Armed Conflict Will Continue in Myanmar

On October 27, 2023, the conflict in Myanmar intensified with the Three Brotherhood Alliance launching Operation 1027 against the State Administration Council's (military junta) Tatmadaw.

The conflict between the Tatmadaw and the National Unity Government has escalated. The intensification of conflict has caused significant internal displacement, worsening the humanitarian crisis. The Tatmadaw will continue armed conflict in the absence of cohesive external action by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and other international states.

Analysis

The 2021 military coup sparked widespread conflict in Myanmar. The conflict is fought between two camps – the State Administration Council and the National Unity Government. The conflict has gradually escalated since the coup, with fighting spreading to over two-thirds of the country's territory.

While the 2021 military coup ignited conflict throughout Myanmar, low-level clashes have been present since Myanmar's independence in 1948. The cause of the conflict therefore goes beyond anti-coup sentiment. Underlying causes such as persistent ethnic tensions, inequality, and resource competition reinforce the roadblocks towards a peaceful resolution. Additionally, there will be no externally driven peace resolution for the Myanmar conflict. ASEAN faces institutional constraints in its Myanmar policy, and international states are unable to cohesively apply pressure, enabling the Tatmadaw to easily circumvent sanctions and isolation. Hence, in the absence of a peaceful resolution, armed conflict will continue in Myanmar.

Fundamental Causes of Conflict

A central theme running through the various causes of conflict in Myanmar is ethnic tensions. Tensions between the majority-Bamar Tatmadaw and the ethnic minority groups have existed since Myanmar's independence due to marginalisation and oppression committed by the former group. Examples of ethnic oppression include appropriation of local food and resources by the Tatmadaw, unequal sharing of revenue from lucrative resource extraction activities, and systemic corruption. This results in systemic inequality along ethnic lines, fuelling ethnic tensions.

The objectives of the Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAO) and the Tatmadaw are thus mutually incompatible. The objectives of the EAOs are to increase autonomy and sovereignty for their respective ethnic groups. This entails seizing control over resource-rich areas to protect their own economic rents. In contrast, the Tatmadaw seeks to protect the state's territorial integrity and assert control over the entire state, by forcibly suppressing secession movements. The Tatmadaw also seeks control over resource-rich areas to fund the junta and its military activities. The mutually incompatible objectives of the EAOs and the Tatmadaw will therefore continue to drive conflict in Myanmar.

ASEAN's Institutional Constraints

ASEAN's failure to push for a peaceful resolution will prolong the Myanmar conflict. This is due to two interdependent factors. Firstly, ASEAN primarily operates through consensus-based mechanisms. Secondly, ASEAN states have different interests and priorities in the Myanmar conflict.

The combination of consensus-based mechanisms and divergent priorities of ASEAN states regarding Myanmar leads to ASEAN's failure to press for a peaceful resolution. Consensus-based mechanisms mean that any state in ASEAN can unilaterally disrupt proceedings. Regarding Myanmar, ASEAN is facing a conundrum as its own norms and principles conflict each other. While ASEAN subscribes to upholding the rule of law and the principles of democracy, it also enshrines the principle of non-interference in domestic politics of member states.

Due to their diverse interests and priorities, ASEAN member states prefer different institutional approaches towards Myanmar. This limits ASEAN's ability to seek a peaceful resolution in Myanmar because of the consensus-based mechanism. Member states geographically further from Myanmar (i.e., Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore) prioritise upholding ASEAN's credibility. They are more willing to violate the non-interference principle in favour of upholding ASEAN's domestic governance principles. These states advocate for the diplomatic isolation of the junta. In contrast, ASEAN member states in closer proximity to Myanmar (i.e., Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam) prioritise immediate conflict management and are less willing to uphold the domestic governance principles, advocating for increased interaction with the junta. Because the conflict in Myanmar affects ASEAN states to differing extents, it leads to divergent perspectives and interests within ASEAN. This paralyses ASEAN due to the consensus-based mechanisms, preventing it from seeking a peaceful resolution in Myanmar.

Lack of Cohesive International Pressure

The Tatmadaw will continue armed conflict in Myanmar due to the lack of cohesive international pressure. While the conflict in Myanmar is a significant humanitarian crisis, it is not geopolitically significant to most international states, especially global powers. Without significant geopolitical interest, global powers have merely sanctioned key individuals in the junta and small junta-linked firms. These sanctions are easy to evade. Additionally, enforcement of sanctions remains poor. US-based Chevron and Canada-based MTI Energy are still operating in Myanmar, collaborating with the lucrative, junta-owned Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE), despite recent sanctions. Other significant international states in Myanmar (i.e., China, Thailand, and South Korea) have not implemented sanctions against MOGE. Additionally, Myanmar has a long history of isolationism. The junta has considerable experience in circumventing sanctions and enduring diplomatic isolation by seeking out closer relations with other states (e.g., China). Without cohesive international pressure, the junta will just seek out other economic partners to fill the gap created by Western sanctions, enabling the Tatmadaw to continue armed conflict.

Conclusion

While the 2021 coup ignited conflict throughout Myanmar, it is important to acknowledge the existence of low-level conflict since Myanmar's independence and its associated underlying causes. Ethnic tensions will continue to drive conflict because of the incompatibility of the Tatmadaw and EAOs' objectives. The lack of external drivers towards a peaceful resolution of the conflict due to ASEAN's institutional constraints and the lack of geopolitical interests in the country, will prolong the conflict in Myanmar.




Xavier Tham is a Master of Arts in International Relations candidate at JHU-SAIS. His current research interests are security and statecraft in the East Asian region. Xavier graduated from the London School of Economics and Political Science with a Bachelor of Science in International Relations.