Burma Campaign UK today publishes a new briefing paper, ‘The Burmese Military’s ‘Elections’: New Date, New Danger, Same Sham.’
The briefing paper is available here.
The Burmese military are planning new elections at the end of 2025. They will clearly be a total sham and mostly rejected internationally and domestically. The Burmese military know this but are calculating that it doesn’t matter. They want to repeat what happened with the 2010 elections. Those elections were also rejected, but the international community went on to drop sanctions and support the regime it had previously described as illegitimate.
“The Burmese military likes elections almost as much as it likes coups,” said Mark Farmaner, Director of Burma Campaign UK. “For the Burmese military, elections are an opportunity to rebrand, renew, and try to convince the people of Burma and the international community that reforms are finally happening. If the international community goes along with it like they did after the 2010 elections, they risk enabling military rule and human rights violations for decades to come.”
The Burmese military is currently fighting for its very survival. In early 2025, the BBC estimated that the military is only in full control of around 20% of the country. Its latest administrative brand name, the State Administrative Council (SAC), has failed to gain the international legitimacy it craves.
The Burmese military needs a gamechanger. A reset. While it initially seemed that the military were being pushed into holding elections by China, the Burmese military are now deploying significant physical and propaganda resources into preparing to hold the election during December 2025 and perhaps into January 2026.
A few days after the 2021 coup, Min Aung Hlaing made a long speech about his post-coup vision. It was basically a version of the Thein Sein era, but with even tighter military control. He spoke of continued international investment, growing the economy. Incredibly, he was trying to persuade people in the country and outside that nothing would really change after the coup. As if it were just some kind of temporary blip.
While the current Burmese military leadership might not have any particular fondness for Thein Sein himself, the period appears to be a blueprint they want to repeat.
Dialogue and compromise with the military, engaging with whatever new post-election system they put in place, will be throwing a lifeline to the military at a time when it has never been weaker and people have genuine hope that they can finally be free.
Many leaders and activists in Burma have expressed the fear that the international community will pressure them to compromise with the military instead of helping them be free from the military.
There is unbearable suffering in Burma, millions of people displaced, more than half the population in poverty, most of the population living in fear. The international community should not try to use this crisis to pressure and manipulate the people of Burma into compromising with the military and coming in under the 2008 Constitution. That is a recipe for decades more conflict, human rights violations and underdevelopment.
Trying to impose a single central government on Burma doesn’t bring stability, it does the opposite. It causes conflict and instability. It hasn’t worked for the past 70 years and decades of military rule have destroyed trust that it could work.
An alternative to the single central state structure which has contributed to conflict and instability is being built from the bottom up. When the Burmese military are forced out of an area, new devolved administrations expand into the space created. Some are authoritarian themselves, but many others are not. They are engaging in long consultations with local people about what they want and need, and what kind of government they want. Local people are gaining more control of their lives, identity, religion and natural resources. They are providing schools and health services. This is not just happening in ethnic states, but also other parts of the country liberated from Burmese military occupation.
This is the process the international community should be supporting. Bottom up democracy built mile by mile. What has been achieved with little or no international support so far is remarkable. It offers a viable, if unfamiliar, alternative to ongoing Burmese military dominance, with much better long-term prospects for peace and economic development than that offered by the Burmese military.