In full, the statement reads like this: “The army may have to come forward and make sure that democracy works.” It was actually made about Indonesia by former defence minister Juwono Sudarsono. But it triggers Myanmar thoughts too. It was cited in an interesting op-ed by Michael Vatikiotis carried in last Friday’s New York Times. Looking at Indonesia after 15 years of mainly peaceful transition, Vatikiotis argued that a troubling trend of religious intolerance and weak civilian leadership could persuade the military it needs to act to safeguard pluralism. He further noted that there is historical precedent for this. In the early years of Indonesian independence, weak domestic governance plus limited protection for minorities fanned intolerance, generating guided democracy in the 1950s and army-backed rule in the 1960s.

The parallels with the Myanmar case today, and with Burmese history from half a century ago, are obvious. Indeed, it is because the two countries have so much in common that Indonesia’s broadly successful transition is frequently touted as a model for Myanmar. However, if comparative lessons are to be drawn, then the negatives are just as important as the positives. They too are self-evident. If civilian leaders in Buddhist-dominated Myanmar follow their counterparts in Muslim-majority Indonesia in failing to speak out against religious intolerance, in fact sometimes appearing to endorse it, then fanaticism will increase. At some point, military leaders may claim they have no choice but to build a more muscular political presence. After all, this is the rationale for discipline-flourishing democracy.

Clearly Myanmar’s military is currently held in far lower regard than Indonesia’s ever was. Nevertheless, its image has already been partially rehabilitated by its provision of order at times of sectarian violence, and Senior General Min Aung Hlaing appears to be eyeing a presidential run. It is therefore quite conceivable that Myanmar’s transition will be restricted to the discipline-flourishing variant sketched in the former junta’s seven-stage roadmap. For Myanmar to push beyond that, civilian politicians from across the political spectrum must demonstrate they are capable of providing real leadership on the most difficult human rights challenges facing the country.