Asia and Burma (Myanmar)
Experts have written about the many Asian countries being catapulted onto the path of development spectacularly in the 60s, in the post World War II period. Japan was the first in reaching the pinnacle of development and it was followed by Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea, which were in turn followed by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. India and China, which the experts would portray allegorically as the elephant lost in the wilderness and the sleeping dragon respectively, have been hooked onto the development wagons with service industry in the case of India and with production of goods on cheap labor in the case of China (under the arrangement of outsourcing and off-shoring by the developed countries). There are a total of 12 newly developed countries, or fast developing countries in Asia, when Vietnam joins the others. that leaves 3 countries– Burma, Cambodia and Laos – in ASEAN remaining behind. we have to rely on indicators mentioned in the chapter ‘Poverty Trap’ of the book titled the ‘Bottom Billion’ by Professor Paul Collier to answer the question, “ Which of the three may be the first to develop like the twelve?” According to Professor Collier, countries fall into ‘poverty trap’ for the following reasons. A country:(a) Being landlocked;(b) Having abundant natural resources;(c) Under bad governance;(d) With civil war. Burma and Natural Resources Burma is not a landlocked country, but it is a country with abundant natural resources. even though abundant natural resources can be looked upon as a gift from nature for the country’s development, government of such a country is normally awash in revenue and it tends to have a feeble link only to the country. Moreover, as it becomes inevitably like a parasite on the State, it fails to develop any sense of duty or responsibility towards the taxpayers, slides soon into corruption and misuses liberally the huge income of State for the benefit of its members and cronies. A government, rich due to abundant natural resources, soon becomes addicted to wealth and power and becomes extremely reluctant to relinquish power. Experts say that according to empirical data, it is a rare occurrence for resource rich countries under dictatorships to transform to democracy in comparison to the occurrence in the resource poor ones under absolute dictatorships. as a result, the experts have come to use the expression “resource curse” for such a phenomenon. however, the experts mention two countries, Chile and Botswana, as good examples for overcoming the ‘resource curse’ due to -(a) Correct leadership;(b) Strong administrative mechanism;(c) Trustworthy institutions. Burma and the Civil WarThe civil war in Burma broke out due to different political ideologies and persecution on ethnic grounds. Denial of the ethnic rights provided for in the Panglong Agreement had caused the ethnic insurgency to spread to all the ethnic homelands. all the minority ethnic nationalities realize that the waging of internal-colonial war, occupation of their lands, unjust exploitation, abuse and destruction of their natural resources for more than half a century by successive governments of the majority ethnic group, the Burman, are a systematic attempt at genocide, indirectly. the flame of civil war is likely to burn many times more vigorously as the war in which the government in power has been committing freely the genocidal atrocities such as extra-judicial executions, burning of villages, rape of women etc., are combined with the war for natural resources.Burma should note with concern the fact pointed out by Paul Collier that turning to piracy by the failed state, Somalia, has affected seriously the security of international shipping, and that when a failed state slides into a ‘rough state’, all kinds of terrorism can overflow into neighboring countries.Relationship between Burma’s Civil and Military EstablishmentsGood relationship between the civil and military establishments may be seen as a life and death matter for Burma. Burma is one of the countries in Asia, in which the military has seized State power and has been involved in the work of civil administration.In reference to an article titled ‘Pakistan’s Armored Democracy’ (March 31, 2008) by Aqil Sha, a political and security analyst, we see that the involvement of the military in civil administration is mainly to justify the seizure of power and in exiting from the involvement, there is a need for an exit strategy without a distorted civil-military configuration.Exit Strategy of Burma’s Military the exit of Gen. Ne Win’s regime from involvement in civil administration in 1988 was involuntary as it occurred because of the mass uprising. the military led by Snr. Gen. Saw Maung took over power and occupied the place of the regime, which had been removed. it held general election voluntarily with a promise to hand over power to the wining party. however, the relationship between the civil and military establishments started to turn ugly when the military reneged on its promise by refusing to hand over power to the National League for Democracy Party, which had won a landslide victory in the election. it is necessary to analyze the second exit strategy designed by the military regime of Snr. Gen. Than Shwe in light of clarifications in the article ‘Twenty Five Years, Fifteen Findings’ by Phillip C. Schmitter. In democratic transition, there can be two processes of the so-called ‘Pacted Transition’, in which the regime in power carries out transition after reaching an agreement with the opposition forces, and ‘Imposed Transition’ where the regime unilaterally sets the terms and conditions for the transition. as the transition undertaken presently in Burma is an ‘Imposed Transition’, we have to examine how much relevancy the process has in light of the prevailing economic, social and political conditions of the country. Burma and National ReconciliationThe crises in Burma are like self-inflicted wounds, occurring not suddenly but together with the country’s independence and they have become chronic and still bleeding, with complication and with no apparent cure. According to Phillip C. Schmitter, before the economic, political and social conditions are strengthened, application of a shock therapy in democratic transition may take the form of ‘zero sum game’ and result in negative consequences. Sweden’s former foreign minister, Jan Eliasson, points out the fact that WW-I victors’ adoption of ‘Winners-Take-All Strategy’ by imposing Versailles Treaty on the losers had resulted like a ‘curse on the winners’. accordingly, Versailles Treaty is a good example of ‘zero sum game’ and probable consequence. the lesson learned is that 20 years after the treaty, there was the rise of Nazism to cause appalling devastation to mankind. Jan Eliasson further points out that in looking for a viable solution, it is important for the States embroiled in cycles of violence to strive for securing mutual agreement and conviction of all the stake holders that all of them have a claim to ownership of the solution. if there is no such a condition, the parties in dispute will simply return to conflict situation and there will be a new cycle of violence. it is food for thought for all of us. We may say that Burma is at a time facing all kinds of crises. how should we understand the issues and find a solution? Rum Immanuel says that ‘never waste a good crisis’. According to Jeffrey Freidan, a political scientist and historian at Harvard University, cooperative effort is necessary to resolve a crisis. He gives as an example the failure in may 1931 of Germany and France to cooperate for rescuing the Austrian Bank, Creditan Stalt, when it was on the verge of bankruptcy. if Germany and France had cooperated to rescue the bank, the collapse could have been averted. it is said that failure of the two countries to cooperate to resolve the crisis caused the bank to collapse and the crisis spread to Hungary, Poland, Germany and England, and then to the whole world. Burma and PowerIn Newsweek Magazine, an analytical article in relation to Iraq war started by President Bush, tried to answer the questions, “What is power?” and “Where is power?” based on the 7 points mentioned below.(1) Military power;(2) Natural resource power;(3) Economic power;(4) Technology power;(5) Diplomacy power;(6) Social power;(7) Movie/Media power.we may use the 7 points given above to determine the real power position ofBurma.Burma and Silent ThreatIn 2004, a world forum titled ‘Urban-21’ was held in Germany. At that forum, a conclusion concerning world population said that in the year 2007, the urban and rural populations would become equal, and in 2010, the urban population would exceed the rural population. In 2015, 3 out of 5 persons would be living in urban areas. In rural population, the number of old age and dependant would increase and at that time, in the agricultural sector, the intensive farming using technology, lesser man power and limited land area would replace extensive farming. In other words, a system of agriculture based on high quality seeds and appropriate technology for higher yield would be used. Urbanization foresees the emergence of ‘City of Dustbin’, ‘City of Volcano’ and ‘City of Knowledge’. According to former UN Secretary-General Kofi Anan, such development may be seen as ‘soft threat’. if there is no knowledge and preparation for it, the threat could become a serious one. Burma and ElectionIn the 48 years starting from 1962 to 2010, there has been no government elected in accordance with norms and standards of the multi-party, democratic system. the government that would come into being now, after the multi-party election held under restrictive conditions, would only be a ‘military and civil hybridized government’. Anyhow, the multi-party election government generation has ceased since 1962, but there is a likelihood of the formation of multi-party election government in the near future. we may say that there is a gap of 48 years between the two. This has exceeded the normal generational gap and we may term it as a dead gap. for the reasons given above, the government that will be formed after the November 7, 2010 election will be just a ‘newly born civil and military hybridized baby government.’ Accordingly, we have to evaluate the capability and competency of the government elected by November 7, 2010 election, in the following areas.(a) Strength;(b) Stability;(c) Efficiency.Burma and Future ProspectFormer US ambassador and Soviet expert George Kaman was the first to say that it was not necessary to fear the Soviet Union as there was the seed of destruction causing internal erosion within the Soviet system and predict that the Soviet Empire with its satellite countries was going to fall, at a time when the US was practicing the geopolitics of blockade against the Soviet Bloc. At a time when the Soviet influence on the developing countries ranged from Vietnam to Nicaragua, when the Western policy makers, the CIA regional analysts themselves and Jimmy Carter’s Security Council were cowering in the face of Domino Theory and when the Soviet Union was seen as a military and economic power, Andrei Amalrick, who had fallen out with the Soviet regime, was the first to predict, in a few years before the sun of the Soviet Union set, that the Soviet leadership clique’s failure to recognize the reality of itself and its organization having become isolated due to the sky-high petroleum prices, was the beginning of the final dissolution of the Soviet Union.According to Timothy Garton Ash, a historian and journalist, if there was no home visit by the Pope in 1979, there could not be Polish Solidarity Movement, and without the Solidarity Movement, there could not be a change of Soviet Union’s policy on Eastern Europe during Gorbachev era, and without such a change there could not be the Velvet Revolution of 1989 (Fall of Berlin wall on 11-9-89) and for that reason he documented that the 79 Crusade Trip gave birth to the 89 Velvet Revolution. The indispensable element required for a complex and permanently adaptive system is a common axis of belief of all the related forces. When this axis becomes loose, the power to adapt in consonant with the changing conditions will become weak. In his article titled ‘Complexity and Collapsed Empires on the Edge of Chaos’ Niall Ferguson, a history professor at Harvard University and a senior fellow of Hoover Institution of Stanford University, said that the development of such weakness can become the death knell for collapse at any time. the 96 miles long Berlin wall, the construction of which started in 1961, came under the hammers of groups of people trying to pull it down, on the night of November 9, 1989 at 11 pm, and officer Gerald Jakagar of the East German border guard troops had to give order for the opening of Berlin’s Bornholmer Strasse Gate before he received a clear order for opening the gate, and soon the wall came crashing down.two years after the fall of Berlin wall, in 1991, in the third week of August, the 74 years old Soviet Empire disintegrated into a number of parts, within 72 hours (3 days).many analysts came up with the critique that the Soviet leaders had to face the horrendous event as they had analyzed developments incorrectly, seeing the up as down and the down as up, as if in the case of a self-deception, and without the knowledge of the objective conditions.ConclusionWe can plainly see that answers to conflicts were successfully found by the countries of Mozambique, Uganda and Rwanda of the African Continent, and with the leadership of De Clerk and Mandela of South Africa. we see clearly also that Poland successfully resolved its internal conflict and the countries of Europe, which had started two World Wars, successfully resolved their conflicts through ‘Table Talk Culture’.we may say that attempt to resolve the current conflicts in Burma through the processes adopted by the junta would almost definitely meet with a dreadful fate similar to the one met by Titanic. I, a humble Delta Karen, would like to suggest that overcoming the current dreadful problems of Burma is more than the business of the election holders and those who have contested the elections. it is the business of all the nationalities in the country and the correct and best process for resolving them is through ‘Table Talk Culture’. —————- <> —————-David Tharckabaw
Comments are closed.