Guest contributor
James Shwe
For years, critics have asked why Myanmar’s people cannot unite against military rule. This question fundamentally misunderstands the battlefield: Myanmar’s junta has weaponized division itself, deploying sophisticated psychological warfare while preparing December 28, 2025 elections that threaten regional and global stability.
As this crucial moment approaches, multiple diverse groups worldwide will launch independent petitions, campaigns, and initiatives to protest these sham elections.
Diaspora organizations, civil society networks, alternative governance bodies, and grassroots movements will each deploy different methods and approaches.
These varied efforts may appear fragmented to outside observers, but they collectively represent the authentic popular will of Myanmar’s people, unified by a single, unequivocal message: rejection of military dictatorship and demand for genuine democracy.
The sham election’s clear dangers
Myanmar’s planned elections constitute a calculated threat to international democratic norms. The military regime has systematically eliminated genuine competition by dissolving over 40 opposition parties, including the democratically-elected National League for Democracy (NLD), while imprisoning leaders like State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi.
The junta controls the entire electoral process: candidate eligibility, party registration, election administration, law enforcement, and judicial oversight. With draconian laws imposing prison sentences or death penalties for “disrupting” the electoral process—including peaceful criticism—Myanmar lacks basic democratic freedoms.
China and India have already signaled support, with India agreeing to send election monitoring teams. If Western allies fail to maintain coordinated opposition, authoritarian powers will fill the vacuum with recognition, investment, and military backing—legitimizing electoral authoritarianism globally.
The division strategy: Manufactured fragmentation
The military’s most effective weapon isn’t artillery—it’s calculated division. Through systematic psychological operations, the regime exploits every societal fault line: generational tensions, ethnic grievances, religious divisions, and political fragmentation encouraging competition over collaboration among resistance groups.
The junta deploys “regime-aligned actors in diaspora spaces, circulating divisive narratives and unhelpful policy advice”, ensuring international observers see discord rather than legitimate resistance. Every time critics point to Myanmar’s divisions as evidence of dysfunction, they reward the military’s most sophisticated weapon.
Multiple campaigns, unified message: The reality of popular resistance
The international community must understand that Myanmar’s resistance will manifest through numerous independent campaigns, petitions, and initiatives launched by different groups worldwide.
Student organizations, business networks, religious communities, ethnic associations, diaspora groups, and civil society organizations will each deploy their own methods and approaches. This diversity of action is not division—it is the natural expression of a broad-based democratic movement operating under extreme constraints.
Each campaign—whether originating from alternative governance bodies like the National Unity Government (NUG) and the National Unity Consultative Council (NUCC), ethnic organizations, or independent advocacy networks—carries the same fundamental message: these elections are illegitimate, the military must step down, and Myanmar deserves genuine democracy.
When dozens of different groups simultaneously reject the same sham process through various channels, this represents overwhelming popular consensus, not organizational weakness.
To give the people the opportunity to work things out among themselves, the junta’s ongoing control must end—as it systematically sustains societal divisions rather than allowing organic democratic reconciliation to emerge.
Strength through diverse unity
Rather than viewing multiple independent efforts as fragmentation, Myanmar’s resistance demonstrates how diverse campaigns carrying the same message create overwhelming legitimacy.
Different groups reaching different audiences with consistent messaging proves the resistance’s authentic popular character: youth activists connect with international student movements, business leaders engage corporate networks, ethnic organizations access regional diplomatic channels.
Each petition strengthens the others by demonstrating breadth of opposition. When governments simultaneously receive formal diplomatic protests from alternative governance bodies, grassroots petitions from diaspora communities, documentation from on-the-ground activists, and economic pressure from international networks, the cumulative effect exposes the artificial nature of the junta’s claimed legitimacy.
These diverse efforts consistently carry the same message—rejection of military rule and demand for democratic restoration—proving that unity exists despite manufactured divisions.
A message to international observers
International election experts have already spoken clearly, with a joint statement “unequivocally reject plans by Myanmar’s illegal military junta…to hold a so-called ‘election’ in 2025.” Yet formal, coordinated rejection remains incomplete.
The international community must recognize multiple simultaneous campaigns as evidence of popular unity, not organizational failure. When observers see resistance across ethnic lines, generational divides, and geographic boundaries—expressed through dozens of independent but consistent initiatives—they should recognize this as proof of extraordinarily popular legitimacy fighting professional manipulation.
Global actors must support not just singular, formal coalitions, but all legitimate expressions of opposition that resonate with the common purpose of rejecting these sham elections.
This means recognizing diverse petitions and campaigns collectively representing popular will, avoiding the trap of dismissing multiple efforts as “lack of unity,” and understanding that varied approaches with consistent messaging demonstrate authentic grassroots resistance.
The world faces a choice: recognize Myanmar’s resistance for what it truly is—multiple independent voices speaking as one against sophisticated psychological warfare—or reward the very tactics that create instability.
The December 28 elections will fail if the world sees the multiplicity of opposition campaigns for what they represent: overwhelming popular rejection expressed through every available channel. Different groups, same message. Varied methods, unified purpose. Multiple petitions, single demand for democracy.
Myanmar’s diverse-but-coordinated resistance proves that popular unity manifests not through organizational uniformity, but through consistency of message across multiple independent voices. When dozens of different groups simultaneously say “no” to the same sham elections, that’s not division—that’s democracy speaking.
#UnifiedMessagingAgainstMyanmarShamElections
James Shwe is a Myanmar democracy activist in the U.S. and is a member of the advocacy groups Free Myanmar and the Los Angeles Myanmar Movement. He has been trying to organize and motivate the Myanmar diaspora to advocate for democracy in Myanmar.
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]
