New Delhi: The 110 minutes devoted by the UN Security Council member states on Myanmar last Friday made the divergence in views about further measures starkly apparent, especially juxtaposed against pro-democracy voices from the Southeast Asian nation calling for urgent steps.
Over the past week, there were two Council meetings on Mali, Syria and an open debate on mine action. While these are still ongoing hotspots, the situation in Myanmar, where the entire country has become paralysed by protests against the military junta, has taken on greater urgency with the fatalities rising from the security crackdown.
According to media reports, over 700 people, including women and children, have been killed by security forces in the onslaught against protestors who have been on the streets for the last two months. On February 1, the military junta had declared a state of emergency and detained all elected political leaders, including Myanmar’s President Win Myint and State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, on the grounds of malpractice in the November 2020 general elections.
Since the military coup, the Council has held three meetings, resulting in three documents adopted by consensus – a press statement, a presidential statement and ‘press elements’. But with continuing reports of repression, there has been increasing pressure on the Council to take more steps.
The United Kingdom, the penholder on Myanmar in the Council, called for an informal Arria-formula meeting on April 9. In this format, Council members can meet without it being part of the formal records and allow consultations with expertise outside the UN system.
In its concept note, UK posed three “guiding questions” for all the speakers to give their views on what further steps the UN Security Council should take to protect democracy, prevent violence and safeguard ethnic and religious minorities in Myanmar.
After the coup, some of the MPs formed the Committee Representing Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH), fashioning it as a government-in-exile. Addressing the UNSC member states through video, CRPH’s Zin Mar Aung said the international community’s reservations regarding direct physical intervention to stop the military’s violence were understandable.
Also read: What Is Keeping India on the Wrong Side of History With Myanmar?
Asserting that further deterioration will trigger massive refugee outflows, Zin Mar Aung urged “UNSC Member States to take immediate concrete action that places both direct and indirect pressure against the military and to uphold Pillar 3 of the Responsibility to Protect”.
Zin Mar Aung, appointed as the “acting foreign minister” by the CRPH, also sought recognition from the international community as the legitimate government in Myanmar.
Among all the 15 member states, only Estonia explicitly called for the Council to start “drafting a resolution”. This resolution should “foresee sanctions, especially a comprehensive arms embargo, in order to stop the atrocities,” said Estonia’s permanent representative, Sven Jürgenson.
The other countries in the Western bloc also called for “concrete action” but did not frame it explicitly in terms of a resolution.
“The military has ignored our condemnations, posing a test for the Security Council. Will the Council quibble over language in yet another statement? Or will we act to save the lives of the Burmese people?” said United States’ Linda Thomas-Garfield.
The veteran US diplomat observed that refugee outflow from Myanmar threatens stability in the region. “Already, we’ve seen thousands of individuals flee Burma into Thailand amid airstrikes on Burma’s eastern border. And hundreds of individuals – hundreds – have tried to flee into India from northwest Burma”.
France noted that Security Council’s “strong messages” were not being heard by the Myanmar regime. “We must go further in order to increase the pressure. Unity is key at the Council, we all know it, but unity should not mean inaction,” said the French deputy envoy to the UN, Nathalie Broadhurst.
The American and French diplomats referred to the three statements issued by the Council. Their adoption by consensus had meant that language related to the possibility of consideration of future punitive steps against Myanmar were removed due to opposition from some member states.
At the meeting, Russia stated that it supported the “balanced position” in the previous Council statements, which indicated that it would not back any escalation in action taken by UNSC.
The Russian diplomat said that it didn’t support the Concept Note nor “share the general mood the meeting”. “Unfortunately, this meeting may serve as a reason only to further incite violence, while we all should be interested in stabilisation of the situation in Myanmar through launching of inclusive national dialogue. We do not want to be part of such a scenario,” he said.
Russia has been strongly backing the Myanmar junta since the coup. It was the only country to send a ministerial representative from outside to attend the Armed Forces parade last month.
Incidentally, when Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov visited India last week, Myanmar, especially in the context of UNSC deliberations, was one of the discussion points with his Indian interlocutors, The Wire had learnt.
China’s Gu Dan stressed that all parties in Myanmar had to start a dialogue as soon as possible. With China often facing the brunt of criticism from pro-democracy protestors in Myanmar, she underlined, “As a close neighbour, China’s friendship policy is for all people in Myanmar”.
The Chinese diplomat also indicated that any efforts had to respect Myanmar’s “sovereignty”. Besides China, Vietnam was the other country referring to the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity, even as it condemned “the use of violence against civilians”.
Also read: At UNSC Meeting on Myanmar, India ‘Condemns Violence’, But Urges ‘Engagement’ With Regime
In its statement, India condemned the “use of violence” in Myanmar and “condoled the loss of lives”. India’s deputy permanent representative K. Nagaraj Naidu asserted that the “first and most immediate step in this regard is the release of detained leaders”.
Strongly hinting that it would not support a confrontationist approach with Myanmar, Naidu said, “This is the time when we need greater engagement, not less. Lack of engagement will only create a vacuum which will be counterproductive. We, therefore, support all initiatives to engage with Myanmar and resolve issues peacefully without further bloodshed”.
The two main common threads in all the statements from the 15 member states were the support for the UN SG’s special envoy Christine Schraner Burgener and intensified role of the regional body, ASEAN.
The UN special envoy, however, is yet to begin direct engagement with the Myanmar government, as she did not get the green light from the military. The UN diplomat had sought unrestricted access to the detained leaders and civil society.
Just arrived in BKK for talks. I regret that Tatmadaw answered me yesterday that they are not ready to receive me. I am ready for dialogue. Violence never leads to peaceful sustainable solutions. pic.twitter.com/cPGy5hSmbZ
— Special Envoy of UN Secretary-General on Myanmar (@SchranerBurgen1) April 9, 2021
ASEAN is set to hold an emergency summit on Myanmar, but it remains divided over how to respond to the crisis.
This week in UNSC
There are four scheduled Council meetings on the Great Lakes region, Kosovo, Libya Sanctions and Yemen. According to Security Council Report, two resolutions could be adopted this week – one on Afghanistan and another on Libya sanctions.
The UNSC open debate organised by Vietnam on Wednesday, is on sexual violence in conflict.
