Party Preference in Myanmar’s Democratization Context

Abstract

Myanmar provides a unique opportunity to study a polity that only recently has begun the processes of political liberalization and democratization. A necessary, though not sufficient, element of this transition was the 2015 general elections, which resulted in a handover of governmental power from the military-turned-civilian-led United Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) to the main prodemocracy opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD). The factors that influenced the behavior of the Burmese voter have yet to be examined at the individual level. This study explores the relationship between various variables and political party choice by analyzing a newly created dataset of Burmese party preference in Thailand. Utilizing a multinomial logistic regression of survey data (n of 3,671), traditional variables of demographic differentials and value of democracy—as well as newly theorized factors of diaspora conditions and past persecution—are tested against party preference. Specifically, the indicators of ethnicity, democratic values, years spent abroad, and governmental threat of persecution prove to be salient in the likelihood that a Burmese voter would choose either the NLD or any “ethnic” party over the USDP. New avenues of research are recommended based on the findings for Burmese party preference, including important considerations for the study of newly democratizing regimes in Southeast Asia and beyond.

Introduction

This research is a first cut at understanding the political party preferences of the Burmese diaspora currently living in Thailand. Use of original data leading up to the 2015 national elections in Myanmar presents an opportunity to speculate about a counterfactual situation of Burmese voters abroad.

Southeast Asia is an empirically rich region of the world for creating theory and testing hypotheses for a variety political science subjects. The variance in political, economic, social, and cultural realities across this region allows the scholar to posit questions that may be difficult for researchers working in other areas of globe. Political science has come to value this wealth of political diversity as a tool for understanding not just Southeast Asia, but also for further developing theory relevant to the field more generally. Some examples include, first, the variance in regime type across Southeast Asia, which allows for new ideas and hypothesis testing regarding political modernization, liberalization, and democratization. Second, the largely free and fair elections and the “caretaking democratization” in Myanmar (Burma) recently have
challenged previous research on political transitions. Similarly, Thailand’s recent backslide into military authoritarianism, compared to Indonesia’s consolidation of democratic processes, continues to make world headlines. Third, some of the world’s longest-running violent political conflicts are in the southern Philippines, East Timor, southern Thailand, and many of the border areas of Myanmarall of which complicate any analysis of democratization where the power of the state still is challenged openly through coercive means.

This study explores one facet of the political variance across Southeast Asia by examining political party preference in recent national elections in the newest national state to make real gains in democratization. Myanmar is a special case of… [click here to continue to read full text]

*Originally published in Taiwan Journal of Democracy by T. F. Rhoden; image-photo credit for this post via the talented Hein Htet at European Photo Press Agency. Unless otherwise stated, all posts on this website are under Creative Commons licence. 

white-compass-rose-th

Migrant Labor Activists Plan for the 2020 Election in Myanmar

Over two million Burmese migrants in Thailand were left out of Myanmar’s 2015 election. Will it happen again in 2020 ?

The Union Election Commission of Myanmar reported turnout at 69 percent for the historic 2015 elections within the country. Outside of the country, the story was very different. Fewer than 20,000 external voters engaged their political right at the ballot box abroad. This amounted to less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the over four million people who compose the Burmese diaspora.

“We labor migrants and refugees were simply considered not important enough by the previous Burmese government to be involved in the elections last year,” says a Bangkok-based migrant and labor rights activist from Myanmar, who wishes to stay anonymous due to her illegal status in Thailand.

Burmese migrant activists have begun meeting to plan for the next election four years away. They want a much higher rate of turnout for absentee voters for the next election.

A recent example of this foresight was an open letter from a network of migrant associations operating in Bangkok to Aung San Suu Kyi, state counselor of Myanmar. The open letter was meant to coincide with her official June 2016 visit to Thailand. Though the majority of recommendations were about more immediate concerns of migrant labor rights for Burmese citizens who make the trek to Thailand for work, the letter also included important recommendations for an extension of absentee suffrage. Migrant associations specifically requested guarantees for inclusion in future national elections.

Suu Kyi did not publicly address the absentee suffrage challenge during her visit like she did other migrant labor problems. Yet the fact that politically active Burmese in Thailand included this in their letter already demonstrates their concern with “not losing this opportunity again” for potential external votes to be counted in the next general election.

Lowering Costs for Migrants

In terms of Myanmar’s… [click here to continue to read full text]

*Originally published in The Diplomat by T. F. Rhoden; image-photo credit for this post via Channel NewsAsia. Unless otherwise stated, all posts on this website are under Creative Commons licence. 

white-compass-rose-th

Who Would Voters with No Votes Vote For?

An exercise in extending absentee suffrage for Myanmar’s citizens abroad.

The 2015 election in Myanmar marked a major milestone in the country’s political transition and return to democracy. But some people were left out of the historic vote.

The reasons to not allow an individual to vote are as much a part of the history of all our great liberal democracies as they are a continual reminder to remain vigilant for those of us who may have lost that right somehow. In the past, some of us did not own property, were not the right kind of ‘white’ (Northern European), were not men, a tad too tanned or rather much too noir, or simply too young to vote — yet not too young to make the ultimate sacrifice in “foreign war.”

If the above reflects too much of the Western experience, then one could also include reasons like class, religion or lack of, language or dialect, caste, cult, ideology, marriage status, education level, sexual preference, and on and on.

Think of some ridiculous social cleavage, some cultural hang-up of yesteryear, and the astute comparative political scientist will ultimately be able to pluck another tawdry example from an even more exotic, backward republic. Give the polity an election and it will collectively vomit out some new excuse for democratic exclusion come election day.

But how does one analyse the individual who once had a political right and has now lost it? How about the individual who lost the right to vote for no reason other than not being at the right place at the right time on election day? A loss on grounds of a technicality—of logistics?

In Myanmar’s 2015 election, they had a constitutional mechanism ready to thwart such a possibility. In the 2010 House of Representatives Election Law, a provision exists in Chapter IX, section 45 to 47, which allows for an “advance ballot.” This is meant to assist those citizens who are bedridden, who may be out of the township on business, or who may be even so far away as to be beyond the territorial sovereignty of the state. Though what is legislated through Parliament and what is effected via on-the-ground operations, alas, proved to be very different.

Of those who were registered… [click here to continue to read full text]

*Originally published in New Mandala by T. F. Rhoden; image-photo credit for this post via ITV. Unless otherwise stated, all posts on this website are under Creative Commons licence. 

white-compass-rose-th