Clinton’s ‘Burma Policy’ preview: For better or worse?

by Mungpi
Thursday, 24 September 2009 23:07

New Delhi (Mizzima) - Washington’s preview of its Burma policy that will include engaging the Burmese generals has been received with mixed reactions with some saying it could be for the better but others maintaining it could render greater legitimacy to the rogue regime.

The US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday said Washington will engage directly with Burmese military generals in a bid to promote democratic changes in the Southeast Asian Nation.

Clinton, in her preview of the Burma policy review, which is soon to be concluded, said sanctions alone have not changed the behaviour of the Burmese government.

“We want credible, democratic reform; a government that respond to the needs of the Burmese people; immediate, unconditional release of political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi; serious dialogue with the opposition and minority ethnic groups,” Clinton said.

But she said, the fundamental objectives are not changed, and that US believes “that sanctions remain important as part of our policy, but by themselves, they have not produced the results that had been hoped for on behalf of the people of Burma.”

Earlier in February, Clinton had said, US is conducting a review of its Burma Policy as both western sanctions and engagement by regional countries have failed to produce substantive political change in Burma.

The policy preview, according to the Chiang Mai-based Burmese analyst Win Min, has come as expected including both ‘carrot and stick’.

“The policy is what we have all expected. It includes both sanctions and engagement. So, I think it is good. It is a combination of both ‘carrot and stick’,” Win Min said.

Win Min said, both the western sanctions as well as Burma’s neighbouring countries’ engagement policy have so far failed to bring about political change in the country and the combination of both could be a new approach.

“It will send a message to the generals that if they do good, the sticks would be lesser and the carrots would increase, but if they chose to continue behaving like this the carrots would decrease,” he added.

Clinton said, she had revealed the policy preview at the meeting of the Group of Friends of Burma convened by the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, as she wished to let Burmese leaders, who are attending the UNGA, know of the process of the policy review.

“But I wanted to preview this policy for our partners in the Friends of Burma group, and also to signal that the United States will be moving in a direction of both engagement and continued sanctions, to be sure that the Burmese leaders – some of whom, as you know, are in our country or about to come to our country – understand where we are in our policy review process,” Clinton told reporters during a press briefing in New York.

Burmese Foreign Minister Nyan Win is currently in New York attending the 64th UNGA and he would be joined by Prime Minister Thein Sein, who will be arriving on Sunday, for the first time in 14 years, since the junta’s second in command Vice-Senior General Maung Aye attended in 1995.

The policy review, which has taken more than six months now, has been much debated among Burma observers, particularly, after Senator James Webb in August visited the military-ruled country and met junta leader Snr Gen Than Shwe and detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

Supporters of engagement including Webb have said, US sanctions has negatively impacted the country’s economy and is further pushing the generals to isolation. It also puts the US in a position with no leverage to influence, while friends of the regime like China take a stronger foothold in the country.

But the mainstream Burmese opposition including senior members of Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, such as Win Tin, said sanctions are not the factor behind Burma’s poverty but sent a strong message to the junta that their actions are not acceptable and it must begin the national reconciliation process before they can be internationally accepted.

“For the Burmese junta, though they want the US to lift sanctions, this policy would be still good, as it would open up a new channel of communication. The junta wants to engage with the US, particularly as it draws closer to their elections in 2010,” Win Min said.

But he said, the engagement would not be in the way the junta wants it, and would require the regime to prove by improving the human rights situation in the country and moving forward with its political process.

“Because the policy has a check-and-balance,” he added.

But unlike Win Min, in-charge of Foreign Affairs Committee of the NLD in exiled, Nyo Ohn Myint said, the new policy, while incorporating both sanctions and engagement, would be largely legitimizing the junta.

“Once there is a channel of engagement, without any pre-conditions, it would only legitimise the junta. So, under the new policy, though sanctions are not abandoned, will send a message to the generals that they are being accepted and recognised by the US,” Nyo Ohn Myint said.

While admitting that sanctions have failed to produce the desired political changes, Nyo Ohn Myint said, the US should have pre-conditions such as release of political prisoners including Aung San Suu Kyi, and the start of a process of national reconciliation.

“It is also important to recognise the issue of ethnic groups, and their aspiration in the US policy, and the role of Aung San Suu Kyi in national reconciliation because by merely releasing her will not solve the problems,” he added.

Nyo Ohn Myint reiterates that the US should realise that engagement could be the beginning of their failed diplomacy on Burma and might not have the kind of leverage that they needed to push for change in the country.

While pro-engagement groups including Webb advocate that engagement with Burma would give greater economic development to the country as well as have more leverage to influence the ruling generals, but Nyo Ohn Myint said, it might only be legitimising the junta.

Aung Din, director of US Campaign for Burma, in an email message to Mizzima commented on Senator Webb’s advocacy on Burma that the senator is deriving his advocacy on the belief that sanctions and pressures by the US pushes the junta under the influence of China.

“In my opinion, [Webb] is trying to stop China's influence in Burma by engaging and supporting the regime. Democracy movement and egregious suffering of ethnic nationalities are not in his interest,” Aung Din said. He added that “We are hoping that the Obama's administration does not fall into [Webb]’s advocacy.” Aung Din said,

India, which was a strong supporter of the Burmese democracy movement, in their apprehension of increasing Chinese influence, changed its policy and adopted the “Look East” policy. But despite appeasing the junta with state visits, military training, loans, investments, and development assistance, India still failed to counter Chinese influence in Burma. “I hope the Obama's administration would not follow the path of India,” Aung Din said.