By Phyo Lin Aung (NP News) – November 15
A strong and defined foreign policy is very important to ensure the protection of a nation’s national interests and sovereignty. While countries around the world have a responsibility to respect and abide by diplomatic relations, there has recently been a continuous wave of interference and illegal interactions between some foreign countries and diplomatic organizations in Myanmar’s internal affairs, judiciary, and domestic law enforcement.
In this context, the recent activities of the German Embassy's Chargé d’Affaires in Yangon, Mr. Mathias Licharz, have drawn attention following the publication of a video concerning U Win Myint on November 8, 2026.
On November 10, Mr. Licharz was summoned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where Deputy Minister U Ko Ko Kyaw expressed the Ministry's serious concerns and issued a formal warning regarding the video. However, as of November 11, the video reportedly remained available on the German Embassy's social media platforms.
The controversy arose after Mr. Licharz recorded a video outside U Win Myint's residence in Yangon to mark his 75th birthday. In the video, he questioned whether U Win Myint, who had been granted a presidential pardon on April 17, 2026, was genuinely free. He also referred to the United Nations' position regarding U Win Myint's status as Myanmar's legitimate President. Such baseless arguments make a mockery of the government’s liberalization efforts.
Concerning this issue, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs noted that as Germany is an established democracy in Europe, one would expect the Chargé d’Affaires to carry out diplomatic matters with professionalism. Yet as a democratically elected government is now taking responsibility in Myanmar, the Chargé d’Affaires comments are an insult to the host country’s Head of State and disrespects the over 13.13 million Myanmar citizens who voted in the election.
In addition, the Chargé d’Affaires’ intentional actions, including the choice of location for the video, appear to be encouraging opposition to the host country and the government, and are inciting internal unrest and discrediting the government. Furthermore, according to Article 41(1) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, diplomats of the sending country are obliged to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving country and not to interfere in its internal affairs.
Deputy Minister further informed that if the German Chargé d’Affaires decided to recognize U Win Myint as President and wished to end his service in Myanmar, the Ministry would not object to his decision. In addition, Deputy Minister stressed that although Myanmar valued its relations with Germany, mutual respect, sovereign equality and non-interference were fundamental pillars of diplomatic relations and had to be strictly upheld. He stated that the Chargé d’Affaires’ conduct was inconsistent with the standards of diplomatic discretion and restraint, and he therefore strongly objected to it.
Therefore, an official explanation was requested on whether the statements made by the Chargé d'Affaires, the choice of location, and the public distribution via social media were carried out with the authorization of the German Federal Foreign Office or of his own personal volition. Furthermore, a stern warning was issued that should similar actions recur, action would be taken in accordance with international law and diplomatic practice.
The incident highlights the importance of maintaining clear boundaries between legitimate diplomatic engagement and involvement in the domestic political affairs of another state. Although foreign diplomatic missions may express views and maintain contact with individuals and organizations, such activities must be conducted in accordance with international diplomatic obligations.
While this action was able to prevent blatant violations of Myanmar’s sovereignty on Myanmar soil in a timely manner, it is important to note that some foreign government organizations are also frequently involved in similar actions. One such development was the reported meeting between members of the Steering Council for the Emergence of a Federal Democratic Union (SCEF), an exiled opposition group, and South Korean lawmakers on November 5, 2026.
The meeting was reportedly attended by Daw Zin Mar Aung, U Tin Htun Naing of the NUG, KNPP Secretary Neineh Plo, and CNF General Secretary Salai Thla Hei, who met with South Korean lawmakers Lee Yong-seon and Kim Jun-hyung.
The purpose and main topics of the meeting were to discuss the progress of the federal democratic transition in Myanmar and the increase in assistance from South Korea. It was also reported that the Myanmar delegation group praised the South Korean government for not recognizing the legitimacy of the current Myanmar government.
Although the meeting took place outside Myanmar's territory, its political implications should not be overlooked. Although contact between foreign politicians and opposition groups does not inherently break any laws or international agreements, if it can be considered to involve some form of political backing, planning or discussion about the political future of another country then it can cause problems in terms of diplomatic relations.
Relations between Myanmar and South Korea remain relevant beyond political considerations. Despite a reduction in certain areas of official diplomatic engagement, the South Korean Embassy in Myanmar continues to operate, while economic cooperation, trade, and labor-related arrangements remain important aspects of bilateral relations.
According to published statistics, South Korea ranks sixth among foreign investors in Myanmar and ninth in total trade volume. As such, these unthoughtful actions by South Korean lawmakers could have political implications for ongoing economic projects and bilateral relations between their government and Myanmar. Therefore, it is worth bearing in mind that such reckless moves by political figures in foreign countries, which undermine Myanmar's sovereignty, could eventually damage bilateral relations in the future.
In addition, in the regional diplomatic arena, recent political movements in Bangladesh are also of particular attention. The Bangladesh government has officially confirmed that it is holding direct talks with the Myanmar government as well as the AA armed group, which the Myanmar government has designated as a terrorist organization, to the repatriation of Bengalis from the Cox’s Bazar and Bhasan Char refugee camps to their homes in Rakhine State.
At a policy dialogue hosted in Dhaka on November 8, Shama Obaed Islam, Bangladesh’s State Minister for Foreign Affairs said, “The government has formed a committee to formulate a national strategy on this issue and is in talks with the Myanmar government and is also in contact with the Arakan Army (AA).”
Furthermore, she warned that relying solely on routine diplomatic channels to achieve repatriation would be “naive," noting that there are differing views on this issue among organizations within Myanmar.
From Myanmar's perspective, direct official engagement between a foreign government and an armed group designated as a terrorist organization under its domestic legal framework could be viewed as undermining the government's position and complicating efforts to resolve the issue through established bilateral mechanisms.
Bangladesh is merely giving the excuse to legitimize its engagement with the armed group under the guise of resolving their problems. Such actions may pose new diplomatic challenges to bilateral relations, and Myanmar needs to consider appropriate diplomatic responses and policy reviews.
In conclusion, national sovereignty and core interests constitute non-negotiable boundaries in international relations. The recent actions by Germany, South Korea, and Bangladesh demonstrate how foreign interference oversteps diplomatic protocol to undermine Myanmar’s internal affairs, judicial sovereignty, and the rule of law. Accordingly, Myanmar must pursue a consistent and well-defined foreign policy, respond to misguided diplomatic intervention through appropriate and proportionate measures, and regularly review its diplomatic strategies to safeguard national interests, uphold its legal framework, and preserve its sovereign integrity. –
