COMMENTS (0)

RECOMMEND (248)

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PLUSONE

MORE

E-MAIL

PRINT

TEXT SIZE

However, without international support, the effects of US sanctions remain limited.

Vietnam survived US sanctions for many years, and the US dollar has long prospered inside Vietnam as an alternative currency. The Vietnamese had no problem in avoiding the effects of US sanctions, and have probably already told the SPDC how to handle the situation. At the height of US sanctions, the Fund of which I was Chairman transferred some US $50 million into Vietnam without any difficulty. Burma can do the same.

There is a mild obsession about a parallel with sanctions and South Africa. The situations of Burma and South Africa are totally different. South Africa is both a first world and a third world country, Burma is o­nly third world. South Africa had a vibrant political opposition in Parliament, and anti-apartheid activists within the country of world class renown. Burma o­nly has Daw Suu Kyi, whereabouts unknown. Trade and investment sanctions against South Africa, despite popular conviction, were largely ineffective. What brought change in South Africa was first, the internal political opposition which became unstoppable, and second, the refusal of overseas banks, particularly US banks, to roll over loans to South African banks, which brought the country to its knees.

South Africa under apartheid simply became bankrupt as overseas banks were no longer willing to accept the financial risks associated with the economic nonsense of apartheid: sanctions of the marketplace, not sanctions imposed by governments. Burma is bankrupt, but it doesn’t matter. Forget the South African model. It simply isn’t relevant.

Without international support, sanctions become largely ritualistic. They "send a strong signal", but the SPDC unfortunately isn’t listening.

Derek Tonkin
British Ambassador to Vietnam 1980-82
Minister, British Embassy in South Africa 1983-86 [Top]

June 16, 2003—Dear Editor,

I wonder why Germany’s attitude is totally off-topic when it comes to the Burmese democracy movement and also very rarely mentioned in The Irrawaddy magazine. Nobody doubts that Germany achieved democracy, but it is very silent when it comes to convincing other countries to join the "Democratic Club."

Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s recent trips to China covered a wide range of topics, but like his visits to other non-democratic countries, human rights and democracy issues were never raised. While Schroeder has never visited Burma, the last high-ranking visit by a German was by the former President Richard von Weizsaecker. We all know his visit was not of any benefit for the citizens of Burma. Would the Generals let a leader ride o­n a white elephant if he was there to criticize them?

During a time when Burma is now under immense pressure, the country also enjoyed a visit by German ex-MP Friedhelm Ost, who is the former head of the right wing CSU party. And under the unspectacular headline "Documentary Film o­n Naga Briefed" in the New Light of Myanmar [26th June 2003], we can read nothing about this film, o­nly about the praise the German federal government has bestowed o­n the Tatmadaw for its efforts to maintain peace and stability. The German government knows the price for this peace and stability: fear and oppression.

Recently, The Irrawaddy reported about the deportation of the Burmese Ko Tun Kyaw, who I have met personally at a friend’s house. The fact that Germany violated its own laws by deporting him was never mentioned. The Potsdam district court declared deportations to Burma are illegal, because just the act of applying for asylum can lead to severe repression, even torture, if the asylum seeker is deported. But who cares for a Burmese?

The point is that the Germans know Burma o­nly as paradise. The German government serves up this image and behind closed doors it does business with the Generals. Than Shwe’s private cars are even maintained by Germans.