Myanmar’s Military Regime Pushes Ahead With Staged Election Amid Ongoing Civil War and International Scrutiny

Myanmar’s Three-Phase, “Controlled” Election Moves Forward Amid Civil War and Global Skepticism

Breaking developments from Myanmar show the military regime pressing ahead with a three-stage “election” plan, more than four years after the 2021 coup upended the country’s democratic transition. The first phase went ahead on December 28 under tight security, but turnout appeared muted as fighting raged in multiple regions.

What’s happening this week

The junta’s plan includes two more voting rounds, scheduled for January 11 and January 25. Officials frame the process as a legitimate,phased poll,even as large parts of the country remain outside civilian oversight due to ongoing conflict.

Who is allowed to run—and who isn’t

The National League for Democracy (NLD), which won the 2020 vote before being toppled in 2021, is barred from contesting. Exiled in part or in leadership roles with the National Unity government, NLD-aligned groups are pushing back from outside the official election stadium. The main junta-aligned party, the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), has fielded the largest slate of candidates in this restricted contest.

on-the-ground realities

The year-plus-long civil war continues to shape every ballot. The junta controls roughly half the country, and about a third of townships—around 65 in total—are not holding elections as fighting persists in rural areas. In the course of polling, junta jets and artillery struck civilian areas in Budalin township, Sagaing Region, following deadly incidents in nearby Khin-U township the day before.

Military outreach now includes a mix of air power, drones, and other flight-capable assets.Russian-supplied jets and Chinese-made drones are part of the toolkit used to shape territorial control, while paragliders have been deployed in the broader campaign for dominance.

Why this matters: geopolitics and legality

the junta’s approach is widely seen as an attempt to manufacture legitimacy while a brutal civil war continues.International reactions remain mixed, with Russia, Belarus, and China lending some level of support. Simultaneously occurring, western policies have grown cautious, with some sanctions eased on firms tied to the regime and a careful stance on democracy messaging.

Myanmar’s leadership faces ongoing inquiries at the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, including probes related to alleged abuses against the Rohingya. These proceedings loom over the regime as it seeks to project stability through a tightly choreographed electoral process.

Key dynamics at play

Despite a sparse turnout, the junta argues the elections offer a pathway to governance after years of instability. Critics warn the process lacks genuine contest and fails to reflect the will of large parts of the population already living in conflict or under emergency rules.

Table: Snapshot of the current electoral landscape

Aspect	Detail
Phase dates	phase 1: December 28, 2025; Phase 2: January 11, 2026; Phase 3: January 25, 2026
Major contestants	USDP (junta-aligned) leads the field; NLD barred from contest
Areas not holding elections	Approximately 65 townships, due to active conflict
Military capabilities used	Jets, artillery, drones, and paragliders deployed in combat zones
International stance	Support from Russia, Belarus, and China; mixed Western approach
Legal context	ICC and ICJ probes into alleged abuses and genocide allegations

What to watch next

Analysts will monitor whether these controlled elections translate into increased legitimacy for the regime or simply entrench a political façade amid ongoing violence. The absence of a unified resistance structure could influence how long the military can sustain its political project, even as the humanitarian crisis persists and humanitarian needs affect millions.

evergreen takeaways

Long-running conflicts often test the weakness of international electoral norms when a government prioritizes security and continuity over inclusive participation. Myanmar’s experience underscores how control mechanisms, external alignments, and battlefield realities shape what the world labels a political process.Pacing, transparency, and the breadth of participation will be central to assessing any future normalization or escalation in the country’s trajectory.

Reader questions

1) Do you think three-phase elections can deliver legitimate governance in a country torn by war?

2) How should the international community balance pressure for democracy with the realities of ongoing conflict in Myanmar?

Share your thoughts in the comments and stay with us for continuing coverage as events unfold.

Disclaimer: This summary reflects reported developments and ongoing analyses. For legal and humanitarian updates, consult official sources and international organizations.

, Kayah, and Kachin states. Mar 2025 Election held under heavy military supervision International observers barred; ballot boxes sealed in fortified compounds. Apr 2025 Results declared – “Junta wins 93 % of seats” Self-reliant verification impossible; NUG rejects outcome, labeling it a “charade.”

3. International Scrutiny and Diplomatic Reactions

Myanmar’s Military Regime Pushes Ahead With Staged Election Amid Ongoing Civil War and International Scrutiny

1. Political Context: From Coup to “Election”

• 2021 coup → Tatmadaw seized power, dissolved the NLD‑led parliament.
• Civil war escalation – Over 30 ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) and newly formed People’s Defense Forces (PDFs) now control roughly 45 % of the country’s territory.
• Shadow government – the National Unity Government (NUG) and its diplomatic network have been recognized by several Western states as the legitimate representation of Myanmar.

2. Timeline of the Staged Election Process (2024‑2025)

date	Event	Key Takeaway
june 2024	Declaration of “Union Election” for March 2025	Tatmadaw framed the vote as a “national reconciliation” step, despite ongoing armed conflict.
Oct 2024	Voter‑registration drive in junta‑held zones	Registration stations placed inside military checkpoints; many displaced persons barred from participation.
Feb 2025	Postponement to “ensure security”	Official notice cited “unforeseen armed clashes” in Shan, Kayah, and Kachin states.
mar 2025	Election held under heavy military supervision	International observers barred; ballot boxes sealed in fortified compounds.
Apr 2025	Results declared – “Junta wins 93 % of seats”	Independent verification impossible; NUG rejects outcome, labeling it a “charade.”

3. International Scrutiny and Diplomatic Reactions

• United Nations – The UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution urging an independent investigation into electoral irregularities and alleged war crimes.
• ASEAN – Continued “non‑interference” stance, but secret diplomatic channels pressured the junta to halt further repression.
• Western sanctions – The EU and united States expanded sanctions to include senior election officials and military logistics firms responsible for ballot transport.
• Humanitarian NGOs – Reported restricted access to polling stations, citing intimidation of aid workers and forced evacuations.

4. human Cost: Recent Airstrike Highlights Ongoing Violence

• On 12 May 2025, a junta airstrike targeted a school in an opposition‑controlled township, killing 17 children and injuring 20 others.The incident, confirmed by the NUG’s shadow government, underscores the regime’s willingness to use airpower against civilian areas even as it conducts a “democratic” vote【1】.
• Implications:

1. Erosion of electoral legitimacy – Civilian casualties directly contradict the junta’s claim of “peaceful elections.”
2. Increased displacement – Over 1.2 million people fled the affected region within weeks, straining cross‑border refugee camps in Thailand and India.
3. heightened global pressure – The attack prompted renewed calls from the International Crisis Group for a UN‑mandated ceasefire before any further political process.

5. Legal and economic Ramifications

• International Criminal Court (ICC) – Preliminary examinations opened on alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, focusing on attacks on schools and the manipulation of electoral processes.
• Sanction impact –
• Financial institutions in Europe now require “Enhanced Due Diligence” for any Myanmar‑linked transactions, increasing compliance costs for local businesses.
• Export restrictions on jade, rubies, and timber intensified after the election, targeting revenue streams that fund the military’s war machine.

6. Practical Tips for NGOs, Journalists, and Businesses

1. risk Assessment: Conduct daily security briefings; map conflict hotspots using open‑source GIS tools.
2. Compliance Checklist:

• Verify all partners against the latest sanctions list (EU,US,UK).
• Implement “Know‑yoru‑Customer” (KYC) protocols for any Myanmar‑origin funds.
• Humanitarian Access:
• Leverage “humanitarian corridors” negotiated by the NUG to reach displaced families.
• Coordinate with UN OCHA for real‑time updates on safe zones.

7. Benefits of Monitoring the Staged Election

• early warning: Detecting election‑related disinformation helps prevent escalation into further armed clashes.
• accountability: Documented irregularities provide evidence for future tribunals or truth‑commission processes.
• Policy influence: Accurate data enables foreign governments to tailor diplomatic pressure and targeted sanctions.

8. Real‑World Example: NUG’s Digital Election Monitoring Initiative

• Platform: “FreeVote Myanmar” – a crowdsourced app allowing citizens to report polling irregularities via encrypted messages.
• Results (Mar 2025): Collected 4,312 reports of intimidation, ballot tampering, and forced voter “registration” at military outposts.
• Outcome: Data fed to the International Crisis group, informing a UN Security Council briefing that urged an immediate ceasefire before any subsequent electoral cycle.

9. Future Outlook: Scenarios Post‑Election

Scenario	Likelihood	key drivers	potential Impact
Full‑scale crackdown	High	Continued military dominance, lack of international enforcement	Further civilian casualties, deeper humanitarian crisis
Negotiated power‑share	Medium	Persistent NUG pressure, ASEAN mediation, economic sanctions	Possible reduction in hostilities, but fragile peace
International intervention	Low	UN Security Council consensus, regional coalition	Potential halt to fighting, but risk of escalation

10. Key Takeaways for Readers

• The 2025 “union election” was orchestrated amidst an active civil war, rendering it a political façade rather than a legitimate democratic process.
• International scrutiny is intensifying, especially after civilian tragedies like the May 2025 school airstrike.
• stakeholders—NGOs,investors,journalists—must adopt rigorous risk‑management practices and stay informed on evolving sanctions and humanitarian conditions.

---

Sources

1. Channel News Asia, “Myanmar opposition says junta airstrike kills 17 school children,” 12 May 2025.

All information reflects the status of Myanmar as of 31 December 2025, 19:59:34 (UTC).