on the military coup in Myanmar (formerly Burma) earlier this month.
The author believes that the occurrence of this coup was only a matter of time, as the situation in the country indicates the escalation of tensions between the "National League for Democracy" party and the army, reaching a point of no return.
The newly elected Myanmar Parliament was scheduled to be sworn in on February 1, starting a period of five years to come.
But in the dawn hours before the swearing-in ceremony, the country's army seized power in a military coup, and the army quickly detained State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi, the country's supreme leader, and President Win Myint, as well as an unspecified number of lawmakers from the National League. Democracy Governor, and other opponents of the Army.
The military also arrested ruling party officials and activists from all over the country, and temporarily disrupted mobile phone networks and the Internet.
In the midst of this interruption in communication, the military declared a nationwide state of emergency for a year, and installed former general Mint Sui, vice president and former military commander of the capital, Yangon, as the acting president.
The military also announced that Myint Soi had transferred legislative, executive, and judicial powers to the Army Commander-in-Chief, Min Aung Hlaing, for the duration of the emergency.
The coup, the first in Myanmar since 1988, took place after days of rumors and reports of an impending military move.
Like previous military coups, the coup took place in the name of democracy, as the constitution in Myanmar permits the army to seize power in order to prevent any situation that would "dismantle the union or national cohesion or cause the loss of sovereignty."
In its recent coup, the army claimed that it needed to investigate allegations of fraud in the elections that took place in the country on 8 November, in which Aung San Suu Kyi of the National League for Democracy (NLD) won the victory over the Federal Solidarity and Development Party, which is affiliated with the army.
In a statement by the Myanmar army on the eve of the coup, which closely resembles the allegations of former US President Trump about irregularities in the presidential elections held on November 3, the army confirmed “serious cases of fraud in the voter lists during the democratic general elections, which is inconsistent with ensuring a stable democracy. And the army added: "Unless this problem is solved, it will impede the progress of the democratic path."
It seemed that the army was anticipating the results of the "investigation" it had promised to conduct, announcing that new elections would be held a year from now, to be followed by the army’s handover of power to the winning party.
It was not election fraud that hindered the path of democracy in Myanmar, but rather a stalled process of partial political reform that exacerbated long-running tensions between civilians and the military.
The country's military leaders were the ones who initiated the reforms after the national elections at the end of 2010, which brought to power a quasi-civilian government that opened the public political sphere and built bridges of cooperation with the United States and other Western governments.
But the army generals sought to preserve their privileges by retaining veto power over constitutional matters.
The landslide victory of the National League for Democracy in the November elections threatened the delicate balance of power, and the army did not want to see its power diminish further than before, suspending the democratic experiment and returning to military rule.
Myanmar Army Spokesman Brigadier General Zhao Min Tun arrives at a press conference at the Military Museum in Naypyitaw, Myanmar, January 26, 2021.
This coup highlights the flaws of the reform campaign initiated by Myanmar's generals who ruled for a long time after the 2010 elections, as the campaign was launched rapidly and carried many hopes, but it quickly faltered and became a partial campaign.
Within months, beginning in mid-2011, the government released hundreds of detainees, lifted censorship of the press, allowed Aung San Suu Kyi to return to political life after years of house arrest, and launched peace talks with more than a dozen opposition groups.
This reform process reached a dizzying climax when Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy won the elections on November 15 and took over the leadership of the government in early 2016.
The narrative of democratization in Myanmar did not entirely match what is happening on the ground.
While many Western observers believed that this nation had finally leapt to be on the right side of history, Myanmar's leaders were still grappling with the repercussions of Britain's century-long occupation and six consecutive decades of civil war and military dictatorship.
In those decades, Myanmar also witnessed long-standing ethnic and religious divisions, the tragedy of which was evident in the brutal military aggression against the Rohingya Muslims in the country, and the unresolved struggle for power between the National League for Democracy party and the army, a conflict that dates back to the massive demonstrations in 1988, which The army suppressed it with brute force.
Aung San Suu Kyi first appeared as a prominent political figure during these demonstrations, and her fame in its entirety is due to her fierce opposition to the military rule since then.
The reforms that began in 2011 deliberately set aside these long-standing disputes between the NLD and the military.
The country's 2008 constitution laid down the determinants of a "democratic transition" (as some Western observers quickly called it at the time).
However, it is the document that was explicitly detailed to protect the authority and powers of the military.
This constitution, drafted by the military junta and approved by a flawed popular referendum in May 2008, ensured that the army controlled three powerful ministries and a quarter of the seats in parliament, the number required to oppose any constitutional amendment.
This constitution also stipulated an article preventing Aung San Suu Kyi from assuming the office of president by virtue of her previous marriage to a foreign citizen.
These constitutional reforms (in 2011) put an end to the long-running dispute between the NLD and the military over the country's constitutional structure.
Eun San Suu Kyi
It is not surprising that the National League for Democracy party sought to push for a constitutional reform agenda after its historic victory in 2015. The party’s efforts emerged at the beginning of last year, when the government led by the National League for Democracy submitted a proposal to make a large number of constitutional amendments aimed at To limit or withdraw the army's special powers and privileges.
Parliament hastily rejected all the proposed amendments, after the army activated the same veto power that the party was seeking to annul.
Then, in November, the party won the general elections by a landslide victory, apparently shaking the army's confidence in its ability to ward off the threat of constitutional reform.
Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy swept 83% of the contested seats in parliament.
In return, the "Federal Solidarity and Development" party, which is backed by the army, received a worthless 7%.
Leading members of the "Federal Solidarity and Development" party, many of them former military leaders, lost their seats across the country. Even the "National League for Democracy" party won in areas previously considered areas controlled by the "Federal Solidarity and Development" party.
However, given the constitutional protections in place, it is unclear whether and to what extent the NLD could threaten the military's privileges.
Military commander Min Aung Hlaing, the de facto ruler of the country, has always dampened his ambitions for the presidency, and he was due to be mandated to retire in July, when he is 65. It is possible that Hlaing has sought a path to power outside the law, Regardless of the results of the November elections.
According to what a foreign diplomat, on condition of secrecy, told Reuters: "Hlaing did not have a constitutional path that would enable him to assume a leadership position in this government."
It is also possible that the army invested heavily in its allegations of fraud in the elections, which made it believe that it could not retreat to save face.
In any case, the landslide victory of the National League for Democracy and the resounding defeat of the Federal Solidarity and Development party seem to have brought the tensions between the NLD and the military to a head.
The military's takeover of power in Myanmar poses a dilemma for the administration of US President Joe Biden.
On the one hand, the generals ’assault on the country's democratic process requires a strong response from Washington.
(Indeed, White House spokeswoman Jane Baskey issued a statement urging "the military and all other parties to adhere to democratic standards and the rule of law, and to release detainees today," and threatening to take action against those who are undermining the democratic transition in Myanmar.)
On the other hand, the Chinese government will seek to benefit from any dispute between Myanmar and the western democratic countries, and will announce its traditional position that what happened this week in Yangon is an "internal matter."
Indeed, many of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries have taken the same stance.
Moreover, history suggests that additional Western sanctions against the leaders of the coup are unlikely to persuade them to back off course.
The US Treasury Department had already blacklisted Min Aung Hlaing in 2019 for his involvement in the genocide committed against the Rohingya Muslims.
The general has little left to lose from additional sanctions, and he may be betting that Western powers will not impose additional sanctions on him, out of their fear that this will push Myanmar closer to China.
In any case, Myanmar's military leaders have a long record of deliberately breaching economic sanctions and trade bans, even if such measures impoverish their own people.
Whatever happens in the coming weeks and months, Myanmar's problems appear to be getting complicated.
As the Myanmar historian Thant Myint U commented after the coup, the country is already facing a sharp economic downturn against the backdrop of the Corona pandemic, widespread poverty, and armed conflicts between dozens of factions, and the country could not tolerate such a political crisis, as the historian said on Twitter: “The doors were opened. Just because her future is so different, I have a deep feeling that no one can control what is coming. "
—————————————————————————————————-
This article is translated from Foreign Affair and does not necessarily refer to Meydan.