The Trump administration has opened direct talks with Myanmar’s military-installed government, marking a significant shift from Washington’s post-coup policy of sanctions and diplomatic isolation.
US officials and people familiar with the outreach say the engagement initially focused on securing the release of an American businessman and shutting down scam networks operating from Myanmar. But the discussions could expand into wider cooperation, including access to Myanmar’s substantial deposits of heavy rare earth minerals that are important to electric vehicles, wind turbines and other advanced technologies.
The emerging relationship reflects a broader change in US policy toward Myanmar. Rather than making democratic transition the central condition for engagement, Washington is increasingly focusing on issues with direct American economic and security interests.
The shift comes even as Myanmar’s military government remains under US sanctions and continues to face accusations of serious human rights abuses.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
A New Level of Contact
US Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research Michael Vance played a leading role in the new outreach, according to current and former US officials.
Vance met Myanmar’s military leader, Min Aung Hlaing, in Naypyitaw on September 15 and 16. The meeting was aimed partly at securing the release of American businessman Adam Castillo, but it also created an opportunity for broader discussions between Washington and Myanmar’s military-backed government.
It was the highest-level US contact with Myanmar’s military leadership since the 2021 coup.
The meeting followed discussions in Tokyo in June involving US and Myanmar officials. Officials from the Treasury Department, Department of Homeland Security and Pentagon were reportedly involved alongside State Department representatives.
Vance has also held discussions with Myanmar’s democratic opposition and ethnic armed groups fighting the military government, suggesting that Washington is not relying exclusively on the military leadership as it assesses the country’s conflict.
Nevertheless, direct engagement with Min Aung Hlaing represents a notable departure from the approach adopted after the coup.
From Democracy Promotion to Transactional Engagement
The Biden administration responded to the 2021 coup by imposing sanctions on senior military figures and military-linked businesses while freezing Myanmar government assets held at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Congress also authorized non-lethal assistance for opposition forces, including programs designed to provide early warning of military airstrikes and encourage defections from the armed forces.
Much of that approach has since been reduced under Trump’s foreign-policy overhaul.
The new strategy appears to place greater emphasis on concrete US interests. Scam networks, the detention of American citizens and access to critical minerals offer Washington practical reasons to maintain contact with Myanmar’s authorities despite the country’s political crisis.
The State Department has defended the engagement.
“You don’t solve problems by ignoring them. You solve them by addressing them,” spokesperson Tommy Pigott said.
The administration has also said that engagement with the military government does not mean abandoning relationships with other groups in Myanmar.
The distinction will be important. Talking to the military does not necessarily amount to formally recognizing its political legitimacy, but sustained high-level contact can nevertheless provide the generals with a degree of diplomatic access they have struggled to obtain since the coup.
The American Detainee Opened the Door
The immediate catalyst for the latest engagement was the detention of Adam Castillo, a former head of the American Chamber of Commerce in Myanmar.
Myanmar authorities detained Castillo at Yangon airport on June 11. People familiar with the negotiations said White House, National Security Council and State Department officials subsequently conducted back-channel discussions with Myanmar officials.
According to one person familiar with the talks, Myanmar sought an official engagement with Washington at an appropriate level in exchange for Castillo’s release.
Castillo was eventually freed and credited President Donald Trump for helping secure his release.
The episode appears to have demonstrated how individual cases involving American citizens can create channels for wider diplomatic engagement.
It also gave both governments an opportunity to establish direct communication without immediately resolving the much larger political dispute surrounding Myanmar’s military rule.
Scam Centres Are Another Common Interest
The fight against criminal scam networks has become another major area of US-Myanmar engagement.
Myanmar has become a major base for networks involved in romance scams, investment fraud and other forms of cyber-enabled financial crime. American victims have lost billions of dollars to such operations.
US officials are seeking cooperation from Myanmar’s authorities to close scam centres operating inside the country. The FBI has also established direct contact with Myanmar officials over cyber scams, according to people familiar with the matter.
The challenge is that many of these operations reportedly operate from territory controlled by militias and ethnic armed groups rather than directly by the central government.
Researchers have also raised concerns that some of the money generated by scam operations flows to actors connected to the military.
That creates an immediate question for Washington: how much influence does Myanmar’s military government actually have over the networks it is being asked to dismantle?
If cooperation produces measurable results, however, the issue could provide a relatively politically manageable area for continued US engagement.
Critical Minerals Could Change the Relationship
The more strategically significant part of the emerging relationship may be Myanmar’s mineral resources.
Myanmar possesses major deposits of heavy rare earth elements used in technologies ranging from electric vehicles to renewable energy systems. For Washington, these resources have become increasingly important as the United States seeks to reduce dependence on China for critical minerals.
US officials have discussed potential access to Myanmar’s rare-earth deposits, according to people familiar with the talks.
But there is a major obstacle: many of the deposits are located in areas controlled by ethnic armed organizations fighting the military government.
That means any US attempt to establish a reliable supply chain would require more than an agreement with Naypyitaw. Washington would potentially need to navigate Myanmar’s fragmented territorial control and the competing interests of ethnic armed groups.
China presents another challenge.
China is currently the principal destination for Myanmar’s rare-earth exports, giving Beijing an established position in a strategically important part of the supply chain. A significant US role in Myanmar’s mineral sector could therefore become another point of competition between Washington and Beijing.
For the Trump administration, however, the possibility of diversifying critical-mineral supplies could make engagement with Myanmar more attractive despite the country’s political and security risks.
Sanctions Are Becoming Harder to Reconcile With Engagement
The emerging policy creates a contradiction at the centre of Washington’s Myanmar strategy.
Min Aung Hlaing remains under US sanctions over human rights abuses, including the military’s treatment of the Rohingya during the 2016-17 campaign that Washington has characterized as genocide.
Myanmar’s military has also continued conducting airstrikes and other military operations during the country’s ongoing civil war.
Less than two weeks after Vance’s meeting with Min Aung Hlaing, a military airstrike on a crowded marketplace in Rakhine state reportedly killed more than 50 people, according to UN human rights officials.
For critics of the new approach, such developments demonstrate the risk of prioritizing strategic and economic interests over pressure for political change.
Representative Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the policy shift undermined US interests and values and could provide greater international legitimacy to Myanmar’s military government.
The administration, however, argues that engagement can be used to address American interests while maintaining relationships with groups opposing military rule.
The tension between those two approaches is likely to define Washington’s Myanmar policy going forward.
China Is the Larger Strategic Question
Myanmar’s importance to Washington extends beyond the country itself.
Its geographical position gives it significance in Southeast Asia, while its natural resources could become increasingly valuable as competition over critical-mineral supply chains intensifies.
China already has deep economic and strategic ties with Myanmar and remains a major buyer of its rare-earth exports.
For Washington, establishing even limited economic access could therefore serve two objectives: protecting American interests in Myanmar and reducing dependence on Chinese-controlled supply chains.
But greater US involvement also risks complicating the country’s internal conflict.
Myanmar’s military does not control the entire country. Ethnic armed organizations and other opposition forces control substantial territory, including areas containing valuable natural resources.
A US strategy focused heavily on the central government could therefore encounter practical limits regardless of diplomatic agreements reached in Naypyitaw.
What Comes Next?
The immediate future of US-Myanmar relations is unlikely to resemble a full diplomatic normalization.
Instead, Washington appears to be pursuing selective engagement based on specific interests: freeing detained Americans, combating cybercrime and potentially securing access to critical minerals.
That approach gives the Trump administration flexibility. It can communicate directly with Myanmar’s military leadership without necessarily abandoning contact with opposition and ethnic groups.
But it also changes the incentives surrounding the military government.
After years of sanctions and isolation, direct meetings with senior US officials could provide Min Aung Hlaing’s government with a valuable channel to Washington and an opportunity to present itself as an actor with which the United States must do business.
Whether that engagement produces concrete results will depend on what Myanmar can deliver in return.
If the military government helps dismantle scam networks or facilitates access to strategically important minerals, Washington may have stronger reasons to deepen the relationship. If cooperation remains limited while military violence continues, pressure to reconsider the approach could grow.
For now, Myanmar is becoming a test of how far the Trump administration is prepared to pursue transactional diplomacy in a country where security, human rights, critical minerals and competition with China are increasingly intertwined.
With information from Reuters.
