[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

3 Letters from Japan Times



A little late, but here is a running debate on the "Readers in Council" page
of the Japan Times.  If you would like to join in the debate, please fax
your letter (typed, double-spaced, less than 300 words and including your
name, address and phone no.) to the JT at +81-3-3453-5456:

Sunday, August 18, 1996:

PROSPERITY BEFORE DEMOCRACY

	For any country to function properly as a legal sovereign entity, an
effective government is necessary.  In Myanmar the military is currently
filling this need.
	Although democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi's course is indisputably noble,
it is doubtful that her party can form an effective government that is also
able to provide for the country's defense and keep it united.  History has
repeatedly shown that when a country suffers from political turmoil and law
and order cannot be maintained, groups and factions (either locally
supported or foreign sponsored) will blossom and throw the country into
chaos or even civil war.
	Economic sanctions and isolation policies have failed to change the
politics in country like South Africa, Iraq and Cuba.  Why should ASEAN
yield to the West's demand that Myanmar be isolated and sanctioned economically?
	Shoichi Kobayashi on Aug. 5 criticized the ASEAN states for being
dictatorial or authoritarian, but he conceded that these states have been
enjoying rapid economic growth.  Doesn't ASEAN's success indicate that
authoritarian or dictatorial regimes are effective in achieving economic
growth?  South Korea and Taiwan also made tremendous economic progress under
dictatorial rule, transforming into democracies only after economic growth
had been achieved.  ASEAN states have far to go before reaching the
prosperity levels of South Korea and Taiwan.  Forcing these countries to
adopt democracy when the fundamental infrastructure of democracy is not yet
laid down is a recipe for disaster.
	Democracy is not an elixir for an immediate peace and prosperity.  We must
[learn] to walk before we can learn how to run.

Wang Wai Ping
Kawaguchi, Saitama

* * *

Sunday, September 1, 1996

THE BEST HOPE FOR BURMA

        Wang Wai Ping claims that the military is the only force capable of
uniting Burma and preventing civil war there (Japan Times, August 18).  The
truth is that because of SLORC's divide-and-conquer policy, Burma is already
in a civil war.  Why else would the regime need 500,000 troops to unite the
country?
	Since the military seized power in 1962, it has pitted soldier against
civilian, Burman against ethnic minority, Buddhist against Christian and
Muslim.  In Arakan State, SLORC persecutes Muslim Rohingyas by desecrating
their mosques and dividing their property among Buddhist settlers.  In Chin
State, soldiers are rewarded with cash and promotions if they force their
Christian Chin wives to convert to Buddhism and are punished if they fail to
do so.  SLORC has exploited a rift between Christian and Buddhist Karens to
undermine the ethnic group's 50-year struggle for autonomy.  No group is
untouched by army abuses, whether forced labor, forced relocation, robbery,
rape, torture or murder.
	What crime have these peoples committed?  They stand in the way of SLORC's
drive to exploit every corner of the country for its own benefit (what Wang
romanticizes as "economic development").  SLORC covets Karen teak, Kachin
minerals and Mon and Tavoyan land for its oil pipeline.  By "unity," then,
SLORC means consolidation of its control of Burma's land, not harmony among
its peoples.
	We too favor a united Burma, but like Aung San Suu Kyi we believe it should
be accomplished through negotiation rather than genocide and preserved
through self-interest rather than terror.  In nationwide prodemocracy
demonstrations in 1988 and in elections in 1990 won overwhelmingly by Suu
Kyi's National League for Democracy, Burma's peoples proved that unity is
possible without a military government -- indeed, SLORC's surrender is
Burma's best hope.

Carol Schlenker
Aung Thu
Tokyo

* * *

Sunday, September 8, 1996

BURMA IS A DANGEROUS INVESTMENT

	In Burma, the status quo is an exceedingly dangerous investment.  At
present, it sill looks as if the cliche-ridden State Law and Order
Restoration Council has been in firm control for several years, but this
year its stranglehold is slipping badly and its ill-considered sledgehammer
tactics are not helping it at all.
	The most obvious characteristics of SLORC, aside from lies and broken
promises, are fear of chaos, turmoil, collapse and anarchy.  Another is an
absolute rejection of (imagined) colonialism to the point of hatred of all
things foreign but money.  Their attitude shows a dislike and distrust of
foreigners and their neighbors.  SLORC has even renamed Burma "Myanmar"and
Rangoon "Yangon" partly because the charismatic and popular NLD leader Aung
San Suu Kyi's husband, Michael Aris, is British.
	Why should they fear "foreign" ideas so much?  Is there not some universal
standard of ethics and conduct for all cultures as well as all time?
Foreigners only have culturally democratic ideas, such as human rights, due
process of law (if not ideal justice), freedoms of speech and media, and
tolerance of differences.  They also have concepts of progress and
development.  Moral values such as human rights and the 10 Commandments, for
example, are considered universal.  They are not though of as "foreign" to
the Burmese, or to any other people in world history.
	SLORC is engaged in a struggle it cannot win for long, yet it never admits
to mistakes.  It has confused ideas of good and evil, but it also fears
appearing illegitimate, illegal, unjustified or abnormal.  It confronts
perceived threats with terror and force, respecting only power and terror,
but also fears something else more subtle it does not seem to understand.
It desperately needs foreign investment, but decades of isolation have not
helped it understand the world.
	In war and peace, business, gaming or problem-solving, the player with
deeper understanding than his or her opponent has a vital advantage.  The
one who patiently coexists with his or her opponent, and gains advantage in
steps and stages, wins over one who tried to "totally annihilate any who
threaten law 'n' order." Suu Kyi is patient, honest, well-disciplined, a
deep thinker and splendid listener -- far from the absurd epithets and pap
SLORC tries to heap on her image.  She has spent her entire life listening
and learning.  SLORC cannot understand her and does not know how to handle
the situation.  It is incapable of understanding her legions of followers.
It hates everything she represents, but still fears being considered
illegitimate and atrocious by the international community or being rejected
by Buddhism.
	Whether the old "constructive engagement" policy is phony, sinister or
timid, it has utterly failed.  This year SLORC is finally faced with an
urgent problem it can never solve.  It lacks understanding of the situation
as a whole.  As an investment, Burma will be no better than Iraq or North
Korea until it accommodates a genuine political change.

Concerned Burma Watcher II
Yamashina, Kyoto