President Min Aung Hlaing has rejected the regional bloc’s approach to Myanmar’s civil conflict, deepening doubts over diplomacy as his administration seeks international legitimacy.

Myanmar’s military-backed government has opened a new confrontation with its Southeast Asian neighbours after President Min Aung Hlaing publicly criticised ASEAN’s stalled peace initiative and presented a political programme intended to consolidate his administration’s authority.

Addressing parliament as his government approached its first 100 days in office, Min Aung Hlaing argued that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ Five-Point Consensus had failed to stabilise Myanmar. He accused the regional organisation of treating the country unfairly and questioned whether the framework had been adopted with the full agreement of ASEAN’s members.

The remarks represented one of his clearest challenges to ASEAN since he exchanged his position as junta chief for the presidency following a military-organised election earlier this year. The vote was rejected by much of the opposition and criticised internationally for taking place while prominent political figures remained detained and fighting continued across large areas of the country.

Min Aung Hlaing used his parliamentary speech to outline a five-year programme covering economic development, government administration and national reconstruction. His attempt to portray the new administration as a functioning civilian government, however, has done little to dispel concerns that the armed forces remain the country’s dominant political institution.

Myanmar has been engulfed in conflict since the military overthrew the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi in February 2021. The coup prompted mass demonstrations, a violent security crackdown and the growth of armed resistance movements allied with long-established ethnic organisations.

ASEAN responded in April 2021 by proposing an immediate reduction in violence, negotiations among the conflicting parties, the appointment of a special envoy and the delivery of humanitarian assistance. The organisation has continued to regard that agreement as its principal framework for addressing the crisis, despite acknowledging that implementation has produced limited results.

Myanmar’s parliament and Foreign Ministry have recently intensified their criticism of the plan. In July, lawmakers adopted a motion urging the government to review the consensus, arguing that it no longer reflected developments inside the country and conflicted with ASEAN’s principles of sovereignty and non-interference.

The dispute exposes a persistent weakness within ASEAN. The organisation operates largely through consensus and has traditionally avoided direct involvement in its members’ domestic affairs. Those principles have made it difficult to respond decisively to a conflict involving one of its own governments.

ASEAN has excluded Myanmar’s senior political leaders from several high-level meetings, allowing the country to send only non-political representatives. Yet the bloc has stopped short of imposing sanctions or formally suspending Myanmar, reflecting divisions among member states over whether isolation or engagement offers the better path towards peace.

Min Aung Hlaing’s government appears to be calculating that regional governments will gradually restore normal relations now that Myanmar formally has a president and parliament. Several neighbouring countries remain concerned about refugees, organised crime and instability spreading across Myanmar’s borders, creating pressure for continued diplomatic contact even in the absence of meaningful political reform.

The administration has also taken carefully controlled steps involving Aung San Suu Kyi. Authorities announced on August 3 that the detained former leader had met a representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross. The government previously said she had been transferred to house arrest after Min Aung Hlaing assumed the presidency. Independent access to her has remained highly restricted.

Such gestures may be intended to soften Myanmar’s international image, but they are unlikely to satisfy governments demanding the release of political prisoners, an end to attacks on civilians and inclusive negotiations with the opposition.

The political atmosphere inside the country remains deeply repressive. Courts recently sentenced nine activists to prison terms of up to 37 years over a protest calling for a boycott of the military-organised election, the abolition of compulsory military service and the release of detainees.

For ASEAN, the latest challenge is whether it can defend its peace framework without pushing Myanmar further away from regional diplomacy. Abandoning the consensus could be interpreted as accepting the military’s political order, while continuing to insist on a plan that has not been implemented risks making the bloc appear powerless.

Min Aung Hlaing’s speech therefore marked more than a disagreement over diplomatic language. It was an attempt to redefine Myanmar’s relationship with its neighbours and persuade the region to recognise a political system still shaped by the coup of 2021.

Whether ASEAN accepts that new reality will influence not only Myanmar’s future but also the organisation’s credibility as Southeast Asia’s principal diplomatic institution.