ARTICLE

COMMENTS (0)

RECOMMEND (745)

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PLUSONE

MORE

E-MAIL

PRINT

TEXT SIZE

We have to find a common platform rather than talking about one country to lead others,” she said. 

Margiyono, an Indonesian journalist who is the advocacy coordinator for the Alliance of Independent Journalists, noted that “The Indonesian government has made many calls to release Aung San Suu Kyi, but there is no mechanism to force Burma to release her.”

Asean’s policy of non-interference is a primary reason observers doubt Indonesia will take a leading role in international efforts to effect change in Burma, with some going so far as to say that Asean’s non-interference policy has been a key factor in allowing the Burmese military regime to entrench itself over the last four decades.

Anggara, a human rights advocate and lawyer who is the executive director of the Indonesian Advocates Association in Jakarta, said that his country needs to abandon the non-interference principal. 

One potential opportunity for finding both a collective Asean platform and a forum for abandoning the non-interference policy that did not exist in previous years is the proposed “Asean community” outlined in the Asean Economic Community Blueprint, under which members would establish a single market and production base that would allow the free flow of goods, services, investment, capital and labor throughout the region.

“For me, the concept of an Asean community is very good. We really need to go together,” said Thung Ju Lan. “But I’m concerned about it because we pay too much attention to politics. The first thing we need to do is try to understand the differences and respect them.”

She and other observers say that while an Asean community is good in concept, the existence of undemocratic member states, especially Burma, will make it difficult to find an effective mechanism to implement the program. “Burma, of course, will be a challenge for an Asean community if it only thinks about its own interest,” Thung Ju Lan said.

As a result, some observers such as Aladdin D. Rillo, the head of the Asean Secretariat Finance Integration, have expressed doubts about the integration of Asean in the time frame outlined in the blueprint. “My personal view is that there will only be a semblance of economic integration … not the full integration that the term implies,” he told The Jakarta Post.

However, if Burma’s undemocratic politics and rights abuses are seen as holding up Asean efforts to establish one economic community, and its members believe they are losing the potential economic benefits to be derived from the blueprint, then it could provide an opportunity for them to bond together under Indonesia’s leadership, forego the non-interference principle and put significant pressure on Burma to change.

Debbie Stothard, a regional activist at Alternative Asean Network on Burma said, “It is time Burma should help Asean, not Asean help Burma to improve its human rights records.”

In the end, however, most observers say that Burma’s revolution must come from within, just as Indonesia’s did, with voluntary change from within the circle of decision makers such as top military officials.

“Activists, media and the international community have to inspire the masses. But the real change will come from the government and the people within,” Djamin said.

“There will be a lot of risk. The more repressive the regime is, the smarter people you need to be able to play in order to sustain the movement,” he said.

Thung Ju Lan said the role of educated young people is also important for change in Burma. “Youth inside and outside Burma should join hands in struggling for democracy. Strong opposition in exile is needed and educated young Burmese people should go back to Burma and struggle for change in different means,” she said.

“Sometimes, it doesn’t mean you need to go back to your country physically. You can do many things even when you stay in exile,” Thung Ju Lan added. 

Anggara said popular support is needed for the democracy movement in Burma to be an effective force. “We need a group of brave people. And they need to be supported by the people, the media and the international community,” he said.

Lessons from Jakarta

But even as most observers acknowledge that Burmese reforms must begin internally, many also say that both the Burmese junta and its opposition could benefit from Indonesia’s support and learn from the history of its transition over the past three decades from a dictatorship under Suharto to a democracy today.

Suharto seized power in a coup d’état in 1967, five years after Gen Ne Win did the same in Burma. Suharto executed an estimated 1.5 million opponents, many more than Ne Win, and Transparency International reported that Suharto and his cronies siphoned off an estimated US $15-35 billion in national assets while in power.

In 1998, university students launched protests at campuses across Indonesia following a massive fuel price rise. This instigated a nationwide uprising, including riots during which approximately 1,500 people died and scores of shops, houses, office buildings, shopping malls, markets and hotels were destroyed.