A Country in Crisis: the Burma Coup, Explained
38 dead, over double the previous daily record of 18. The violent crackdown instigated in response to the protests sweeping across Burma reached a fever pitch on March 3 as civilians were fired upon with little to no warning by the country’s security forces. These inhumane tactics are the standard procedure of authoritarian governments around the world, and Myanmar’s newly installed military junta seems more than willing to cement its power through any means necessary. Understanding the political history and distribution of political power in Burma could provide key insight into how the junta managed to seize power.
The Southeast Asian country of Burma, also known as Myanmar, is a majority Buddhist country bordered by powerful neighbors such as India and China. Having first achieved independence from Britain in 1948, Myanmar is no stranger to turbulent transitions of power and the violence that follows in their wake. Particularly defining incidents in the country’s history include the 1962 socialist coup and the 1988 counter-revolutionary coup.
After its emancipation, Burma was plunged into a civil war that has continued to this day. The roots of this conflict lie in the persecution of multiple ethnic minorities, including the Christian Kachins and the Muslim Rohingya. Under the pretext of re-establishing order and security, General Ne Win ousted the democratic government under Prime Minister U Nu and brought the military’s Union Revolutionary Council into power. Ne Win embraced a socialist command economy and seized all private property, forcing Western institutions out of the country and cutting off almost all contact with the outside world. The people of Myanmar were plunged into many years of significant financial, physical, and emotional hardship that came to a head in 1988.
In 1988, the resentment from years of mistreatment and suffering erupted into a near revolution. A nationwide strike consisting of people from a wide variety of occupations, including monks and students, took place. From March to September, many were killed as the military (Tatmadaw) and security forces massacred the protestors. One particularly appalling act of violence took place on August 10, where soldiers purposefully murdered doctors and nurses that were treating civilians at Rangoon General Hospital. As Sein Lwin, the replacement of dictator Ne Win resigned on August 12, the violence quieted as soldiers retreated to their barracks.
The interim government was overthrown by a military coup on September 18, which established the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC). Soldiers were redeployed to the streets and fired upon protestors on September 18 and 19, killing thousands. Similar numbers of activists and student leaders either fled or were imprisoned and tortured. The SLORC changed the country’s name from Burma to Myanmar and held the country’s first elections in 1990. Although the National League for Democracy coalition won the election in a landslide, the SLORC refused to allow the new legislature to convene or release the leaders of the NLD (Tin U and Aung San Suu Kyi) from house arrest.
Despite the continued consolidation of military power over Burman society under the 2008 constitution, some positive changes took place in 2011. The newly elected civilian government under Thein Sein implemented broad reforms including relaxing press restrictions and providing provisions for peaceful demonstrations. Aung San Suu Kyi, who had been released from house arrest, was allowed to travel and meet with people freely. This surprising trend of liberalization continued through 2015 when Suu Kyi graduated into a number of important positions including the newly created State Counsellor role.
On November 8, 2020, the NLD achieved a landslide victory, while the USDP (Union Solidarity and Development Party), one of the two military-backed parties in the legislature, lost seats. After allegations of electoral fraud were denied by the election commission, Suu Kyi and other senior NLD members were detained in early morning raids on February 1. The military doubled down on its claims of fraud and has used a combination of checkpoints, communication blackouts, and violence to quell dissent.
Now, it is up to the international community to respond to this crisis.
One potential avenue of resolution lies in China’s relationship with Burma. Although the military juntas of Myanmar’s past had a steady relationship with China, the disruption of major Chinese enterprises and the distrust of China present in both the new government and the general public could negatively impact China’s future ambitions. China could be a valuable asset in this situation by helping to apply political and economic pressure to re-establish lawful democratic rule.
The US had previously lifted sanctions on Myanmar in response to the encouraging steps that the country had taken in the past, and could always reinstate them if necessary. China could pursue a similar course of action. Resources could also be given to provide humanitarian aid to protestors and keep advocates for democratic institutions supplied and engaged. When democracy returns to Burma, however, the US should take steps to hold the government accountable for the Rohingya genocide. Failing to enforce decisive consequences for unethical actions will inevitably lead to their renewal, stronger and crueler as the perpetrators gather strength and confidence for their next evil act.
