Country: Myanmar Source: Association of Southeast Asian Nations JAKARTA, 30 May 2025 — The ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR) acknowledges the adoption of the ASEAN Leaders’ Statement on an Extended and Expanded Ceasefire in Myanmar during the 46th ASEAN Summit (24–25 May 2025) as an important step toward the peace process. However, the statement notably lacks any enforceable mechanisms, independent monitoring provisions, and fails entirely to address accountability.By definition, a ceasefire is an agreement to halt all military activities for a specified period within a defined area. It can be unilateral or negotiated between conflicting parties.The ceasefire announced by ASEAN, appears to build on the three-consecutive temporary ceasefires by the authority in Myanmar and the other unilateral ceasefires by other relevant stakeholders, which offer no clarity on timelines, scope, or responsibilities. This absence of a firm framework risks reducing the ceasefire to an ambiguous gesture—one that allows Myanmar’s military junta to exploit the language of peace while continuing its brutal campaign with impunity.“The SAC has repeatedly demonstrated that ceasefire announcements mean little on the ground. Despite declarations, violence has only escalated, with increasing airstrikes, bombings, and killings—even in the aftermath of the devastating 7.7-magnitude earthquake,” said Mercy Chriesty Barends, APHR Chairperson and Member of the House of Representatives of Indonesia.Following the earthquake in April 2025, Myanmar’s military junta declared a 20-day ceasefire citing humanitarian needs and national unity. Yet, within 24 hours, airstrikes resumed. Between 2 and 5 April alone, over 60 attacks were recorded, killing at least 68 civilians, including women and children, and targeting displacement shelters in Kachin and Sagaing regions. For those enduring the conflict, it was clear: this was no ceasefire but a strategic ploy to consolidate power. Peace became yet another tool of oppression.While ASEAN leaders may publicly commend the ceasefire, in practice the junta uses it as a shield to continue violence against the people of Myanmar and resistance forces. Barends added, “By endorsing these declarations without demanding concrete actions or accountability, ASEAN risks enabling this vicious cycle of abuse.”This situation underscores the urgent necessity for a clear, credible, and robust monitoring mechanism to ensure any ceasefire is not merely symbolic but genuinely upheld and enforced. “A ceasefire lacking a defined duration or independent oversight is no step toward peace—it is a political smokescreen,” said Charles Santiago, APHR Co-Chairperson and former Member of Parliament from Malaysia. “There is no clarity on who will observe, verify, or respond to violations. The junta operates unchecked, while ASEAN congratulates itself on hollow gestures.”ASEAN must stop the use of vague language and weak declarations and demonstrate real political will. Empty statements without execution only embolden the atrocities of the junta and prolong the suffering of the people of Myanmar.Despite repeated and documented violations of the Five-Point Consensus, the ASEAN Leaders’ Statement continues to invoke it without consequence. More troubling is ASEAN’s refusal to engage with Myanmar’s legitimate political actors, including the National Unity of Government (NUG), ethnic revolutionary organizations, and civil society groups.The ASEAN Leaders’ statement’s vague assurances of humanitarian aid also lack credibility. It remains silent on cross-border access—an urgent necessity to reach communities outside junta control—and offers no guarantee that aid will be free from political manipulation.“We cannot talk about humanitarian assistance without addressing who controls access,” said Rangsiman Rome, APHR Board Member and Member of Parliament from Thailand. “The military has repeatedly manipulated aid for its own purposes. ASEAN must back reliable cross-border humanitarian channels that operate independently of the junta.”Calls for “inclusive dialogue” lack credibility when democratic actors and ethnic resistance groups are excluded, leaving the junta free to dictate the terms.“ASEAN’s failure to establish monitoring mechanisms, protect victims, or hold perpetrators accountable reveals a deeper problem—its unwillingness to confront the brutal reality of Myanmar’s military,” said Arlene Brosas, APHR Board Member and Member of the House of Representatives from the Philippines. “A ceasefire without oversight is not a peace process—it is complicity in ongoing abuses.”APHR urges ASEAN to urgently translate rhetoric into a coordinated, concrete strategy. This must include formal engagement with pro-democracy and ethnic resistance groups, a clearly defined ceasefire timeline, independent monitoring, and unimpeded cross-border humanitarian access. Above all, ASEAN must demand accountability, not appeasement, from those responsible for mass atrocities. #