New Delhi (AsiaNews) - The U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says she wants to work with Aung San Suu Kyi for democracy in Myanmar. But the parliamentary groups - an expression of ethnic minorities, and foreign ministers of ASEAN countries have called for the removal of sanctions implemented by the United States and European Union towards the Burmese military regime. An appeal that does not find the support of leaders of the National League for Democracy (NLD), the largest opposition movement in Myanmar, who insist that "targeted" sanctions should be maintained.
We have requested the opinion of Tint Swe, a member of the Council of Ministers of the National Coalition Government Union of Burma (NCGUB), composed of refugees from Myanmar after the 1990 elections won by the National League for Democracy, and never recognized by the junta. He fled to India in 1990, and since December 21, 1991 Tint Swe has lived in New Delhi, and is responsible for information on Asia South and East Timor in the Council.
It has been said when it comes to Burma sanctions have principally affected the common people. But to be honest, it is merely theoretical assumption yet to be substantiated. The debate on sanctions reappears after the most degraded election held on 7th November 2010 in Burma. It is something like those who presume that the regime is not persuadable so other governments should be blamed at.
A part from the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the holding of an election, there is no change on ground and no hope for next five years either. At this point the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) at foreign ministers’ meeting correctly observed the developments. But though detention of Aung San Suu Kyi and imprisonment of political prisoners might have invited restrictions from the responsible governments, the rationales of imposing sanctions did not include an electoral practice.
Since bloc’s inception in August 1967, and inclusion of Burma in July 1997, the ASEAN constantly pronounced in favor of the governments in power and failed to express for the oppressed people of a member country because the ASEAN charter is strictly based on no-embarrassment to each other. The ASEAN conferences are just retreats held habitually at tourist spots. This call for lifting sanction means merely for the ruling junta’s pleasure lacking sympathy for poor people there in Burma.
Before the ASEAN, the political parties including some, not all ethnic leaders also called for total removal of all sanctions. Those parties represent a small section of the people because the Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP) has 7, the Chin Progressive Party (CPP) has 4, and the All Mon Region Democratic Party (AMRDP) has 3, the Shan Nationalities Democratic Party (SDDP) has 3 and Chin National Party (CNP) has 2 out of 168 seats in the House of Nationalities (Amyotha Hluttaw). The SNDP has 18, the RNDP has 9 and the AMRDP has 3, and two Chin party has 2 each out of 330 seats in the House of Representatives (Pyithu Hluttaw). So their role in the parliament is minimal if not negligible because the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) won 129 out of 168 and 259 out of 330 parliamentary seats in two Houses. Those parties have to say something that might entertain the voters and also not make ashamed of the junta. They also failed to study the genesis of the sanctions and most of them had little visible political sacrifice during the last two decades of struggle for democracy.
Moreover those political parties are to engage in doing business as advised given by the (USDP) soon after the election. The Nationalities Brotherhood Forum which was formed on 15th January among five businessmen parties see sanctions as obstacle to make profit for party and personal funds. Now it becomes obvious that the good advice from the (USDP) meant for that statement. Moreover the minority parties can enjoy only relative liberty of giving interviews to Burmese language radios rather than drafting bills in the parliament. The world media is correct that those parties are not termed as opposition.
The security precautions at the entrance of the new parliament are more scrupulous than those of the international airports around the world. The political parties which have surrendered to the 2008 controversial constitution would have to promote the junta because they are in the hands of the junta. Otherwise they will be shown exit door.
It is a ridiculous assumption that while western sanctions are in place the generals and the cronies get richer whereas people poorer because of trades with China, India and ASEAN and so sanctions should be removed. In the same way more trade and more investment will make the rich richer and the poor poorer if there is no regime change. So who hate and who advocate for the sanctions?
The observation which says that the Burmese people are trapped between the incumbent regime and the daily hardships caused by the sanctions imposed by the West seems superficially correct. But for that reason, the recommendation, embargos should be taken away is absolutely wrong. Instead the former must be eliminated.
Aung San Suu Kyi never goes against the command of her people. One of the reasons the regime put her house arrest was to keep her away from the people. Since her release she has relentlessly been consulting with various personals. Excluding foreign diplomats and journalists the list includes the her party organizers, the non-NLD politicians, the serious ethnic leaders, the young men and women of the new generation from inside and outside the country, the victims of natural disasters, the HIV patients, the families of political prisoners and so forth Then the (NLD) finally says that the targeted sanctions should remain as before.
Besides the NLD there are a few people who call for amnesty of 2189 political prisoners. The unfortunate Burmese people have expected the release order at the time of the election, on the New Year and on the Independence Day, the 4th January. But no good news comes. Instead they all are about to be recruited into the armed forces by law.
It is regrettable that all are talking about the harsh punishment to revoke by ignoring the terrible crime and forgiving the evil perpetrator because the anti-sanction camp is calling for amnesty to the perpetrators who imprisoned the political dissidents.
