THE recent decision by Burma's government to sentence pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi to a further 18 months' house arrest shows how difficult it is to deal with that country's ruling generals. Yet the first steps towards a new approach may already have been taken.
The clearest sign comes from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, of which Burma is a member. At first, most of ASEAN's member governments responded mildly to the verdict, expressing their "disappointment" - a stance that reflects the group's principle of non-interference in fellow members' internal politics.
But Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya then consulted his counterparts in Cambodia, Indonesia, Singapore and Vietnam. As current ASEAN chairman, he floated the idea of requesting a pardon for Suu Kyi.
ASEAN government officials have since met to draft a text. Approval by the association's foreign ministers may come this month and ASEAN leaders may tackle the issue next month.
Of course, amendments and objections to the draft should be expected. But the pardon request is already significant. It seeks to be finely balanced, respecting the regime's sovereignty while subtly pressing home the point in unison, as neighbouring states. The request would be politely worded, but it would also be an official and public mode of communication, instead of the usual behind-the-scenes quiet diplomacy.
What ASEAN says or does not say will not change things immediately. Cynics might add that even if Suu Kyi is pardoned, she may yet be detained on political grounds or face other barriers aimed at preventing her from competing in the elections promised in Burma next year.
But Western sanctions have not worked either. Since the 1990s crackdown, human rights violations have continued, most recently with the suppression of the protests led by Buddhist monks in 2007. The average citizen has grown poorer, even as those close to the junta become ostentatiously rich.
Western sanctions paved the way for investments in Burma by those less concerned about human rights violations - first by ASEAN neighbours in hotels and other sectors, and more recently by China and India, which are vying for projects and influence in the energy sector. As a result, Burma's generals have been able to play one side off against another.
The game, however, may now be changing. ASEAN's initiative is a new step forward for the group. While ASEAN rejected previous calls to impose sanctions, or even to expel Burma, this step shows it will not remain inert, regardless of what the generals do. Moreover, some ASEAN member countries, such as Singapore, have called for Suu Kyi to be allowed to participate in next year's elections.
The ASEAN effort coincides with two other developments. One is the decision by the US to reconsider its policy of sanctions, becoming more flexible while remaining true to its values and interests.
Some activists have criticised US senator Jim Webb's journey to Rangoon to obtain the release of John Yettaw, the American whose actions triggered the charges against Suu Kyi. But this is consistent with the Obama administration's policy of seeking a dialogue even with those who are not America's friends. Such dialogue is vital if Burma is to be prevented from possibly pursuing nuclear weapons and rigging elections, a la Iran.
The other development is less obvious. After the court delivered its verdict, the regime halved the sentence and agreed to keep Suu Kyi under house arrest, rather than in one of its worst jails. This may not seem like much of a concession, but the junta seems to be trying to cause less offence.
Consider, too, the junta's gesture in handing over Yettaw to Webb, and its interaction with the international community on humanitarian assistance after Cyclone Nargis. Might it be possible the generals in Burma recognise they are in a cul de sac? Could the regime be seeking ways out of its isolation in the run-up to the elections? Could it welcome dialogue and engagement?
How the generals respond to the ASEAN request will be an important signal of the regime's intentions. Even if it does want to begin talks, sustaining a dialogue will be no easier than has been the case with North Korea.
ASEAN, as the organisation of neighbouring states, is important to achieving that goal, but US involvement is key, as is inclusion of China and India. They must be pressed to see more than the opportunity for strategic access to energy and other natural resources. Japan, as the largest Asian economy and a traditional donor to the region, must also play a role.
A moral but pragmatic community needs to be constructed, with all in agreement on how to deal with Burma.
If this can be done, the chances of progress before the elections will be strengthened. Success may still prove elusive, but a new game with a greater possibility for success will have begun.
Simon Tay is chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs and an Asia Society fellow
Project Syndicate
No comments:
Post a Comment