|
A prosperous and equitable Myanmar society is an idea whose time has come. The challenges facing Naypyidaw today are not quite in the geopolitical sphere but are primarily domestic. This is because the economic development and societal cohesion sought by the ongoing political & economic reforms shall be assessed through internal indicators albeit under considerable international scrutiny. In the recently adopted democratic set-up, the litmus test for progress in the domestic sphere shall be the 2015 national elections. In other words, 2013-14 should ideally bring about not just a diversity of foreign direct investment into the country but that influx of capital and opportunities should function to lift masses out of the clutches of poverty.
Cynicism for the reforms process is perhaps easy to justify given the hardship of the masses and the excesses of the Military Junta for decades. It’s possible that the primary motivation of the military heavy cabinet is not to empower the masses economically and politically but rather the reforms are a mechanism to guarantee the longevity and monopoly of the military generals upon the nation’s wealth and power. Additionally, after a lifetime of unquestioned and uninterrupted hegemony over the nation; there finally emerged in wake of the Arab spring a definite and hard to shake off insecurity amongst the Military Junta. Apart from concern over another mass upheaval against them from within Myanmar, the generals were also considerably impacted by what happened to the dictators of the Middle East from 2010-11. One day they had the patronage of the west, control over their country and its sovereignty and the next day they died a violent death, not objected to by the world community E.g.: Muammar al-Gaddafi, President of Libya. The Arab spring also highlighted the speed with which mass mobilisation can pick up momentum in the internet age and when there is support for it beyond the national sphere. All these considerations put the Junta in a position amenable to reform and bring Aung San Suu Kyi out; a saving for a rainy day.
Any domestic misgivings for the reforms process stem from lifelong experiences of the masses. This is perhaps why there is no expectation of incumbents of military background taking a backseat despite talks of a cabinet re-shuffle. Interestingly, the iconic Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has also come under criticism for championing the cause of the military leadership to the outside world, while not shedding any light on the plight of the ethnic minorities in all corners of the country.
To balance this view, it can be surmised that it would not have been helpful for the recently empowered Suu Kyi, her political career or freedom to make a difference within the established order, had she adopted a critical approach. It is also highly likely that because Suu Kyi was under house arrest and shut out from the world and her own country; it made her unfamiliar with realities in conflict zones and how they may have deteriorated or evolved over time. Championing the cause of justice and human rights violations does not at present appear in the realm of possibilities. The immediate goal of the reformist government is to develop economically and make political shifts, very gradually.
Nevertheless, justice remains pertinent to poverty alleviation and economic development as well – given allegations that ancestral lands of ordinary farmers have in the past and perhaps continue to be confiscated by the military owned mining and agricultural companies. Perhaps herein, it would be helpful to have not only independent international policy experts but also the guidance of ASEAN, given that Myanmar is now more receptive to external voices. The positive image of Suu Kyi, in the hearts and minds of the masses translates to her playing the pivotal role. This would be not only in public relations at the foreign policy level but also for negotiating economic development and political restructuring, between the reformist government and various ethnic minorities that have been impoverished and nursing grievances for a while.
Additionally, in the spirit of positive and transformational change perhaps the spearheads of reform among the current leadership or at least the internal discourse should ponder upon the scourge of a systemic monopoly and whether the continuance of the same would be able to address the problem of corruption. Arguably, the lack of revenue to manifest the capacity building, development and accelerate the reforms process may not be due to a lack of capital but a stashing away of the country’s wealth in the personal bank accounts of the military leadership. As a result, the issue is also whether the onus to undertake the financial costs of Myanmar’s economic transformation should fall upon external stakeholders, be they nation states or international lending agencies. The agents of change that are pumping in aid should also have a process in mind for monitoring the flow of capital. Without addressing these concerns it would be difficult to take forward the cause of inclusivity & equity as opportunities emerge and the political re-structuring solidifies.
Ultimately, for the external stakeholders who are verbose on matters of human rights and democracy, the primary concern is after all, financial. As the economic foundation of Myanmar is developed, there is much to be gained for those who engage early with this resource rich and investment-expertise ready country. The proactive and forthcoming stance of various regional & extra-regional countries and international organisations makes the immediate and long term aspirations of Myanmar’s leadership, a matter of global interest and competition. After all, it can only be refreshing and fruitful to make forays into a resource rich country apart from the Middle East & Africa. Moreover, there is strategic value to making forays into Myanmar due to its central location between South & Southeast Asia and given its more or less neutral stance on international affairs. Myanmar’s location is something that until recently only China and India where capitalising upon.
USA’s much advertised pivoting back towards East Asia under the Obama administration coincides with Myanmar’s opening and has provided an opportunity for the so-called declining world power to build bridges. Geo-politically, this improves upon USA’s regional’s influence by allowing a resource rich country to step away from the close embrace of the regional giant, China. For Myanmar, it provides an opportunity to leapfrog into the circle of international community and usher in some legitimising diversity in its political alliances, which would be harder to accomplish without western support.
The engagement of other nations with Myanmar’s government should not be understood as tantamount to a tacit endorsement of the misrule that has been underway for decades but instead as the only way to empower a fledgling reform process. The guidance and support of the ASEAN countries for an effective and equitable reformation within Myanmar is particularly important at this juncture. Myanmar is taking hard measures to develop economically and become a global player. It is taking baby steps towards democracy and while it is not guaranteed whether the reformation shall effectively alleviate poverty for all sections of society, it has at least opened a few windows of opportunity wherein a discourse can be developed and grievances addressed. The verdict is still out and indeed it should be because the transformation has only just begun; only a foundation has been laid thus far.
The author is an Associate Fellow at CLAWS
Views expressed are personal.
| 
