SCMP-Editorial -Stand-off in Burma

[hlaing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

South China Morning Post
Thursday  August 13  1998

Editorial 
Stand-off in Burma 

Despite widespread international condemnation at the beginning of the month
when troops kept Aung San Suu Kyi captive in her car for five days before
forcing her back to Rangoon, the military junta in Burma remains impervious
to foreign criticism - and seems as resolute as ever in its methods.
That only seems to spur on its most prominent opponent. The leader of the
National League for Democracy has set out once more to visit supporters,
and, again, security forces have stopped her.
By repeatedly barring her access to supporters, the regime only turns the
glare of the spotlight once more on the repressive nature of its rule, and
attracts more attention to the Nobel Peace Prize laureate.
In ordinary circumstances, this would hardly be an astute strategy for a
government which has sought some sort of international respectability
through membership of Asean, and which is seeking to attract foreign
investment and tourists to its country.
Without such help, Burma risks falling into ever-greater isolation. The
situation is already so bad that soldiers are reported to be deserting to
fend for themselves.
If discontent is, indeed, spreading in the 350,000-strong army, which
accounts for between 40 and 60 per cent of the national budget, it may only
be a matter of time before the situation becomes even more polarised and
veers out of control.
Before the Southeast Asian crisis, the conventional wisdom was that,
despite its economic mismanagement, the junta could retain power well into
the next century. But the price of doing that in present circumstances has
risen steeply, and may account for the tougher attitude which the military
is now taking towards the opposition, and towards the foreigners who have
been arrested for political activities in the past week.
The situation is all the more tense because Burma has a popularly elected
leader waiting to claim her political inheritance.
The generals cannot say that there is no alternative to their rule. But the
longer they hang on, and the greater their repression, the greater the
danger they pose for their country.