Myanmar Revolution, from Collective Leadership to the Right Direction and Right Time Towards Building a New State

Nicholas Kong As the United States celebrates its 250th anniversary of independence, some observers are drawing parallels between the American Revolution and Myanmar's Spring Revolution. Both revolutions arose from resistance to authoritarianism and demands for political rights. However, the Myanmar revolution is fundamentally different in nature. While the American colonies fought against an external imperialist dictatorship, the Myanmar revolution is resisting the dominance of the Myanmar military, which has long monopolized the country's economic and political system. Therefore, Myanmar's challenge today is not only to change the ruling dictator but also to build a political system that can overcome the deep-seated ethnic divisions within the country and the distinctions between the ruling class and the oppressed populace. Against this backdrop, the establishment of the Steering Council for the Emergence of a Federal Democratic Union (SCEF) on March 30, 2026, marks a significant historical milestone. The SCEF was formed by the National Unity Government (NUG), the Committee Representing the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (CRPH), and key ethnic armed organizations, including the Karen National Union (KNU), the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), the Karenni National Progressive Party/Interim Governing Council (KNPP/IEC), and the Chin National Front (CNF). This Steering Council is the most significant formal alliance to emerge from years of discussions and efforts to systematically build collective leadership among long-standing ethnic revolutionary organizations. Thus, the SCEF is not merely symbolic but a systematically organized body capable of practical action. It is also a leadership organization born out of genuine efforts to build a future based on ethnic equality, self-determination, civilian supremacy, justice and accountability, and mutual respect. Furthermore, the formation of the SCEF represents a transition from ad-hoc cooperation among revolutionary forces to regular collective action for policy-making and governance. However, the mere establishment of the SCEF will not automatically create political power or an effective governance mechanism in the liberated areas. To gain the trust and support of the people, it is imperative to quickly establish transparent policy-making, effective governance structures, military and security cooperation, and effective diplomacy. The people's expectations are clear. They want to see tangible progress and achievements, rather than just organizational names. To meet the people's expectations, the SCEF needs to lead simultaneously and without delay in the military, diplomatic, and governance sectors. Myanmar's Geopolitical Stalemate International responses to Myanmar remain fragmented. China and Russia are increasingly providing military and financial support to the Myanmar military junta to varying degrees for their national interests. Western countries, on the other hand, are focusing more on humanitarian aid, economic sanctions, and political support for democratic aspirations. Regional countries are also pursuing policies that prioritize their strategic interests and border stability. Thus, Myanmar's political situation is in a geopolitical stalemate and a quagmire, caught between the competition of major powers and regional interests. Furthermore, international attention is being diverted by global conflicts, the junta's sham elections, and the military leader's visits to China, India, and Laos, casting a shadow over the progress of the Myanmar revolution and the ground situation. Consequently, the Steering Council will have to address not only the international and geopolitical challenges mentioned above but also critical challenges for regional security, such as transnational crime, online fraud syndicates, drug and human trafficking, refugee flows, and border instability. These issues are a priority for the SCEF. This is because, once regional countries acknowledge that Myanmar's conflict poses a threat to regional security, the Steering Council must seize the opportunity and prioritize addressing the question of which organization can cooperate with which foreign partner countries to resolve these issues. Ceasefire Trap The Steering Council will face external pressure for a ceasefire and negotiations. While peace is the ultimate goal for all people, it is crucial to make the international community understand that, historically, the military junta has used ceasefires and sham peace as mere tactics to gain strategic advantage without resolving fundamental political issues. If ceasefire proposals are presented without addressing the root causes of Myanmar's political conflict – the lack of federal democracy for ethnic nationalities, the erosion of equal power sharing, the military junta's evasion of war crimes, the dominance of the military, and the disappearance of civilian authority – and without the military seriously undertaking guaranteed accountability and fundamental changes for political agreements, revolutionary forces and the Steering Council must proceed with extreme caution. A ceasefire without addressing the fundamental issues will be nothing more than a meaningless political maneuver. This ceasefire political maneuver and sham peace must be made understood by the international community, including neighboring countries. Sustainable peace and stability depend solely on genuine political agreements and cannot be resolved by temporary ceasefires. The Steering Council's No