Egypt and Libya, why not Burma?

2011 has been an interesting year so far, with pro-democracy protests in countries all over the world, including Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, Yemen, Kuwait, Oman, Algeria, and many others. However, this drive for democracy makes one wonder, why have there been no protests in Burma, one of the most repressive and undemocratic countries in the world?

It is evident that the Burmese people are almost too scared to protest, as past protests have resulted in vicious crackdowns and killings. Also, the Burmese government is well adapted to dealing with protests as soon as they start, not showing the slightest bit of sympathy or weakness, and not caring how the international community feels about their actions. Also, the last successful protest in Burma, which resulted of the ousting of  General Ne Win, only led to another dictator, general Than Shwe, who was even more oppressive and ruthless than Ne Win, to seize power.

One expert, Roland Watson who writes for dictatorwatch.org, believes that the Burmese government may not be as harsh this time if the people were to protest, as the government is facing claims of war crimes, and a brutal crackdown would only strengthen those believes. Also, it has been suggested that during the Saffron Uprising in 2007 some generals were against the harsh retaliation. He also believes that after the events in Egypt, it would lead to a slightly more relaxed take on a protest. He and many other experts believe that a peaceful protest (like the Saffron Uprising) is not the way to go, and that a rally similar to the ones in Egypt are the only way forward. However, this article was written before the massacre's in Libya, and when has international opinion and sanctions ever stopped the Burmese junta from doing exactly what they pleased? Even if there are war crimes facing them, they have never once considered the consequences of their actions towards the international community, and i don't see why they would start caring now.

An interesting side note on this issue is that the book that started many of these revolutions across the globe, 'From dictatorship to democracy' by Gene Sharpe, was actually written primarily to overthrow the dictatorship in Burma. 

Fictional UN report

Yesterday experts have decided that a UN report submited by the Burmese government, depicting its human rights records as nice and rosy, is actually completely fake. One of the items discussed in the report was the election in november 2010.

This is yet another example as to how the Burmese government is just the same old, corrupt generals calling themselves by a different name. Their human rights policy hasn't changed at all, and the people of Burma are still greatly mistreated.

The full article can be read at: http://www.dvb.no/news/burma%E2%80%99s-report-to-un-is-%E2%80%98fictional%E2%80%99/14378

Burma to keep Australian in jail.

The other week i made a post about the australian editor of the newspaper 'the myanmar times' being arrested for not having a valid visa, and to follow up on that it has bee revealed that he will not be granted bail between now and his trial on the 3rd of March.

This has caused outrage in south east asia, as many western investors who have been keen to get involved with Burma are now more wary of investing there. This comes shortly after Aung San Suu Kyi made a speech saying how western countries needed to get involved and invest in Burma, however, the countries less than friendly government has made that very hard. 

General Tin Aye quits

Former general, now member of parliment, Tin Aye, has resigned from Burma's new parliment, only two weeks after it first convened. Aye was the sixth most important general in Burma before he resigned to join the USDP party in the election, and in the new government he was in the running to become defence minister, but he didn't get the job. Many analysts believe the unexpected resignation is a sign that the new government is not going to plan, as senior military figures are not happy having to share power with each other for the first time.

I feel that this resignation is the beginning of the new regime starting to fail, as Burma has not been under a democratic governemnt in half a century, and the generals turned polititions are not used to having to work together as a parliment and share their power. 

A crackdown on journalism.

An Australian journalist, and owner and editor of the english-language newspaper 'Myanmar Times', was arrested in Burma on the 12th for overstaying his visa, and if convicted, could be facing up to five years in jail. Also, only days before this, a burmese journalist was given a sentence for thirteen years in prison for various  'crimes'. 

These recent events show how Burma is not changing under it's new leadership, but simply continuing on with the same corrupt and unjust things, which is further shown through the press freedom index from media group 'reporters without borders', where Burma is placed 174th out of 178. 

'You're now on the dead list'

Here is a link to an article which really highlights the atrocity of the military regime in Burma. One of the interviewees is a man who was jailed for having a fight with a neighbor and then was unable to bribe the police and so was given a year long sentence. Eleven months into his sentence he was taken by the Burmese military and forced to be a 'human minesweeper', traveling ahead of the Burmese army to clear the path of any hidden land mines, while carrying all the soldier's supplies and equipment. Another interviewee describes the infamous Burmese labour camps, with his depiction of the camps bringing to mind the descriptions of the Nazi labour camps.

This article emphasises the gross injustices committed by the burmese military, yet nothing has been done to stop them, and burmese representatives in human rights associations vehemently deny that there have been any human rights violations. I feel that this article highlights the massive need for change in Burma, and how it is going to need more than a new government filled with the same military generals to make any kind of difference.

Also, this article is from the Bangkok post, a Thai newspaper. This is particularly important as these refugees are currently being held in Thailand, and therefore the article is much more personal and has a sense of immediacy that it wouldn't have if it was in a canadian newspaper.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/security/221288/you-re-now-on-the-dead-list

a 'tragic end' for Aung San Suu Kyi?

The Burmese media has spoken out against democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi for the first time since her release from house arrest back in November.

This criticism is almost a retaliation to the statement made a few days ago by the NLD, showing their support of the sanctions placed on Burma. The Burmese military junta have always spoken out against the sanctions placed upon them, as they say that they harm the people more than the country, and have caused even more poverty in the country. However, it is widely recognised in the international community that these sanctions effectively hinder the military regime from prospering, without harming the people to a great extent.

Along with saying that the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi would 'meet a tragic end' if they continued to speak out, the Burmese media (which is, of course, completely state run) also threw out other insults, such as calling the party 'Big headed' and saying that they are ignoring that Burma is 'marching towards a new era'. The statement released also mentioned that it wanted the NLD to 'co-operate' with the Burmese military, although it did not say what this co-operation would entail.

I feel that this statement is the government's attempt to try and suppress and blacken the name of the NLD, who, despite being disbanded in november of last year, have been extremely active and prominent on the international scene recently. However, there is so much support behind the NLD that i feel that it is a wasted effort on behalf of the military junta, and will influence very few, even in Burma. 

Myanmar sanctions.

Burma has had sanctions placed upon it since 1997 when they refused to let Aung San Suu Kyi out of house arrest, and now Suu Kyi and her disbanded party have spoken out about them, saying they 'affect only the leaders of the ruling regime and their close business associates, not the majority of the people'.


The UN sanctions on Burma include a trade embargo, and other sanctions from individual countries have made it impossible for western nations to invest and do business with Burma. While this is helpful in showing the lack of support for the military dictatorship, it does leave the field open for other countries, such as China and Thailand to trade with Burma, which is rich in natural resources, and therefore is not as effective as it could be if it were universal across all countries. Countries that have placed sanctions on Burma include the EU, who have banned all aid except for humanitarian assistance and the sale of military equipment and other trading items, the US, who have similar sanctions, (although they do allow the trade and sale of some items as Burma has lots of natural resources), Canada, and Japan. Both Australia and New Zealand have visa restrictions on military officals, but no other sanctions are in place, and the South East Asian group, ASEAN, have opposed the use of sanctions against Burma(who is also a member of ASEAN). 


I agree whole heartedly with Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD, as the people of Burma should not be punished for the mistakes and failures of their leadership, and i believe that this is the only way that the west can show their support for the NLD (which has been technically been forced to disband by the junta, but still continues to function unofficially) and their lack of support for the military regime. 

A different take on democracy.

Here is a link to an article from 'the Myanmar times', announcing the election of president Thein Sein. The article describes how Sein won the election by a margin of 200 votes, and the intricacies of Burma's constitution, for example, the article states how the president is not allowed to serve more than two terms in a row, both lasting five years.

I found this article surprisingly unbiased, as it talked not only about the military party, but also about the other democratic parties who were running for seats in the election last November. Also, there is a somewhat skeptical tone to the article when it discusses Burma's newly found 'democracy'. However, despite being relatively unbiased and unlikely to be propaganda from the military, we cannot totally trust the article as a source of information, as it is widely known that media and foreign correspondence in Burma is highly censored.

http://www.mmtimes.com/2011/news/561/news56109.html 

A new leader, no real change.

After 50 years of military rule, Burma finally has a new ruler. Unfortunately, this leader is Thein Sein, a longtime ally of the previous military ruler, Than Shwe. Both Thein Sein and his two vice presidents are members of the USDP, the military backed party. Sein, who has been a part of the military government since 1997, will be able to choose his own officials and ministers in the government, however, i suspect that these will simply be more of the same military generals from the old junta. 

This is another example of how the Burmese government is putting on a fake air of change to the international community, and simply replacing leaders and regimes with more of the same.

Than Shwe out of the running.

Last week it was revealed that Than Shwe, a military general who has been Burma's leader since the late 1980's, is not in the list of presidential nominees for the countries new government. Although he is not going to be president, it is highly unlikely that he will relinquish much power, and i expect that he will continue to have an important role in the governance of the country, or at least a leading military position. Aung San Suu Kyi is undecided as to how this turn of events will play out in Burma, as even if he is not president, being in charge of the military will give him as much power as the president, if not more. I feel that really, leaving Shwe will not really affect the country hugely, as no matter what, the military and himself will always play a dominant role in the governing of Burma. 

The actual nominees for the presidency consist of two USDP backed candidates, and two more candidates from parties representing ethnic minorities. The fifth candidates name has not been released to the public. I feel that while it is a good sign that the parliament put forward two candidates from parties representing ethnic minorities, especially due to their previous mistreatment in Burma, it is highly unlikely, if not impossible, that one of them will ever be elected president,