Polls begin in Myanmar, but democratic transition is elusive

Nearly four decades ago, when Myanmar’s military crushed the 8888 pro-democracy uprising, India backed the protesters and offered refuge to fleeing citizens. By the early 1990s, New Delhi had to nuance its strategy as the military consolidated power and drew closer to China. Equally crucial was cooperation from the Tatmadaw to manage security challenges in the Northeast. After the February 2021 coup that deposed the democratically elected head of government, Aung San Suu Kyi, and triggered a prolonged civil war, India reaffirmed its “steadfast support for democratic transition” and has called for the restoration of democracy in Myanmar. That transition is now being tested, beginning with the first phase of a three-phase process on December 28, the first polls since the coup.

As recently as December 26, India reiterated its support for free and fair polls, echoing PM Modi’s message to junta leader Min Aung Hlaing at the SCO, but Myanmar’s elections are being widely viewed, at home and abroad, as a “sham”. More than half of the parties that contested the 2020 election no longer exist. The military-controlled Union Election Commission has deregistered parties for failing to meet its criteria and dissolved Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy. At the ASEAN-UN Summit, UN Secretary-General António Guterres was blunt: “I don’t think anybody believes that those elections [in Myanmar] will be free and fair.” For Min Aung Hlaing, arguably, regional legitimacy matters more than Western or domestic approval, as neighbours prioritise border stability, tackling refugee flows and the thriving drug trade. Armed with Chinese weapons, the junta has been regaining lost ground.

India’s challenge is to balance engagement with Naypyidaw and non-state actors who control large stretches of the border. For example, Delhi interacts with the rebel Arakan Army for the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project. To actualise its Act East policy, India needs a stable, sovereign neighbour outside China’s sphere of influence that can serve as a gateway to Southeast Asia. Delhi must press for a return to democracy in Myanmar while remaining a supportive neighbour, as demonstrated by its first-responder role after the devastating earthquake in March. Given that ties with Dhaka continue to be in flux, stability with other neighbours becomes all the more critical for India’s neighbourhood strategy.

Overall Analysis

The editorial analyses the political developments in Myanmar’s post-coup landscape, questioning the credibility of elections being conducted under military rule. It begins by placing India’s Myanmar policy in historical context, recalling New Delhi’s early support for democratic forces during the 1988 uprising and the subsequent recalibration of its approach as strategic and security concerns took precedence. This background establishes the editorial’s central tension: India’s stated commitment to democracy versus the realities of geopolitical pragmatism.

The language then shifts to scepticism regarding the current electoral process. By highlighting the dissolution of major political parties, especially Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, and citing international voices such as the UN Secretary-General, the editorial reinforces the idea that the polls lack legitimacy. The repeated use of words like “sham” and references to military-controlled institutions convey strong doubt while maintaining a formal, analytical tone.

In the final section, the editorial turns inward, examining India’s strategic dilemma. It frames India’s Myanmar engagement as a balancing act between democratic ideals and regional stability, border security, and economic connectivity under the Act East policy. The language becomes policy-oriented and pragmatic, emphasizing realism over idealism. By linking Myanmar’s instability with broader regional dynamics — including China’s influence and uncertainty in ties with Bangladesh — the editorial underscores why Myanmar’s democratic transition remains elusive and why India cannot disengage despite the flawed political process.

Important Vocabulary (5)

1. Nuance – to modify or adapt something subtly to suit circumstances.
2. Tatmadaw – Myanmar’s armed forces.
3. Junta – a military group that has taken control of a government.
4. Legitimacy – acceptance or recognition of authority as rightful.
5. Actualise – to make something real or put it into effect.

Conclusion & Tone

The editorial concludes that Myanmar’s elections are unlikely to restore democracy and instead risk entrenching military rule. For India, the challenge lies in pressing for democratic transition while pragmatically engaging with the junta to safeguard regional stability and strategic interests.

Tone: Analytical, sceptical, and pragmatic — balancing democratic concern with geopolitical realism.