China’s sham election: Why Beijing is propping up Myanmar’s brutal junta

Summary

---

Battle Lines — “China’s Sham Election: Why Beijing Is Propping Up Myanmar’s Brutal Junta”

Podcast: Battle Lines (The Telegraph)
Date: January 21, 2026
Hosts: Venetia Rainey & Arthur Scott-Geddes
Guests: Sarah Newey (The Telegraph’s Global Health Security Correspondent, Bangkok) & Joe Freeman (Amnesty International)

---

Episode Overview

This episode investigates the context and consequences of Myanmar’s recent “sham” elections, focusing on the central role China (and Russia) play in propping up the country’s military junta. Journalists and human rights experts explore what life is like under the new regime, how these elections serve the military’s quest for international legitimacy, and the shifting regional dynamics as the US withdraws and China consolidates influence. Key issues discussed include the economic collapse inside Myanmar, the crackdown on dissent, the humanitarian crisis, the scam center phenomenon, and prospects for resistance amid deepening military control.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What is Happening on the Ground in Myanmar?

[02:12–07:23]

• Life in Yangon:
  • The surface appears “almost normal” with everyday activities continuing, but a deeper look reveals “the fabric of the city has just been torn apart.”
  • Absence of young people is striking—many have fled forced conscription or left for work overseas.
  • Economic collapse is visible: the middle class is “completely wiped out,” fuel prices are up, and children are forced to work.
  • Unlike rebel areas where airstrikes and extreme poverty are prevalent, in Yangon the war’s impact is more economic than physical.

"On first glance, it almost looked normal...but as soon as you ask even a single question, it's clear that everyone's experiences in life over the last five years have changed dramatically."
— Sarah Newey [02:36]

• Election Environment:
  • Strong police (rather than military) presence during elections.
  • People are fearful—"terrified of talking to journalists," worrying that participation or boycotts could put families at risk.
  • A new election law threatens up to 49 years in prison for anti-junta dissent.
  • Use of indelible ink makes voting (or not) visible, fostering an environment of intimidation.

“There was this tension in the air around the election and concerns about whether they should or shouldn’t be taking part. What’s going to happen if they don’t? Are they going to be arrested or followed? Are their family members going to be arrested and followed?”
— Sarah Newey [05:11]

2. A Sham Election: Mechanics and Stakes

[06:56–13:03]

• The ‘Choice’ at the Polls:

  • Vast majority of 2020’s political parties were banned.
  • Main choice is the military-backed Union, Solidarity and Development Party; main opposition (Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy) is disbanded, its leader imprisoned and incommunicado.
  • Official claims of 50% turnout and 80% support for military party are “probably not” credible.

• Why Hold an Election?

  • Military seeks “credibility laundering”—a way to maintain its grip but project a façade of civilian rule to the world.
  • Election laws make dissent dangerous (from severe sentences to the death penalty).
  • For civilians, the stakes are existential: "They're fighting for their lives...for their community, they're fighting for their livelihoods."

“What it [the junta] wants to do is retain its position, but in a way that, like a criminal would launder its money to become a legitimate business. So this election is a kind of credibility laundering.”
— Joe Freeman [08:25]

3. Context: The Lost Promise of Democracy

[13:03–17:16]

• The Contrast to 2015:
  • International optimism and openness; people queued to vote, took selfies with their inked fingers.
  • Aung San Suu Kyi led public celebrations, opposition media operated freely.
  • Now: “None of that this time at all. It was such a contrast... at polling stations in the morning, it was like tumbleweed.”
  • Exile media, civil society, and international companies have largely fled or been banned.

“It really is this kind of heartbreaking reset to what Myanmar used to be. And it's only happened in 5 to 10 years...and now look at what's happened to Myanmar.”
— Joe Freeman [15:47]

---

4. Why is China Propping Up the Junta?

[19:28–25:00]

• China's Calculations:
  • Sees the junta as the “best source of stability,” not a partner of choice but one of necessity.
  • Seeks to shield business/commercial interests, keep out Western influence, and avoid border instability.
  • China's support includes political cover (e.g., blocking UN action), sending election monitors, and at times giving “tacit approval” to rebel actions—but only up to the point that its own interests are threatened.

“China just sees the military as the best source of a stable country and that's why it's backing the elections, wanting a veneer of legitimacy to be able to expand upon the business it's already doing...”
— Sarah Newey [19:46]

• A Marriage of Convenience:
  • China does not “love” the Myanmar military—its support is pragmatic and can shift if interests change.
  • Recent actions:
    • In 2023, China allowed (tacitly) rebel offensives against the military, before quickly stepping in to rein in these groups once its interests were threatened.
    • Pressured rebel groups to return territory and supported the junta’s electoral “political maneuver.”

“The trend of the past year has been these really important levels of support for the military by China...I can't think of a more important international partner or backer than China in this process. But I think the military also needs to beware because...China will do what is in its interest.”
— Joe Freeman [23:30]

5. Shifting Spheres of Influence: Withdrawal of the US; Rise of China & Russia

[25:00–29:23]

• US Withdrawal:
  • Trump administration’s drawdown has left a vacuum in border and civil society support.
  • China is moving into that vacuum—“stepping up to support de-mining programs” and humanitarian initiatives previously led by the US.

“US funding was almost, I won’t say propping up, but it was supporting almost all Myanmar-based media...and so there’s all of a sudden this huge vacuum. It stands to reason...that China saw this as a great opportunity to step in.”
— Joe Freeman [25:20]

• Russia’s Role:
  • Russia is a key military backer—supplying weapons, fighter jets, and high-level political support.
  • Organized official visits, parades, and trade with Myanmar.

“Russia was sending people to attend high profile visits...provides weapons and fighter jets and things that help Myanmar keep the upper hand in the conflict as well.”
— Joe Freeman [28:34]

---

6. Illicit Economies: Scam Centers and China's Crackdown

[29:23–31:10]

• Myanmar has become a regional hub for organized crime—scams, trafficking, narcotics, and illegal wildlife trade.
• Recent increase in Chinese crackdown owing to domestic pressure—operations targeted both large and small scam centers across Southeast Asia.
• Changes are visible but the criminal networks have adapted, dispersing to more decentralized operations.

“The problem has almost grown too large to ignore for a long time. I think they [China] turned a blind eye to a lot of Chinese crime syndicates who were operating not only in Myanmar, but also in Cambodia and in Laos. But...I think it's a marker of the political pressure that China is putting on these governments.”
— Sarah Newey [29:44]

---

7. Who’s Winning? Status of the Conflict and Humanitarian Crisis

[31:10–38:06]

• Military Resurgence:
  • Junta “has gained the upper hand recently,” regaining lost territory—in part due to Chinese and Russian support and the introduction of forced conscription in 2024.
  • Airstrikes up 30% in 2025. Humanitarian situation remains dire—blockades, famine risk, and millions displaced (3.5 million people) with an estimated 7–8 million children out of school.

“In December...we actually saw an airstrike on a hospital that killed 30 people in Rakhine State. So the war is not decelerating and the humanitarian situation is only getting worse.”
— Sarah Newey [31:34]

• Grim Economic Collapse:
  • Currency value has plunged 80% against the USD since 2020; inflation is 30%.
  • Everyday life is dominated by survival, not by political engagement.

“One statistic that has really stuck in my head is that the value of the currency has dropped by 80%... inflation is now at 30%. That was something that came up again and again. So that's impacting cities as well as these more rural areas that are at the epicentre of fighting.”
— Sarah Newey [33:55]

• International Abandonment & The Hope in Resistance:
  • As aid dwindles, the pressure mounts on the local population, making international recommitment critical.
  • Justice efforts (e.g., ICC, ICJ) are stuck; the Rohingya genocide trial has begun but actual accountability remains distant.
  • Despite crackdowns, ordinary people continue to resist—through silent strikes and creative protests.

“Despite all these challenges, there is quite a strong resistance in Myanmar...normal people who are continuing to do whatever they can to resist the military peacefully...So I don't want to end on quite a bleak message. I think there's still a lot of hope in Myanmar that people can resist what's happening and endure this. Of course, it's easier said than done.”
— Joe Freeman [38:01]

---

Notable Quotes

• “Every decision feels dangerous, and I think that really cuts to the heart of why these are sham elections. But Burmese people are really caught in the middle.”
  — Venetia Rainey [06:56]

• “It was such a contrast from the stories that I've heard of that period of excitement...there was none of that this time at all.”
  — Sarah Newey [16:37]

• “This election is a kind of...credibility laundering. And it spent the past year very craftily kind of laying all this out.”
  — Joe Freeman [08:25]

• “China was surprised by how well [the rebel attacks] did and then freaked out because they don't — there's no clear path for who can take over if not the military.”
  — Sarah Newey [19:46]

• “The overall status of the country in the war right now is there's no end in sight. The humanitarian situation is horrendous. Collapse has been huge.”
  — Sarah Newey [33:55]

---

Timestamps of Key Segments

• [02:12] — Life in junta-held Myanmar, absence of young men, economic struggles
• [05:11] — Atmosphere around the elections, repression, voting intimidation
• [07:23] — What’s at stake for different groups, why the military wanted elections
• [11:22] — Who can people vote for, what happened to Aung San Suu Kyi
• [13:03] — Contrast with 2015’s democratic moment
• [19:46] — Why China is supporting the junta, “marriage of convenience”
• [25:20] — The regional shift: US withdrawal, China and Russia fill the void
• [28:34] — Russia’s role as a military and political backer
• [29:44] — The scam center economy and China’s crackdown
• [31:34] — Who’s winning? Military gains ground, humanitarian crisis intensifies
• [34:51] — International abandonment, enduring resistance, and a call for renewed global attention

---

Tone & Style

The conversation is direct, deeply informed, and at times urgent and mournful—but always focused on illuminating the human stakes amidst geopolitical maneuvering. The guests blend on-the-ground reportage with policy and human rights analysis; the hosts highlight critical quotes and sharpen thematic connections.

---

Takeaways

• The 2026 election in Myanmar is a strategic play by the junta to “launder” its credibility, not a genuine return to civilian rule.
• Ordinary people face impossible choices amid harsh repression and economic collapse.
• China and Russia are the external lifelines for the junta, supporting it for their own interests and in the context of US disengagement.
• Organized crime and illicit industries have flourished in the instability—increasingly targeted (selectively) by Beijing as a matter of self-interest.
• Despite deepening authoritarianism, resistance and hope persist inside Myanmar, and international re-engagement is desperately needed.

---

Transcript

[Sarah Newey]

The telegraph.

[Amazon One Medical Advertiser]

Amazon One Medical presents painful thoughts. Do they ever actually clean the ball.

[Sarah Newey]

Pit at these kids play gyms? Or is my kid just swimming in.

[Amazon One Medical Advertiser]

A vat of bacteria catching whatever cootie.

[Sarah Newey]

Of the day is breeding in there? A cootie that'll probably take down our whole family.

[Amazon One Medical Advertiser]

Luckily, with Amazon One Medical 24. 7 Virtual Care, you can get checked out for whatever ball pittitis you've contracted. Amazon One Medical Healthcare just got less painful.

[MeUndies Advertiser]

Flowers die in three days. Matching underwear from Meundies. That's a gift that lasts. Meundies creates matching prints for couples and friends. Same adorable designs in different cuts for each of you. All made from their signature ultra modal fabric that feels impossibly soft. With 30 million pairs sold and 90,000 five star reviews, MeUndies matching prints are the perfect gift. Valentine's Day is February 14th, so don't wait. Get exclusive deals up to 50% off at Meundies.com acast code acast that's Meundies.com acast Code acast.

[Sarah Newey]

China just sees the military as the best source of a stable country. And that's why it's backing the election. Wanting a veneer of legitimacy to be able to expand upon the business it's already doing in the country and also ensure that a western backed government doesn't come in and potentially take over.

[Joe Freeman]

These cuts will make the world less healthy, less safe and less prosperous.

[Sarah Newey]

Countries are continuing extremely risky research into bioweapons.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

It is a famine. The Gaza famine.

[Venetia Rainey]

I'm Venetia Raining and I'm Arthur Scott Geddes and this is, this is Battle Lines Global Health security. It's Wednesday 21st of January 2026.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

Myanmar is in the middle of a sham election at the same time as the country is mired in a civil conflict.

[Venetia Rainey]

But China really wants this election to go well. Why? On today's episode we're going to be finding out.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

We're joined by Sarah Nguy, the Telegraph's global health security correspondent based in Bangkok, and Joe Freeman from Amnesty International. So Sarah, you had a rare opportunity to visit junta held Myanmar recently for the most recent round of the elections. They've been widely dismissed as a sh. But before we get onto the elections themselves, what was the situation like on the ground? What was it like to be there? How was it different to the rebel held areas of Myanmar that you visited?

[Sarah Newey]

Yeah, so I think what was striking about Yangon was on first glance it almost looked normal. You know, I was staying at a hotel with Christmas music blaring, people are selling things on the side of the road, life continuing as normal. But as soon as you ask even a single question, it's clear that everyone's experiences in life over the last five years have changed dramatically. And the more you look, the more you notice all developments around the city. Lots of an absence of young people. A lot of young men in particular have fled because of forced conscription or to seek work overseas. So to me, it was just very striking. In particular and in contrast, rebel areas where you see more airstrikes and real poverty and hardship and hunger. Here it was much more about the economic ramifications of conflict. We've seen huge currency deflation since the coup in 2020. And it was just very striking to me how much people were struggling and talking about fuel, you know, taxi drivers complaining about how much fuel has gone up, young people, you know, 12, 15 year olds who've now had to start working instead of going to school, and a whole section of the middle class that's just been completely wiped out by the economic collapse that Myanmar has seen in the last five years. So it was one of those places where on the surface you can almost forget there's a conflict raging in so much of the country. We're not seeing bombed buildings or fighting in the center of Yangon, but this economic impact, it. It's hard to ignore.

[Venetia Rainey]

So you were in Yangon, which is not Myanmar's capital, but its most populous city. Right. So no signs of fighting, but was there a heavy military presence? I mean, what signs were there that there is a massive civil war raging across the country?

[Sarah Newey]

Well, it was an interesting time to be there because it was the days around the election. So we were seeing lots of, well, outside the polling station, much more police, armed police outside all the polling stations. And there were some military in the city. But it actually, it was my first time, Tiangon, unlike my colleague Joe, it was surprising to me that there wasn't more military presence in the area that I was in. It was much more police presence that I saw and felt. I know some colleague who went to Mandalay and the reporter we were working with in Mandalay, Nandi Sen, who's a Burmese reporter, I think there was more military and police presence there, which is a city further north, which is actually where the earthquake hit earlier this year. But yeah, in Yangon, it was striking to me how you could just go and have a nice time in a cafe if you wanted to. But then as soon as you start having conversations or look more deeply, kind of the fabric of the city has Just been torn apart.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

The absence of young people must have been quite sort of unsettling as an experience. What was the kind of atmosphere like?

[Sarah Newey]

It was striking to me at the polling stages that the majority of people who were coming in were older rather than younger people. I think that's partly because a lot of young people, as I said, have left, but also potentially less fear among those groups. The election in general, there was a very strange atmosphere because people are terrified of talking to journalists of whether they should or shouldn't vote in the election. There's been a new election law introduced a few months ago which really cracked down on any criticism. We've seen people go be sentenced to 49 years in prison for putting up stickers around Yangon calling for boycotts of the election. This is really extreme repression that's been going on. When we did come across young people, I think that they were more willing to talk to me, potentially. Also, I was speaking to people in English, so maybe there's a language barrier there too. But yeah, I think that the overarching sense, especially outside polling stations, we had a lot of people, people who didn't want to torture us at all and they were never rude. Burmese people are some of the friendliest people, welcoming people, but they'd be like, oh, you're going to cause me trouble if I talk to you, or oh, please be careful. I'm not sure it's safe. So there was this tension in the air around the election and around concerns about whether they should or shouldn't be taking part. What's going to happen if they don't? Are they going to be arrested or followed? Are their family members going to be arrested and followed? We met some one person whose family worked in the civil service and she clearly didn't want to vote, but she was there because she was terrified about what would happen to her family member she didn't have if she didn't. It wasn't on the polling list. I think one thing that was notable to me as well is they've introduced digital ballots, electric ballots, but at the end of voting process, they still made people dip their little finger into an ink. So people are walking around and it's really visible to see who has and hasn't voted. Whether that was a deliberate or not is hard to say for me, but I thought that was striking.

[Venetia Rainey]

I was really struck by one of the quotes in your article, which we'll link to in the show notes. If I vote, I feel like I'm betraying my own beliefs. If I don't vote. I worry that my name will be noted and I could be questioned later. Every decision feels dangerous, and I think that really cuts to the heart of why these are sham elections. But Burmese people are really caught in the middle. Joe, just talk us through the stakes here. So this election is being held in three phases from December 28 to January 25, and it's the first since 2020. What's at stake for Myanmar here?

[Joe Freeman]

I think we need to break that down into what's at stake for the different stakeholders. So, I mean, maybe to start with the people who are running this election, the military. It's been five years since they launched this coup, which was an attempt to sort of reassert their dominance and position in Myanmar society and Myanmar politics. The whole point of the sort of democratic transition that started in 2020-2012, these reforms that were supposed to lead to this civilian democratic era in Myanmar, was to slowly sort of help the military withdraw from the political scene, because they've always played a very large role in political life in Myanmar since independence. This is not the first coup from five years ago. There have been several. There have been several different military regimes. So the idea, though, this time was that the military would officially sort of recede from political view. I think the military, after five years of not having that same role it used to have or getting a taste of what that would look like over time, decided this isn't for me. And so that's why they launched the coup, to reassert their sort of position and dominance. And then over the past five years, they've really been desperately trying to cement the paragraph that they launched on February 1, 2021. I think they were a bit surprised at the nationwide resistance, including the sort of initial protest movement, and then the proliferation of armed conflict and armed groups, including armed uprisings in many parts of the country, in almost all parts of the country. I think that took them a little bit by surprise. But we have to remember this is an organization that has never fought a war kind of outside its own territory. It's only fought against its own people since independence in 1948. So in a way, this is what it does. You know, it puts down rebellions. They're very good at it. So what's at stake in this election is for the military is its credibility as the leader going forward in Myanmar. What it wants to do is retain its position, but in a way that, like a criminal would launder its money to become a legitimate business. So this election is a kind of human rights or Credibility laundering. And it spent the past year very craftily kind of laying all this out. I would say it started about six months ago with this election law that Sarah mentioned where they made it almost impossible to oppose the election in any way because there were severe punishments, as she mentioned, there's also the death penalty for anyone who kills someone who is taking part in the election. So creating quite a chilling effect on really any opposition from three years to the death penalty. Right. I would say that is one prong of their strategy to have this election to create kind of an off ramp from this five years of military rule and show the international community that it's ready to lead as a responsible civilian government. Of course, that's all a mirage and it's just going to be the same thing that it has been for the past five years. Just, you know, new wine in different bad bottles, I guess you could say. So I think for the military, those are the stakes. It's credibility for civilians, for people of Myanmar, for the people who are in the, in the resistance. I mean, the stakes are their lives, right? They're fighting for their lives. They're fighting for their community, they're fighting for their livelihoods. Many of them, as Sarah mentioned, have had to leave the country, have been conscripted into the army. We're talking about whole lost generations of young people here, lost their education, lost their future, lost their family members. So I think for everyone, the stakes are quite high. And that's why, despite this election, I don't think many things are going to change inside the country. The question is how the international community is going to respond to it, whether people will start recognizing the military, dealing with it, and ignoring the abuses of the past five years. And that's what we're quite concerned about.

[Venetia Rainey]

So who can people vote for in these elections? Who are the available candidates? And crucially, where is Aung San SUU Kyi in all of this? Our listeners will remember she was the leader effectively until she was deposed in the 2021 coup.

[Sarah Newey]

Well, the vast majority of parties that were on the ballot in 2020 are not on the ballot anymore. There's an election monitoring group called AMFREL and they've said 57% of parties that ran in 2020 no longer exist, even though these parties received 70% of the votes and 90% of the seats in that election. The main party, the nationwide party, is called the Union, Solidarity and Development Party. That's a military backed, military backed party. And they've in the first round of elections, as Jo said, this held over three rounds, they won, or they said they won 80% of the votes and turnout was about 50% of people.

[Venetia Rainey]

Can we believe either of those numbers? 80% and 50%?

[Sarah Newey]

I would say probably not. I mean, it was striking to me. We were there on the day of the ballot and I think that, as Joe said, they really want credibility. That's why they invited journalists in in the first place, to create a veneer of legitimacy for this process. At the end of the day, at 4pm on the Sunday when in the first round of voting in Yangon, they kind of announced it very loudly at the polling stations. And the polling station, they wanted all the journalists to go out. They started counting ballots there and then, but they announced very quickly who won. So I'm not sure we can really trust these figures at all. But yes, the National League for Democracy and Sang so Party, they've been disbanded and San SUU Kyi is imprisoned. It's really not clear where or how she is. Previously she was under house arrest, but we really have no information about how she's doing or where she is. Even her own son said in an interview before Christmas that if she had died, he wouldn't be surprised if she didn't know. So, yes, this isn't really a choice. This is vote for the military backed party or else.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

And Joe, you were in Myanmar in 2015 for an election that was very different. Could you just set out that contrast for us?

[Joe Freeman]

Absolutely. I mean, it couldn't be more different. It's night and day. First of all, I could go to Myanmar in 2015. Now. If I went, I could, you know, as a member of a human rights organization that constantly criticizes the military, I would probably not be allowed in the country or granted a visa. That's the first thing. The second thing is just the different emotions of optimism that permeated Myanmar society at that time. Let me give you a quick example about that. Right after the election in, I think it was late 2015 or 2016, after it had been made clear that Aung San Suu Kyi's party had won in a landslide, Aung San Suu Kyi herself did this sort of public trash cleanup campaign, almost like a victory lap in her own constituency in a town right outside of Yangon. And she invited people, journalists, media to come, you know, pick up trash with her. It was a little bit strange. Anyway, we all went and we're literally standing, I don't know, three feet away from her, taking pictures, but also picking up some garbage at the same time. It was kind of quaint and charming and fun, and everyone kind of thought, well, this is the beginning of something maybe special in Myanmar. Like, things are going to change. Obviously, a lot of the problems that still exist were, were there. You have persecution of the Rohingya community. You have conflict in other ethnic minority states. However, there was this general feeling of joy. And I remember on election night when we were all standing outside the National League for Democracy headquarters and the ballots kept coming in and they kept announcing another NLD victory and another NLD victory, and the whole crowd was cheering. I remember someone saying, well, is the military going to allow this? And actually, the surprise at the time was that they did that. There was no backlash. And I think that was also what was so strange about this coup and why it took so many people by surprise, because in some ways, the military had everything to lose by launching this coup. They had still retained a certain amount of power after 2015. They still held seats in parliament. They still had several control of several ministries. They still had control of tons and tons of very lucrative businesses and companies. I mean, they really are kind of cartel in that respect. So in this way, they've just kind of invited more scrutiny onto all these things that they have, and all the sort of dirty business and human rights abuses that they're quite known for. But just to end by saying that, it is quite a heartbreaking contrast, because at the time, it really did feel like Myanmar had turned a page over really decades of junta rule and really horrific abuses that have never really been accounted for to something new and something exciting, and the international community was involved. You know, we had new companies coming in, and now look at what's happened to Myanmar. A lot of those companies have pulled out. A lot of the people who came back have now left again. A lot of the exile media that came back to take part in this transition to be based in their own country, have been banned. They were not permitted to, and they wouldn't be safe to even go back and cover this election. A lot of them are in exile, like they were pre2015 or pre2012. So it really is this kind of heartbreaking reset to what Myanmar used to be. And it's only happened in, I don't know, you know, five to 10 years. So it's also quite a rap, quite a rapid reset. You know, it's kind of happened very, very quickly, and there also appears to be no real end in sight. And maybe we can talk about that later about what's coming next. But it doesn't look good right now.

[Sarah Newey]

To add to what Jo was saying, this came up a lot on election day. The polling stations in the morning at like 6, 7 o'. Clock. When we first got there, it was like tumbleweed. It was really quiet. It took quite a long time for people to trickle in. Some people were telling us, and I know other journalists who covered it back in 2015 and 2020 like Joe, that there were queues around the street for people to vote for Ansang Sushi then. And like I said about the finger with the ink, people were taking all these photos and posing for Facebook pictures afterwards. Be like, look, we voted. Is so exciting. There was none of that this time at all. It was such a contrast from the stories that I've heard of that period of excitement.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

We're going to take a quick pause now, but after the break we'll find out how both Russia and China are propping up the Myanmar military.

[Mint Mobile Advertiser]

Well, the holidays have come and gone once again, but if you've forgotten to get that special someone in your life a gift, well, Mint Mobile is extending their holiday offer of half off unlimited wireless. So here's the idea. You get it now. You call it an early present for next year.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

What do you have to lose?

[Mint Mobile Advertiser]

Give it a [e-mail] Switch limited time.

[MeUndies Advertiser]

50% off regular price for new customers. Upfront payment required $45 for 3 months, $90 for 6 month or $180 for 12 month plan taxes and fees. Extra speeds may slow after 50 gigabytes per month when network is busy.

[Amazon One Medical Advertiser]

See terms Amazon One Medical presents Painful.

[Greenlight Advertiser]

Thoughts I've been on hold to make a doctor's appointment for 23 minutes now. The automated voice has told me 47 times that my call is very important to them. Hmm, I'm starting to think that they don't think my call is important at all.

[Amazon One Medical Advertiser]

With Amazon One Medical 24. 7 Virtual Care, you'll get help fast without having to remain on the line to make an appointment. Amazon One Medical Healthcare just got less painful.

[MeUndies Advertiser]

Flowers die in three days. Matching underwear from Meundies. That's a gift that lasts. Meundies creates matching prints for couples and friends. Same adorable designs in different cuts for each of you. All made from their signature ultra modal fabric that feels impossibly soft. With 30 million pairs sold and 90,000 five star reviews, MeUndies matching prints are the perfect gift. Valentine's Day is February 14th, so don't wait. Get exclusive deals up to 50% off at Meundies.com acast code ac acast. That's Meundies.com acast Code acast.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

Welcome back. You're listening to Battle Lines Global Health Security. We're still in the studio with Joe Freeman, a researcher at Amnesty International and Sarah Newey, the Telegraph's Global Health security correspondent in Bangkok.

[Venetia Rainey]

You've both mentioned that these elections were an attempt by the junta to seek international credibility. And there's one major backer in particular that we haven't talked about yet and that's China. Why are they interested in this, this election taking place given they're not a country known for adherence to democratic values? What's their interest in Myanmar?

[Sarah Newey]

I think it's interesting that they sent election monitors. There was some international media pointing out that a one party state has been advising on what is meant to be a multi party election in Myanmar. But you know, Myanmar shares a 1,300 mile border with China. It's very much within its sphere of influence and it takes a keen interest of what's happening for lots of business reasons, crime related reasons, etc. I don't think that Beijing loves the military in Myanmar, but they see it as the best source of stability for the country in 2023. They actually backed a small, well, actually it became quite a big and exciting moment where they, they gave kind of tacit approval for some rebel groups to attack the military and, and this operation did very well. China was surprised by how well it did and then freaked out because they don't. There's no clear path for who can take over if not the military. The resistance group groups are splintered, it's a patchwork of opposition. There's a lot of different ethnicities and viewpoints at play and I think China just sees the military as the best source of a stable country and that's why it's backing the elections, wanting a veneer of legitimacy to be able to expand upon the business it's already doing in the country and also ensure that a western backed government doesn't come in and potentially take over. Basically it's a marriage of convenience. It's not love at first sight, but they just don't want an unsettled country on their border. Joe, I'm sure you have some thoughts to add on that.

[Joe Freeman]

Completely agree with, with everything you said. I mean China has massive infrastructure interests in Myanmar, especially in Chopu. There's a deep sea port kind of in a Rakhine state where there's a lot of conflict. But I think it's important to remember that China has always kind of been in A backer of Myanmar's military in one way or another. They're one of its biggest arms suppliers. They obviously give it cover at the Security Council. You know, one of the things that Amnesty International has been calling for for years is for the Security Council to refer the situation in Myanmar, situation, all of Myanmar, to the International Criminal Court, the icc. And they can't do that without a Security Council referral. And so of course, Russia and China will almost always block that. Russia being a whole other part of this story. And the level of stepped up support they've given to the regime is also part of this. But just back to China for a second. The story, I think, of 2025 was China deciding to. They've always been a backer of the military in one way or another, but maybe they've been more nuanced about it. In 2025, they really came out and stood in front of them kind of completely. So. And they did that in a few really important ways. So Sarah mentioned this operation 1027 that started in late on October 27th in 2023, that operation, which is led by three armed groups, some of which have some ties to China. It could obviously not have happened without China's sort of tacit approval. And some of this was related to scam centers where that are operating in Myanmar, where China has a lot of its citizens. China was really pissed off that the situation had had escalated to the extent where there are all these Chinese nationals stuck in these scam centers. And Myanmar military couldn't do anything about it, or they weren't doing anything about it because they have ties to some of these groups who are protecting the centers. So they unleash these, or not unleash, but they sort of tacitly back some of these armed groups to liberate some of these scam centers, but also to just show, I think, the military that it can sort of press a button and make things happen in certain parts of the country. However, the problem with that is it works both ways and it can work in favor of the military too. And that's what happened this past year. And sort of the trend of the past year has been these really important levels of support for the military by China. That includes the election, of course. Like they fully back that, as Sarah said, they send monitors, they're backing the process. So did Russia, by the way. But also the more important, or more sort of on the ground, logistically important backing is they convinced these armed groups, who they had kind of previously tacitly supported, to launch an operation to dial back everything that they'd achieved. So they convinced two of the groups to give back territory that they'd won at great cost. People had died in this fighting and they reclaimed all this territory, reclaiming areas where there were military bases, captured trade posts, all sorts, all sorts of things that came at quite high cost for, for these armed groups. So within the space of a year, the Myanmar military had regained a lot of territory. They had, they received some important backing for a political, I guess you could call it political maneuver with this election. And China was sort of helping guide this. You know, what I talked about earlier, this try to return to a form of credibility. And so I can't think of a more important international partner or backer than China in this process. But I think the military also needs to beware because as Sarah mentioned before, it can work the other way. They can turn around and back other groups. China will do what is in its interest. At the end of the day, we.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

Seem to be returning to a kind of era of spheres of influence in which big countries essentially seek to dominate smaller countries. Do you think that in some ways China might be responding to this shift, responding to a more assertive United States, and that might be why it's taken this decision only recently to kind of fully back the military in Myanmar?

[Joe Freeman]

I mean, one thing of course, we haven't touched on is all this has happened at the same time that the Trump administration is withdrawing the US from, I don't know, the entire world in many respects. In the past year or so, I have traveled to parts of the Myanmar border on both the east and the western side, like the Thai Myanmar border and the Bangladesh Myanmar border, where a lot of US Funding used to go until the Trump administration came into power. And it really struck even me. I've worked on Myanmar for now, 10 years even I don't think I really truly understood the extent of US Support for civil society, for humanitarian organizations, for education, health, media. I mean, U.S. funding was almost, I won't say propping up, but it was supporting almost all Myanmar based media that kind of disappeared almost overnight. And so there's all of a sudden this huge vacuum. And okay, it stands to reason, we can't say for sure, but it stands to reason that China saw this as a great opportunity to step in and show that it's a friend of Myanmar and that it can help it when another, you know, another supposed friend pulls out. And you're not just seeing this in Myanmar, you saw this in other Southeast Asian countries, I believe in Cambodia, where China has also stepped up to support demining programs which was long a part of US support in the region. So of course I don't think they're going to issue a press release and say that this is the reason they're doing this. But the timing obviously is very intriguing.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

And Joe, how decisive has China's support been for helping the junta regain the upper hand in the conflict? Because it doesn't seem like that long ago that the military really seemed like it was on the back foot.

[Joe Freeman]

So every year at Amnesty International we write these annual reports, entries for our different countries that we work on. And I just finished mine today actually for 2025. I was looking back at the one I wrote a year ago and the two paragraphs, the two sort of opening paragraphs of background and context are completely different. The one a year ago was talking about how the military was on the back foot. They've lost all this territory. They only control, I don't know, a third of the country and only major cities. And I was laying out what they've lost. And I looked at what I wrote this year and it was this is sort of the return of the junta. This is where they've completely made a comeback. They've regained territory that they've lost. They've made a political comeback. We talked a bit about Minon Lang, the senior general who's the head of the junta. He made a sort of international comeback too because he for the first time traveled to some countries. I think it was the first time he traveled to Thailand or to an official meeting in an ASEAN country since the couple. And he also, I believe, met with Putin G, the president of Belarus. So for him himself it was this kind of almost coming out party and it's such a contrast to a year ago. So how decisive? I think that it's been very decisive in, in the conflict. And I feel like the military is coming into this new year feeling way more confident because they have supportive friends who are a little bit more supportive than they've been in the recent past and they've reversed a lot of their losses.

[Venetia Rainey]

Supportive friends. Just before we move on, can you tell us a bit more about Russia's role? Because I think that's also really interesting and maybe something our listeners will be less aware of.

[Joe Freeman]

For some reason that does tend to fly a little bit under the radar. Maybe because what Russia is doing in Ukraine, maybe because they kind of got in there first a little bit before China. So before China I think expressed a more full throated support of Myanmar as it has in the past sort of six to eight months around the election and the conflict, Russia was the really public supporter. So Russia was sending people to attend high profile visits to attend Myanmar's military parades. Minon Lang was taking. I lost count of the kind of trips he was being taken to in Russia. They were splashing these big photos over Myanmar state media of him traveling around in helicopters, visiting Russian factories. And of course, Russia provides weapons and fighter jets and things that help Myanmar keep the upper hand in the conflict as well.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

I want to return to an idea that you touched on briefly in one of your previous answers, which is the scam centers. As well as suffering this conflict, Myanmar has kind of become a crossroads or a hub for all sorts of illicit activities from human trafficking and the scam centers you mentioned to the drug trade and even the illegal wildlife trade. How effective has China's crackdown on these activities been?

[Sarah Newey]

So I think again, we're seeing a bit of a turning point in China's approach across the whole region, not in Myanmar to scam centers. The problem has almost grown too large to ignore for a long time. I think they turned a blind eye to a lot of Chinese crime syndicates who were operating not only in Myanmar, but also in Cambodia and in Laos. But I mean, for instance, in Cambodia just last week, we saw a major arrest, an extradition of a Chinese businessman, Shanji, who was controlling a massive scam center operation under international company called Prince.

[Venetia Rainey]

Group here in the uk. Right?

[Sarah Newey]

Yes. The UK sanction was part of US Sanctions and seized a mansion and an office block that he owned in in the uk. So we had strong links to that whole process. But I think it's a marker of the political pressure that China is putting on these governments. We were also in Laos at the end of last year and we saw the crackdown there as well. And in Myanmar, there's been a lot of destruction of the scam center operations in the last three or four months. Joe's actually been to the border to see this with drones. But the military has been bombing these scam centers at KK park and Shuikoko, and that is under pressure from China. China is being like, you guys need to act now. How much? We are actually seeing the end of scam centers. I don't think that's the case at all. In many places, they've just moved from the big centralized locations into smaller spots across the region. But we've definitely seen a shift in the scale of China's response.

[Venetia Rainey]

Yeah. And I will say that we did an episode towards the end of last year with Sarah about scam centres, you went to visit one in Laos, so we'll link to that in the show notes. It was a really good episode and it gives a lot of background on this huge organised crime project that seems to be unfolding across Southeast Asia and across large parts of the world. So do go back and listen to that. Just a final question, I think, for our Battlelines audience. What's the status of the conflict in Myanmar? Who's winning right now?

[Sarah Newey]

Well, I think, as we've mentioned already, really, it's been a year of a turning point, with the military gaining a lot of territory, gaining a lot of ground. We've seen airstrikes massively ramp up in the last year accled, which tracks this, found that there was a 30% increase in airstrikes in 2025. Some of that was ahead of the election in order to try and gain territory so that they could have elections in that territory. But I think it's just a marker of the fact that this battle is very much still raging. In December, just before Christmas, we actually saw an airstrike on a hospital that killed 30 people in Rakhine State. So the war is not decelerating and the humanitarian situation is only getting worse. We spoke a little bit about the situation in the cities in. In Yangon and also in Mandalay, but it's worth noting that in the western Rakhine State, there's huge segments of the population that are on the brink of famine. Like, the hunger situation is horrendous there because they've effectively been under a blockade for 18 months across the country. We've got 3.5 million people now displaced. There are estimates that 8 million children or 7 or 8 million children are out of school. So the conflict is raging. It shows no end in sight. The military has gained the upper hand recently. We've also seen. Some of this is because of the backing of China. Some of it's also because of the impact of their forced conscription law, which came in 2024. We really have seen the impacts of. Of that in terms of just boosting the number of people that they've got to fight for them. And some of those people being treated very poorly, just thrown again and again and again as, like, extra resources. A bit like what we're seeing in Ukraine and Russia, with Russia. So, yeah, I think the overall status of the country in the war right now is there's no end in sight. The humanitarian situation is horrendous. Collapse has been huge. I mean, one Statistic that has really stuck in my head is that the value of the currency has dropped by 80% against the US dollar since 2020 and inflation is now at 30%. That was something that came up again and again. So that's impacting cities as well as these more rural areas that are at the epicenter of fighting. And yeah, I think it's a pretty, as Jo said, demoralizing because at the start of 2025, I was quite optimistic, thinking maybe we are going to see change. Maybe there is going to be a resistance movement that suc and potentially combat some of these human rights abuses, this humanitarian situation, et cetera. Instead, we're in a situation with an election that is going to change very little in terms of people's lives. When we have an election in the uk, all of our political parties go out and they tell us why they should vote for them in terms of improving our lives. Right. Whether you agree with their policies or not, at least they're coming up with policies that they want to say is going to improve the cost of living in Myanmar. There was none of that this year. It was much more about all of the campaigns ahead of the vote, where you have to turn out and vote. It wasn't, we're going to make your life better. So maybe that sums up where the country is. I think it's almost in a stalemate. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next year. But I think, as Jo said, it's definitely the military are starting 2026 in a fairly strong position both on the battlefield and potentially in gaining international legitimacy again. Certainly they really want to get back into asean. We mentioned that earlier. That's the association of Southeast Asian Countries. They want to be going to those meetings again. And some of these countries are kind of showing signs that they want to engage with the military again. So that's something that I'm watching for in the next six months to see how that unfolds.

[Joe Freeman]

Now that this election is kind of coming to a close later this month, I think we're going to start seeing more offensives in other parts of the country. Sarah mentioned Rakhine State, which is largely controlled by the Arakan army, which now controls the whole border with Bangladesh. I think you're going to see stepped up offensives there now that they've clawed back territory in other areas, they can redirect those resources, the people they've conscripted, the fighter jets, all that to the western side of the country. So I think, unfortunately we're going to seeing Way more airstrikes, way more violence in Rakhine State. And I think the other thing that I'm really concerned about in the context here is the general withdrawal from Myanmar from countries and from the international community in general. We mentioned the United States, obviously, I don't think that their support is coming back anytime soon. But sort of my main message that I've been trying to get across is that the international community needs to really try to recommit to Myanmar in 2026. Because the last year, in addition to it being a year that was sort of win after win for the military, in a way, was also coinciding at a time when international community was kind of abandoning Myanmar. You saw countries like the US but others drawing down their foreign aid budgets. I recently heard about some countries who are closing down their embassies in Yangon because their budgets are decreasing. And when I say budgets decreasing, that can be a bit amorphous. But you know, those things, as Sarah mentioned, they pay for food rations for people, for humanitarian aid, for education, for so many things. And if that doesn't come back, I mean, people can only hold on, hold on for so long. So I think states around the world need to recommit to Myanmar, not just with money. There are other ways that they can. They can put pressure on the. On the military. They can call for the release of prisoners. There's still tens of thousands of people who are either facing arrest warrants or are in jail in Myanmar who have been there since the coup or even now since the election. Under this election law, there's currently several efforts at international justice, efforts that states can get behind, including the Rohingya genocide trial that started at the International Court of Justice this week. I mentioned 2024 and 2025. Contrast, the international Criminal Court prosecutors there issued a request for an arrest warrant for Min aun lang in 2024. In 2025. Well, what has happened with that? So I would encourage that process to move forward. It would be great to see more accountability and justice efforts in these international platforms. So there are things that can be done. You know, it's not all happening within Myanmar, but I think I also just close by saying I'm constantly kind of amazed that despite all these challenges, that there is quite a strong resistance in Myanmar. And I don't just mean armed resistance that has held up. I mean, you know, normal people who are continuing to do whatever they can to resist the military peacefully, whether that's in silent strikes, where they close down their business for the day, whether that's in creative protests that they do inside the country and flash mobs. So I don't want to end on quite a bleak message. I think there's still a lot of hope in Myanmar that people can resist what's happening and endure this. Of course, it's easier said than done.

[Venetia Rainey]

Jo Freeman, researcher for Amnesty International, and Sarah Newi, our global health correspondent in Bangkok. Thank you very much for joining us on battleline's Global Health Security.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

That's all for today's episode. We'll be back on Friday.

[Venetia Rainey]

Until then, goodbye.

[Arthur Scott Geddes]

Goodbye. Battle Lines is an original podcast from the Telegraph, created by David Knowles and hosted by me, Arthur Scott Geddes and Venetia Rainey. If you appreciated this podcast, please consider following Battle Lines on your preferred podcast app. And if you have a moment, leave a review as it helps others find the show. To stay on top of all our news, subscribe to the Telegraph, sign up to our Global Health newsletter or listen to our sister podcast Ukraine, the latest. You can also get in touch directly by emailing battlelinestelegraph.co.uk or contact us on X. You can find our handles in the show. Notes the producer is Sophie o'. Sullivan. The Executive producer is Louisa Wells. The Telegraph's Global Health Security team is supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Found.

[MeUndies Advertiser]

Flowers die in three days Matching Underwear from Meundies that's a gift that lasts Meundies creates matching prints for couples and friends. Same adorable designs in different cuts for each of you, all made from their signature ultra modal fabric that feels impossibly soft. With 30 million pairs sold and 90,000 five star reviews, Meundie's matching prints are the perfect gift. Valentine's Day is February 14th, so don't wait. Get exclusive deals up to 50% off at Meundies.com acast code acast that's Meundies.com acast Code acast did you know that.

[Greenlight Advertiser]

Parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families. With Greenlight, you can set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on your kids spending with real time notifications, kids learn to earn, save and spend wisely and parents can rest easy knowing their kids are learning about money. With guardrails in place. Sign up for Greenlight [e-mail] podcast.