By guest author, Michael Charney
Myanmar's reigning generals, who have so far blocked foreign offers to distribute aid directly to the country's cyclone victims, appear to have relented and will now permit involvement by it's ASEAN neighbours, as well as China and India. Nevertheless, this move represents no major watershed in the generals' intentions to maintain their grip over the country and its future.
On the one-hand, it is a knee-jerk reaction to the shift in international suspension of criticism of the regime in the hopes of easing government cooperation on saving the victims of the cyclone to warnings of bringing 'crimes against humanity' charges against the generals when that cooperation was not imminent, despite the worsening situation in the affected areas.
But even then, Myanmar's generals have appeared unconcerned about foreign demands to reform or surrender their power in the past. The difference may lie further north.
China, able to simultaneously maintain popular support while keeping firm control on civil liberties in its own country, is becoming an increasingly attractive model for Myanmar's and other non-democratic governments to follow. Myanmar's unprecedented declaration of a three-day period of mourning, for example, was clearly mere mimickery of China's earlier declaration for it's own earthquake victims. Throughout the crisis and indeed consistently throughout the two decades since 1988 the generals, Than Shwe most of all, have displayed nothing but callous disregard for the poverty and suffering of the country's general population.
More than this, however, China, in recent years Myanmar's most reliable friend and ally, appears to be extending an umbrella of diplomatic protection to its southern "brother," chastising, at least indirectly, those who criticize how the generals handle domestic affairs and, if past voting is any indication, presenting an almost guaranteed block to any prospective UN action through its veto in the Security Council. General Than Shwe must feel that so protected he can afford to take the step of allowing in help from other Asian states without losing control to democratic elements inside and outside the country. He is also clearly learning that if he wants to maintain his control or that of his successors, he will have to start acting publicly, both domestically and for the international press, a lot more like his friends in Beijing.
Dr Michael W. Charney is an expert on Myanmar at SOAS, and author of the History of Modern Burma
I'm very sure it suits the PRC to have a compliant and obedient friend like Burma, whose vast natural resources can be sold for fourpence to Chinese concerns who are even kind enough to come and take them away, to save the problem of delivery.
In return, China defends its vassal nation with menaces on the world stage - and the world sits back and wrings its hands and does nothing.
Posted by: Neil McGowan | Tuesday, 20 May 2008 at 05:51 PM
It's worth noting that China is widely seen by westerners to have more sway on the Burmese generals than she really does. Burmese leaders do not have a record of listening to any foreigners east or west. Might is the only language the junta understands. So far as trade and arms go, they know from experience it's never too difficult to deal with any of the other neighbours be it India or ASEAN countries. If you won't do it Jones will. They've become quite good at manipulating the players in their own region having the good fortune of Burma's still substantial natural resources, and they are playing the China card very well.
Indonesia was the model they had in mind. It's a bit late in the day to try the China model after the demise of the Burma Socialist Programme Party sans economic liberalisation, even though the new constitution together with the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA) looks set to be a platform for yet another one party state dominated by the military.
Posted by: gus | Tuesday, 20 May 2008 at 06:47 PM
Neil i think you are talking about Britain's colonial relationship with Burma as it was rather than modern China....when the time was ripe for Britain...it simply walked away after getting its spoils.
Posted by: len | Tuesday, 20 May 2008 at 09:51 PM
Hi len
You are undoubtedly right that the British Empire ruthlessly ravaged all its dependencies for anything that wasn't actually nailed down.
But take a peep on YouTube at a short clip made by Journeyman Pictures? It illustrates how China is running and profiting from the illegal logging business in Burma. It's just one area of hundreds in which China is exploiting the resources of a third-party country by paying-off the local hoodlum leaders with a cut of the action. The losers are the local population forced to work as slave-labour for the Chinese operations. It's not unique to Burma - China is doing the same in Africa too.
Posted by: Neil McGowan | Tuesday, 20 May 2008 at 10:03 PM
yeah you're probably right Neil; I've read a few of your blogs and you seem to know your stuff....are you an academic? Just interested , hope i haven't offended
Posted by: len | Tuesday, 20 May 2008 at 11:26 PM
Ta Len, but I'm not an academic - I'm a theatre director, mostly in the sphere of opera. Like most bloggers here, I just take a concerned interest in the wider world around us, and Britain's role in things.
Posted by: Neil McGowan | Wednesday, 21 May 2008 at 12:12 AM
Odd how India's close relationship with Burma isn't criticized. Oh I fogot, they're 'deomcratic' and hence beyond reproach, how silly of me.
Posted by: Keith | Wednesday, 21 May 2008 at 02:49 AM
"India's close relationship with Burma". When did that happen.
Posted by: Ramy | Wednesday, 21 May 2008 at 03:05 AM
Since India ditched her principled stand based on moral values and embraced Mrs T's priciple of looking after number one and globalisation in competition with China for Burma's natural resources besides military cooperation re their own insurgencies.
Posted by: gus | Wednesday, 21 May 2008 at 01:55 PM
India had no option but to change its policy with regard to BUrma as Chinese have been quietly encircling India. Why talk of only India, does USA have any regard for democracy ? USA is known to extend support to dictators of all sorts. USA sided with China and Pakistan against India in past. West should not get surprised when countries like India are playing the same games to suit their needs. World is changing much faster than what westen powers can grasp.
Posted by: Rajendra Kumar | Wednesday, 21 May 2008 at 03:10 PM
Yeah, all the chickens are coming home to roost while the rest of the world is being sucked into the deadly vortex of capitalist competition.
Posted by: gus | Wednesday, 21 May 2008 at 10:22 PM