UNDERSTANDING COUPS AND ASSESSING THE CURRENT SITUATION IN MYANMAR

Profile of the Author - Angela Arora is first year B.A. LL.B. student at University School of Law and Legal Studies, GGS Indraprastha University.

INTRODUCTION

A coup, or a coup d’ Etat, which literally means “blow of state”, is a removal and seizure of a government and its powers. In layman terms, it is an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a political faction, generally by the military. 

In his best-selling book, ‘Coup D’etat’, Edward Luttwak, a European  strategist and historian known for his works on grand strategy, geoeconomics, military history, and international relations defined a coup as consisting of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder.

In this article, a sincere attempt has been made to cover certain important aspects of a coup such as the reasons behind military takeovers, history of coups, role of international agents etc. which are then explained in the light of the current situation in Myanmar.

WHY DO COUPS TAKE PLACE?

A considerable number of countries in the world have witnessed a coup, a sudden and jostling removal of the governmental power by force. Technically, a coup may be seen as a change in the political order of a country. Since times immemorial, factions of citizens have critically analysed and protested against the governmental regimes, demanding reforms. Coups are essentially presented to the world as a way of usurping an ‘ineffective and corrupt government’, and putting a disciplined, patriotic and a nationalist regime in its place. An important question that arises here is that - are traditional, customary or legal ways available to change the political order, not sufficient? [1] Violent methods of seizing power are used when the legal provisions available are either too rigid, as in the case of monarchies, where the ruler has effective control and influence on policy formation, or when there is a decay in the existing legal and social structures of choosing a government.

This political decay is an umbrella term, which may include events like election frauds, malpractices, amendment of the constitution to keep one party in power etc. However, one has to be careful while considering such reasons justifying a coup. A good case in point to illustrate this is the current situation of Myanmar. The military is now in charge and has declared a year-long state of emergency. It seized control following a general election which Ms. Aan Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) party won by a landslide. The armed forces have backed the opposition, who are demanding a rerun of the vote, claiming widespread fraud. The election commission has said there is no evidence to support these claims. This example goes on to how coups are mostly hidden behind the farce of protecting the political sanctity and national security of the state. 

Other popular reasons cited for a coup are economic backwardness of the country, sectional interests, inability of the government to tackle internal and international challenges etc. Feelings of dissent, inadequacy and inequality among a section of a people can lead them to support, if only temporarily, any attempts made to remove a government which enjoyed legal or constitutional support. 

Many a times, a military’s superior view of its own self, strong beliefs in its power and influence, a strong saviour complex, a personality cult and the inherent need to take control felt by it also triggers coups. The Pakistani army had set up factories to manufacture corn flakes and started a production house to make movies on the lives of army personnel, after the military’s takeover of the government. These actions, however frivolous they may seem, were justified on the grounds that they generated revenue for the ‘government’. As discussed further in the article, the Pakistani coup which was led by Gen Parvez Musharraf also presented the idea of a ‘competition’ between the civilian government and the military. 

Apart from internal dissent or power struggle, it was observed during the cold war that powerful foreign regimes also sometimes played a role in usurping governments hostile to their interests and installing dictators or monarchs friendly to them. The Chilean coup of 1973 is the perfect example that portrays how the United States worked for three years to brew a coup against the first democratically elected government of Chile, which was under the leadership of President Salvador Allende. American President Nixon considered this to be a ‘threat’ to ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ of Latin America. President Allende was killed in the coup, and General Augusto Pinochet ruled Chile with an iron fist for the subsequent seventeen years.

HISTORICAL INSTANCES OF COUPS

Coups are as old as the human desire to dissent, disrupt and take control. 

FRANCE - Napoleon Bonaparte (1799)

The oldest coup of this era can traced back to that of Napoleon Bonaparte. [2] After he returned to France from his Egyptian military campaign in 1799, he started to plot against the five-member Directory that ruled France after the French Revolution. What Napoleon did could make a great movie plot. With the support of several high-level co-conspirators, including two of the five directors, Napoleon arranged for a special legislative session to take place outside Paris. Using a combination of propaganda, bribery and intimidation, he hoped to cajole the legislature into putting him in charge. The lower house instead chased him out of the chamber after hurling abuses at him. But he managed to prevail anyway by convincing troops to clear the area and then, in an attempt to preserve the veneer of constitutionality, he convened a small, handpicked group of legislatures to abolish the Directory and appoint him to a three-member Consulate. Quickly becoming the first consul, Napoleon completed his consolidation of power in 1804, when he crowned himself emperor.

LIBYA - Muammar al-Qaddafi (1969)

Muammar al-Qaddafi was born in an illiterate tribal family living in ghastly conditions. [2] He grew up loathing the Libyan monarchy and its Western backers. Sensing its growing weakness, the then-27-year-old junior army officer decided to take the opportunity and seize power himself on September 1, 1969, while King Idris was out of the country at a health resort. He drove military vehicles into the cities of Tripoli and Benghazi. His 70 co-conspirators surrounded the royal palace and other key government buildings. Communication was cut and top officials were arrested. Qaddafi’s attempt was only met with a remote, token resistance. He addressed his countrymen the next day, justifying his actions. He informed them that the corrupt, Westernised, reactionary regime had been toppled. His rule lasted for forty-two years in Libya, until he was killed in 2011, in the ‘Arab Spring’ uprising.

Pakistan - Parvez Musharraf (1999)

On 12 October 1999, the Pakistani army led by General Pervez Musharraf ousted the civilian government headed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in a coup. The overthrow of a legitimately constituted civilian government by the army for the fourth time in Pakistan's 52-year history had underscored the question of political stability and viability of democracy in the country. According to the historian, Mazhar Aziz, the military takeover in Pakistan made a "striking example in the case study of civil military relations" in a post–Cold War era. [3]

It is interesting to note here that two of the above mentioned countries, France and Pakistan, were democracies. On the other hand, the coup in Libya was projected as the desire of the people to break free from American control under the name of a puppet monarch. In reality, consensus of the people was not taken into account and the dictator imposed his will on the lives of the citizens.

INTERNATIONAL INFLUENCE IN COUPS

Numerous coups took place in the era of the Cold war. It is a widely accepted fact that many of these were results of indirect interventions by the two superpowers of the time, the United States and USSR. Military coups became resourceful instruments to topple governments which went against the political, democratic and economic interests of the superpowers. Often, coups and the subsequent governments formed were supported and funded by them. [4] The United States backed a number of military coups across Asia, Africa and South America. Sustaining rigid military regimes helped the Americans score ideological victories as such governments prevented and suppressed Leftist revolutions. Left leaning governments of Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Argentina (1976), Brazil (1964) and El Salvador (1979) which were alleged to be establishing Soviet influence in South America were toppled by the US government using military coups. The Soviet Union’s first backing of a coup took place in a European country when in 1945, the Soviet Union facilitated the Communist party and the military of Romania to eliminate all opposition and establish a Communist dictatorship in the country. The Soviets repeated this in 1948 in Czechoslovakia. The Soviets did not plan or fund any direct military intervention in South America but instead they resorted to funding militancy and backing revolutions which attempted to change the political order. 

These examples provide a much clearer picture about the intention behind coups. They also highlight the volatile nature of many militaries, and raise important questions about the level of autonomy enjoyed by them, the balance of power between civilian governments and the military and changing notions of patriotism and nationalism.

A MODERN DAY COUP - ASSESSING THE CURRENT SITUATION IN MYANMAR 

Since its independence from the British in 1948, political instability has been a constant part of the political order in Myanmar (previously called Burma).  U Nu, the first democratically elected prime minister, had requested the military to form a caretaker government between 1958n and 1960, to gain time to resolve the political infighting in the country. Civilian government was voluntarily restored by the military in 1960 after holding General elections. Unfortunately, democracy was short lived. Within two years, a coup was staged by the military under the command of General Ne Win, which resulted in a twenty six year long military rule. 

In August 1988, the military regime was strongly protested against. This uprising, led by the students and teachers of  Rangoon Arts and Sciences University and the Rangoon Institute of Technology was joined by a number of common people who protested against the military governments’ economic policies which had made the country one of the most impoverished countries of the world. During this crisis, Aung San Suu Kyi emerged as a national icon. When the military junta arranged an election in 1990, her party, the National League for Democracy, won 81% of the seats in the government (392 out of 492). However, the military junta refused to recognise the results and continued ruling the country as the State Law and Order Restoration Council. Aung San Suu Kyi was also put under house arrest. The powerful military remained in power till 2011. It adopted a ‘roadmap to democracy’, during which it drafted a constitution for the country in 2008.  A tentative democratic transition began, and in 2015 elections were held, in which Suu Kyi’s party emerged as the winner. Not willing to give all powers back to a legitimate civilian government, the military withheld substantial control, including the right to appoint 1/4th members of the parliament. 

Fast forward to 2021- The latest coup has resulted as an aftermath of the General Elections which were held in November 2020. These elections mandated a landslide victory for Ms Suu Kyi’s party.  The military's proxy party, the Union Solidarity and Development Party, won only 33 seats. The military's motives for the coup remain unclear. Ostensibly, the military has posited that alleged voter fraud threatened national sovereignty. A few days before the coup, the civilian-appointed Union Election Commission had categorically rejected the military's claims of voter fraud, citing the lack of evidence to support the military's claims of 8.6 million irregularities in voter lists across Myanmar's 314 townships. It is argued that this coup by the military was planned to maintain the central role of the military in the Burmese political system. It is also being speculated that this coup may be staged to preserve the power of the incumbent Commander-in-chief, Min Aung Hlaing, who is set to retire in 2021. Min Aung Hlaing and his various family members hold substantial business holdings in the country and they also oversee important military conglomerates. The resistance of the people is running strong in the country, while they face crackdowns and internet shutdowns. The party leaders and Ms Suu Kyi have been placed under house arrest. Thousands of people have taken to the streets of Yangon, protesting against the military action and calling for the restoration of democracy. The international diaspora has also strongly reacted to it, with countries like France, Australia and the United Kingdom condemning the action. 

CONCLUSION 

Coup d’états are an unfortunate phenomenon of the complicated international order of governance. As discussed above, the motives behind a coup varies, ranging from protecting national interests and sovereignty to internal power tussles, and the equation between the military and civilian leaders. Coups also force countries and citizens of the world to reevaluate their standpoints on the powers of the military, since in most cultures, armies and soldiers are revered as protectors of motherland.

The legitimacy of coups is also one question hotly discussed by scholars, who differentiate between the concept of legality and legitimacy of a coup. In the initial stages, a coup may enjoy the support of the citizens, and derive its legitimacy from it. But this legitimacy can be short lived and cannot be considered to be legal, as most coups violate constitutions and put a new one in place. The international community and bodies like the UN can play a greater role in preventing the breakdown of legitimate, people-mandated governments. For that, they need to keep their vested interests aside. The citizens of the world have the most active and vibrant role to play in the maintenance of their chosen governments, for when the people of a country actively participate and hold all authorities accountable, it sends a strong message of solidarity and belief in traditional, democratic ideals.

Endnotes -

[1] Luttwak, E., 1996. Coup d'état, mode d'emploi. Paris: O. Jacob.

[2] HISTORY. 2021. 5 Famous Coups. [online] Available at: <https://www.history.com/news/5-famous-coups> 

[3] Jstor.org. 2021. Military Coups in the Post-Cold War Era: Pakistan, Ecuador and Venezuela on JSTOR. [online] Available at: <https://www.jstor.org/stable/4017797> 

[4] Paracha, N., 2021. Storming into power: A short history of coups in the 20th century. [online] Scroll.in. Available at: <https://scroll.in/article/812287/storming-into-power-a-short-history-of-coups-in-the-20th-century> 

Disclaimer: This article is an original submission of the Author. Niti Manthan does not hold any liability arising out of this article. Kindly refer to our Terms of use or write to us in case of any concerns.