Anwar's Highly Calculated Handshake With Min Aung Hlaing

Second, Anwar insisted-publicly and privately-on the need for a ceasefire in disaster zones and unfettered access for aid workers, especially in contested territories held by ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) and People's Defense Forces (PDFs).

According to diplomatic sources in Putrajaya and Jakarta, the Tatmadaw has tentatively agreed to a temporary cessation of hostilities in certain areas, though the credibility and durability of this pledge remain in doubt.

Third, Anwar used the occasion to deliver what observers described as a“polite but firm” rebuke of the military regime.

In a press briefing following the visit, Anwar emphasized that while ASEAN's humanitarian concern is unconditional, political legitimacy is not.“This assistance does not confer recognition. It reflects our concern for the people of Myanmar,” he stated.

Still, the visit was not without serious omissions, not unlike any delicate diplomatic missions. Most glaringly, Anwar did not meet with representatives of the National Unity Government (NUG), the civilian government-in-exile that commands growing international recognition and domestic allegiance.

Nor did he engage with civil society or ethnic leaderships from the Karen, Shan or Rakhine communities-actors who now control wide swathes of territory and whose participation is indispensable in any viable peace process.

However, some of these groups are militias that have participated in transnational crime syndicates. Anwar, obviously, was not obliged to meet them, especially when their activities have taken corrosive root along Myanmar's borders with Thailand and China.

These groups-many of them operating with tacit or direct protection from local militias-are running scam compounds, cybercrime hubs and trafficking networks.

While the unchecked rise of these syndicates is a direct result of Myanmar's internal collapse, these groups cannot run amok with various scams and then be rewarded to meet ASEAN's chair.

Yet the failure to balance the visit with non-junta groups and voices created an impression-fair or not-that ASEAN may be drifting back into its old habits of privileging state-centric diplomacy at the expense of inclusive dialogue.

This risks alienating pro-democracy actors and reinforcing the narrative that ASEAN is unable-or unwilling-to uphold its own consensus-based principles.

But such a broad analysis would be mistaken, too. ASEAN was not formed on August 8, 1967, to handle non-traditional security issues. Decades later, it still has a long way to go.

Furthermore, the visit occurred against the backdrop of escalating regional instability. Invariably, Anwar's meeting must now be interpreted against the broader disintegration of the post-Cold War order driven by Donald Trump's escalating tariff war with China.

Trump's disruption has redefined global trade-not with new rules, but with new ruptures. The economic fragmentation has emboldened authoritarian regimes, deepened Global South dependency and turned Southeast Asia into a new frontline of strategic vulnerability.

Myanmar is the canary in the coal mine of this global governance mechanism collapse. In this geopolitical climate, Anwar's visit may be seen not as an ASEAN retreat, but a tactical necessity-a move to prevent Myanmar's complete descent into a failed state.

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

• The Daily Report Start your day right with Asia Times' top stories
• AT Weekly Report A weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories

As ASEAN's chair, Anwar perhaps calculated that disengagement would cede the field to greater violence, deeper Chinese penetration and unchecked criminal syndicates.

As such, the meeting was both a diplomatic risk and a humanitarian imperative, signaling that ASEAN, while imperfect and divided, is not entirely paralyzed. Yet, it also highlighted the limits of quiet diplomacy in the face of militarized cruelty and regional decay.

What comes next matters most. Anwar must now balance this high-level engagement with an equally robust push for political inclusivity. He must rally ASEAN to not only deliver aid but to begin shaping a peace framework that includes all of Myanmar's actors, not just the ones holding capital cities and airports.

In more ways than one, the Anwar-Min Aung Hlaing meeting was necessary to ensure better conditions for the delivery of humanitarian assistance and to demonstrate that ASEAN still retains a pulse in the face of extreme human suffering in its midst.

But it must not come without the necessary censure: that Min Aung Hlaing and the Tatmadaw are presiding over Myanmar's disintegration at a time when the traditional world order itself is dissolving under Trump's trade wars and unilateralism.

In such a world, silence is complicity. Engagement, if done with clarity and conscience, is the lesser sin.

Phar Kim Beng, PhD, is professor of ASEAN studies at the International Islamic University Malaysia. He writes regularly on Southeast Asia's diplomacy, regionalism and security challenges.

Sign up here to comment on Asia Times stories Or Sign in to an existing accoun

Thank you for registering!

An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
• Click to print (Opens in new window) Print