Myanmar President Min Aung Hlaing’s recent visit to Thailand, intended to advance Bangkok’s policy of calibrated re-engagement with Nay Pyi Taw, may have been counterproductive, as reflected in the strong criticism at home and in the region, and the negligible gains on resolving Myanmar’s protracted crisis.
Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul rolled out the red carpet for Min Aung Hlaing on August 6-7 with clear objectives — of protecting national interests in border security management, combating transnational crimes, control over cross-border pollution, migrant worker management, and economic linkages with the strife-torn neighbor.
With the ambition of elevating its profile on the global stage, Anutin’s administration also sought to facilitate peace talks between the military-backed regime and its dissidents and to help Myanmar’s return to the ASEAN fold.
During the visit, both sides signed a new memorandum of understanding (MOU) on labour cooperation and an agreement on employment of workers, the terms of reference (ToR) for the Joint Working Group on Water Quality Management in Boundary and Transboundary Rivers, and an MOU between Thailand’s Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency and the Myanmar Space Agency to enhance partnership on earth observation technology.
On the economic front, both sides committed to achieve the bilateral trade target of US$12 billion and reaffirmed strengthening of connectivity through enhanced transport and infrastructure linkages.
Peace and humanity
For Nay Pyi Taw, the visit to Bangkok was seen as a diplomatic achievement in securing international recognition, if not legitimacy, and the recognition of former coup leader Min Aung Hlaing as the country’s president through a flawed three-phase election in December and January.
In June, Min Aung Hlaing had made official visits to immediate neighboring countries India, China and Laos, to cement ties as well as secure the border from various threats, including active insurgencies.
While Min Aung Hlaing received diplomatic hospitality from the authorities in Bangkok, opposition and civic groups in Thailand expressed their disapproval of his presence.
On August 6, on Min Aung Hlaing’s arrival, a pro-democracy civil society group staged a symbolic protest in front of Government House and some at the United Nations regional office on Ratchadamnoen Road opposing the visit.
Two protest leaders wearing masks depicting Anutin and Min Aung Hlaing sat together cutting and eating a cake, symbolising what protesters described as the sharing of benefits from Myanmar’s natural resources while ordinary people bear the human and environmental costs.
International human rights defender Forty-Five Rights urged Thailand to utilize the visit to pressure Nay Pyi Taw on civilian protection and accountability.
Amnesty International urged the Thai government to push a human rights agenda, not just economic cooperation.
Opposition MP Anusorn Tamajai from the People’s Party shouted a protest message calling for “peace and humanity” in front of Min Aung Hlaing during a reception ceremony at Parliament on August 7.
Unless he was escorted out of the event, Anusorn said he had prepared a letter for the Myanmar president, seeking a process of dialogue and consultation aimed at achieving genuine and sustainable peace and democracy in Myanmar.
High diplomatic cost
Another People’s Party MP, Sorasak Samonkraisorkit, said that Min Aung Hlaing’s presence in Thailand carried high diplomatic and political costs.
It risked weakening ASEAN’s collective position, and provided legitimacy to the regime, which had yet to demonstrate meaningful compliance with the ASEAN Five-Point Consensus that had been formally rejected by the Myanmar parliament, he said.
There is also a broader strategic risk. By concentrating on engaging with Nay Pyi Taw, Thailand may lose opportunities to develop channels with other important actors, including the National Unity Government and Ethnic Armed Organisations that exercise effective control over substantial territories, said Sorasak, a former career diplomat.
Few tangible results
The protesters drew particular attention to contamination of the Kok River, which they linked to large-scale mining operations, including rare-earth mining, in upstream areas of Myanmar’s Shan State. Arsenic and other heavy-metal contamination had crossed the border into Thailand, they said.
The issue of water pollution is the most serious gap between diplomatic engagement and practical outcomes, said Sorasak.
Despite negotiations, the Myanmar side removed the provision for “joint water sampling” from the draft ToR, leaving Thailand without one of the most important mechanisms needed to identify and address the source of contamination, he said.
The signed ToR seen by Thai PBS World indicated that the joint working group would “establish harmonized monitoring stations, adopt common methodologies and parameters, conduct ‘coordinated’ sampling and laboratory analysis at mutually agreed locations with the mutually agreed standard for the comparative study of water quality laboratory findings between both countries, and prepare an annual joint monitoring report”.
The same limitation applies to major cross-border security problems, Sorasak said.
Scam centres, human trafficking and online gambling operations in border economic zones such as Myawaddy and Shwe Kokko, as well as pollution associated with mining activities in Shan State, involve Chinese business interests and local armed ethnic groups.
Nay Pyi Taw itself acknowledges that some of these areas and actors lie beyond effective control of the central government, he said.
“Thailand is negotiating with a government that may not possess the capacity to deliver solutions to many of the problems Thailand actually needs solved,” Sorasak said in a Facebook post.
Calibrated re-engagement should, therefore, not be rejected simply because it involves engagement with Myanmar’s authorities, he said, noting that the real question was whether Thailand could make engagement conditional, reciprocal and results-oriented.
Bridge and facilitator?
Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow has said that the Thai government was strongly committed to facilitating peace talks between Nay Pyi Taw and the dissidents as well as to pave the way for Myanmar’s return to the ASEAN fold.
The results of the bilateral meeting between Anutin and Min Aung Hlaing, however, did not yield promising results.
The joint statement issued after the meeting on August 6 simply said “Thailand welcomed Myanmar’s continued commitment in advancing the peace talks with the goal of achieving lasting peace through a Myanmar-owned and Myanmar-led process. Thailand’s support in this regard, in close consultation with Myanmar, was welcomed.”
While the statement said Thailand was committed to supporting the return of Myanmar to ASEAN, there was no reference to the Five Point Consensus, which the regional group and Thailand have insisted on upholding all along as a key instrument to deal with the Myanmar crisis.
In July, the Thai authorities hosted an informal meeting with representatives of ethnic armed groups, including the Karen National Union, Karenni National Progressive Party, Kachin Independent Organization, Chin National Front, and Restoration Council of Shan State.
However, the group had no trust in the peace process facilitated by Thailand, and said that the environment on the ground was not conducive to engaging in a formal peace negotiation, according to a security source.
Only a day after Min Aung Hlaing departed from Thailand, the Myanmar military launched attacks and air strikes against the Karen groups along the Thai border.
During the visit, the Myanmar leader had requested Thai cooperation in closing supply routes and preventing ethnic armed groups from gaining access to weapons and other equipment that could enhance their operational capabilities.
Anutin described the request as reasonable and said he had instructed the defence minister, the Interior Ministry and the military to strengthen surveillance and controls at both official border checkpoints and informal border crossings.
The objective, he said, was to prevent weapons from being exported from Thailand to armed groups operating along the Myanmar border.
