The Burma Spring

Myanmar's new rulers seem to be serious about change we can all believe in. So what can the West do now to end decades of isolation?

BY JIM DELLA-GIACOMA | OCTOBER 13, 2011

These are heady days for those long hoping for change in Myanmar. The government, which was installed on the back of a sham election that saw the ruling junta ditch their military uniforms for civilian garb, has set out an ambitious reform agenda and seems to be trying to stick to it. After 20 years without a parliament and democratic process, its new leaders are now showing a surprising impatience with the status quo and are changing the way this country is ruled. Western policymakers should sit up and take notice of these reforms -- and, most importantly, respond.

The new government's apparent decision this week to shift its stance toward the prisoners of conscience in Myanmar's jails is an important sign of its efforts to promote internal reconciliation in the divided country. On Oct. 12, it released more than 6,359 detainees as part of a general amnesty, first hinted at in a landmark parliamentary motion urging the president to consider such a move. While the exact number of political prisoners among those released is yet to be confirmed, Amnesty International has said that the government released at least 120 of some 2,000 incarcerated political detainees.

Although the actual figure may be debated, it is the quality as much as the quantity that is significant. While less well-known than Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, a number of leading dissidents appear to be among those released, such as Ashin Gambira from the All Burma Monks' Alliance, who led street protests in 2007; comedian and social activist Zarganar, who criticized the government's response to the devastating Cyclone Nargis; and a prominent ethnic figure, Hso Ten, who headed the Shan State Army-North armed group.

The fact that the release was channeled through the new institutions of the presidency, parliament, and the country's fledging human rights commission lends it an unprecedented institutional basis that makes it harder to reverse. The vote in favor of the parliamentary resolution on the amnesty included the military's faction, indicating the move is openly backed by the armed forces in a way that previous releases have not been. Opposition figures in Myanmar believe that this is the first stage of a phased release of political prisoners, possibly with two more tranches in coming weeks.

The release should not be interpreted as a stand-alone event. In recent months, President Thein Sein has reached out to prominent critics, including Aung San Suu Kyi. He has made overtures to armed ethnic groups, signing preliminary peace agreements with the Wa and Mongla, which like others are still fighting a 60-year civil war. Controls on freedom of expression and the right to organize have been loosened. Myanmar has set its sights on chairing the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in 2014, which will require even more dramatic steps to alter the old mindset and become more integrated with its neighbors.

Some critics doubt the government's commitment to the reforms. But since the International Crisis Group released its Sept. 22 report, "Myanmar: Major Reform Underway," which foreshadowed greater political, economic, and human rights changes in the country, some of the subsequent positive actions have exceeded our expectations. This includes the decision to suspend construction of the controversial Chinese-backed Myitsone hydroelectric dam, which would have flooded Kachin lands and created an environmental disaster for those living downstream on the Irrawaddy River. All these moves should be seen in the context of a country seemingly now determined to pull itself out of decades of isolation.

Many recent visitors have made similar observations, as visas are increasingly issued freely, even to exile media. "I almost left the country thinking they're moving a little too fast. I never thought I would say that about Myanmar," Norwegian Deputy Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told the Financial Times after a trip this week. He cited the lifting of bans on websites, the chief censor's proclamation that all forms of censorship should be reviewed, the broadcast of lively parliamentary debates, the toning down of propaganda, and the positive statements from Aung San Suu Kyi after she met with the president on Aug. 19.

These are real changes, not just words. And they can effect political activity inside the country, create a more open environment, and add momentum for further change. But they are just a start on a long road ahead and do not guarantee reform will succeed. There are still many challenges to be tackled, including the difficult tasks of healing deep ethnic divisions, overcoming the legacy of decades of armed conflict, taming the brutality of the armed forces, freeing all political prisoners, fully restoring basic civil liberties, and allowing a truly free media.

But there is finally reason for optimism in Myanmar. The message from the prisoner release is that key benchmarks many in the West have insisted on are being reached. The skeptics in the international community need to acknowledge and support such a dramatic policy shift by immediately allowing institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to provide greater advice and by finding new ways to interact directly with the government, parliament, and nascent human rights commission. Simply noting the positive change but waiting to see more before reciprocating would be a mistake.

This prisoner release is a genuine move and must elicit a positive response in kind by the West -- showing the Myanmar government that it is serious about engagement. Restrictions on international aid and advice should be the first to go. Failure to do so or shifting the goal posts by replacing old demands with new ones would undermine the credibility of these policies and diminish what little leverage the West holds. It is time to support Myanmar's reformers rather than just give them another lecture.

STR/AFP/Getty Images

 

Jim Della-Giacoma is Southeast Asia project director at the International Crisis Group.

TRUTHBURMA

12:44 AM ET

October 14, 2011

The Burma Spring

Boomers, who have lived the current – and tragic -- history of Burma and have studied it, would say the nationwide protests in 1988 was our *Burmese Spring*, after millions of extraordinary people, from all walks of life, toppled the almost-totalitarian Marxist socialist dictatorship.

The uprising was triggered by endless economic and financial hardships, above all. The desperate regime had again cancelled all banknotes in circulation, enough to make even the simple roadside vendors furious.

Earlier, after toppling the civilian government in 1962, ultranationalist Gen Ne Win invited the Communists to join his government, hoping to end the raging insurgency.

During the 26-year revolution (1962-1988), the communistic regime nationalised everything that can be confiscated, including all small businesses, banks, schools, movie theatres and warehouses, among many others.

The military establishment was not spared: the giant army-run Burma Economic Development Corp, operating dozens of firms and businesses ranging from banking to fisheries and turning handsome profits running into millions of dollars was also nationalised.

Over the years tens of thousands of enterprises, both domestic and foreign, were confiscated without compensation. In the end not much was left to nationalise. By 1987, the once-rich country became one of the *least developed nations* in the world.

Under the stifling Soviet-style economic system, tens of thousands of ordinary Burmese were jailed for trying to eke out a living in the shadows of the black-market, which entirely replaced the private sector.

(The fact that Western nations and international lending bodies, like the World Bank and the IMF, bankrolled the revolution is another story).

The officer corps was never to forgive the Communists, who now dominate the leadership of Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) party.

(Strangely, the Communists have mysteriously vanished from today's narratives -- facts so important in understanding the country. Such ignorance, or denial, is unforgivable).

Today’s third-generation military rulers, having crushed the communists, have unshackled the economy, rehabilitated the private sector and now welcome foreign investors. The regime has also opened its arms to Burmese citizens, like me, who fled the socialist revolution.

With the transition to democracy in place, and to secure their future, the military was back in business, operating more than 40 firms and businesses.

Like it or not, free enterprise was here to stay in Burma. Those who can’t see the changes for the better in Burma must have cataract.

As one Burmese entrepreneur told me in Yangon: *It’s commerce and industry -- not politics -– that will feed the people*.

Please explain why more than two million Burmese -- young and old -- were forced to work in heartless neighbouring countries for pittance -- and abuse -- if not for the economic sanctions. This collective punishment of ordinary Burmese must end now.

The recent criticisms leveled at the reforms -- and the ICG -- clearly reveal the desperation of professional Burmese activists, *instant* experts and those living off the miseries of the long-suffering Burmese that the gravy trail is about to run dry following the fast-changing events in Myanmar/Burma.

Meanwhile, you cannot *export democracy to Burma*. It was a country with deep democratic traditions - there have been village headmen, appointed by general consensus, for centuries -- where democracy was waiting to emerge.

After independence from Britain in 1948, it did. The first constitution was highly liberal. (On the other extreme, the second, and now-defunct, 1974 charter was dreadful: it was based on the Soviet constitution).

There was free speech, a key index of freedom. When the Burmese were voting, the minorities in the US, among others, were denied that right.

The (gullible) world is today supporting the same tyrants — now in the NLD leadership — who destroyed our hopes and freedom.

So, can democracies develop without outside intervention? South Korea is a good example: the country moved from a military dictatorship to democracy on its own, not as a result of great encouragement from anyone outside, in spite of the presence of American troops.

It took Western Europe 200 years to develop a stable democracy, not counting the two bloody world wars. Give the Burmese a break.

As the first elected prime minister U Nu said: Democracy (in Burma) must have Burmese characteristics.

Sincerely
Rich Mookerdum
Burmese-born journalist
richm009@gmail.com

 

STEEL

5:44 AM ET

October 18, 2011

Re: The Burma Spring

Very good article, well pronounced stal
I congratulate
I look forward to more.

 

BOLE1

5:39 PM ET

November 11, 2011

I went to Burma last year and

I went to Burma last year and it is very beautiful country.
lpn to rn
medical assistant schools
cna courses