JAKARTA: Indonesia’s top diplomat made a visit to Myanmar on June 8, the latest foreign minister from an Asean country to visit Naypyidaw as the grouping rethinks how best to engage the conflict-mired country.
The visit of Indonesia Foreign Minister Sugiono, the first official trip by an Indonesian minister to Myanmar since the 2021 military coup, has raised eyebrows, given Jakarta’s longstanding position as one of Asean’s strongest advocates for holding the military regime to account.
But analysts told The Straits Times that the visit does not mark a major shift in Indonesia’s stance. Instead, it reflects a broader reassessment within Asean of how best to engage Myanmar.
“It could be seen as a pragmatic recalibration,” said Joanne Lin, senior fellow and coordinator of the Asean Studies Centre at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
“Jakarta’s move reflects a broader recognition that isolation alone has not delivered meaningful progress,” she added.
“While Indonesia remains supportive of the Asean 5PC, what appears to be changing is the emphasis,” she added, referring to Asean’s Five-Point Consensus, the group’s peace road map adopted in 2021.
During the visit to Naypyidaw, Sugiono conveyed a message from President Prabowo Subianto reaffirming Indonesia’s support for an inclusive and sustainable peace process in Myanmar, Indonesia’s Foreign Ministry said.
Reiterating Jakarta’s support for the peace plan, he said Indonesia was ready to work with stakeholders in Myanmar to encourage dialogue and a peaceful resolution of the conflict.
He later described his discussions with junta chief-turned-president Min Aung Hlaing as having taken place in a “cordial, positive, open and constructive atmosphere”.
On the heels of other visits
Several Asean countries had already engaged Myanmar’s military leadership in recent months.
Thailand’s Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow visited Naypyidaw in April and has publicly offered to act as a bridge between Myanmar and Asean, while Malaysia’s top diplomat Mohamad Hasan travelled there in May as part of efforts to reassess the group’s approach.
For Indonesia, the visit to Myanmar may be a way to preserve influence over developments in the country while reinforcing Jakarta’s standing within Asean, noted Lin. “Indonesia may see that maintaining direct channels allows it to convey Asean’s expectations more effectively.”
The discussion comes as Asean members reassess their approach towards Myanmar following elections held between December 2025 and January 2026 that were widely criticised by opposition groups and rights advocates as neither free nor inclusive.
The polls paved the way for Min Aung Hlaing to become president in April, prompting fresh debate within the group over how to engage Myanmar’s leadership while maintaining pressure for progress on peace efforts.
Asean has largely barred Myanmar’s military leadership from attending high-level meetings since the coup, citing the junta’s failure to implement the peace plan.
The plan calls for an immediate cessation of violence, dialogue among all parties, the appointment of a special envoy and the delivery of humanitarian assistance.
But progress has been scant, and this has prompted some in the region to reconsider how best to engage Naypyidaw while still maintaining pressure on the military leadership.
Asean Secretary-General Kao Kim Hourn himself has spoken about this, telling Reuters on May 8 that the group’s foreign ministers have agreed to a virtual meeting with their Myanmar counterpart.
Lin said there is a growing recognition across Asean that the current approach has reached its limits. “In this sense, engagement between Asean member states and the junta is increasingly being viewed not as a recognition of the new government, but as a practical necessity.”
Continuous efforts
Analysts noted that Indonesia itself has never completely disengaged from Myanmar.
Principal fellow at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute Julia Lau said the language used by Sugiono may have sounded softer, but did not necessarily represent a fundamental change in policy.
“I do not see this as a significant change in tone from Indonesia,” said Lau, who is also coordinator of the institute’s Indonesia Studies Programme.
She pointed to Indonesia’s activism during its 2023 Asean chairmanship, when then-foreign minister Retno Marsudi led extensive behind-the-scenes diplomacy involving Asean members and external partners in an attempt to advance the peace plan.
“It is clear that there has been minimal progress on all of the 5PC’s conditions, but Indonesia likely still believes there is a chance it can play some role as a mediator or intermediary in finding some resolution to the stalemate that is Myanmar,” she said.
Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, a senior international affairs analyst at Solaris Strategies Singapore, said Indonesia deserved credit for continuing efforts to find a solution to the crisis.
“Whether in the end the outcome is fruitful, credit should be given to Indonesia for staying the course to find a resolution to the Myanmar conundrum,” he said.
“The driving impetus to solve the Myanmar conundrum stems from Indonesia positioning itself under Prabowo as a principled and pragmatic middle power that seeks to mediate conflicts as a humane internationalist.”
Some Indonesian observers believe Jakarta’s own political history may shape how it views Myanmar’s future.
Teuku Rezasyah, a lecturer in international relations at President University in Cikarang, Indonesia, told ST that Myanmar could draw lessons from Indonesia’s post-1998 transition, which saw the military gradually withdraw from politics before former military figures later returned through democratic elections.
“President Prabowo is uneasy seeing the unsettled Myanmar issue and would like to make a breakthrough,” he said.
Risks of bilateral engagements
Still, analysts cautioned that engagement carries significant risks.
Bilateral engagement by individual Asean members could be misconstrued as legitimising Myanmar’s military leadership if it is not accompanied by tangible progress on the ground, Lin said.
“The most important concern is that such engagement could be perceived as conferring legitimacy on the military leadership without corresponding progress on the ground,” she said, adding that Asean’s credibility could suffer if member states pursued separate bilateral approaches without common objectives.
While engagement could be useful if it advanced the peace plan, efforts seen as normalising relations with the junta despite limited progress could raise questions about the bloc’s consistency and commitment to its own decisions.
Lau similarly cautioned that varying views among Asean members on how quickly Myanmar should be reintegrated into regional diplomacy could expose divisions within the bloc.
“The risk would be that Asean consensus may be seen as elusive or fragile, given the varying positions of each Asean member state regarding how soon to reintegrate Myanmar politically,” she said. - The Straits Times/ANN
