The ASEAN leaders’ 9-point statement on the ceasefire in Myanmar was released on May 27 after a two-day ASEAN summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The statement called on all parties to extend the temporary ceasefire as a first step to ending the ongoing conflict in Myanmar. It also called for building trust and confidence in the holding of inclusive national political dialogues with the aim of achieving lasting peace.

ASEAN shortened 9-point statement version includes:-

1. Remain deeply concerned over the escalation of conflicts and deteriorating humanitarian situation in Myanmar compounded by earthquake disaster of March;
2. Committed to assisting Myanmar in finding a peaceful and durable solution to the ongoing crisis, reiterating the Five-Point Consensus to achieve an inclusive and durable peaceful resolution owned by Myanmar;
3. Urged all parties to immediately cease acts of violence against civilians, public facilities, halt indiscriminate violence, denounce any escalation, exercise utmost restraint, and ensure protection and safety of all civilians;
4. Acknowledged appreciation of three-consecutive temporary ceasefires by The Myanmar Authority and further called for sustained extension and nationwide expansion of ceasefire, in order to deliver humanitarian aid assistance and establishing an inclusive national dialogue;
5. Urged all parties concerned to ensure the safe, timely, effective and transparent delivery of ASEAN humanitarian assistance without discrimination;
6. Encouraged all relevant stakeholders in Myanmar to build trust to convene an inclusive national dialogue by continuing to reach out to parties concerned;
7. Reaffirmed continued support of ASEAN Chair, including the Special Envoy in full and effective implementation of Five-Pont Consensus;
8. Noted with appreciation the continued support from the international community, particularly the UN for ASEAN in the implementation of Five-Point Consensus;
9. Committed to enhance cooperation among ASEAN Member States, between ASEAN and External Partners, neighbouring countries of Myanmar, and the UN to address transnational crimes, drugs trafficking, human trafficking and online scams.

Likewise, the NUG on May 28 released an 8-point statement welcoming the ASEAN initiative with some recommendation. The shortened version is as follows:-

1. Warmly welcomes ASEAN leaders’ exclusive statement on political situation on Myanmar and believes ASEAN has a vital role to play in resolving Myanmar ongoing crisis;
2. Expresses appreciation for ASEAN’s strong call for immediate cessation of violence against civilians and public infrastructure, the halting of indiscriminate attacks, the exercise of utmost restraint, and protection and safety of all civilians;
3. Acknowledges the ASEAN leaders’ call for extended and expanded ceasefire to create a safe and conducive environment for effective humanitarian assistance, in this spirit the NUG declared a temporary ceasefire followed by the military junta’s declared ceasefire, but it continues with airstrikes, artillery attacks and all sorts of human rights violations against the civilians;
4. Believes that ensuring the safety and protection of civilians requires the establishment of a robust and structured international ceasefire monitoring mechanism under ASEAN leadership;
5. Appreciates ASEAN’s emphasis on safe, timely, effective, and transparent delivery of humanitarian assistance conducted by AHA Centre, but urges to incorporate assessment of the NUG and ethnic resistance organizations (EROs) which collectively govern nearly 80 percent of the country’s territory and engage directly with these areas;
6. Reaffirms strong commitment to collaborating with ASEAN in strengthening regional cooperation with member states, external partners, neighbouring countries, and the UN to growing transnational challenges, drugs trafficking, human trafficking, and cyber-enabled crimes;
7. Remains open and ready to engage with any entity that demonstrates genuine accountability and commitment to the people’s aspirations of Myanmar, which are the ending of military dictatorship, establishment of a federal democratic union and transitional justice; and
8. Recognizes the critical role of the ASEAN Chair’s Special Envoy but would like to propose the consideration of extending the tenure than the current one-year tenure so as to enhance the envoy’s ability to facilitate meaningful dialogue and coordinate international support, including with the UN and other partners.

On ASEAN call for extension and nationwide expansion of ceasefire

Mon State Revolutionary Army (MSRF) spokesperson Naing Nagar told Than Lwin Times that ASEAN’s call for an extension of the ceasefire in response to the military council’s daily bombing of civilians and public buildings is unrealistic.

“While the world is seeing and hearing that the terrorist military council is bombing people’s homes, villages, schools, monasteries, etc. every day, shelling them with heavy weapons, and burning down villages, ASEAN’s call for an extension of the ceasefire to end the conflict is a very unreasonable statement. I would also like to say that it is an unrealistic statement.”

According to the Ministry of Human Rights of the National Unity Government (NUG), nearly 300 civilians were killed and 456 injured in airstrikes across the country during the two ceasefire declarations by the military council.

The military council has extended the ceasefire three times, but has stepped up airstrikes targeting civilians and public buildings.

The ASEAN leaders called on all parties concerned to immediately cease violence against civilians and public buildings, and to immediately cease all attacks, regardless of whether they are military or civilian.

Analysts say the unrealistic declaration, rather than taking effective action against the military council’s attacks on civilians, will not do justice to the military leader and his allies.

KNU spokesman Pado Saw Taw Nee told the Than Lwin Times that the military council’s actions on the ground are still being repelled and fought back with all possible means.

“We can see that the military council continues to bomb the people despite the ceasefire. There has been no significant change on the ground. That is why we are continuing to fight with all our might, using all military, political and diplomatic means, to overthrow the military dictatorship and prevent any authoritarian regime from taking root,” he said.

Former Captain Zin Yaw of Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) believes that the talks are stalling the Spring Revolution with both sides making concessions and demands, so the attacks on the military council needs to be stepped up.

“The armed struggle is the only way to end the Spring Revolution. If we talk, it will only stall the Spring Revolution, which has been going on for a long time, with both sides making impossible concessions and demands. As for the revolutionary forces, regardless of whether they talk or not, or who they talk to, the armed struggle needs to step up its attacks on the military council,” he said.

The NUG has said that coercion, negotiation and a ceasefire will not help resolve the conflict in the long term, presidential spokesman U Kyaw Zaw said.

Justice For Myanmar also said that the five common understandings (Five-Point Consensus) have not only failed to work, but have also prevented effective international action and provided cover for the military regime to continue its massacres.

On its May 24 announcement, 54 companies from ASEAN member states Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia are said to be providing tax money, jet fuel and technology to the military council, according to the Myanmar Now report.

Opinion of ASEAN and Anwar Ibrahim stance

Leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have expressed deep concern over the deteriorating situation and violent conflict in Myanmar, but more than four years after the coup, they have failed to collectively decide how to respond to the military council’s brutal crackdown on civilians, according to the People’s Spring report of May 28.

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who holds the rotating ASEAN chair, has been meeting separately with military junta leader Min Aung Hlaing and the National Unity Government (NUG) since last month as part of a dialogue effort.

There have been questions about the meeting with the internationally unrecognized junta leader, but in his opening speech to ASEAN, Anwar defended the move, referring to it as a necessary risk.

He said that even small steps could help put Myanmar on the path to peace.

On the other hand, the ASEAN Parliamentarians’ Human Rights Group criticized Anwar’s meeting with Min Aung Hlaing as something he should not have done, pointing out that the people of Myanmar have clearly shown that they cannot accept a military leader as their government.

Philippine lawmaker Arlene Brosas a year ago said ASEAN should stand with the people, not with a dictator who has committed crimes. Treating a military dictator as a legitimate government violates ASEAN’s founding principles and ignores the will of millions of people who are resisting the military dictatorship, he said.

Myanmar Now in its opinion piece on May 29 pointed out ASEAN’s position on Myanmar as quite different from those of China.

According to Myanmar Now: “Chinese leaders have prioritized the protection of their own interests in Myanmar in their intervention in the Myanmar issue, and have yet to make any real efforts to bring peace to the country. However, ASEAN has learned from its mistakes in accepting the previous Burmese military regime as a member, and this time, it is not taking an interest-based approach to the Myanmar issue, but rather a member state with a genuine desire to achieve peace.”

Moreover, by not allowing military council leader Min Aung Hlaing and his appointed Foreign Minister Than Swe to attend ASEAN’s 46th Summit in May 26, it is sending signal to China and Russia that it is adhering firmly to its own stance.

In its statement, ASEAN used “The Authority of Myanmar” and not the military council’s name State Administration Council (SAC) or Myanmar Government, to show its disapproval of the junta’s legitimacy thrust.

Other than that, “Myanmar-owned, Myanmar-led” peace process phrase to achieve lasting piece was used several times in the statement, which serves as a warning to major non-ASEAN countries such as Russia and China that are interfering in Myanmar’s affairs.

ASEAN leaders do not want any outside power to influence Myanmar’s affairs. In the past, ASEAN did not want the United States to interfere. Recently, Russia and China have openly acknowledged and supported the military leader Min Aung Hlaing. This posture seems to challenge the UN’s recognized “ASEAN Centrality” in Myanmar affairs and the actions taken by ASEAN leaders against Min Aung Hlaing.

Indonesia has officially stated that it has engaged with the National Unity Government (NUG) and ethnic armed groups more than 200 times during its presidency.

However, the momentum that Indonesia has built has been significantly reduced as the 2024 ASEAN rotating chair, Laos, has a more pro-junta and China-oriented policy.

Thus, the Laos ASEAN Special Representative for Myanmar has only showed (reluctantly) that he has engaged with NUG officials in accordance with ASEAN’s principle of engagement with all parties.

When Malaysia took over the 2025 ASEAN rotating chair, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim held informal meetings with military leader Min Aung Hlaing and NUG Prime Minister Mahn Win Khaing Than during his visit to Thailand, in a move to lead and break through to ASEAN leaders over the Sagaing earthquake.

This was seen as a leadership and steadfast stance by the ASEAN rotating chair, which was in stark contrast to the Chinese leaders’ non-engagement position towards the NUG.

Because of this, ASEAN’s approach to resolving the Myanmar issue is not one that is biased like the Chinese government leaders, but rather a stance that does not ignore the wishes of the people of Myanmar even if the Myanmar issue cannot be resolved, according to Myanmar Now opinion piece report.

Analysis

Looking at the whole spectrum, it is evident that China is opting for the junta to implement its prescribed political roadmap, which is holding general elections, no matter how fraud and unacceptable it may be, to follow and realize its national interest. Russia to a lesser extend is also endorsing the military junta like China.

ASEAN is trying to be even by meeting with all relevant stakeholders and pushing for inclusive peace negotiation process owned and led by Myanmar or Burma, which means China’s heavy-handedness and opting to endorse the military junta is not accepted.

The UN seems to be in tune with ASEAN and would probably back ASEAN’s initiative, if the plan is to come to live and proceed forward with the inclusive peace negotiation process of all relevant parties.

In this regard, NUG has made a proposal to establish a robust and structured international ceasefire monitoring mechanism under ASEAN leadership, which is a commendable first step, rather than self-help mediation undertaking that won’t go anywhere.

For instance, just look at the unilateral ceasefire announcements of the junta and EROs that have made no positive outcome concerning ceasefire on the ground, but only continued fighting, bombardment and airstrikes by the junta; and likewise, the EROs also didn’t stop fighting in the name of self-defence.

In sum, if the civil war goes on unabated the country will slide more deeper into the category of which can now be termed as “failed state” and eventual won’t be able to govern any longer, which is the primary, principle international concern.

In this respect, the NUG, together with the EROs may need to come up with a credible political entity alliance to replace the military junta. The military junta in turn will also have to come to term that it needs to exit from political arena for good according to the people’s aspirations, wish and accept transitional justice, so that the country can be at peace and move forward.

It is a tall order for both political blocs. But somehow this has to be tackled, one way or the other, for the benefit of the people and not just keep on muddling through political waters for group survival instinct and need satisfaction only.

The survival of the country and people are paramount and it is time that all adversaries ponder on this crucial issue in a mature and responsible manner through political dialogue and political means.