The UN’s Struggle to Enforce International Law in Myanmar: Time for Pragmatic Reform
The United Nations was formed to promote international law, defend human rights, and ensure global security and peace. However, in Myanmar, the failure to impose legal and humanitarian standards on the junta displays the institutional fragility of the UN and majorly questions its efficacy. The Myanmar junta has perpetrated heinous human rights abuses since the 2021 military coup, including extrajudicial executions, forced evictions, and crackdowns on democratic opposition and yet the UN has not taken strong action in the face of the overwhelming evidence of atrocities committed, which further exposes the structural limits of international law enforcement.
One of the primary issues is the paralysis of the UN Security Council as it has allowed Myanmar’s military to be sheltered from strong international action due to the great powers’ geopolitical interests. China and Russia, both UNSC permanent members, have repeatedly employed their veto powers to veto or weaken resolutions demanding Myanmar’s junta be held accountable. The selective enforcement of international law undermines the legitimacy of the UN and demonstrates the ineffectiveness of a system where legal enforcement relies on the interests of a privileged group of strong states. Additionally, this issue is being exacerbated by the lack of enforcement mechanisms in UN resolutions. While the General Assembly had adopted a resolution condemning the coup and implementing an arms embargo, it was not binding and thus merely symbolic in impact. Moreover, the International Criminal Court has jurisdictional limitations due to Myanmar not having ratified the Rome Statute and, thus, without powers to enforce its will, the legal tools of the UN only exist in theory and not in reality. Aside from that, the response from the UN in Myanmar has also been hampered by administrative inefficiency and inability to coordinate with internal actors. The recent 7.7-magnitude earthquake in March 2025 demonstrated the junta’s ability to impede the delivery of aid and further exacerbated the humanitarian crisis. The World Food Programme and UNICEF have been unable to provide aid due to their significant dependency on official diplomatic channels rather than engaging with community-based organizations that may be able to circumvent the restrictions imposed by the state.
In order to be effective, the UN must undertake pragmatic and immediate reforms. Firstly, the General Assembly should establish a dedicated task force on Myanmar with regional organizations such as ASEAN and the Pacific Islands Forum, which would avoid UNSC deadlock and bring coordinated diplomatic and economic pressure to bear on the junta. Furthermore, the UN should provide support to the National Unity Government, the rightful democratic opposition, by means of its recognition as a primary interlocutor and ensuring its participation in international dialogue. Additionally, providing the civil resistance movements with logistics and finances would further strengthen efforts to counter the military regime.
That being said, it is necessary to design international mechanisms to address uncooperative nations such as Myanmar. The UN Human Rights Council could call for the establishment of an ad hoc international court targeting Myanmar in the same manner used in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, which would be another avenue through which accountability can be sought beyond the scope of the ICC’s mandate. Lastly, the UN needs to rethink its peacekeeping policies. Although deploying peacekeepers in Myanmar might be politically impossible, the UN can play a stronger role through supporting independent cross-border humanitarian corridors that do not fall under the junta’s influence while also building stronger alliances with NGOs and regional actors, which would ensure that aid delivery reaches targeted populations and while not being subject to manipulation from the military.
If the UN fails to act firmly, it will further erode its position as a defender of international law. Myanmar is a test case in whether the international community will be able to bring about the end of authoritarian regimes in the 21st century. Without decisive change, the UN will be relegated to the sidelines, impotent in its central mission and, thus, decision-makers must realize that inaction amounts to complicity, not neutrality.
By The World Forum on Peace and Security
