Myanmar's Foreign Policy under President U Thein Sein: Non-aligned and Diversified

Summary

Introduction

Foreign analysts may be forgiven for pausing briefly over a translated passage relating to foreign policy in a state-of-the-nation address delivered by Myanmar's then-President U Thein Sein in early January 2015. Following the President's Office's website, Myanmar seemed to have suddenly opted for what would be a significant shift in relation to its foreign policy principle. Specifically, the text suggested that Myanmar might be surrendering the principle of non-alignment. According to the President's Office, U Thein Sein said that “We [Myanmar] are … on the path of a much more dynamic and multi-aligned foreign policy.” Such a move towardsmulti-alignment would certainly have represented discontinuity with the country's longstanding foreign policy. After all, newly independent Burma committed early to non-alignment, and — as suggested by Myanmar's Foreign Ministry — this foreign policy principle, has since been pursued by all subsequent governments. The 2008 Constitution, drafted under the watchful eyes of the last military government under Senior General Than Shwe, identifies Myanmar foreign policy principles as being non-aligned, independent and active. In his own presidential inaugural address, U Thein Sein had also clearly formulated his high regard for non-alignment as he also emphasized the fact that Myanmar has never allowed foreign military bases in the country.

In the event, suspicions that the use of the word “multi-aligned” fell into the category of translation errors were quickly confirmed. The Myanmar language version of the same speech did not in fact include the terminology of “multi-aligned”. Instead, the term used in the original Burmese version is arguably better translated as “dynamic and multi-partner” foreign policy. In other words, what at first sight, at least for foreign consumers of presidential news, could easily have appeared to be a noteworthy if not significant shift in declared foreign policy thus represents only an apparent moment of carelessness, a seeming oversight in editing, as well as — in all probability — an instance of insufficient coordination in internal bureaucratic processes. That said, the translation issue does invite us to raise an important question, namely as to whether or not the Republic of the Union of Myanmar has been as committed to the non-alignment principle in practice as it has been in rhetorical terms.