Burma and the Limits of International Influence
18 Feb, 2009 · 2810
Report of the IPCS Seminar held on 5 February 2009
Report of the IPCS Seminar held on 5 February 2009
Chair: Maj Gen (Retd.) Dipankar Banerjee
Speaker: Dr Andrew Selth, Research Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University, Australia
Introductory Remarks
Burma has been facing a tough time and its problem has become an issue of global concern. Ironically, despite being concerned, the international community has not been able to play a significant role to resolve the democratic dilemma of Burma and liberate its people from the dictatorship of military rulers. In this context, it becomes necessary to analyze the prospects and limitations of the likely role of the international community in the ongoing crisis in Burma.
Andrew Selth
Since the uprising of 1988, Burma has posed a challenge to the international community and in its response to the crisis in Burma, the international community has responded in different voices. The international community’s approach to Burma issue can be understood better by classifying the responses of various important countries into three approaches. The first approach favors imposing sanctions on Burma in order to pressurize the military government. It is seemingly quite hard-line in nature and particularly preferred by the US. The second approach, characterized as ‘constructive engagement’ is a soft-line approach and has been adopted by ASEAN in dealing with Burma. The third approach, also soft-line and extremely pragmatic in nature, is preferred by India, China and Russia. In contrast to the first approach, the latter two are focused on developing good relations with Burma for the promotion of economic interests. Though they are concerned about the situation in Burma, these countries nevertheless, prefer to engage Burma rather than follow the US policy of isolating Burma by imposing sanctions.
However, it is clearly remarkable that none of the above approaches have been successful in achieving any substantial objectives with respect to the ongoing crisis in Burma. The hardliner approach cannot be considered successful because despite the sanctions no significant pressure on the military junta could be created. As a result, there has not been much progress in Burma over the issue of human rights violations and democratic transition. However, soft-liners also have not achieved any significant results by their approach of engaging the junta in this regard. Consequently, the problems in Burma still remain unresolved.
While the international community unanimously condemned the Burmese junta after the unprecedented crackdown of September 2007 - even soft-liners like ASEAN spoke very strongly against the brutality shown by the junta and China also expressed concerned on the incident - unfortunately, however, despite the high level of concern across the globe, no substantial step was taken against the junta. In fact, after the September crackdown it has become quite clear that there is lack of consensus among the international community over the issue of how to approach the Burmese problem. Moreover, there is a lack of viable policy options before the international community to deal with the junta. As a result of fragmented response by the international community, military rulers are feeling safe and confident rather than becoming worried about the international happenings. In fact, due to the lack of strong response from the international community, the military junta has successfully resisted the pressure to be more accountable to its people.
The International community has not only failed to take strong actions against Burma, but is also caught in a dilemma about possible future policy options vis-à-vis Burma. The million dollar question before the international community is of which policy is likely to work in dealing with Burma. It is noteworthy here that dealing with Burma is no cakewalk given its distinctive history, traditions and perceptions about sovereignty.
An Out-of-the-Box Solution to the Crisis in Burma
If democracy returns to Burma, it is quite unlikely that it will be sustained for a long time because the structures of civil society institutions in Burma have completely deteriorated. Therefore, the international community needs to look for some out-of-the-box solutions to the crisis in Burma rather than immediately rushing to impose democratic institutions over a fragile social structure. For the time being focus should be on the economic integration of Burma with the regional economies particularly with the economy of Northeast India. Once the Burmese economy gets integrated with regional economies, a new middle class will emerge in Burma which can play the role of a catalyst for accelerating the process of its democratic transition.
Burma: Possibility of another Six Party Talks
Another available policy initiative that the international community can adopt to engage Burma is kicking off a Six-Party Talks kind of an initiative, on the pattern of North Korea. However, given the reservations of the military junta in Burma regarding any kind of foreign intervention in its domestic matters, the possibility of realization of the idea of Six-Party Talks in the case of Burma is very unlikely. Moreover, the assumption regarding replication of this mechanism in case of Burma has two possible shortcomings. First, the international community was highly concerned about North Korea given the nuclear ambitions of the country, but the same concerns do not apply to Burma. Thus, why should the international community be worried about the happenings in Burma? Second, the Six-Party Talks moved because North Korea needed economic assistance from the outside world for its survival. By contrast, it is going to be very difficult to persuade a junta that even refused unconditional aid following the devastating cyclone Nargis, to engage in this kind of talks. Thus, before moving for Six-Party Talks in the case of Burma, it is important to understand the psychology of the Burmese generals. To this purpose it would be logical to engage with the junta rather than isolating it. Additionally, a breakthrough can be achieved on the issue of Burma if the US and other countries lift the sanctions temporarily and wait for the response of the military junta in Burma.
Chinese Influence on Burma
Undoubtedly, China is the closest friend of Burma and it enjoys a certain degree of influence over the military junta. However, it is not logical to argue that Burma is a puppet of China. Chinese influence on Burma has been exaggerated by some strategic thinkers. China is not in a position to dictate to the junta while the latter has used its relationship with China to strengthen itself. Though, China played a crucial role in case of Six-Party Talks on North Korea, in the case of Burma China has a different spectrum of interests and different chemistry with the junta. Thus, China is neither able nor willing to encourage a multilateral initiative.
Role of India in Democratic Transition in Burma
India also has a good relationship with Burma. Since the early 1990s India has changed its policy towards Burma and adopted the ASEAN’s diplomatic design of constructive engagement in its relations with Burma. Though economic engagement between both countries has improved, India is still not in a position to play any role in the process of democratic transition in Burma or to pressurize the junta over the issue of democracy. Whatever little India can do in this regard is limited to moral encouragement but these kind of efforts could be lethal for Indian interests in Burma.
Possibility of Intervention in Burma
Though the US has been a staunch critic of the military junta in Burma, it is quite improbable that it or any other country will ever militarily intervene in Burma to end the brutal military dictatorship. Due to the lack of direct foreign policy objectives in Burma, the US has nothing more than rhetoric on its agenda vis-à-vis Burma.
Concluding Remarks
In sum, it can be argued that change will come to Burma, but it can not be predicted when it will come. It is also possible that change in Burma will be a result of the regional and domestic initiatives and the US and the West will have a very limited role in this regard.
Chair: Maj Gen (Retd.) Dipankar Banerjee
Speaker: Dr Andrew Selth, Research Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University, Australia
Introductory Remarks
Burma has been facing a tough time and its problem has become an issue of global concern. Ironically, despite being concerned, the international community has not been able to play a significant role to resolve the democratic dilemma of Burma and liberate its people from the dictatorship of military rulers. In this context, it becomes necessary to analyze the prospects and limitations of the likely role of the international community in the ongoing crisis in Burma.
Andrew Selth
Since the uprising of 1988, Burma has posed a challenge to the international community and in its response to the crisis in Burma, the international community has responded in different voices. The international community’s approach to Burma issue can be understood better by classifying the responses of various important countries into three approaches. The first approach favors imposing sanctions on Burma in order to pressurize the military government. It is seemingly quite hard-line in nature and particularly preferred by the US. The second approach, characterized as ‘constructive engagement’ is a soft-line approach and has been adopted by ASEAN in dealing with Burma. The third approach, also soft-line and extremely pragmatic in nature, is preferred by India, China and Russia. In contrast to the first approach, the latter two are focused on developing good relations with Burma for the promotion of economic interests. Though they are concerned about the situation in Burma, these countries nevertheless, prefer to engage Burma rather than follow the US policy of isolating Burma by imposing sanctions.
However, it is clearly remarkable that none of the above approaches have been successful in achieving any substantial objectives with respect to the ongoing crisis in Burma. The hardliner approach cannot be considered successful because despite the sanctions no significant pressure on the military junta could be created. As a result, there has not been much progress in Burma over the issue of human rights violations and democratic transition. However, soft-liners also have not achieved any significant results by their approach of engaging the junta in this regard. Consequently, the problems in Burma still remain unresolved.
While the international community unanimously condemned the Burmese junta after the unprecedented crackdown of September 2007 - even soft-liners like ASEAN spoke very strongly against the brutality shown by the junta and China also expressed concerned on the incident - unfortunately, however, despite the high level of concern across the globe, no substantial step was taken against the junta. In fact, after the September crackdown it has become quite clear that there is lack of consensus among the international community over the issue of how to approach the Burmese problem. Moreover, there is a lack of viable policy options before the international community to deal with the junta. As a result of fragmented response by the international community, military rulers are feeling safe and confident rather than becoming worried about the international happenings. In fact, due to the lack of strong response from the international community, the military junta has successfully resisted the pressure to be more accountable to its people.
The International community has not only failed to take strong actions against Burma, but is also caught in a dilemma about possible future policy options vis-à-vis Burma. The million dollar question before the international community is of which policy is likely to work in dealing with Burma. It is noteworthy here that dealing with Burma is no cakewalk given its distinctive history, traditions and perceptions about sovereignty.
An important factor that should not be ignored in dealing with Burma is the mindset of Burmese military junta. The military junta in Burma has been facing some problems on the domestic front and is also struggling hard to manage its political, military and strategic relations with the other countries. Therefore, it becomes necessary to understand the threat perception of the junta regarding critical national security issues. An assessment of their psychology and threat perceptions will be helpful for the international community to formulate a workable and successful policy to deal with the ongoing crisis in Burma.
COMMENTS
An Out-of-the-Box Solution to the Crisis in Burma
If democracy returns to Burma, it is quite unlikely that it will be sustained for a long time because the structures of civil society institutions in Burma have completely deteriorated. Therefore, the international community needs to look for some out-of-the-box solutions to the crisis in Burma rather than immediately rushing to impose democratic institutions over a fragile social structure. For the time being focus should be on the economic integration of Burma with the regional economies particularly with the economy of Northeast India. Once the Burmese economy gets integrated with regional economies, a new middle class will emerge in Burma which can play the role of a catalyst for accelerating the process of its democratic transition.
Burma: Possibility of another Six Party Talks
Another available policy initiative that the international community can adopt to engage Burma is kicking off a Six-Party Talks kind of an initiative, on the pattern of North Korea. However, given the reservations of the military junta in Burma regarding any kind of foreign intervention in its domestic matters, the possibility of realization of the idea of Six-Party Talks in the case of Burma is very unlikely. Moreover, the assumption regarding replication of this mechanism in case of Burma has two possible shortcomings. First, the international community was highly concerned about North Korea given the nuclear ambitions of the country, but the same concerns do not apply to Burma. Thus, why should the international community be worried about the happenings in Burma? Second, the Six-Party Talks moved because North Korea needed economic assistance from the outside world for its survival. By contrast, it is going to be very difficult to persuade a junta that even refused unconditional aid following the devastating cyclone Nargis, to engage in this kind of talks. Thus, before moving for Six-Party Talks in the case of Burma, it is important to understand the psychology of the Burmese generals. To this purpose it would be logical to engage with the junta rather than isolating it. Additionally, a breakthrough can be achieved on the issue of Burma if the US and other countries lift the sanctions temporarily and wait for the response of the military junta in Burma.
Chinese Influence on Burma
Undoubtedly, China is the closest friend of Burma and it enjoys a certain degree of influence over the military junta. However, it is not logical to argue that Burma is a puppet of China. Chinese influence on Burma has been exaggerated by some strategic thinkers. China is not in a position to dictate to the junta while the latter has used its relationship with China to strengthen itself. Though, China played a crucial role in case of Six-Party Talks on North Korea, in the case of Burma China has a different spectrum of interests and different chemistry with the junta. Thus, China is neither able nor willing to encourage a multilateral initiative.
Role of India in Democratic Transition in Burma
India also has a good relationship with Burma. Since the early 1990s India has changed its policy towards Burma and adopted the ASEAN’s diplomatic design of constructive engagement in its relations with Burma. Though economic engagement between both countries has improved, India is still not in a position to play any role in the process of democratic transition in Burma or to pressurize the junta over the issue of democracy. Whatever little India can do in this regard is limited to moral encouragement but these kind of efforts could be lethal for Indian interests in Burma.
Possibility of Intervention in Burma
Though the US has been a staunch critic of the military junta in Burma, it is quite improbable that it or any other country will ever militarily intervene in Burma to end the brutal military dictatorship. Due to the lack of direct foreign policy objectives in Burma, the US has nothing more than rhetoric on its agenda vis-à-vis Burma.
Concluding Remarks
In sum, it can be argued that change will come to Burma, but it can not be predicted when it will come. It is also possible that change in Burma will be a result of the regional and domestic initiatives and the US and the West will have a very limited role in this regard.
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
