 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Paper no. 2411
12-Oct-2007
MYANMAR: The Crisis, Reaction and Repercussions
By C. S. Kuppuswamy
There is an eerie lull (though enforced) after the storm that swept Myanmar (Burma) during the second fortnight of September 2007. Unlike the 1988 uprising which was spearheaded by the students, this uprising was led by the Buddhist Monks, the most revered section of the Burmese community. The military crackdown was on expected lines though the junta had acted with much restraint in the first few days. This paper analyses the causes for the crisis, the reaction of the international community and the likely repercussions on the junta and the common people.
The Crisis
The seed for the crisis was laid on 15 August 2007 when the withdrawal of subsidies by the junta resulted in a five fold increase in the price of CNG and 100% increase in the price of petrol and diesel. As a result inflation shot up and prices of essential commodities went up by 35% putting the common man in misery and some could not even afford a bus ride to their place of work.
On August 19, 500 pro-democracy activists demonstrated against the fuel hike and promptly more than 150 of the demonstrators were arrested.
In a surprise move, 500 monks took out a protest march on September 5 in the small town of Pakhoku near Mandalay when three of them were reportedly arrested by a front organization of the junta called the Swan Arrshin.
From then on, the protests gathered strength and spread to other towns including the erstwhile capital Yangon (Rangon) and from September 18 when it was a few thousands, the numbers swelled up to 20,000 on September 22 and further more on September 24.
The junta had acted with unusual restraint though the police and troops were deployed around all important locations from where the demonstrations were being organized such as the Shwedagon and Sule Pagodas. After warning the monks and the general public on September 24 and 25, the troops opened fire on September 26 and 27 on the demonstrators, imposed curfew; arrested a few thousands of monks and general public and ensured that the uprising came to an end, at least for the time being.
The official figures indicate that 13 people were killed which included a Japanese journalist and over 2000 detained. Unofficial estimates by various agencies indicated that a few hundreds must have been killed and over 6000 detained.
The junta is also employing a pro-government community group called the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA) for disrupting such protests without the official machinery getting involved in it. The USDA has one wing known as the Swan Arrshin, specifically trained for such tasks. The wing has a number of ex convicts in its ranks.
The causes for the crisis this time seem to be more economic than political. Besides the recent fuel hike, the construction of the new capital at Nayipidaw at an enormous cost, the recent hike in pay for the military and civil servants and an IT project on a grand scale have all had an impact on the countrys economy. The decapitated political opposition joined hands with the protesters to gain some political mileage in staking their claims for a role in the government.
The current uprising was different from the one of 1988 in many respects. The development in Information Technology helped the international media to publish pictures and information transmitted through internet and mobile phones. Blogs of dead bodies strewn in the streets were seen by the international community. News of protesters at one city or town was conveyed to other locations instantaneously for the protests to be more coordinated and wide spread. As it was the monks that led the uprising, the junta was in a quandary, as to how to deal with them because of the sensitivity of any harm caused to the Buddhist clergy in the nation.
The Military Junta
The ruling junta called the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) has been under great pressure, presumably from China as reported in the international media, for a military crackdown at the outset. The junta has been rather naive in allowing the protesting monks to meet Aung San Suu Kyi on 22 September at her residence and permitting her to pray with them. This proved to be a catalyst for the uprising to gain further strength.
Consequent to the crackdown the ruling junta seems to be more pliant and in a conciliatory mode, though this can also be a time gaining tactic. Allowing the UN envoy to meet with Aung San Suu Kyi once before meeting the head of the state, Senior General Than Shwe and once after, has been seen as a welcome gesture by the international community in making some headway in the democratic process. Gen Than Shwes offer to meet with Aung San Suu Kyi, though with some preconditions, is surprising, especially in view of his total contempt for the lady.
The military Government has appointed on October 8, Deputy Labour Minister, Aung Kyi as a liaison officer, though he was called manager for relations, to continue relations with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in the future.
News reports indicate that the military Government had donated thousands of dollars as well as food and medicines to monasteries in Yangon, in an apparent gesture of reconciliation with the monks.
The official media has also announced that more than half of 2171 people arrested have been released and more than 400 monks have been sent to their monasteries.
These conciliatory measures may seem to have been taken under pressure or to ward off a condemnation of the regime by a UN Security Council resolution which is under consideration. Even if taken in that light, the military government has not done so earlier even under pressure.
The Political Opposition
Nation Leagure for Democracy (NLD) which won a land slide victory in the elections in 1990 under the leadership of Aung San Suu Kyi has been badly mauled in the last 17 years with most of its leaders having fled the country or detained for long periods. Most of the branches have been closed under pressure by various means of the junta. According to a news report of October 10, the NLD has said that it was prepared to make adjustments for the sake of dialogue in response to the offer of the junta for talks through a cabinet level official who will coordinate the process.
The 88 generation (who were then students) is still keeping the movement alive discreetly or surreptitiously. The recent uprising has been a fillip to their activities in reviving the opposition. In fact it is the net savvy younger generation which has sent pictures and information across the globe on the current crisis.
The political leaders in exile have not been able to make much impact on the international agencies. However the Democratic Voice of Burma (the radio and television network in Oslo) has been able to broadcast regularly on the happenings in Myanmar. The Irrawady a news magazine run by an exile in Thailand has also been able to cover the crisis extensively.
Reaction of the International Community
United Nations
This years session of the UN General Assembly has been overshadowed by the worsening political crisis in Myanmar. The United Nations sent its envoy Ibrahim Gambari to Myanmar. He was in Myanmar for four days till 02 October 2007. He was permitted to meet Aung San Suu Kyi twice once before meeting the Senior General Than Shwe and once after that prior to his return. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described the mission you cannot call it a success.
USA, Britain and France sponsored a non binding statement on 05 October 2007 after the Security Council heard a report from the UN envoy on his mission to Myanmar. The statement condemning the military crackdown had to be softened at the instance of China.
However, a resolution by the UN Human Rights Council was passed on 04 October 2007 which strongly deplored the continued violent repression of peaceful demonstrations in Myanmar, including through beatings, killings, arbitrary detentions and enforced disappearances.
United States
In an address to the United Nations on September 25, President George W. Bush strongly criticized the military junta for the growing unrest and announced that The United States will tighten economic sanctions on the leaders of the regime and their financial backers. We will impose an expanded visa ban on those responsible for the most egregious violations of human rights, as well as their family members. He also urged the UN and all nations to use their diplomatic and economic leverage to help the Burmese people reclaim their freedom.
The media has also indicated that US is applying pressure on both China and India as it feels that only a concerted effort by these two countries can help bring about some meaningful reforms in Myanmar.
The US had threatened to push for UN sanctions, which in any case would have been vetoed by China and Russia as it happened in January 2007.
The most senior US diplomat in Myanmar, Shari Villarosa met the juntas foreign minister in the first week of October 2007. The US state department said the meeting was not productive.
China
When there is a crisis in Myanmar, it benefits China, as it can bail out Myanmar and as a quid pro quo extract more concessions for itself. Most analysts agree that China, with its overwhelming influence over Myanmar, has a crucial role in making the military junta mend its ways and restore some semblance of democracy.
However, China has always maintained that what is happening in Myanmar is an internal matter, which is not a threat to the regional security and stability. China has high stakes in Myanmar by way of energy resources being made available, access to the Indian Ocean and increasing trade.
Most media reports hinted that it was at the insistence of China that the military junta had dealt with the uprising with such unusual restraint and the visit of the UN envoy to Myanmar was also agreed to.
If China is worried on any account, it is the likelihood of a boycott of the forthcoming Beijing Olympics by the western nations, because of its indifference to world opinion on the recent crisis in Myanmar. China by chastising Myanmar may be giving a leeway to India in getting closer to Myanmar, which is not in its best interest.
India
India needs Burma more than Burma needs it wrote one Indian Analyst. It is perhaps an overstatement as they need each other for different reasons.
Another political analyst has remarked that Myanmar plays the China card with India and the India card with China. Thus Myanmar needs India as the countervailing force against China, and India needs Myanmar for its energy resources, strategic and security concerns. For more details on Indo-Myanmar relations please see paper http://www.saag.org/papers21/paper2043.html dated 30.11.2006.
If India can tolerate a neighbour in the west under virtual military rule (with the blessings of the US) it can also bear with Myanmar in the east under a military rule (through decried by the US).
Being a large democracy there has been great pressure on India to wield its influence over Myanmar on the current crisis. Can India venture to take any serious measures when it may have a negligible effect on the junta and in the bargain lose the foothold gained in that nation since 1991? This is the dilemma that is being faced by Indian policy makers.
In the UN General Assembly, Indian Foreign Minister said I do not subscribe to penal sanctions at all times. We should instead try to engage the country concerned in negotiations, in talks, in dialogue. The Indian Foreign Minister however met his Myanmarese counterpart U Nyan Win on the sidelines of UN General Assembly and the foreign secretary met the UN special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari. But India subscribed to the release of Suu Kyi in the UN Human Rights resolution. This itself is a major change in Indias position as India has been silent on this issue for the last few years.
ASEAN
ASEAN as a grouping has been resorting to constructive engagement with Myanmar with the avowed principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of its members. However the Economist (29 September 2007) has rightly indicated that it is proving to be more of a destructive engagement.
ASEAN has been embarrassed on many an occasion since Myanmar was admitted as a member of its grouping in 1997. Myanmar was made to forfeit the rotating chairmanship of ASEAN in 2006.
However, some of the members continue to have flourishing trade relations with Myanmar because of the abundance of natural resources by way oil, gas, timber etc. Hence, there is a division in the grouping on any strong action, though even expulsion of Myanmar was under consideration.
ASEAN is in the process of finalizing a charter which will be binding on its members. It is not known how Myanmar will accede to such a charter or as to how ASEAN will circumvent this problem.
Thailand
Thomas Fuller in an article in The New York times has elaborated on the resources in Myanmar that keep the junta in business. Natural gas from Myanmar generates 20% of all electricity in Thailand. It is the largest single export (costing $ 2.8 billion) for Myanmar this year. Thai companies are building hydro power plants and have entered into contracts worth billions of dollars. He adds that Thailand is Myanmars biggest trade partner and not China as is widely believed.
Thailand is also the only country of ASEAN which is affected by a large influx of refugees from Myanmar. Consequent to the coup and the government under an erstwhile military general, the relations with Myanmar are improving. How can Thailand rock the boat?
Russia
Russia has been towing the line adopted by China in wooing the military junta for its own ends. In January 2007 it vetoed a UN resolution on Myanmar along with China on the political situation in Myanmar.
Russia has increased its stakes by importing oil and gas from Myanmar in a big way and supplying arms, aircrafts and other military equipment to Myanmar.
Russia is building a nuclear research centre in Myanmar. Russia has also been providing training to Myanmar scientists and military personnel in Russia since 2003.
In sticking to its anti US stance, Russia will continue to support Myanmar and is not interested in weakening the military junta.
Japan
Japan, which has been continuing its economic aid to Myanmar has threatened to cut down the aid in view of the lone Japanese journalist killed during the shooting of the protesters in this crisis.
News Analysis
Neither the economic sanctions of the Western nations nor the constructive engagement of the ASEAN has had any impact on the military junta over the years.
Both China and India (to a greater extent) have been under intense pressure to influence, Myanmar for releasing the political prisoners and ushering in democratic reforms.
The uprising this time has been limited to a few cities and has been short lived. The monks leading the uprising have given it a new dimension, touching on the sensitivities of the Burmese community.
The development of information technology has made the world see and know the happenings during the crackdown instantaneously.
The military junta in the initial stage had acted with great restraint in the crackdown, though repressive measures continue to be in force.
By allowing the visit of the UN envoy and offering to talk to Aung San Suu Kyi, the military junta has shown some flexibility in initiating the negotiations.
The political opposition seems to have been decimated and no leading figure other than Aung San Suu Kyi has been identified who can negotiate or co-ordinate and consolidate the opposition to its pre-1990 level.
Economic woes, with the runaway inflation and sky rocketing prices, human rights violations and health concerns seem to be the driving force of this recent uprising which perhaps need immediate attention more than the political reforms.
Rumours of internal dissension in the higher ranks of the army or disenchantment and discontentment in the lower ranks because of the action taken against the monks, seem to be unfounded. The armed forces seem to be loyal to the top brass and a new general at the top may not be any different from the present one.
The military junta may have had yet another jolt, but still seem to be unscathed to carry on business as usual perhaps with some cosmetic changes like ushering in a new constitution and promising fresh elections.
Home | Papers | Notes | Forum | Search | Feedback | Links
Copyright South Asia Analysis Group
All rights reserved. Permission is given to refer this on-line document for use in research papers and articles, provided the source and the author's name are acknowledged. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes.