Myanmar Spring Chronicle – February 14 Perspective
MoeMaKa, February 15, 2025
The Impact of the Argentine Court’s Arrest Warrants on Myanmar’s Politics
On February 14, news broke that an Argentine court had issued arrest warrants against those responsible for the 2017 Rohingya genocide in northern Rakhine State. This development came over five years after the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK), based in the United Kingdom, filed a case in November 2019 demanding action against those who ordered, were responsible for, and carried out the genocide.
The significant news is that the Argentine court has issued arrest warrants for Myanmar’s military chief, Min Aung Hlaing, and 23 other military officials. This means that Interpol will notify countries that have signed international agreements to detain these individuals. The goal is to ensure that those responsible for the August–September 2017 genocide face justice.
However, in practical terms, Myanmar’s military leaders responsible for the genocide are unlikely to travel to countries outside their allied nations, reducing the actual risk of arrest. Even powerful international courts like the International Criminal Court (ICC), based in The Hague, Netherlands, have struggled to enforce warrants. For instance, despite an ICC-issued arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, signatory nations failed to detain him during an official visit last year.
Similarly, the ICC recently issued warrants for Israeli Prime Minister and Defense Minister over air and ground military operations in Gaza and southern Lebanon, which resulted in over 40,000 civilian deaths over 17 months. However, neither Israeli leader has been arrested, and both recently met with former U.S. President Trump at the White House, demonstrating a lack of enforcement. Trump even condemned the ICC and imposed sanctions on its judges and prosecutors for issuing those warrants.
Surprising Inclusion of Aung San Suu Kyi and U Htin Kyaw
On February 14, reports revealed that Myanmar’s civilian leaders at the time—President U Htin Kyaw and State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi—were also named in the arrest warrants. While many in Myanmar celebrated Min Aung Hlaing’s warrant, they were shocked and outraged to learn that Suu Kyi and U Htin Kyaw were also included.
BROUK clarified that when it originally submitted the case to the Argentine court, it did not request the inclusion of Aung San Suu Kyi and U Htin Kyaw and had not provided any evidence against them. It appears that the Argentine court, based on its own deliberations, decided to include these two figures due to their high-ranking government positions at the time of the genocide.
Back in 2019, before the military coup, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague had already accepted a genocide case filed by Gambia against Myanmar. At the time, Aung San Suu Kyi personally led Myanmar’s defense at the court, arguing against the genocide allegations. Following the 2021 military coup, the military regime continued handling the case on behalf of Myanmar.
This history raises the possibility that Suu Kyi’s defense at the ICJ may have contributed to the Argentine court’s decision to include her in the warrants.
Implications and Future Consequences
The issuance of these arrest warrants highlights key legal actions taken by the ICJ, ICC, and now the Argentine court against Myanmar’s military. However, the practical consequences remain uncertain. Myanmar’s military leaders are likely to avoid travel to countries where they risk arrest, and no domestic authority in Myanmar can enforce the warrants against them.
For many Myanmar citizens—especially supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD—her inclusion in the warrant list has caused anger and frustration. There is also growing resentment toward Rohingya advocacy groups like BROUK, which initiated the case.
Within anti-junta resistance movements, including the National Unity Government (NUG), this development may deepen differences in views and strategies regarding the Rohingya genocide. Some groups may struggle to reconcile their positions, potentially impacting the broader Spring Revolution and the fight against military rule.