Someone Must Always Be in Control

The question we need to ask ourselves is this: What is the alternative? Will democracy be better served if he fails? Who or what will replace him? It will definitely not be a more liberal democratic civilian government. The most likely scenario is that the Tatmadaw will seize power. Given the failure of U Thein Sein’s experiment, the next regime is likely to be more conservative and repressive, not more liberal.

Q: What reforms would you like to see? What specific actions should Burma’s government take now?

A: A lot of reforms have already been promised. The ones related to the economy are very complicated and extremely hard to implement because they are interconnected. We also have problems that have been ignored and have festered for more than five decades. I think it is now more important for the government to implement promised reforms than to embark on new ones. The difficulty in implementing any reform is that the government may not have the capacity to deliver. If expectations exceed the government’s capacity to deliver, more reforms could be counter-productive. Repealing some security laws, declaring an amnesty, releasing political prisoners, putting in place procedures to allow exiles to return, lifting censorship laws, allowing journalists more freedom and allowing foreign journalists to visit are some of the easier reforms that will not overtax the already overloaded bureaucracy.

Q: President Thein Sein’s decision to suspend the China-backed Myitsone Dam project is partly viewed as a strategic move to foster better relations with Western powers, including the US, and thereby to balance Burma’s international relationships. Do you agree with that assessment? Was this really an effort by Burma to counter Chinese influence? Some critics say that by playing the China card, Burma can evade real political reform and still make friends with the West, do you agree?

A: I do not believe it is related to a grand international strategy. It is wishful thinking on the part of some people in the West. The suspension has to do with sending a domestic message that the president is the one in charge, that there is now a new strong man in place. The controversial dam had been negotiated in secret between a Chinese company and some past and present members of the government. U Thein Sein was apparently unaware of some aspects of the deals. The fact that it became a national cause célèbre gave U Thein Sein the ammunition that he was looking for. The issue of the Myitsone Dam was of concern not only to the Kachin people but all the people of Burma. Issues like that can really be used to build national unity. I welcome the president’s decision. I do not think China will intervene. It is not happy that one of its private companies is losing money, but it has too much to lose to use strong arm tactics with Burma.

As for reforms, the facts are that if the President wants to survive and protect Burma’s sovereignty, he cannot avoid reforms. There is no other way forward. Most people are still skeptical about the reforms but U Thein Sein is taking a lot of risks and going far beyond what anyone had expected. The danger now is of a backlash from those—inside and outside the country—who prefer the status quo and who do not want change.

 Q: Some activists and dissidents believe the EU’s Burma policy has been soft, non-comprehensive and one-sided—almost an appeasement of the regime and its apologists. What kind of policy changes are you expecting in the EU bloc towards Burma? Meanwhile, the US is reportedly considering relaxing restrictions on financial assistance to Burma. If many political prisoners are released, as is widely anticipated, is it time for the West to lift their economic sanctions against Burma? Also, without lifting sanctions, what actions can the EU and the US take to show Napyidaw that they are positively responding to Burma's reform initiatives? Do you expect the IMF and World Bank to provide greater technical and financial assistance to Burma in the near future?

A: If someone is weak, he may try to appease a bully in the hope that the bully will leave him alone. This hardly applies to the case of the EU and Burma. The EU does not need Burma to survive. It is also much stronger than Burma in very many ways.