It was an emotional and inspiring morning to see thousands of people waving Myanmar national flags, under the February sunshine, welcoming home our bravest and most gentle warriors from the frontline.
On 1 February 2026, the team of Myanmar Agent led by Union Minister U Ko Ko Hlaing and Union Minister and Union Attorney-General Dr Thida Oo arrived back at Yangon International Airport at around 9 am. The team’s return home was saluted with a big respect and a warm welcome by thousands of Myanmar nationals from different walks of life, enthusiastically, voluntarily and respectfully.
The togetherness of the people in the crowd by singing Myanmar’s national anthem while waving the national flags that morning was a perfect match that signals the solidarity of all Myanmar citizens in dealing with the genocide accusation.

Bravest and most gentle warriors with full respect and honour
The Agent of Myanmar and the legal team led by Lead Counsel Mr Christopher Staker, including Professor Alina Miron, Mr Stefan Talmon, Ms Chiara Cordone, and Ms Leigh Lawrie represented the Republic of the Union of Myanmar at the Public Hearings in the Case Concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia versus Myanmar) before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
They defended not only the truth and justice, as well as the pride and prestige of our country against the accusation of the utmost gravity with their professional skills, honour and unparalleled courage before the ICJ with solid evidence, historical facts and records from 12 to 29 January 2026.
Since the case is extremely significant for Myanmar, the people of Myanmar from various backgrounds are not only closely monitoring the follow-ups and the proceedings but also standing back together with the team.
The Agent of Myanmar Union Minister U Ko Ko Hlaing and the legal team presented truths and facts of what had really happened in Rakhine State in 2016 and 2017, which the world is not able to deny and refuse, while The Gambia made accusations based on emotions and make-up narratives. Within three weeks, the Gambia failed to present the evidence objectively or failed to meet the required legal evidentiary standards.
What is more, the Gambia insisted on using the self-claimed name for the Bengalis. We, our country and our people respect human rights, but we firmly reject the groundless accusations and demands.
Accordingly, the Agent of Myanmar and Myanmar’s Counsels contended, with a very detailed presentation as per the historical facts, that those populations are culturally, ethnically and religiously part of the same group as the population living immediately across the border in Bangladesh.

Citizenship status
It goes without saying that there are differences and conditions between the statuses of ‘National’ and ‘Citizen’ all over the world. Those who immigrated and lived in a country for a certain period of time, as prescribed by the specific laws, here in Myanmar, after three generations, with no violation nor breaching the laws of the host country, may have the right to naturalize their citizenship. Still, they must obey and abide by the Constitutional provisos and the host country’s existing laws.
The Gambia unreasonably demanded a guarantee for the citizenship of the Bengalis in the country, which they claim they are being genocided. Such ridiculous and absurd demands made by The Gambia in the hearings are unprofessional and out of reason. The citizenship matter, as a matter of fact, is under Myanmar’s supreme authority and thus, The Gambia or any other nation is not even qualified to criticize the 1982 Citizenship Law of Myanmar.
However, Agent of Myanmar Union Minister U Ko Ko Hlaing calmly explained with respect before the court about verification and scrutiny processes for citizenship statuses of Bengalis. “There are around two hundred thousand Bengalis holding citizenship cards across the country, and fifty thousand Bengalis holding NVCs in Rakhine State alone. Those who apply for an NVC and are found not to be entitled to citizenship can continue to live lawfully in Myanmar as holders of an NVC (National Verification Card),” said U Ko Ko Hlaing in the presentation.
Furthermore, “Despite this, many Bengalis in northern Rakhine State refuse to engage with the NVC process. Some refuse on political grounds. Some refuse because they are pressured by activists not to do so, or have received false information from activists that anyone who applies for an NVC will never be granted citizenship. All this has nothing to do with genocide,” he added in the hearing.

Argument for the nation’s pride
Dr Naing Swe Oo, senior advisor to Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies, expressed his view and gratitude to the Myanmar Agent team as follows: –
“The Agent of Myanmar, led by Union Minister U Ko Ko Hlaing, argued for the pride of our country. We, all Myanmar citizens, are confident that we did not commit genocide. As a think tank personnel, I also monitored the case and observed that the Gambia only relied on the reports of FFM and IIMM (Fact-Finding Mission and Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar). But the team led by the Union Minister presented very detail in the appeal. I am very proud of and thank the Agent of Myanmar and the legal team.”
This article is dedicated to honouring the team of Myanmar Agent led by Union Minister U Ko Ko Hlaing and Union Minister and Union Attorney-General Dr Thida Oo, the legal team led by Lead Counsel Mr Christopher Staker, including Professor Alina Miron, Mr Stefan Talmon, Ms Chiara Cordone, and Ms Leigh Lawrie, and every member involved in the teams who defended the truth and justice for, and the pride and prestige of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar and its people.
The people of Myanmar value and respect every single effort of both the Agent of Myanmar and Myanmar’s Counsels as the bravest but the gentlest warriors ever.

gnlm

Voting is one of the most important ways that citizens can participate in shaping the future of their country. Yet, some people decide not to vote because they think their one vote will not matter, while others are simply not interested in politics. Some feel they do not know enough about politics or politicians and do not have the time to learn before an election. Finally, some citizens choose not to vote because they do not like any of the candidates. These reasons may seem personal and harmless, but in reality, the absence of voting represents a significant loss of chances for both the individual and the society they live in.
When a citizen does not vote, they lose the opportunity to have their voice heard in decisions that directly affect their lives. Policies on education, healthcare, employment, and civil rights are shaped by elected leaders, and abstaining from voting means surrendering influence over these critical areas. Even if one vote seems small, elections are often decided by narrow margins, and the collective power of many individuals who think their vote does not matter can change the outcome. By not voting, citizens allow others to decide for them, weakening their own agency and representation.
The absence of voting also erodes collective power. Democracy depends on participation, and when large numbers of citizens abstain, the balance of representation shifts toward groups that consistently vote. This often results in policies that favour certain demographics while ignoring others. For example, younger citizens who fail to vote may find their concerns about education or employment overlooked, while older generations who vote regularly see their priorities reflected in government decisions. Thus, non-voting contributes to inequality in representation and strengthens entrenched elites who benefit from low participation.
Beyond personal and collective losses, not voting reflects a weakening of civic responsibility.
Voting is not only a right but also a duty that sustains democratic culture. When citizens abstain, leaders are less accountable, and democratic institutions lose legitimacy. This opens the door to authoritarian tendencies, corruption, and policies that serve narrow interests rather than the public good. The absence of voting also leads to stagnation, as governments face less pressure to innovate or address pressing issues.
Citizens who do not vote miss the chance to demand change, leaving outdated policies in place.
There are also psychological and social consequences of non-voting. Citizens who abstain often feel alienated from their communities and governments, reinforcing cycles of disengagement. They lose the sense of empowerment that comes from participating in democracy and may begin to believe that politics is irrelevant to their lives. This alienation weakens solidarity within communities, as voting is a collective act that affirms shared values and responsibilities. Moreover, when parents abstain, they often model disengagement for their children, perpetuating cycles of non-participation across generations.
History teaches us that widespread non-voting can have grave consequences. In societies where citizens disengage, authoritarian leaders often exploit the vacuum, consolidating power without resistance. The absence of voting undermines freedoms and disregards the sacrifices made by those who fought for the right to vote. It diminishes a nation’s moral authority and weakens its voice on the global stage, as policies shaped by disengaged electorates lack legitimacy. In many countries, hard-won rights to vote were achieved through struggle, protest, and sacrifice.
To abstain from voting is to ignore these struggles and to waste the opportunities they created.
The reasons people give for not voting — whether believing their vote does not matter, disinterest in politics, lack of knowledge, or dissatisfaction with candidates — are understandable but ultimately harmful. Each reason represents a missed opportunity to influence the future. Citizens who abstain lose the chance to be part of change, to hold leaders accountable, and to affirm their place in the democratic community. The absence of voting is therefore not just a personal choice but a collective loss that weakens democracy itself.
Reclaiming the duty to vote is essential. Citizens must recognize that voting is both a right and a responsibility. Governments and civil society should invest in civic education to address ignorance and apathy, while making voting more accessible through technolo-
gy and inclusive policies. Most importantly, societies must cultivate a culture where voting is valued as a shared duty, reinforcing its importance across generations.
By embracing this duty, citizens can reclaim their lost chances, strengthen democracy, and ensure that their voices contribute to shaping a future that reflects the will of the people.
Ultimately, the absence of voting is not only about missing a single election. It is about missing the chance to be part of history, to influence the direction of society, and to stand alongside fellow citizens in shaping a collective destiny. Each ballot cast is a statement of belonging, a declaration that one’s voice matters, and a contribution to the ongoing story of democracy. When citizens abstain, they silence themselves, leaving gaps in the narrative of their nation. The loss of chances is therefore profound: it is the loss of agency, of representation, of solidarity, and of the opportunity to shape a better future.
By choosing to vote, citizens affirm their role in democracy and reclaim the opportunities that are lost when they abstain. Voting is not perfect, nor is it the only form of civic engagement, but it remains the most direct and powerful tool citizens possess to shape their future. To abstain is to relinquish this tool, to forfeit the chance to be heard, and to weaken the democratic fabric that binds societies together. The duty to vote is, therefore, not only a personal responsibility but also a collective necessity. By embracing it, citizens reclaim their lost chances and strengthen the promise of democracy for generations to come.

gnlm

Myanmar, the nation living with Buddha’s teachings, is globally famous as “The Golden Land” for its abundance of golden pagodas, stupas and temples across the land. People of Myanmar innately borne a peaceful mind and a non-aggressive life since ancient. Peaceful coexistence, generosity, kindness, and love are the typical characteristics of the Myanmar people.
King Anawrahta firstly united the diverse people into a common faith and cultural identity, and established the very first Myanmar nation – the Bagan Empire – in AD 1044. Since then, daily life, ritual and traditional activities, festivals, perspectives, beliefs and cultures of the Myanmar people have been primarily associated with Buddha’s thoughts and teachings.
Gifted by nature, Myanmar is one of the most beautiful countries, possessing rich natural resources and picturesque scenes from icy mountains, colourful hill ranges, seasonal forests, and beaches and archipelagos. The land is also a gateway linking the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean. Such a precious heritage given by nature and founded by our ancestors is our home.

Rakhine State
Rakhine State is situated on Myanmar’s western coast and is territorially connected with Chin State, Magway Region, Bago Region, and Ayeyawady Region, and the Bay of Bengal and Bangladesh to the west. Indigenous ethnicities living in Rakhine State include Rakhine, Kaman, Bamar, Mro, Khami, Thet, Maramagyi, and Dinat.
Looking back at the bygone era in the 19th century, Myanmar could not avoid the external shocks of colonialism. Invasion by the coercive forces of British imperialism left the country in chaos with many misfortune inheritances. British imperialists brought many consequences to the people of Myanmar that they had never experienced in the land before colonial rule. Instability, armed revolutions, conflicts and crises, and political disunity among ethnicities were the results of exercising divide and rule tactics by the imperialists.
The Bengali immigrant issue became one of the unfortunate consequences. British imperialists imported Bengalis from neighbouring areas to employ them in cultivation and plantations in Myanmar during the colonial rule. Since then, people with different physical features, different facial appearances, different spoken languages, different belief and different traditional outfits started arriving in Myanmar’s western land. Those people from neighbouring territory (today Bangladesh) were never brothers and sisters of ours.

Rakhine State in 2016
The ongoing court trial at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which Myanmar is facing for committing genocide the Bengalis can be traced back in October 2016 in Rakhine State when the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) terrorists raided Myanmar’s borderline security outposts, where only approximately ten police personnel were deployed in each outpost, with disproportionately larger numbers around 400 ARSA terrorists in the attack. It was part of their plan to create the plot “Myanmar troops killing civilians” as a forerunner of genocide.
In the terroristic assaults committed by the ARSA terrorists, at least 20-40 Myanmar police personnel were brutally killed, and some were dismembered. In response, the Myanmar Tatmadaw launched a military operation of counter-terrorism measures. It truly was a counter-terrorism measure taken against the armed terrorists by the national armed forces (Tatmadaw) in the sphere of defending the country’s sovereignty. In fact, the crackdown only targeted the armed terrorists (ARSA) who attacked the country’s sovereignty.
Following the October 2016 outrage, the ARSA terrorists, within Rakhine State, especially in the borderline villages, not only committed terroristic offences against small security outposts but also killed indigenous Rakhine, Mro, and Kaman ethnics, and Hindu people who had been living with peaceful coexistence in the area throughout history. The incidents resulted in the 2017 bloodshed in Rakhine State.
There were many solid reports that the ARSA terrorists killed more than 150 Hindus, including women, men, and children, and abducted several Hindu villagers in August 2017. Such an atrocity committed by the ARSA terrorists is deemed to be a crime against humanity. It certainly was the genocide. However, the massacre of the Hindus killed by ARSA terrorists did not receive international attention or widespread condemnation at that time. Rapes, brutal killings, forcibly occupying the villages and fields, and setting houses and villages ablaze are the techniques usually used by terrorists against other communities in Rakhine State territory, especially in the borderline areas.

No motive to commit genocide
U Khin Maung Zaw, joint-secretary of Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies, remarked in a talk show about Myanmar versus The Gambia at the ICJ held at MRTV on 17 January that “We have no reason or intention to commit genocide against them (Bengalis). The land is ours. We do not need to occupy the land by force. We do not need to get rid of the locals (Rakhine, Mro, Kaman, Thet, Daingnet and Hindus). They are our people,” giving an example by contrasting the situation when the Americans discovered and invaded the American continent.
A rational argument
U Ko Ko, Chairman of the Myanmar Narrative Think Tank group, posed a logical question in the same talk show, “If we committed genocide, why is the population of those people steadily increasing over the years? Figure of their population keeps growing over the years.”

Defending the motherland is not a crime
Attacking a country’s Tatmadaw, security outposts, and border guard police, and mass killing the indigenous natives is one hundred per cent humiliating the sovereignty and threatening the country’s national security. It is crystal clear that defending or protecting sovereignty and national security is not a crime nor genocide. There is a line between advocating human rights and defending national security in the debate of national interest. It was purely a passive defence to protect the motherland.

(Views expressed in the article solely belong to the author.)

gnlm

The day of 28 December 2025 marked a very important milestone in Myanmar’s political history. In other words, it can be called a historic day on which the genuine will of the people who truly support a multiparty democracy was clearly demonstrated. From the early morning to the evening, peaceable civilians in 102 townships across the nation revealed their genuine desire through casting the ballot, which came from their hearts. With the aim of bringing about an elected government for the sake of their future, peace and stability, and better opportunities for the nation’s political, economic, and social development, they proved how they fulfilled their civic duties by taking their steps towards the polling stations where Phase I of the election was held.
The results of Phase I of the election differed from those of previous conventional elections and revealed that good outcomes were achieved to pursue the goal of multiparty democracy despite terrorist threats, disruptions, and attacks. In particular, this reflected an expression of the genuine desire of the people, who totally rejected the various forms of threats, harassment, and violent attacks carried out by those who do not wish for peace and stability in Myanmar, the political hypocrites who distort the definition of democracy, and terrorists who seek to achieve political objectives through armed struggle.
If an elected government emerges, it will become difficult for egotists who exploit political causes for personal gain to maintain their position. Likewise, armed terrorist groups operating under the guise of ethnic representation, who are attempting to seize territorial control through armed struggle, fear the emergence of Hluttaws where ethnic issues can be legitimately raised. For these reasons, they carried out criticism, slander, threats, and attacks from multiple fronts to prevent the election from taking place and to deny recognition of the election results. In response, the Government and the Election Commission acted in accordance with the law to counter such multifaceted disruptions and attacks, ensuring that eligible voters were able to cast their votes freely, safely, and without intimidation.
If we review Phase I of the election, pro-democracy citizens eagerly participated in the electoral process for establishing a democratic system. However, anti-democracy terrorists carried out various forms of attacks to disrupt and prevent the emergence of a legitimate Hluttaw in terms of politics. In other words, the difference can be witnessed between the will of pro-democracy citizens and the acts of anti-democracy terrorists. Seeing the results of Phase I of the election, it can be seen that the attempts of anti-election actions of the terrorists totally failed, as the people do not support their terrorist acts.
Phase I of the 2025 Multiparty Democratic General Election began at 6 am on 28 December. As soon as the polling stations opened, it was truly spine-tingling to see people eagerly lining up and waiting to cast their votes, especially the large number of young voters. Seeing so many young people coming to vote even drew praise from Mr Yerman Mukhtar, Vice-Chairman of the Kazakhstan Election Commission, who remarked, “I see many young people among the voters. This is a very positive sign.” He further commented, “So many young people lining up to vote shows that this country’s future is looking very bright.” This demonstrates that the nation’s youth have rejected violent paths. Instead, they proved that they want to shape their own destiny within the framework of the law.
Although some negative media outlets claimed that young voters were opposing the election, international observers vividly witnessed young voters lining up enthusiastically to cast their votes. Mr Sholban Kara-Ool, Vice-Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, also stated, “Seeing people lining up to vote clearly shows the public is genuinely engaged in choosing its future and its rightful government.”
Nicaraguan Ambassador Mr Mario Jose Armengol Campos personally observed the situation on the ground and testified, saying, “From what I have observed, the people of Myanmar are voting safely. I saw them voting freely on their own will.” The smiles and enthusiasm on the faces of the voters served to silently refute the fabricated reports circulated by negative media outlets.

It can be said that the people have come to clearly grasp the essence of democracy. It is also noteworthy that the Head of State himself spoke to journalists after casting his vote. He stated, “If someone says they support a multiparty democracy, they should actively take part in elections, which are the essence of democracy. Not voting may indicate a lack of full understanding of democracy.” Those who refrain from voting after being influenced by terrorist incitement, or who boycott the vote because the party or individual they support is not participating, are just the ones with a low level of democratic awareness who do not figure out their civic duties and rights.

Having learned lessons from the widespread reputational damage and international embarrassment caused by the NLD’s electoral fraud during the 2020 general election, the Government can be seen to have made systematic preparations this time. No matter how the anti-government media attempt to make accusations, if one listens to the genuine voices of the people who actually cast their votes, the truth becomes evident. For example, a teenage girl from Pyinmana who voted for the first time shared her feelings, saying, “I feel that I have fulfilled the civic duties, and I have raised high hopes for good leaders who will benefit young people.” These are not scripted or staged words. In fact, these reflect the sincere sentiments of citizens who voted with honest hopes for the progress of their country and their people. They did not heed malicious words spread through the air. Instead, they went to the polling stations on their own convictions.
One of the distinctive features of this election is that technological safeguards were put in place to prevent wrong voter lists and electoral fraud. Even though certain negative media have raised suspicions by suggesting the possibility of irregularities, in reality, this election utilized the Myanmar Electronic Voting Machines (MEVMs), which were domestically developed by Myanmar experts themselves. Regarding these machines, Nicaraguan Ambassador based in Vietnam, Mr Mario Jose Armengol Campos, praised the initiative, stating, “I consider the Electronic Voting Machine to be a good idea. By using this machine, voting can be done more quickly, and results can also be obtained faster.”
As clarified by the Union Election Commission, these machines operate on a stand-alone basis and are not connected to the internet, Wi-Fi, or Bluetooth, making external hacking or interference impossible. In addition, there are no invalid ballots. Accuracy of the voting results is assured. This constitutes a key factor in ensuring a transparent and fair election. The electoral system is no longer limited to the previous First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system alone. Instead, it has been changed to and implemented as a Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) system that combines proportional representation (PR). In this election, as many as 4,863 candidates from 57 political parties are running. This clearly shows that the election is oriented towards all-inclusive participation.
It can be said that the people have come to clearly grasp the essence of democracy. It is also noteworthy that the Head of State himself spoke to journalists after casting his vote. He stated, “If someone says they support a multiparty democracy, they should actively take part in elections, which are the essence of democracy. Not voting may indicate a lack of full understanding of democracy.” Those who refrain from voting after being influenced by terrorist incitement, or who boycott the vote because the party or individual they support is not participating, are just the ones with a low level of democratic awareness who do not figure out their civic duties and rights.
Some eligible voters may not participate in Phase I of the election due to low political awareness and in fear for their lives because of terrorist threats. Nevertheless, according to statements released by the Election Commission, the fact that the percentage of voters who came to vote despite intimidation and obstruction is higher than those who chose a “No Vote” clearly demonstrates the genuine will of the people who desire peace and stability.
One notable point is that the saboteurs’ “No Vote” campaigns did not produce the results they had hoped for in reality. Instead, the election concluded peacefully, highlighting the defeat of those who opposed it. The time has come for the public to carefully consider whether choosing “No Vote” truly benefits them, or whether casting a vote to support a party that can contribute to the nation’s interests, while the right to choose still exists, is the more beneficial option. Although Phase I has concluded, it is not too late. By taking the situation in Phase I as a reference, eligible voters for the remaining Phase II and Phase III of the election still have the opportunity to decide whether to participate in a “No Vote” or to cast their votes. Hence, I strongly urge responsible citizens who genuinely wish to see the country develop and progress not to be misled by political manipulation, and not to forfeit their rights, but to exercise their right to cast their votes.
Threats telling unarmed politicians, who believes in multiparty democratic path and wish to deal with political problems by political means instead of armed struggle, not to take part in the election, bombings of party offices, drone attacks on polling station areas, and attacks on towns and villages with rockets and heavy weapons on the morning of voting, all intended to frighten citizens who would come to cast their votes, are acts of terrorism. These terrorist acts are violations of human rights because such attacks attempt to disrupt and destroy the right of eligible voters to cast their ballots.
While there are organizations that criticize, attack, and oppose the electoral process, which is an unavoidable stage for the emergence of the multiparty democratic system desired by the people, and terrorists who use various means to disrupt and destroy the election, there are also nine countries that understand the essence of democracy and wish for peace and stability in Myanmar. Additionally, observers from 14 foreign embassies and 139 international election observers personally came to Myanmar to observe the election. Moreover, 215 journalists from 61 international media organizations and 1,177 journalists from 52 domestic media outlets also covered the election, which was conducted with transparency by the State. Their observation and remarks are sufficient evidence to recognize the dignified election. Everybody knows that countries, including world powers, recognize Phase I of the election as a free, transparent and fair one. Mr Deng Xijun, Special Envoy for Asian Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, commented, “We have seen that the staff members carrying out their duties in the election are performing their work correctly, accurately, and well. We have observed that Phase I of the current election has proceeded smoothly and peacefully.” Similarly, Belarusian Member of Parliament Mr Shpakouski Aliaksandr stated clearly, “We believe that elections are the only correct path in a legitimate political process, and that they represent fair competition in the formation of power and the convening of parliament.” All of these are evidence that reflect the recognition of the international community on the correct path towards Myanmar’s democratic development.
Among the international community’s increasingly positive attitude towards Myanmar’s elections, indications of a shift in United States policy have also emerged as a notable development. In Real Clear Defence, a retired US Army colonel wrote that the upcoming election could become an opportunity to renegotiate and reshape US-Myanmar relations, which have been stalled for decades. In addition, US Secretary of State Rubio himself has stated that he would avoid making public judgements regarding the fairness of the electoral process and democratic values. As a result, it is now becoming apparent that the United States may be shifting away from its previous approach of sanctions and towards more pragmatic cooperation based on Myanmar’s strategic importance.
Accordingly, no matter how terrorists threaten the people via social media platforms, the scenes from Phase I of the election have already proven that the people of Myanmar are firmly determined to shape their own destiny. On the morning of 28 December, the steps taken by citizens heading for polling stations were not merely simple walks. Every step they took was a historic one, clearly rejecting the path of terrorism and acts of destruction. Their historic steps demonstrated to the world their desire for peace, stability, and the rule of law.
At present, Phase I of the election was successfully held on 28 December in 102 townships. This is just the beginning. Going forward, Phase II will continue to be held on 11 January 2026, in 100 townships, and Phase III will be held on 25 January in 63 townships. The entire population believes that a new Hluttaw will be convened, a new government will be able to be formed, and national development can continue, once the whole process is completed.
Voting is not only a right of every citizen, but also a responsibility. The ink-stained little finger of each voter is a proud symbol of having contributed, a single brick and a single grain of sand, to democracy. Each ballot is a foundation stone upon which the nation’s future destiny will be built, and every step taken towards the polling station is undeniably a step towards a genuine, disciplined, and new democratic state. For these reasons, this article urges everyone not to relinquish their rights but to continue marching resolutely to the polling stations with firm and determined steps during the periods of the remaining Phases II and III of the election.

gnlm

In the heart of Southeast Asia, where venerable pagodas ascend toward the heavens and sinuous rivers traverse verdant landscapes, the Republic of the Union of Myanmar observes one of its most venerated national holidays: Independence Day on January 4. This auspicious occasion commemorates the historic declaration of sovereignty in 1948, when Myanmar—formerly known as Burma—severed ties with British colonial administration after more than six decades of subjugation. Amidst the nation's frequent prominence in international discourse owing to its multifaceted challenges, Independence Day serves as an illuminating emblem of fortitude, collective national pride, and aspirational hope, extending an invitation to the global community to appreciate Myanmar's indomitable spirit.

Historical Foundations of Independence
The narrative of Myanmar's independence constitutes a profound saga of steadfast perseverance, astute diplomacy, and resolute determination. British imperial forces initiated the colonization of Burma in the late 19th century, methodically annexing its territories through a series of three Anglo-Burmese Wars spanning 1824 to 1885. Subsequent decades witnessed a profound transformation under British stewardship: Yangon, the former capital, underwent a metamorphosis with the erection of imposing colonial edifices; and invaluable resources such as teak timber and rice were systematically extracted to sustain the British Empire. Beneath this ostensibly progressive facade, however, latent discontent proliferated. Burmese scholars, Buddhist monks, and students merged into united movements, deriving impetus from contemporaneous global endeavors, notably India's campaign of non-violent resistance spearheaded by Mahatma Gandhi.
The nationalist fervor crystallized during the 1930s, propelled by luminaries such as U Ottama, a pioneering monk-orator, and Saya San, whose galvanizing peasant rebellion from 1930 to 1931 was ruthlessly suppressed by colonial authorities. The cataclysm of World War II precipitated an acceleration toward autonomy. Japanese forces invaded Burma in 1942, proffering ostensible liberation yet imposing a marionette regime via the Burma National Army under the command of the youthful General Aung San. Disillusioned by Japanese authoritarianism, Aung San realigned with Allied powers in 1945. In the war's aftermath, he engaged in pivotal negotiations with British Prime Minister Clement Attlee, culminating in the 1947 Panglong Agreement. This accord pledged administrative autonomy to ethnic minorities, including the Shan, Kachin, and Karen peoples, thereby laying the groundwork for a federated union.
Tragedy imperiled these advancements on July 19, 1947, when political adversaries assassinated Aung San and six of his cabinet ministers in Rangoon (present-day Yangon). Undaunted, his devoted successor, U Nu, propelled the nation toward fruition. At precisely 4:20 a.m. on January 4, 1948—a moment deemed propitious by Burmese astrological traditions—Prime Minister U Nu formally proclaimed independence. Thus, the Union of Burma materialized as a democratic republic, with Yangon designated as its vibrant capital. This arduously attained liberty established the framework for a federal structure, albeit one perpetually strained by ethnic discord and recurrent military interventions in subsequent decades.

Nationwide Commemorations: Dignity and Reflection
Contemporary observances of Independence Day interlace historical reverence with communal solemnity, metamorphosing urban centers, provincial towns, and rural villages into vibrant mosaics of patriotism. Ceremonies commence at dawn across the republic, meticulously recapitulating the 1948 declaration. In Yangon, the preeminent festivities convene at the resplendent Shwedagon Pagoda, where multitudes assemble beneath radiant floodlights. Saffron-clad monks intone sacred incantations, harmonizing with the resonant peals of colossal bells, evoking a profound spiritual ambiance.
Distinct from the ostentatious military parades characteristic of many independence celebrations, Myanmar's proceedings embody characteristic restraint and introspection. The principal official rite transpires in Nay Pyi Taw, the meticulously planned administrative capital. There, the national flag ascends the mast at City Hall concomitant with the broadcast of the President's address, which acknowledges ancestral sacrifices while articulating visions for national cohesion and advancement. A ceremonial 11-gun salute reverberates through the city, symbolizing tribute to each of the nation's principal ethnic states and regions.

Community and Cultural Expressions
The most affecting vignettes unfold within local communities. At the Martyrs’ Mausoleum in Yangon—proximate to the site of Aung San's martyrdom—dignitaries, foreign diplomats, and ordinary citizens deposit wreaths in contemplative silence, the atmosphere covered with veneration. Public edifices and private residences proudly display the tricolor ensign of yellow, green, and red. Indigenous pwe festivals animate the proceedings, showcasing anyein satirical dance-dramas and yodaya classical musical ensembles. Monasteries emerge as focal points, receiving offerings from devotees who honor national progenitors.
Familial gatherings underscore the day's intimacy, with elders imparting oral histories of the liberation struggle to attentive youth. “Independence Day evokes the valor of our forebears,” remarks Daw Khin Mar, a pedagogue from Mandalay. “We collectively prepare mont lone yay paw—sticky rice balls—a modest ritual that exemplifies the sweetness derived from harmonious collaboration.” A pivotal ritual graces Yangon's 220-foot Independence Column, an obelisk inaugurated in 1948. The Head of State delivers a nationwide address, contemplating Aung San's legacy and advocating reconciliation. 

Regional Diversity and International Resonance
Regional variations infuse the observances with distinctive cultural inflections. In Mandalay, the erstwhile royal seat, caparisoned elephants procession through the moated palace precincts, evoking imperial grandeur, while Naga dancers from upland enclaves execute intricate routines adorned in feathered regalia, acknowledging ethnic contributions to the independence odyssey. Nay Pyi Taw mounts grandiose military exhibitions, parading armored vehicles and ordnance to affirm the armed forces' custodial role in territorial integrity.
A Message to the World: Resilience and Identity
For a global audience, Myanmar’s Independence Day serves as a reminder of the country’s enduring identity. Despite the challenges of the modern era, the celebration of January 4 remains a unifying force. It is a day when the diverse ethnic groups of the "Golden Land" reflect on their shared history and their collective hope for a peaceful, prosperous future.
The resilience of the Myanmar people—their ability to find joy in traditional games and draw strength from their deep heritage—is what truly defines the nation. To understand Myanmar, one must look past the headlines and witness the unyielding community spirit that thrives on its independence day.

NP News

Disregarding an avalanche of criticism, Myanmar went to the polls on 28 December. The landmark elections, meant to usher in a meaningful political transition, despite violent disruptions from Non-state Armed Groups (NSAG), will last nearly a month. Two more rounds will be held – one on 11 January and another a fortnight later. These three-phased elections will set the stage for the formation of a new civilian government.
Once concluded, these polls will end the military takeover of the country, which took place in February 2021, under severely trying and exceptional circumstances.
Critics have labelled the ongoing elections as a sham, pointing out that free and fair polls are impossible due to the raging violence in many parts of the country, the military’s alleged mal-intent, and the decision by the National League of Democracy (NLD), still on paper led by Aung San Suu Kyi, who is behind bars, to boycott the polls.
Nothing could be farther than the truth. Before throwing mud at the government, these analysts have to understand that elections in Myanmar have, since its independence, always been held in troubling political contexts, and have never been perfect. This one is no exception either.
Take, for instance, the 1951 poll – Myanmar’s first founding elections. It took place at a time when the country was encountering multiple insurgencies that had immediately followed Myanmar’s independence in 1948.
The post-independence government of U Nu was labelled as the “Yangon Government”, as it was unable to extend its writ beyond Yangon, the former capital. But in a bold counteroffensive that was launched in 1950, government forces succeeded in wresting control over major urban centres. Consequently, a decision was taken to hold elections as promised in 1951.
Those landmark elections, too, were held in three phases, but lasted an extended period of over fourteen months. Starting in June 1951, they concluded in April 1952.
However, polls could not be held in many border zones, where ethnic states had been formed. In fact, polling failed to materialize in nearly 11 per cent of central Myanmar’s regions due to fighting.  But, despite the odds, U Nu’s Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League won handsomely.  A decade of peaceful and prosperous democratic rule followed.
Fast forward to 2010, when another imperfect but highly consequential poll took place. In that year, the military-led State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) convened elections, following the adoption of the 2008 Constitution through a referendum.
Sceptics then too slammed those elections, which were being held after decades of military rule. National morale too was quite low, as the people en masse had been suffering from the aftermath of Nargis, a deadly super-cyclone.
Amid the pessimism, some major political parties, including the National League for Democracy (NLD), boycotted these elections. In fact, polling could not be held in the entire Wa Self-Administered Division.
But beating all odds, these elections yielded the government led by U Thein Sein, who assumed office in 2011. Despite the dim view of critics, the Thein Sein administration introduced pathbreaking 360-degree reforms, comprising political, economic and humanitarian domains. Consequently, for another decade, Myanmar plugged into the international mainstream. Foreign investments poured in, imparting forward momentum to the economy. Besides, political stability returned following the “Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement” with eight Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs).
Though the international context has entirely changed – the Western-dominated unipolar world hurtling towards multipolarity now – the 2025 elections do faintly echo the 2010 situation.
Several international organizations have dismissed the credibility of the polls, as the majority of the country’s remote regions are still engulfed in serious armed conflicts.
Yet, it is important to peer through the international media haze in order to evaluate the factual situation. For instance, the State Security and Peace Commission (SSPC) is all set to hold elections in 265 townships. This would cover a whopping 80 per cent of the total 330 townships in the country.
On 28 December, 102 townships went to the polls. Voters in 100 townships will head to the polling stations on 11 January, culminating in the third phase of balloting on 25 January 2026.
Contrary to the views of the poorly informed or biased external observers, who have billboarded that the elections cover less than half the population, the facts on the ground reveal otherwise. For instance, the 2024 national census shows that only 13 per cent of the total population lives in 65 townships where elections have been cancelled.
Not only are these 65 townships sparsely populated because of their remote locations, but they have also suffered heavy migration to neighbouring countries from these conflict-prone areas, further reducing the population density there.
Despite the structural difficulties, the UEC has imparted innovation and freshness to these polls.
For instance, Myanmar’s polling authorities have introduced the new Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) system to these polls, to make them more representative.  This has meant that a system of proportional representation has been introduced to Amyotha Hluttaw, or the Upper House of the parliament, as well as State and Region Hluttaws or assemblies.
Consequently, these provisions have encouraged many ethnic political parties to stand for elections, as half of the seats will be reserved for smaller parties.
In contrast, in the last three elections, the largest national parties – both the Union Solidarity and Development Party and the NLD – benefited from the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) electoral system, as this was the only game in town.
Consequently, the smaller ethnic political parties representing Kayin, Kayah, Chin, and Pa-O groups never won a substantial number of seats, leading to significant alienation among the ethnic groups, many of whom took up arms.
Besides, the military authorities are reportedly supporting the proposed change to Section 261 of the Constitution. As a result, certain ethnic political parties will be allowed to choose their Chief Ministers, imparting a deeper connection among ethnic groups to the political process.
Taken together with the creation of larger constituencies for proportional representation, the MMP system has provided breathing space to ethnic political parties residing in conflict-prone states. This can greatly encourage the national reconciliation process.
For instance, in highly conflict-ridden regions such as Rakhine and Chin States, where elections to the Pyithu Hluttaw or the Lower House have been largely cancelled, some candidates can still hope to enter the Amyotha Hluttaw or the Upper House because of the proportional representation system. Unsurprisingly, five Rakhine political parties and three Chin political parties are contesting in the upcoming elections, despite their smaller size, taking advantage of the MMP system.
The introduction of the non-armed ethnic leaders to the legislature has another important fallout. The presence of these lawmakers can encourage a peaceful dialogue with those ethnic groups who have taken up arms. It is interesting that in these elections, nearly 18 per cent of the candidates are women — the highest since polls in Myanmar began. This has raised hopes of greater participation in the peace processes of women, who have been active advocates of the cessation of conflicts and the promotion of women’s and youth rights.
Finally, the UEC has introduced Myanmar Electronic Voting Machines (MEVMs) to counter vote-counting irregularities and raise the level of transparency and accountability through the use of modern technology.
Besides, the use of voting machines erases the possibility of “invalid votes” – a major problem that was encountered when handwritten procedures were used in the past. In fact, the ratio of wasted invalid votes was as high as five per cent in all three previous elections where paper ballots were used.
The UEC has gone out of its way to ensure that the MEVMs remain tamper-proof. This has been done by ensuring that the machines are based on a simple design and have no provisions to be connected to the internet.
The success of the three-phased elections in Myanmar is not only important for spurring a process of peace and reconciliation, prosperity and cultural accomplishments, but they can also significantly encourage stability in the broader Asian region. A frontier state, bridging India and China – two major civilizational states – Myanmar is a unique country where the national interests of Beijing and New Delhi do not collide. In fact, there is a convergence of interests as both India and China can draw significant benefits from political stability in Myanmar. India’s Act East policy of greater engagement of Southeast Asia can succeed only if there is peace and security in Myanmar, a country that is a key geographic link between India and the 10-nation ASEAN. The China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC) can also only succeed if Myanmar remains conflict-free.
A forward-looking Myanmar post-election can encourage the border process of multipolarity, as Naypyidaw has shown keen interest in joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and BRICS – two organizations that spearhead the international movement towards multipolarity.
(Views expressed in the article belong solely to the author.)
(Columnist and journalist Atul Aneja observed the Multiparty General Election held on 28 December as an international election observer, accompanying the election observation delegation from India. He is also an Adviser to the Myanmar Narrative Think Tank.)
Original Article Link-
https://www.geopolitika.ru/en/article/why-myanmar-can-hope-bright-future-after-landmark-elections?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.geopolitika.ru%2Fen%2Farticle%2Fwhy-myanmar-can-hope-bright-future-after-landmark-elections

gnlm

The upcoming elections on 28 December 2025 will turn a new page for Myanmar, shifting the narrative from a conflict-affected, crisis-laden country to a new chapter of hope for building peace and reconstructing the economy. Myanmar is no stranger to “founding” elections. These founding elections, often held amidst challenging environments and imperfect processes, have historically produced defining moments of opportunity to tackle the country’s ongoing conflicts and allow it to take its rightful place in the international community to fulfil its obligations.
The first founding election in Myanmar in 1951 was full of challenges. After gaining independence in 1948, the country became engulfed in multi-coloured insurgencies. The post-independence government of U Nu was dubbed the “Yangon Government” due to its last line of defence being the former capital, Yangon. However, the Yangon government was able to launch counter-offensives in 1950, regaining control over Myanmar’s major urban centres, and decided to hold the promised elections in 1951. The election was held in three phases over a period of fourteen months – from phase one in June 1951 to phase three in April 1952. Many frontier areas – today’s ethnic states – could not hold elections, and 11 per cent of central Myanmar’s regions also missed voting because they remained under insurgent control. Amidst the threat of violence from insurgents and general instability across the country, the Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League, led by U Nu, won a massive victory, and Myanmar enjoyed a decade of peaceful and prosperous democratic rule.
The second founding election occurred in 2010, when the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) convened the polls after successfully adopting the 2008 Constitution. These elections were organized after twenty years of Tatmadaw rule and just two years after the deadly Cyclone Nargis. A few political parties boycotted the process, and elections were not held at all in the entire Wa Self-Administered Division. Nevertheless, the elections successfully ushered in the government led by President U Thein Sein in 2011, which introduced comprehensive political liberalization and economic reforms across the country. From 2011 onward, for another decade, Myanmar was able to re-engage with the global community and achieve a “Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement” with eight ethnic armed organizations.
The environment for holding the upcoming elections this year is no less challenging. Several international organizations have pointed out that the majority of the country’s remote regions are experiencing severe armed conflicts. However, the State Security and Peace Commission is resolved to hold elections in 265 townships, covering 80 per cent of the total 330 townships in the country. Given the preceding conflicts, the Union Election Commission (UEC) has tried its best to conduct the elections in three phases – 102 townships on 28 December 2025, 100 townships on 11 January 2026, and 63 townships on 25 January 2026 – aiming to complete all three phases within a month. Given the active pledge of violent suppression of voting by non-state armed groups, the UEC has done its utmost to ensure maximum election coverage.
Election coverage has declined dramatically over the last three elections since 2010. The election was wholly cancelled in 5 townships in 2010 and seven townships in 2015, but suddenly increased to 15 townships in 2020. In 2020, elections were cancelled in nine out of 17 total townships in Rakhine State, although the conflict in northern Rakhine was less violent and concentrated in only a few villages at that time. Rakhine political parties called foul, arguing that the southern part of Rakhine State – where the ruling party was able to grab support from local populations against regional parties – was favoured. This time, however, the cancellations are due mainly to security reasons, not political manipulation.

Figure 2: New MMP System introduced in Amyotha and State/Region Hluttaws

Contrary to the views of ill-informed external observers who note election coverage as low as 50 per cent of the population, the recent 2024 national census suggests that the population living in the 65 election-cancelled townships constitutes only 13 per cent of the total population. Although these 65 townships represent 20 per cent of the total townships, they are located in remote areas where population density is much lower than in central Myanmar. In addition, the affected population may be even lower than the census estimates, since most of these conflict-affected populations may have already relocated to different parts of the country or neighbouring countries. Despite these structural weaknesses, the upcoming elections feature a few redeeming qualities that can generate positive outcomes from this, albeit imperfect process.
First, the participation of over 5,000 candidates from 57 political parties vying for an estimated 950 seats in three parliaments – the Pyithu Hluttaw (Lower House), Amyotha Hluttaw (Upper House), and State and Region Hluttaws – demonstrates a highly motivated group of citizens. These candidates paid costly candidacy registration fees of K500,000 to participate, knowing they are likely to lose the fees if they do not win. They have offered pledges to their constituencies ranging from lowering inflation to cleaning up garbage and draining sewage – thousands of worthy ideas for possible reform initiatives for the incoming government. The active cooperation from constituencies is also encouraging candidates to step up their last-minute, high-intensity door-to-door push in many areas, despite the UEC’s rules against certain types of canvassing due to security reasons.
Second, the introduction of the new Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) system to elect candidates for the Amyotha Hluttaw and State and Region Hluttaws has encouraged many ethnic political parties to enter the contest. The introduction of MMP into the Amyotha Hluttaw was a decisive incentive for ethnic parties, as half of the seats will be reserved for the compensation of seats to smaller parties. In the last three elections, the largest national parties – both the Union Solidarity and Development Party and the National League for Democracy – benefited from the British-style First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) electoral system used for all three types of parliaments. Smaller ethnic political parties representing Kayin, Kayah, Chin, and Pa-O groups never won a substantial number of seats, as large national parties defeated them in their home regions. Ethnic political parties such as the Shan and Rakhine narrowly won some seats due to the concentration of ethnic populations within their states; however, they were largely excluded from a substantial part of sub-national governments. The introduction of the MMP system will change the landscape in both the Amyotha Hluttaw and sub-national parliaments. Furthermore, the proposed change of Section 261 of the Constitution, as agreed by Tatmadaw, will allow certain ethnic political parties to choose their Chief Ministers or participate in sub-national government. This can be a major game-changer for ethnic states, where ethnic political parties can hope for better representation for the first time. Unlike previous FPTP systems that favoured large national parties, the MMP system will boost smaller ethnic and regional parties, allowing them to gain seats through the “compensatory mechanism” of proportional representation, as they consistently collected the second or third largest vote counts in previous elections.
Third, the combination of the MMP system and the creation of larger constituencies for proportional representation has provided breathing space for ethnic political parties facing the acute challenge of campaigning in their respective conflict-affected states. Although ethnic political parties, particularly in highly conflict-ridden regions such as Rakhine and Chin States, may see the majority of their Pyithu Hluttaw elections cancelled, they can still enhance their representation through the Amyotha Hluttaw. They can compensate with vote counts from the townships where elections are held through the MMP mechanism and larger constituencies. That is why five Rakhine political parties and three Chin political parties are contesting in the upcoming elections, even though they can barely match powerful national parties in terms of resources and protection. This gives an opportunity for non-armed ethnic leaders to gain popular support to organize effective mediation for conflict reduction and the negotiation of peace processes with various ethnic armed counterparts in their respective regions.
Fourth, for the first time in twenty years, women candidates have reached the highest percentage ever – 18 per cent of total registered candidates – surpassing the already high percentage of 15 per cent in the 2020 elections, when women office-holders were attracting more women into the political process. This is a welcome recognition of the role of women in peace, reconciliation, and nation-building, as many female candidates have raised hopes for the cessation of conflicts and the promotion of women’s and youth affairs. Public campaigns for higher voter turnout will benefit women and youth candidates. In fact, the use of the MMP system will also benefit smaller ethnic and regional political parties when voter turnout is higher.
Last but not least, the introduction of Myanmar Electronic Voting Machines (MEVMs) can not only address the unfinished issue of vote-counting irregularities but also step up electoral practices to a higher level of transparency and accountability through technological upgrades. The use of voting machines can erase the possibility of “invalid votes” caused by the handwritten procedures of the past. The ratio of wasted invalid votes was as high as five per cent in all three previous elections where paper ballots were used. Unlike what outside observers have wildly suggested regarding the possibility of electronic surveillance through the machines (claims which tend to exaggerate the capabilities of low-cost, locally-made MEVMs), public demonstrations on the use of MEVMs across the country have never raised doubts over the surveillance issue, as the machines do not have the sophisticated design required to capture additional information about voters.
To conclude, the Myanmar elections are being conducted in the interest of the Myanmar people and are being organized with the best humanly possible procedures and methods to maximize public participation despite the conflict and unstable environment. While the elections do not choose the elected government directly, they will choose candidates for the three parliaments, where the voice of the people can be reflected in future governance. With the new MMP electoral system, the election will also enhance the role of smaller ethnic and regional political parties in national affairs through compensatory mechanisms at the Amyotha Hluttaw. At the sub-national parliaments, these ethnic and regional political parties will surely gain representation this time, and they can immediately pick up the task of peace and reconciliation with their armed counterparts in different states and regions. Like previous founding elections in Myanmar, the upcoming elections have certainly brought hope and energy to people who have suffered for too long under ongoing conflicts. An election that strives for popular participation should be cherished, not condemned.

If anyone is in fear of everything, they will not have a safe and sound place and situation. Consequently, everything will not be safe and secure. If so, suspicion, hate, hostility, grudge, conflicts, enemies, fighting, wars, and so on will influence society. If so, can everyone accept such a situation?
Negotiation plays a key role in easing the suspicion, hate, hostility, grudge, conflicts, fighting and wars, and reconciliation is as well. The capability of those who are taking a leadership role in negotiation as well as reconciliation activities is very important. In order to restore durable peace, the most capable persons have to thoroughly lead the process. Those genuine leaders should not emphasize selfishness but sacrifice their lives and interests for the sake of the nation and all nationalities.
Generally, everyone aspires to the restoration of peace in society. In this regard, those wishing to disrupt the peace process should be identified as perpetrators to hinder the peace process. In a time of turbulence, tumult, and uncertainty, it is critical for everyone to take concrete action to mobilize for peace.

If they all work together in building the Union based on democracy and federalism, the entire nation will be peaceful, stable and prosperous due to the fact that no one would strictly grasp pessimistic attitudes and opinions. Without even intention in activities, they will all keep peace in mind in the working process. If so, all communities of Myanmar are sure to enjoy the fruits of peace in the future. So, everyone has to march forward in the peace process.

For the International Day of Peace, the United Nations stated, “From peacekeepers on the front lines of conflict, to community members, to students in classrooms around the world, everyone has a role to play. We must speak up against violence, hate, discrimination, and inequality; practise respect; and embrace the diversity of our world.”
Recently, the government stated extending further invitations to the peace process through different forms of State media. The government invited all armed groups, including the PDF, to return to the legal fold with the expectation of building a Union based on democracy and federalism.
The statement said that armed groups, including PDFs, are once again invited to cooperate with the government and Tatmadaw if they wish to contribute to the upcoming general election and help build a genuine, disciplined democracy and a Union based on democracy and a federal system, which everyone hopes for.
If they all work together in building the Union based on democracy and federalism, the entire nation will be peaceful, stable and prosperous due to the fact that no one would strictly grasp pessimistic attitudes and opinions. Without even intention in activities, they will all keep peace in mind in the working process. If so, all communities of Myanmar are sure to enjoy the fruits of peace in the future. So, everyone has to march forward in the peace process.

GNLM