The message is clear- that despite four years of so-called reforms, Myanmar�s military is still not ready to give up its grip on power. The
indications are that a true switch to a civilian rule will �need to wait�
Myanmar: Military hardly ready to give up control
Muhammad Zamir
Domestic political developments within Myanmar and evolving factors have been churning up interesting options within that countrys matrix. Interest is being generated all over South East Asia, the European Union and the USA about the possible course of politics within Myanmar over the next few months leading up to the first quarter of 2016. Resource-rich Myanmar and its future governance mechanism are again under scrutiny.
Myanmar officials announced on 8 July that the next general election in that country will be held on 8 November this year. This announcement came after a series of moves by different political parties over the last few months. The elections will mark, according to Michael Peel of the Financial Times a 25-year turn of the political wheel from the 1990 polls held by the then Myanmarese military junta and won by a landslide by Ms. Sun Kyis National League for Democracy (NLD).
Shocked by her overwhelming victory, the military junta simply ignored the verdict and extended their repressive and insular rule. Over the next few years there was however a gradual realization among the Myanmarese Armed Forces that there was need for a gradual change. There was another election effort of sorts in 2010 but that was not participated by the NLD. The end result was the formation of a quasi-civilian administration in 2011.
This time round the opposition parties seeking to bring about changes initiated a process whereby they attempted to amend certain existing constitutional provisions ahead of an impending general election. The Constitution, it may be mentioned, grants the military automatic representation of at least 25% of parliamentary seats, guarantees a military veto over any constitutional change, and ensures only the militarys Commander-in-Chief controls key ministry appointments. It also excludes any person from becoming President if their family members are foreigners. By most accounts, this prohibition was designed to prevent Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, perhaps the most popular politician in the country, from ever becoming President as her two sons hold British citizenship.
The vote on amending the Constitution was held in two phases- on 25 June and 9 July. The votes however failed to remove the armys veto over constitutional change, dealing a blow to hopes for fuller democracy. The bill received a majority of MPs votes but not the 75% needed to pass. Both Chambers of Parliament took part in the vote. This meant that 498 votes were needed to reach 75% of the 664 lawmakers in total. The amendment bill could not be enacted upon according to the Parliamentary Speaker Shwe Mann because the 388 votes in favor of change fell below the threshold needed for it to pass. Local media reported that more than 600 MPs were present for the vote. BBCs Jonah Fisher reporting from Yangon commented that although it was a secret ballot there was no doubt that the army had flexed its political muscle. The message was clear- that despite four years of so-called reforms, Myanmars military is still not ready to give up its grip on power.
Many view this as a major setback for Ms Aung San Suu Kyi but Oxford Universitys Myanmar expert Andrew McLeod argues that if anything, her odds may have improved. He has commented that very little progress might have been made over the last two-year constitutional review process that culminated in the two parliamentary votes- minor change to the wording on Presidential qualifications, meagre new powers for state and regional parliaments and granting of new legislative and revenue-raising powers to sub-national governments.
Nevertheless, the very fact that such voting could have taken place is itself a movement forward. In this context, it has been recalled that until early 2013, it was technically a crime to critique the current constitution, and the mere mention of certain political ideals like federalism was treasonous. In this sense, public debate about changing the constitution has been a step forward by itself. Despite such optimism on the part of some, the Armys grip appears to have tightened in Myanmar. On 13 August, the leader of Myanmars ruling party- Shwe Mann, also the Parliamentary Speaker- was ousted by the countrys President Thien Sein in a dramatic swoop. This measure apparently arose out of the in-fighting that had gripped the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP). It may however be mentioned here that both Shwe Mann and Thien Sein are former Generals who shed their uniforms to play central roles in Myanmars evolving democratic process.
It may be recalled that the USDP has served a vehicle for some time as a means for former junta figures transforming themselves as MPs. Thien Sein has now appointed a new leader for that Party- Htay Oo, in order for that Party to be run more effectively. This move, it may be pointed out came a day before the deadline for candidates to register to contest the upcoming polls.
Analysts, in this context are now suggesting that through this latest step, the Army authorities have reiterated their aversion for any support that might have been evolving between Shwe Mann and Ms Suu Kyi. Military lawmakers have also underlined that they have not appreciated the steps taken by Shwe Mann to create distance between him and the military regime of which he was a leader until 2011. Ms Suu Kyi, on the other hand has suggested that this abrupt change has outlined that The military is holding up reforms - a vote for me is a vote for change.
Accordingly, it would appear that if Ms Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), does secure the electoral success expected in Novembers polls, the pressure on the military to amend the Constitution and allow her to become President might not be as high as was expected two weeks ago. It would be pertinent to point out here that currently Myanmars President is not popularly elected but is selected by an electoral college formed from national parliamentarians voting to choose the President and two Vice-Presidents.
In this context, political analysts are also referring to another scenario. One of the possible measures that might be followed by the NLD would be tabling its own amendment Bill if it wins a serious majority in the November election. It would then rely on the Parliament convening only lame duck sessions following the elections in December and January. They will then focus in late January, 2016 on changing the presidential qualifications through a two-step process- that will require not only approval by the Parliament but also afterwards by the public through a referendum arranged by the Election Commission. Those close to Ms Suu Kyi believe that after this, the military will change its stance to avoid public unrest and international pressure. Such a scenario can then lead to the appointment of a caretaker President while constitutional changes are implemented. This person could later step aside to clear the way for Ms Suu Kyis ascension to the Presidency.
The dynamics referred to above is a possibility but does not appear to be very realistic, particularly because of several factors. The first relates to the evolution upwards of the nationalistic Buddhist monk movement which has waged an 18-month campaign to undermine NLDs support among Buddhists, who represent close to two-thirds of Myanmars population. The second refers to the mix of ethnic parties and minority ethnic groups, most of whom are anti-NLD. The third arises from the risk of voter intimidation, electoral maladministration or fraud with the military looking the other way.
The anticipations of NLD have also been dealt a severe blow by the recent comments of Myanmars Senior General Min Aung Hlaing, probably the most powerful man in Myanmar. Speaking in an interview carried out by the BBC (reported on 20 July), the General had an uncompromising message. He made it very clear that there was still need for Myanmars so called disciplined democracy with its carefully limited space for debate and political activity.
His comments also connoted that there was no immediate need to reduce the militarys grip on Myanmars political life and hand over to a truly civilian Administration. Jonah Fisher, who carried out the interview, interpreted the Generals comments as indicating that a true switch to a civilian rule will need to wait, until ceasefires and peace deals have been concluded with all of Myanmars many ethnic armed groups. This phase, according to the General could take five years or 10 years. Interesting indeed!
General Min Aung Hlaing has also said that he believes that the upcoming election will be free and fair and that he will respect the result. In this context he was also asked whether he would like to be considered as a possible Presidential candidate in 2016. His response was not very enigmatic. He pointed out that he would be retiring when he turns 60 next year but the duty of the soldier is to serve the country in whatever role he is asked to perform. Jonah Fisher has interpreted it as a yes in all but name. Analysts have however pointed out that this might not be easy for Min Aung Hlaing. Whether he gets that chance will depend on how the November election turns out. It is true that a quarter of the Parliaments seats (those selected from the Armed Forces) may already be under his control, but he will have to tackle the remaining 75 per cent. The military bloc will also need the support of at least a third of the elected MPs. This might prove to be quite difficult and he would then have to settle with the post of Vice President.
In the meantime, one thing is clear. The ruling USDP is possibly facing electoral disaster, partially so, because its relationship with the military has soured in the last two years, making a partisan intervention less likely. On the other hand it is generally agreed that if the NLD falls short of a majority, then Thein Sein, the current President, might use his position to reach out to ethnic parties and secure a second term with their support. That would be quite a twist in the tale.
The writer is a former ambassador, an analyst specialised in foreign affairs, right to information and good governance.
He can be reached at [email protected]
