Guest contributors
Majid Lenz & Nyein Chan May
Aid to civil society groups and NGOs
In response to the junta’s crackdown on dissent, the E.U. increased funding for civil society organisations in Myanmar, aiming to empower those defending human rights, documenting abuses, and providing essential services to communities in need. The E.U. collaborated with international NGOs and local groups to strengthen democratic resilience in Myanmar, even as the military restricted these organisations’ activities.
This support was particularly important given the military’s crackdown on independent media and the persecution of journalists. By providing financial resources and technical support to these organisations, the E.U. sought to maintain an independent flow of information and bolster Myanmar’s civil society against state repression.
Backing the National Unity Government (NUG)
The E.U. has also engaged with the National Unity Government (NUG), a pro-democracy coalition formed by elected officials and opposition leaders in exile, as well as ethnic representatives. While the E.U. has not formally recognized the NUG as the legitimate government of Myanmar, it has expressed support for its democratic objectives and cooperated with the NUG on some levels, primarily through symbolic gestures and indirect aid.
Additionally, the E.U. has supported Myanmar’s exile communities and diaspora organisations in Europe and other regions, amplifying the voices of those advocating for a return to democracy. By standing with these groups, the E.U. aims to strengthen international support for Myanmar’s democratic aspirations.
Collaboration with ASEAN and regional actors
While maintaining support for Myanmar’s civil society, the E.U. has also coordinated with regional bodies like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Although ASEAN’s response has been limited due to its non-interference policy, the E.U. supported ASEAN’s Five-Point Consensus plan, which aimed to promote dialogue and peace within Myanmar. Despite the slow implementation of this plan, the E.U. viewed collaboration with ASEAN as essential to building regional momentum toward a peaceful resolution.
5. Criticism and limitations of the EU approach
Despite the E.U.’s commitment to supporting democracy and human rights in Myanmar, its approach to the military coup has faced several criticisms. These concerns focus on the limitations and impact of E.U. sanctions, the delays in response, and challenges related to the E.U.’s role as an external actor in a geopolitically complex region.
Limited impact of sanctions
Critics argue that E.U. sanctions, though targeting military leaders and revenue-generating sectors like gems and timber, have had minimal impact on the junta’s control. Myanmar’s military remains financially resilient due to its control of state-owned enterprises and trade partnerships, particularly with neighbouring countries like China and Thailand. These alliances provide alternative revenue sources that undermine E.U. efforts, highlighting the challenge of applying effective pressure in a globalised economy.
Additionally, the E.U.’s decision to retain Myanmar’s preferential trade access through the Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) has been questioned. Some E.U. members argued for revoking these privileges to increase economic pressure on the junta, while others feared such a move could harm Myanmar’s struggling civilian population.
Slow and Symbolic Response
Many view the E.U.’s response as slow and primarily symbolic, particularly in comparison to the rapid, comprehensive sanctions imposed by other Western allies like the U.S. The E.U.’s initial sanctions focused on high-profile military officials, but critics contend that tougher measures on sectors linked to the military should have been enacted more quickly. This delay, some argue, allowed the junta to consolidate its power further and weakened the E.U.’s message of solidarity with the Myanmar people.
The E.U. continues to deliberate on the potential impact of sanctions on jet fuel, carefully balancing the goal of pressuring the junta with the need to avoid disrupting humanitarian aid delivery. In parallel, it is imperative that the E.U.’s actions toward Myanmar remain well-informed and aligned with the evolving situation on the ground.
Maintaining solidarity with the people of Myanmar is crucial. However, this commitment may be undermined if high-profile figures, such as the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, are seen engaging with representatives of the military junta at official receptions within the E.U. institutions. Currently, the junta’s representatives in Brussels are actively participating in diplomatic events, including both informal gatherings and formal receptions, often hosted by ASEAN representatives.
The E.U. must be vigilant in ensuring that its diplomatic engagements do not inadvertently lend legitimacy to the junta or serve its propaganda objectives. This requires a steadfast political will to address ongoing human rights violations in Myanmar and to respond with principled, decisive action.
Dependency on international cooperation
The E.U.’s reliance on partnerships with international bodies like ASEAN, the U.N., and allies like the U.S. has also drawn criticism. While multilateral action strengthens global responses, it can also delay decisive E.U. action, especially when ASEAN, with its principle of non-interference, remains divided on Myanmar. This reliance highlights the E.U.’s limited influence in Southeast Asia, where other powers such as China play more central roles. Without more direct leverage, the E.U.’s ability to pressure the junta independently is constrained.
Unintended consequences for Myanmar’s civilian population
The E.U. has made efforts to avoid harm to the general population, yet some sanctions targeting key sectors risk deepening economic hardship. Sectors like garment manufacturing, heavily reliant on E.U. trade, employ thousands of Myanmar citizens who now face heightened job insecurity. Critics argue that these unintended effects may ultimately harm civilians rather than pressuring the junta, further complicating Myanmar’s already fragile economy and deepening poverty for ordinary citizens.
Internal divisions within the EU
Internal debates among E.U. member states over the extent and focus of sanctions have led to a fragmented approach. While some member states advocate for a stronger stance, others caution against measures that could worsen Myanmar’s economic crisis. This lack of a unified position weakens the E.U.’s response, making it difficult to maintain a clear and assertive foreign policy that effectively pressures Myanmar’s military leaders.
Limited support for pro-democracy movements
Finally, the E.U.’s support for pro-democracy forces, including the NUG, has been critiqued as insufficient. Although the E.U. has offered some aid to civil society groups, critics argue it has stopped short of formally recognizing the NUG. This lack of recognition, they say, weakens E.U. support for Myanmar’s democratic aspirations.
Additionally, while funding has been provided to civil society organisations, more substantial assistance, such as support for independent media and legal aid for activists, is needed to effectively bolster democratic resilience against the junta’s repression.
These criticisms highlight the complexity of the E.U. approach, balancing its commitment to democracy with the practical limitations of regional influence and the need to avoid harming Myanmar’s citizens. To enhance its effectiveness, the E.U. may need to address these limitations, boost its support for civil society, and foster more decisive and unified policies within its member states.
6. The EU’s broader goals and long-term strategy in Myanmar
In responding to the Myanmar coup, the E.U. has pursued a dual approach that combines sanctions with sustained humanitarian aid. This strategy reflects the E.U.’s broader goals of supporting democratic governance and advancing human rights globally, even in regions where it faces limited influence.
Advancing human rights and democracy as core principles
The E.U.’s actions align with its commitment to promote human rights, democratic values, and international law. By supporting Myanmar’s civil society, applying sanctions, and coordinating with international partners, the E.U. seeks to affirm these values on a global scale. Myanmar’s crisis has also underscored the E.U.’s willingness to act on human rights issues, even where it may not directly shift the political landscape.
Humanitarian priorities and civil society resilience
Beyond political goals, the E.U.’s support for humanitarian assistance in Myanmar demonstrates its commitment to alleviating the suffering of civilians. Through direct aid and collaboration with civil society, the E.U. has prioritised basic needs for Myanmar’s most vulnerable communities, including ethnic minorities affected by violence and displacement. This approach highlights the E.U.’s long-term dedication to fostering resilience and sustaining democratic forces within Myanmar.
Continued monitoring and potential future actions
The E.U. has pledged to closely monitor the situation in Myanmar, emphasising its readiness to adjust policies if conditions worsen or if new opportunities for dialogue arise. European leaders have signalled that further sanctions, increased support for civil society, or expanded diplomatic engagements may be considered in response to future developments.
In this way, the E.U.’s response to Myanmar remains fluid, adaptable, and prepared to address both immediate needs and long-term goals.
The E.U.’s reaction to the Myanmar coup reflects its dedication to defending democracy and human rights, even when challenges limit its direct influence. By condemning the junta, imposing targeted sanctions, redirecting aid, and supporting civil society, the E.U. has worked to promote accountability and alleviate civilian suffering.
Yet, its approach also illustrates the complexities of acting in a region where neighbouring powers hold greater sway, and where diplomatic solutions require sustained, multilateral efforts.
Moving forward, the E.U.’s continued support for Myanmar’s democratic aspirations will depend on international collaboration and adaptive strategies. In this crisis, the E.U. reaffirms its role as a defender of democratic values, with its response carrying implications for future crises where democracy is under threat. The E.U.’s steadfast approach, though constrained, remains a testament to its commitment to global human rights and its solidarity with the people of Myanmar.
To reinforce its solidarity with the people of Myanmar, the E.U. should focus on supporting locally established infrastructure, such as schools, hospitals, and administrative systems, particularly in areas like Karenni State.
This effort should be coupled with a shift towards localising humanitarian assistance by collaborating more closely with community-based organisations (CBOs) and civil society organisations (CSOs), thereby reducing bureaucratic hurdles and ensuring aid effectively reaches those in need.
At the same time, the E.U. should carefully weigh the implications of sanctioning jet fuel, striking a balance between applying pressure on the junta and safeguarding the delivery of humanitarian aid.
Moreover, investing in education remains essential, with support directed towards alternative educational institutions established by young leaders, such as the Burma Academy, Spring University Myanmar, and the University of Yangon’s Interim Council, which continue to provide critical learning opportunities despite the ongoing turmoil.
Majid Lenz is the desk officer for Myanmar at Stiftung Asienhaus. Stiftung Asienhaus follows the guiding principle “Connecting people, promoting insights, shaping the future” and contributes to building bridges between civil societies in Asia and Europe.
Nyein Chan May is a student activist, co-founder and executive director of the organisation German Solidarity Myanmar e.V., an organisation that is committed to a more decisive stance and proactive Myanmar policy on the part of the Federal Republic of Germany and the European Union.
DVB publishes a diversity of opinions that does not reflect DVB editorial policy. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our stories: [email protected]
