Posted on 10/03/2007 4:38:24 PM PDT by angkor
The shouting and hand-wringing by politicians over Burma is almost over. Soon, attention will turn to the inglorious task of finding a scapegoat for political embarrassment. In Brussels there are calls for more sanctions against the Rangoon junta and, in response to big talk from the French President, his Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner is waving a little stick and a European company, perhaps Total, will be held up to example.
Burma is a tiny sore, a snag in the woodwork that occasionally trips us up and begs the question: why did we not mend this problem years ago? Tellingly, when asked about British investments in Burma, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, admitted that he could think of none. He might have asked John Battle, a former Labour Foreign and Commonwealth Office minister, who in 2000 led a campaign against Premier Oil, a small British explorer that found gas in the Andaman Sea. Campaigners latched on to Premier, the only significant British investor, and made wild accusations that the company used slaves to build a gas pipeline. Premier became embroiled in the politics and played a clever game. Instead of distancing itself, it became more engaged with the regime, forcing embarrassed military officers to take part in human rights seminars and, occasionally acting as an intermediary, helping to secure the release from prison of James Mawdsley, a young Briton who had staged a rash protest in Rangoon.
Still, Premier tired of the Government’s nagging and the cost in management time of dealing with Burma. It quit in 2002, selling its investment in the Yetagun gasfield to Petronas, the Malaysian oil company.
That was five years ago and what has changed? Burma is poorer, its people more desperate and isolated and, it seems, the army more entrenched than ever before. Mass protests led by Buddhist monks have failed to prise the generals from their villas. There are no significant Western investors, other than Total, which operates another gasfield, piping fuel to power stations in Thailand. It is Burma’s neighbours that hold the few cards that matter, notably China, which provides military support to the generals, and Thai logging companies, which raid the Burmese forests. As long as businessmen from Shanghai to Singapore can secure supplies of hardwood and gemstones, the generals will survive. While tribal warlords and corrupt Thai police facilitate the drug trade on the Burmese frontier, there will be little support in Asia for regime change in Rangoon.
Isolation from the West is a virus that is slowly killing Burma. Moral voices, including that of Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader who lives imprisoned in her own house, call for more sanctions, but at best they are ineffective, at worst they will harm people who have suffered enough. For every multinational that has struck Burma off its list of manufacturing locations, there have been countless deaths and lost jobs that would have prevented the steady flow of desperate young Burmese women into disease-ridden brothels in Thailand.
This is killing by neglect and those in Europe who protest that foreign investment fills the generals’ pockets are washing their hands of responsibility and forcing the Burmese to prostitute themselves to their neighbours.
It’s been going on since Ne Win took power in 1961 and steered the country on a bizarre path of socialist autarchy, militarism and Buddhism.
Watching the extraordinary spectacle of monks in saffron robes marching through the streets, it’s tempting to see this as a Gandhi-like civil rights movement, “loving kindness” confronting the jackboot of tyranny. It is nothing of the sort; this is a Burmese quarrel, a civil war with all that is dreadful within family conflict. If every Burmese family has a member in monastic orders, the same could be said of representation in the Armed Forces, which number about 400,000, roughly equivalent to the number of monks.
These two communities are perhaps the only institutions that function effectively in Burma. One is loved, the other feared, but neither offers any solutions to the country’s backwardness and isolation. Both the mendicant monks and the parasitic military are a burden on a society that has never properly developed a professional middle class.
It is depressing that our only response to such a crisis is to shut an entire country back into its cage. Decades ago, when American and European multinationals monopolised the global investment game, sanctions had moral authority and some limited economic effect. Today, Asian investors have clout in every corner of the globe and an attempt to organise a boycott without their participation is not just pointless but likely to undermine the moral authority of Western business principles.
If our only response to offensive regimes is to cut them off, we not only lose a business advantage but the moral high ground as well.
Lots of expatriate Burmese are posting on various forums and boards, and from my quick survey it looks like "more guns" might be the best (and ugliest) solution.
I'm posting some of the comments from The Times below, without names, because they capture a certain ennui which IMO indicates there are no more U.N., E.U., ASEAN, or fingerpointing solutions. Which again supports the need for "more guns".
From The Times, comments to the above article:
In stead of arguing for or against sanction, the international stakeholders should be looking at on how to end this “reign of terror” befallen on the people of Burma.
Otherwise, they could just throw away the human responsibility or duty to protect the ongoing crime against humanity by blaming country like China, India, Russia and hide behind “non-intervention” facade, which is outdated.
Such privelege is only valid for government that look after its people well-being and protect them from danger and not one that is slaughtering its own people and enslaving them.
****, Bangkok, Thailand
Whether it is Burma or Iran- the self interests (mostly economic) of most all countries decide on their punishment of or action against rogue nations. The U.K. and the U.S. seem to be the only countries that at least pay lip sevice to the injustices that the whole world sees. Infortunately there is often little the good guys can do without the support of other nations, particularly those in the same region.
****, Centerport, New York USA
I’m with Elbert of Bolder here. What are the alternatives? Why woudl allowing business to operate there kimprove anything? Sanctions worked in South Africa and against the white regime in Rhodesia but pretty much nowhere else.
Active particpation of business in a fascist regime doesn’t change the regime (witness south africa where active business involvement propped up the regime).
Chine is the only power that can make much difference, and maybe other neighbours such as Thailand, but how much without bloodshed is debateable.
I would like to see constructive suggetsions, not ponticiation, but in reality I can’t see any way through this.
*****
bfl
$200 a container won't destroy anyone, but it'd be an irritant with a point, and liberals can be thrilled they sneak in another tax increase.
Burma ping
I don't know about boycotts but I'll bet donations to the monasteries are voluntary while contributions to the junta are not.
“I’ll bet donations to the monasteries are voluntary while contributions to the junta are not.”
You got that right, if you know anyone that has escaped the tyranny in Shan State or Karen State like I do, they can tell you how they come into the village and demand chickens, pigs, and rice frome each household at gunpoint. Shan Human Rights Foundation (SHRF) and Shan Herald Agency For News(SHAN) are two sources of info about that, you can look at shanland.org sorry, don’t know how to post a link
Just to be clear, so that anyone that might like to distort this cannot, you meant the military comes to confiscate goods not the monks!?! I am certain of the answer but there are those who would take the opportunity to play it the other way.
sorry, “they” refers to the military
Thank you. I knew it did. ; )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.