Burma’s
Struggle For Democracy - What Needs To Be Done?
By Dr. Habib Siddiqui
05 October, 2007
Countercurrents.org
Last
month, we saw protests inside Burma. Dozens of people were killed. On
September 25, 2007 President Bush announced “new” sanctions
against the military government of Burma, symbolically joining hands
with tens of thousands of protesters in the streets of Yangon and challenging
the United Nations to join him in a broader "mission of liberation."
However, as I see it, the
older sanctions imposed by the USA and some western countries did not
really bite deep into the skin of the SPDC regime that is ruling Burma.
There is also crass hypocrisy in how the sanctions have thus far been
imposed by the Bush Administration. A multi-national oil company like
Chevron was apparently exempted from adhering to the sanction rule book
and is allowed to do business as usual in the oil and gas exploration
sector with the SPDC.
Why this selective application
for an oil company? Well, we don’t have to be reminded that oil
is important to the trio - Bush, Cheney & Rice – all linked
with the oil industry before joining the Administration. As is also
obvious now, it was not the WMD but the control of the oil fields in
Iraq that was the primary motivation for why they invaded Iraq. [And
of course, there are other reasons too, namely, making the region ‘secure’
for the rogue state - Israel.] I doubt that the Bush Administration
is unaware that the Chevron-money goes directly to the pockets of the
SPDC regime, providing the necessary blood infusion that it needs to
function. [But then again, we are continuously reminded by our Wall
Street pundits that if Chevron does not do business, there are many
other non-American companies willing to close the deal with the Myanmar
regime! They argue: why should a U.S. company suffer the brunt of unfair
trading or business practices?] So, if the Bush Administration wants
it to be taken seriously, it must go beyond the hollow rhetoric to imposing
biting sanctions to isolate the hated regime.
As we also know, in spite
of unrest and demonstrations inside Burma, two major trading partners
- China and India – continue to doing business with the SPDC regime.
Thailand, Russia and Japan are also doing business as usual with the
regime, as are many other countries including India, Sri Lanka and Singapore.
So, unless the sanctions are universally imposed and fully embraced,
stopping all sorts of trade, explorations, and flow of goods and currency
to and from Burma by land, sea and air with all other countries, something
that were done for Saddam Hossein's Iraq under the tutelage of the U.N.,
I see little chance in disciplining the brutal regime. The clearest
case for a win-win strategy, without requiring a devastating war from
outside, is that of mimicking the measures taken two decades earlier
against the Apartheid regime of South Africa that forced it to collapse
under massive pressure of sanctions.
In those days, the USA and
Israel were the biggest trading partners of the hated regime in South
Africa. But with world-wide condemnation from outside, and struggle
for freedom and equality within under the able and time-tested leadership
of the ANC and people like Bishop Desmond Tutu, all the big foreign
companies and institutions (including my own alma mater – the
University of Southern California. Los Angeles) were forced to withdraw
their massive investment money and stop all dealings, thus nailing the
beast of Botha’s Apartheid rule and dawning the age of democracy,
liberty and equality in Mandela’s South Africa.
But I don't see anything
remotely similar happening for Burma. The oppressive SPDC regime has
two veto-wielding backers inside the UNSC - China and Russia. Unless
they change their attitude, I doubt anything positive would emerge from
the UNSC. Mind that: neither of these two countries has what we call
a functioning democracy. They are oligarchies with a centralized power
structure. No opposition party or candidate can win any important election
there. From their records of monumental crimes against the Muslims in
Chechnya, Russia and Xinjiang, China, and Buddhists in Tibet, China,
it is obvious that human rights are not a moral compass in these two
countries. As much it is true for most countries in this age of moral
bankruptcy, cheap trade with Burma is more important to these two countries.
That is why, we are not surprised either to see how Gandhi’s India
has no moral qualms to emerge as the second largest trading partner
of the SPDC regime.
All these ground realities
do sound really hopeless and depressing. Is there a light at the end
of the tunnel in Myanmar? I believe: there is. The clue to toppling
the SPDC regime probably lies in mimicking the South African experiment
of disengagement. In the 1980s, the Apartheid regime also had its powerful
backers in the U.N. They were the United States of America and Israel
(and Marcos’s Philippines). When the entire U.N. voted in one
way, recommending sanctions against and condemning the Apartheid regime,
the USA and Israel continued to cast their votes in the opposite way,
even wielding the Veto power (by the USA) in the UNSC. [The two countries
had remarkable similarities with South Africa in that the more powerful
settlers from Europe had dispossessed the less powerful indigenous,
native communities.] It was truly an uphill battle in the U.N. to pass
any punitive measure or incriminating Resolution against the racist
regime. However, in the mid-1980s, even the die-hard supporters had
to say that the days of Apartheid rule in South Africa were over. Yes,
with nation-wide demonstrations inside the USA and some European countries
that had heavily engaged in business with the Apartheid regime, the
governments and powerful corporations in these countries caved in. They
stopped all future business dealings with the regime, and pulled out
money. The ‘Old Crocodile’ President Botha relented to intense
domestic and external pressure and implemented a series of gradual race
reforms, telling his white Afrikaners that they must "adapt or
die." Botha was ousted as National Party leader by F.W. de Klerk
in September 1989, who released Mandela the next year.
So, for a desired change
in Burma, all the conscientious human beings must demand that their
respective governments stop all forms of business dealings with the
SPDC regime. The UNSC must steer head the global demand for an end to
tyranny in Burma. If the regime’s ethnic cleansing against the
minority Rohingyas and Karens, and overbearing repression against its
citizens are not appropriate subjects for the UNSC, what is? Why should
this organization even exist if it cannot redress people’s legitimate
grievances against a despised, unelected, usurping power that had dishonored
people’s verdict and tyrannized everyone – from the Muslim
and Christian minorities to majority Buddhists for more than four decades?
Should the UNSC Resolution be only reserved for a (now hanged) brute
like Saddam Hossein, and launching unjust and immoral wars against civilians
in the Middle East, let alone conspiring to attack Iran under false
pretext at the behest of powerful ‘Amen Corner’?
The UNSC must do the right
thing. It has more proofs than it requires to isolating the SPDC regime
100 per cent. Through its biting resolutions, it can let every government
within the U.N. know that if it were to conduct any business deal with
the regime, it will lose its membership in the world body, and will
feel the pinch from losing bilateral ‘favored nation’ trading
status with other developed nations. The UNSC must also stop all multi-national
companies from doing any business with the regime. Let “real”
sanctions hurt the regime! Let it find out that it has no friend to
lean on to.
The most important factor
for a change in Burma is, however, its own people. It is they who must
desire change wholeheartedly and should be willing to make the ultimate
sacrifice necessary to bring about a positive change in their lives.
If they are afraid to sacrifice for a noble cause, nothing will happen
for them. No outside intervention or goodwill will help. So far, I have
not seen that kind of sacrifice made inside Burma. There has not been
a repeat of the 8-8-88 event. The Junta-defying demonstrations in September
were neither big enough nor well organized to shake the SPDC boat.
Leadership is very crucial
for the success or failure of any movement. The events of the past weeks
have demonstrated that the Burmese people are radar-less without an
effective leadership that gravitates everyone for a common, noble cause.
The people of Burma must develop genuine leadership the same way the
Black South Africans had done when their charismatic leaders Mandela
and Mbeki were serving long prison times. Most of the opposition leaders
in Burma are grossly incompetent and selfish. They live in their feudal
past. They look at things from their chauvinistic, foggy, ethnic prism
that is not wide enough to understand other communities. Their inherent
xenophobia, racism and feudalistic behavior do not encourage other groups
to take them seriously as better alternatives to the current regime.
They often talk about democracy, but have no clue about what it takes
to make a democratic society. They talk about liberty but approve the
1982 Burma Citizenship Law that effectively denies basic citizenship
rights to millions of minority Muslims and Christians. They talk of
human rights, but to them the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
is a non-binding leaflet from a distant planet that they can be oblivious
about or show selective amnesia. They display no understanding about
pluralism and integration, and respect for others.
These are, in my analysis,
the sad realities of today’s Burma. And yet the march for democracy,
freedom and human rights must go on – both inside and outside
Burma. In the absence of imprisoned political leaders, Burma must find
its genuine leadership that integrates and empowers people of various
races, ethnicities and religious persuasions for a common, higher goal
so that she can develop true democratic spirits under a Federal framework.
As for those of us who are outside, we must do our part to pressure
our respective governments and the world bodies to bring about measures
that force the repressive junta towards a democratic transition with
minority rights protected.
[About the author: Dr. Siddiqui
is Director of the Arakan-Burma Research Institute, USA.]
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.