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

Engaging a democracy 'icon'



--------------691346B0EDAE3A2C394907DE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Engaging a democracy `icon'

The Hindu (New Delhi)
January 17, 2001

THE UNITED NATIONS has done well to broker a political engagement
between Myanmar's ruling military junta and its arch adversary and a
phenomenal proponent of democracy, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi. However, it is
a measure of diplomatic circumspection that the global organisation
appears to have waited for this new reality to seem sustainable before
announcing the evident breakthrough. Ms. Suu Kyi and the governing SPDC
(the State Peace and Development Council) have held at least one
meaningful meeting in recent months to begin addressing the intractable
puzzle of how best Myanmar can be administered. The aim of ``confidence
building'' was at the core of the in camera discussions that the two
sides have held so far under the current initiative of the U.N. The more
tangible objective, discernible in the latest official comments at the
U.N. headquarters, is to facilitate a round of preliminary talks between
the SPDC and Ms. Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) so that
the two can try and agree to begin direct parleys on the substantive
questions of how Myanmar should reorganise its constitutional order. It
is obviously too early to judge how promising the U.N.'s facilitation is
for a final political settlement of the impasse between the SPDC and the
NLD.

In one sense, the U.N.'s current agenda in regard to Myanmar's internal
affairs is particularly delicate, given that there has been no
intervention in that country by any external force within the
conventional definitions of the world body's diplomatic business.
However, the SPDC had consented to the appointment of a veteran
Malaysian diplomat, Mr. Razali Ismail, as the U.N. Secretary-General,
Mr. Kofi Annan's Special Envoy to Myanmar last April. The Yangon
regime's action then was explainable on two counts - Myanmar's
reasonably cordial equation with the U.N., which had been cognisant of
that country's domestic situation all along, and possibly the SPDC's
calculation that the democracy question could perhaps be `internalised'.
Myanmar's military Government had by that time traversed a long way in
gaining leverage in regional institutions such as the Association of
South East Asian Nations. Yet, it was arguable that a U.N.- facilitated
`internalisation' of the challenge from Ms. Suu Kyi's
externally-applauded movement would be a bonus for the SPDC. For the
U.N., it was simply a matter of affirming international interest in
Myanmar's political question in the wake of a controversy over the
so-called ``dollars for democracy'' plan.

The message in Myanmar's contemporary history is that its military
leadership, long used to being the `government', will not be willing to
transfer power to the people without a grim struggle. A parallel reality
is that Ms. Suu Kyi has somehow been unable in recent years to recapture
her earlier mystique of a messianic leader so as to unseat the military
dictatorship through a revolution of `people power'. This has not of
course diminished her status as a democracy `icon', although the SPDC
seems to have skilfully resorted to the politics of manipulation within
a societal framework of poverty and ethnic diversity in order to stay in
power. The SPDC's top leaders such as Gen. Than Shwe and Lt. Gen. Khin
Nyunt are also aware of the political power of the gun barrel besides
the potency of propaganda. The skewed but perceived meaning of Ms. Suu
Kyi's marriage to a foreign national has remained an emotive topic in
the political counter-attack against her by the SPDC and its earlier
incarnation in power, the State Law and Order Restoration Committee
(SLORC). In addition, the SPDC's hold on power is traceable to a
tangential political discourse on the need for measured steps towards
`full' democracy over time. Linked to the SPDC's version of a slow march
towards democracy is its constant refrain about the need to sustain
Myanmar's territorial integrity in the face of divisive tendencies along
ethnic lines.




--------------691346B0EDAE3A2C394907DE
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<b><font size=+2>Engaging a democracy `icon'</font></b>
<p>The Hindu (New Delhi)
<br>January 17, 2001
<p>THE UNITED NATIONS has done well to broker a political engagement between
Myanmar's ruling military junta and its arch adversary and a phenomenal
proponent of democracy, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi. However, it is a measure
of diplomatic circumspection that the global organisation appears to have
waited for this new reality to seem sustainable before announcing the evident
breakthrough. Ms. Suu Kyi and the governing SPDC (the State Peace and Development
Council) have held at least one meaningful meeting in recent months to
begin addressing the intractable puzzle of how best Myanmar can be administered.
The aim of ``confidence building'' was at the core of the in camera discussions
that the two sides have held so far under the current initiative of the
U.N. The more tangible objective, discernible in the latest official comments
at the U.N. headquarters, is to facilitate a round of preliminary talks
between the SPDC and Ms. Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD)
so that the two can try and agree to begin direct parleys on the substantive
questions of how Myanmar should reorganise its constitutional order. It
is obviously too early to judge how promising the U.N.'s facilitation is
for a final political settlement of the impasse between the SPDC and the
NLD.
<p>In one sense, the U.N.'s current agenda in regard to Myanmar's internal
affairs is particularly delicate, given that there has been no intervention
in that country by any external force within the conventional definitions
of the world body's diplomatic business. However, the SPDC had consented
to the appointment of a veteran Malaysian diplomat, Mr. Razali Ismail,
as the U.N. Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan's Special Envoy to Myanmar
last April. The Yangon regime's action then was explainable on two counts
- Myanmar's reasonably cordial equation with the U.N., which had been cognisant
of that country's domestic situation all along, and possibly the SPDC's
calculation that the democracy question could perhaps be `internalised'.
Myanmar's military Government had by that time traversed a long way in
gaining leverage in regional institutions such as the Association of South
East Asian Nations. Yet, it was arguable that a U.N.- facilitated `internalisation'
of the challenge from Ms. Suu Kyi's externally-applauded movement would
be a bonus for the SPDC. For the U.N., it was simply a matter of affirming
international interest in Myanmar's political question in the wake of a
controversy over the so-called ``dollars for democracy'' plan.
<p>The message in Myanmar's contemporary history is that its military leadership,
long used to being the `government', will not be willing to transfer power
to the people without a grim struggle. A parallel reality is that Ms. Suu
Kyi has somehow been unable in recent years to recapture her earlier mystique
of a messianic leader so as to unseat the military dictatorship through
a revolution of `people power'. This has not of course diminished her status
as a democracy `icon', although the SPDC seems to have skilfully resorted
to the politics of manipulation within a societal framework of poverty
and ethnic diversity in order to stay in power. The SPDC's top leaders
such as Gen. Than Shwe and Lt. Gen. Khin Nyunt are also aware of the political
power of the gun barrel besides the potency of propaganda. The skewed but
perceived meaning of Ms. Suu Kyi's marriage to a foreign national has remained
an emotive topic in the political counter-attack against her by the SPDC
and its earlier incarnation in power, the State Law and Order Restoration
Committee (SLORC). In addition, the SPDC's hold on power is traceable to
a tangential political discourse on the need for measured steps towards
`full' democracy over time. Linked to the SPDC's version of a slow march
towards democracy is its constant refrain about the need to sustain Myanmar's
territorial integrity in the face of divisive tendencies along ethnic lines.
<br>&nbsp;
<p>&nbsp;</html>

--------------691346B0EDAE3A2C394907DE--