Printable Version

Hopes and Tears of Burma 

                                                                                                            Prof. Kanbawza Win

For more than half a century (to be exact since 1962) the people of Burma has been under the boots of the military with a fonder hope that some miracle or an outside power would intervene to save them from the clutches of the tyrannical Burmese Generals. This hope still continues to spring eternal in the Burmese people's breast. Last December, the UN Security Council, the world's most powerful joint body was being brief on the woeful situation of Burma. True, Burma was not officially in the United Nations Security Council's (UNSC) agenda but had gained enough recognition as a threat to regional peace and security, so much so that the members has to take up the matter.

The case for potential threat was clearly outlined by the two Nobel Laureates, Vaclav Havel, former President of the Czech Republic, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa. Its alacrity and recommendations to the UNSC under Chapter VII and Article 41 were clearly outlined. Millions of refugees, Internally Displaced Persons and migrant workers are present in the peripheral of Burma, posing a grave threat to its neighboring countries and its prominent role as the region's narco powerhouse with drug warlords as the illustrious gentlemen of Rangoon, are just some of the irrevocable points, not to mention the persecutions of its political opponents and of course the hush- hush nuclear reactor near Maymyo, all post a severe threat to the international security.

But the big power rivalry in the region which at present is maintained by an unspoken equilibrium or at arms length in international relations, the current latent balance would be thrust to the front in the vortex of geopolitical active competition, for strategic control or influence in this vital strategic country, whose borders are shared by principal competitors and overlooks the important critical gateway to the Sea lanes of
the Indian Ocean to the South China Sea and the Pacific Ocean.

Burma has embarrassed ASEAN over and over again. Instead of offering political cover for the Junta, elected leaders of other countries should be standing side by side with Aung San Suu Kyi and others in Burma fighting for their rights. Because of continued political support and trade with China, India, Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries, the military government in Rangoon has remained largely impervious to sanctions by the United States and European Union. In fact, even the military can lay claim to having some sort of transitional strategy. While it is a sham, they have the National Convention and the road map to democracy. Using these, the military will able to emulate the 1974 election when the Junta transformed itself into a civilian government. They will claim legitimacy without giving the Burmese people any real political change.

            During the Cold War era, Ne Win, the father of the Burmese dictators, has perfected his isolationist policy allowing the military to suppress internal opposition without attracting international attention. They are bent on staying in power at all cost and have crawled for dialogue and have tied themselves to China, ASEAN and India, forging economic links that are difficult to break. The Burmese Generals strategy is to isolate themselves from spheres of Western influence, consolidate their power and marginalize Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD. It had has served them well, allowing them to remain in power for 16 years. The Western world and the US are shouting for democracy and political transition in Burma but they have no clear strategy for how they will implement these things. They have plenty to say, but no solutions for the Burmese people. It is time to formulate a plan and a policy if we want to see a democratic Burma.
            It seems that China and the United States are not pushing harder for democratic reforms in Burma as they had done in North Korea. China, Burma's strongest ally, has steered clear of calls for democratization there, and has not pressed for Daw Suu's release. Also, India, Burma's western neighbor, has spoken in general terms about the virtues of democracy without directly criticizing the Junta or lending a helping hand to the pro democracy movement. As hard as it seems all three of them including the European Union and Japan need to play major roles in the future of Burma and tough political decisions must be made by all sides if we were to achieve our dire result. A Six-power conference (China, India, US, EU, Japan and ASEAN) like Korea should be attempted on the Burmese thugs.

In Burma's case it is very evident that the wills of the superpowers were sorely wanting In his second inaugural address, President George W. Bush pledged that "All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know the United States will not ignore` your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you. And not only in spirit but we will defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary" But did the President really mean it? Now Bush II has pledged in an open forum that "all who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know that when you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you." Supposing to day if Taiwan were to declare independence will the United States defend by force of arms? Bush's followers will complain, "Well, of course he doesn't mean it'. 

In spite of the America's long and sometimes dubious history of encouraging opposition groups only to stand by and watch tanks or helicopters mow the persecuted people down our hopes are still pin on Uncle Sam. Even though we know that in 1956, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles pledged to the Hungarians and ended up as thousands of Hungarians were slaughtered and in 1991, during the first Iraq War the first Bush administration encouraged the Shiite to rise up against Saddam Hussein. Helicopters flew and the Shiites were slaughter, yet we look towards America.

As a Burmese we can only applaud the US resolve on Burma issue, and its launch of what could be a snowball effect in its international drive to effect the change in Burma. There is hope and the fifty million plus people cling on to it. Even at the State of the Union address, the other day President Bush said "We seek the end of tyranny in our world….At the start of 2006, more than half the people of our world live in democratic nations. And we do not forget the other half in places like Burma…, because the demands of justice, and the peace of this world, require their freedom as well." To the Burmese people these kind of words rings like sweet bells in their ears. What we need is the follow up actions. 

At the briefing of the UNSC the consensus was "The most important point we came away with was the Secretary General's comment that this situation obviously requires further scrutiny," commented John Bolton the British representative. The UN Secretary General has tried his level best since a decade ago, when he endeavor to facilitate national reconciliation and democratization but was hampered by the Junta, who refused to let the Special Envoy Razali Ismail into the country.

In the words of Ibrahin Gambari, Kofi Annan's political chief, who brief the Security Council "The people of Burma has endured unnecessary social and economic hardships. In the longer term, deep-rooted chronic and accelerating poverty growing insecurity and increasing political tension appeared to be moving Burma towards humanitarian crisis. Clearly this was a man made disaster, in other words is a disaster imposed by the Generals over its own people. The consensus of the UNSC was that the Burmese problem need to be addressed. Now the Burmese people are hoping and praying that the UNSC will keep Burma firmly under it international security and of course all power should be give to the US and Britain to take the lead in changing Burma.

It is already high time for a UN Commission of Inquiry to be established to investigate the longstanding dire human rights situation in Burma and the possibility that war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed. Burma remains one of the most repressive countries in Asia, despite promises for political reform and national reconciliation by its authoritarian military government. It continues to commit systematic, widespread, and well-documented abuses in ongoing conflicts with ethnic minority rebel groups, including extra-judicial executions, rape, torture, forced relocation of entire villages, and forced labor. Perhaps it is time for the civilized world to stop the tear drops and the Burmese people and hear their sorrowful and pathetic cries.  

Prof. Kanbawza Win

Chiangmai