Introduction

Myanmar’s military regime is conducting elections not as a democratic transition but as an instrument to entrench control under the 2008 Constitution. The polls exclude most opposition forces, occur only in junta-controlled areas, and coincide with intensified violence against civilians. The election mirrors the military’s 2010 strategy but unfolds under far more adverse domestic and international conditions, raising serious questions about legitimacy, sovereignty, and governance.

Why in the News

Nearly five years after overthrowing the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi in February 2021, Myanmar’s military (Tatmadaw) has initiated a tightly controlled, multi-phase election process. The first phase, held on December 28, recorded sparse turnout amid heavy security and active conflict, with subsequent phases scheduled in January. The exercise is significant because it marks the junta’s attempt to manufacture political legitimacy during an ongoing civil war that has killed thousands, displaced millions, and fragmented territorial control.

How has the military structured the election process?

1. Phased Elections: Conducted in three phases to manage security risks, with the first phase on December 28 and later phases in January.
2. Restricted Geography: Held only in areas under junta control, excluding conflict-affected rural regions.
3. Low Participation: Sparse turnout recorded, indicating limited public acceptance and fear-driven abstention.
4. Security Enforcement: Conducted under heavy militarisation, including troop deployment and surveillance.

Why is the election widely considered a sham?

1. Exclusion of Opposition: National League for Democracy (NLD), which won 90% of seats in 2020, barred from contesting.
2. Token Political Competition: Military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) dominates candidate lists.
3. Criminalisation of Resistance: National Unity Government (NUG) and People’s Defence Forces (PDFs) designated as illegal.
4. Absence of Electoral Integrity: No independent monitoring, free campaigning, or fair media access.

What constitutional framework enables military dominance?

1. Structural Power: 2008 Constitution reserves 25% of parliamentary seats for the military.
2. Legislative Control: Ensures veto power over constitutional amendments.
3. Emergency Provisions: Enables prolonged emergency rule since the 2021 coup.
4. Electoral Engineering: Proportional representation favours military-aligned parties.

How has the civil war altered electoral legitimacy?

1. Territorial Fragmentation: Junta controls barely half of Myanmar’s townships.
2. Active Conflict Zones: Elections absent in at least 65 townships where fighting persists.
3. Civilian Casualties: Bombing of residential areas during polling, including Budalin and Khin-U townships.
4. Humanitarian Crisis: Over 20 million people require assistance, undermining basic state capacity.

What role do ethnic armed organisations (EAOs) play?

1. Military Setbacks: Three Brotherhood Alliance (TBA) forced junta withdrawal from northern Shan and parts of Rakhine.
2. Expanded Resistance: Kachin, Karen, and Karenni groups intensified operations alongside PDFs.
3. Urban-Rural Divide: Junta retains urban centres like Sittwe while losing peripheral regions.
4. Operational Adaptation: Use of Chinese-made drones and paragliders by the military.

How do external actors influence the conflict and elections?

1. Strategic Backing: Russia, China, and Belarus provide diplomatic and military support.
2. China’s Calculus: Tacit approval of rebel advances near border scam centres, followed by ceasefire pressure.
3. Western Ambivalence: US signals moderation, including sanction relief for some junta-linked firms.
4. Geoeconomic Interests: Rare-earth minerals and border trade routes shape external engagement.

Why does the junta persist despite unpopularity?

1. Fragmented Resistance: Lack of unified command between PDFs and EAOs.
2. International Paralysis: Absence of coordinated global pressure.
3. Resource Control: Retention of key economic assets and trade corridors.
4. Institutional Entrenchment: Constitutional safeguards ensure military primacy regardless of electoral outcomes.

Conclusion

Myanmar’s elections represent an exercise in controlled political symbolism rather than democratic renewal. Conducted amid widespread violence, exclusion, and constitutional manipulation, the polls fail to address the fundamental crisis of legitimacy confronting the military regime. The result is strategic stalemate, prolonged instability, and deepening civilian suffering with no political resolution in sight.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2022]  ‘India is an age -old friend of Sri Lanka.’ Discuss India’s role in the recent crisis in Sri Lanka in the light of the preceding statement.

Linkage: This PYQ is relevant to GS-II (International Relations-Neighbourhood) as it examines India’s response to political-economic crises in its immediate neighbourhood. The Myanmar case similarly highlights India’s calibrated engagement amid instability, balancing humanitarian concerns, regional security, and strategic competition, reflecting the same neighbourhood-first and strategic autonomy dilemmas.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now