Editorial 1: ​Sham election

Context

Myanmar’s military regime’s attempt to gain legitimacy through stage-managed elections is doomed to fail.

Introduction

Electoral democracy derives legitimacy from the free expression of popular will through inclusive representation. When elections are engineered to validate authoritarian rule, they lose democratic meaning. Myanmar’s junta-led polls, conducted amid civil war, political exclusion, and military repression, exemplify how electoral processes can be distorted to seek false legitimacy rather than reflect the people’s mandate.

Elections as a Façade of Democracy

• The essence of electoral democracy lies in translating popular will into governance through genuine representation.
• In Myanmar, elections are being conducted not to reflect public choice but to manufacture legitimacy for military rule.
• The three-phase polls, held nearly five years after the coup, stand disconnected from democratic consent.

Exclusion, Boycott and One-Party Dominance

• The junta controls barely half of Myanmar’s townships, with voting cancelled in many conflict-hit areas.
• Major parties from the 2020 mandate, including the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by jailed Aung San Suu Kyi, are absent.
• The field is dominated by the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), stacked with former military figures, echoing the discredited 2010 polls.

Civil War, Resistance and Shifting Battlelines

• Since the coup, the junta has bombed civilian areas, killing thousands and deepening a nationwide civil war.
• Ethnic armed organisations and People’s Defence Forces (PDFs) aligned with the National Unity Government seized territory in 2023.
• The Three Brotherhood Alliance inflicted major losses on the military in Shan State and Rakhine, especially along the China border.

Foreign Backing, Military Entrenchment and Bleak Prospects

• The junta survives with backing from Russia and Belarus, while China shifted policy in 2025 to protect geo-economic interests.
• Despite tactical gains, the regime retains only nominal control in many regions.
• With a constitutionally guaranteed 25% military quota in Parliament and leadership under Min Aung Hlaing, these elections are unlikely to secure popular legitimacy, pointing instead to continued instability and conflict.

Conclusion

Far from restoring democratic order, Myanmar’s elections risk deepening instability. With military dominance, foreign backing, low participation, and the exclusion of popular forces, the polls lack credibility. History suggests that such farcical elections cannot secure public consent. Instead, they are likely to prolong conflict, reinforcing the reality that peace cannot emerge without genuine democracy.