ADVERTISE | DONATION
Irrawaddy CONTACT US|FAQ
BURMESE VERSION | VIDEO





COMMENTARY
Doing Something about Black Friday
By Donald M Seekins Friday, September 19, 2003


COMMENTS (0)
RECOMMEND (67)
FACEBOOK
TWITTER
 
MORE
E-MAIL
PRINT
September 19, 2003—Saying a situation is "complex" is sometimes acknowledged as displaying commendable realism; but at other times, a complex view is dismissed as a sign of moral weakness, especially by those who prefer to see things in terms of black and white. The May 30 attack on Aung San Suu Kyi and her convoy in Sagaing Division, which resulted in her detention and the death of as many as 100 pro-democracy supporters at the hands of junta-enlisted thugs, has made the situation in Burma more complex than ever. We need to come to an understanding about what is happening inside the country that transcends simple moralism or political side-taking. Without it, the international community cannot respond in an effective way. The world has expressed clear indignation over the Black Friday incident. On July 29, US President George W Bush signed into law the "Burma Freedom and Democracy Act," a far tougher measure than the 1997 non-retroactive ban on US investments. This act embargoes Burmese exports and effectively closes off access to US currency by individuals or companies inside the country. To the surprise of those who considered him the junta’s best friend in the region, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad suggested that should negotiations with the junta fail, Burma should be expelled from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). The Japanese government, which has generally taken a patient, indeed indulgent, attitude toward the junta since 1988, announced that it was halting all new aid, and has apparently frozen on-going projects as well. China, however, weighed in as usual on the junta’s side, criticizing external interference in the country’s domestic affairs. But sanctions are, as Colin Powell once said, a "blunt instrument," and despite the bully-pulpit exuberance of certain Congressmen and activists in Washington, it seems they are hitting the wrong targets. According to the BBC, 400 textile factories, mostly located on the outskirts of Rangoon, employ as many as 350,000 low-paid female workers. In recent years, Burma has exported up to US $400 million in textiles to the United States annually. Since the latest US sanctions ban imports from the country, in Prof David Steinberg’s estimate "some 80,000 jobs have already been lost and this will be followed by another 100,000, mostly young women who provide supplementary income for impoverished families." In the South China Morning Post, Steinberg cited a recent academic inquiry in central Burma indicating that some of those let off are finding their way into the brothels. "There are few other jobs available," Steinberg wrote in mid-August. Small traders who see greenbacks as the lifeblood of their business are also being hit hard, as the sanctions shut Burmese banks off from a supply of dollars. Some advocates of sanctions see them as a way of causing damage to the military-controlled economy in the hope the whole thing will just collapse: apr?s moi, le deluge. Consider the argument from one of them, Philip Robertson of the AFL-CIO, the main American labor federation. He claims that because Burma’s junta controls the economy through Army-owned conglomerates such as the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings, the imposition of trade and investment bans hits hard at its economic interests. But as he wrote in The Irrawaddy ("Sanctions Are Working in Burma," Online Commentary, Aug 26, 2003) "… for this reason, sanctions has a disproportionate impact on the military, not necessarily the people of Burma." As tough sanctions begin to bite, Robertson says, Burma’s ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) will step up oppressive measures such as forced expropriation of land and forced labor to scrape together enough resources to buy the loyalty to the officer corps, the key to its continued survival. This "creates additional popular resentment against the military, and builds support for political change." But, I wonder, what does he expect the people, newly resentful, to do? To refuse to perform forced labor? To march in the streets as they did in 1988, and get shot? It’s hard to believe that Robertson has fully thought through the implications of his words. He seems to expect the people of Burma to be (or to continue to be) a punching bag for an angry and isolated junta.


1  |  2 | 3 



More Articles in This Section

bullet Sizing Up an Icon

bullet Fighting Corruption Begins at Home

bullet Future of Exiled Burmese Media

bullet How Much Freedom Does Burmese Media Enjoy?

bullet Five Days in Burma

bullet Turning Burma into Next Asian Tiger No Simple Task

bullet With Suu Kyi On Board, Is Burma Finally Moving Toward Real Change?

bullet The ‘Rule of Law’ in Burma

bullet New Doors are Opening in Burma

bullet A Good Beginning to the New Year






Thailand Hotels
Bangkok Hotels
China Hotels
India Hotels

Donations

Home |News |Regional |Business |Opinion |Multimedia |Special Feature |Interview |Magazine |Burmese Elections 2010 |Archives |Research
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved.