In his August 16 speech to a gathering of handpicked cronies and technocrats in the Burmese capital of Naypyidaw, President Thein Sein, an ex-general, dropped a bombshell: his government would like Burmese dissidents in exile to “come home” in order to help contribute towards the national development of their birthplace.
Curiously, the real thrust of the President’s speech was about the popularly mandated nature of his quasi-parliamentary government—which works under the directives of the non-elected National Defense and Security Council; the terrorist insurgent nature and lack of public support of the Kachin Independence Organization; and the compassionate nature of the economic measures the government is undertaking in order to alleviate the economic pains of the country’s masses, including the working urban poor, the rural farmers and the pensioners.
Be that as it may, let me single out the issue of the exiles’ return.
Dr Zarni ([email protected]) is Visiting Fellow, Department of International Development, LSE and columnist for the Irrawaddy.
Unlike emigrants, political exiles typically look back not only to the circle of immediate and extended family that they left behind, voluntarily or not. They look beyond that circle, to their “home” communities and people. And the greatest dream of political exiles is not to have a prosperous permanent home in the country where they have taken “temporary refuge,” but to return home in order to both reunite with their loved ones who are still alive and contribute to the betterment of the people of their country.
Burmese exiles—who number in the thousands, span several generations and include people from diverse professional and educational backgrounds—are no exception.
Judging from on-line chats and Facebook discussions, the potent idea of the “exiles’ return” has triggered widespread conversations among the Burmese diasporas. And as a one-time “returnee” from exile in the US, I do feel I have something worthwhile to share with my compatriots on the subject of “going home”— especially when that return home would take place in a climate of political uncertainty and against the backdrop of a government, run by the very same leaders as the old regime, which is unlawfully keeping 2,000 plus fellow dissidents with various talents behind bars.
In particular, I don’t want other exiles to repeat my mistake of seeing the mirage of a negotiable or expandable political and societal space, when in fact no such space actually exists on the ground.
On a final note, Dr. Zarni, we may be seeing an opportunity where the entrenched system that was formerly unwilling to get behind progress may finally be doing so. We may be seeing an opportunity to validate the struggles of the revolutionaries and the ?evolutionaries? in the country. Let?s not miss the forest for the trees.
Kyaw Myo Wrote:
31/08/2011
For those of us powerless but forced by circumstance to continue working, whether in NGOs or the civil service or even the private sector, we don?t have the luxury of such choice. Many have to work within the realm of what can be perceived as possible or probable, and to try to install piecemeal all the conditions that would be favorable for progress. This may involve working with new civil servants (unlike career civil servants) newly shorn of their military uniforms, but often no less eager for positive impact. It may involve working with likely self-interested entities such as the Chinese/Japanese/Indians/Americans/EU with longer term strategic interests that may not necessarily be in the long term interests of our country. NGOs have to profess an ?apolitical? lifestyle to get work done that is very much political in nature. What can be more empowering for a polity than a full stomach, than freedom from disease, than education, than the ability to believe that you have a say in your day-to-day wellbeing?
Kyaw Myo Wrote:
31/08/2011
Yes there are thousands jailed, an oft-repeated scene across the ages between the desires of a generation and the inability or unwillingness of an entrenched power system to realize those desires. This country?s postcolonial (not just ethnic) contentions will not be resolved with 100 percent satisfaction on any side, most definitely not in any short amount of time.
I agree with you, that there is always a role for revolutionaries and revolutions. The problem with your thinking is that you seem to insist on a strategy around them. By definition a ?revolution? is rare (let alone ?successful revolution?). You cannot plan around improbable (even if systemically impactful) events. Trying to engineer revolutions is hard and expensive, and fraught with uncertainty, not being sure of what lies beyond. Look at Libya right now, with the rebels lining up for a return on their investment.
Of course, waiting for a revolution is even more reprehensible, and to me is no different from giving up responsibility, vision, and hope.
Kyaw Myo Wrote:
31/08/2011
Read much, Dr. Zarni? I never said "exiles abroad". I said "activists abroad".
But nice try.
Adam Selene Wrote:
30/08/2011
To Zarni: you're right that revolution is historically very relevant indeed. One wonders, though, if the Arab spring will lead to new suffering and the oppressed becoming the oppressors.
I think that Burma is not ready for a revolution. The NLD is not capable of governing in a million years and would lose trust of the people quickly if it failed in such a scenario. Which in turn would give way to opportunists and a whole lot of new trouble.
Another thing is that Burma is awash with weapons. Instability like that of post-1948 would loom, which could in turn warrant a new military coup under the guise of "stabilizing the country".
So, what do you prefer Zarni? The regime's evolution or revolution? I personally prefer them to leave through the backdoor slowly, while the opposition pushes them along and gets ready to step in.
Moe Aung Wrote:
30/08/2011
Adam Selene,
I share your frustration over her self limited options and where she parts from her famous father who was practical and effective. She definitely has the commitment, courage and stamina , but sadly neither the political acumen nor planning capabilities for an all out fight for freedom.
Kyaw Myo,
And that's why it remains my firm belief that only those inside Burma can bring about change. That's also the reason for ASSK to stay so she can organize and lead rather than become the Burma lobby in New York and Washington. We look to you guys in building solidarity and People Power, above and underground, armed and unarmed. Work ceaselessly to win over the army rank and file to join People Power in droves for the final showdown.
May the force be with you.
zarni Wrote:
30/08/2011
"Kyaw Myo" -
If anything the new trend among the so-called "donor" Western governments is to pour millions of $ INTO the country - not into exile communities - with the intent of turning local elites into pimps (HPAR SWAE) in the name of "civil society" for their ultimate strategic and commercial interests. Do enjoy licking your crumbs, chewing the bones and barking and biting among you pimps.
zarni Wrote:
30/08/2011
again to "Kyaw Myo"-
Several thousand revolutionaries from all kids of backgrounds, are in jail INSIDE THE COUNTRY – and thousands more in ethnic nonBama communities such as the Kachin public prefer revolution to a semi-colonial situation.
Only a historically ignorant, or opportunistic reactionary mind, would trash the role of revolutionary push in human history as "irrelevant".
Go tell the courageous Arabs your trash.
zarni Wrote:
30/08/2011
Kyaw Myo - You are completely off the mark when you wrote the factually incorrect rubbish like this passage: 'Activists abroad who have make a living out of activism ..."
99.9% of the thousands of exiles from Burma from 1960s on earn their living doing both blue- and white collar works. As honest workers, many roll Sushi to support themselves.
Kyaw Myo Wrote:
26/08/2011
To people like Dr. Zarni abroad, they can't accept the fact that those of us who live and work in Burma (either as civilian members of the government bureaucracy, as civil society participants, or in the private sector) despise the military regime AS MUCH IF NOT MORE than them. We have to deal with it daily. They can't accept that we actually want political freedoms more than them, harder to find when you?re not in exile.
They can't accept that us countrymen who choose to work here have to make difficult choices within a very different operating environment, with power constraints, poor information, fleeting opportunities, and personalized politics and relations, in a way more complex than merely shouting "Down with them, I say!" on internet message boards.
Oh but of course, I guess because we who live and work here are automatically apologists.
Enjoy your online musings, Dr. Zarni. Some of us have to deal with the uncertainties as well as the opportunities of living and working in-country.
Kyaw Myo Wrote:
26/08/2011
It's no use arguing with Dr. Zarni. Activists abroad who have make a living out of activism will always stick to their revolutionary (read: irrelevant) vision that is just out of reach enough to justify continued funding and support to a "revolution" they lead from the sidelines. Heavens forbid that change actually happens in Burma, because what would they do then? Find a real job? Or the worst: to have to put their money where their mouths are and give up the trappings of the activist-exile lifestyle and move back to actually push along progress?
Adam Selene Wrote:
26/08/2011
Moe Aung, I agree with you that the NLD and ASSK's problem is the lack of a plan B and C and the unwillingness to use all options available. That's the big difference with Aung San, who used all means available to reach his goal.
The NLD painted itself into a corner. That's why I have been critical of the NLD/ASSK, not because I sympathize with the regime. It's also pretty normal (and democratic) to hold the NLD/ASSK responsible for underperforming. Do we agree that due to her errors ASSK is now just a pawn?
So if we agree on all this, stop trying to put me in Myanmar Patriots camp.
The only thing I am saying is that due to strategical errors in the past the opposition is stuck in the current scenario. The only way to deal with this now is to take it as it is and be realistic, pragmatic and cunning. Like Aung San was.
Moe Aung Wrote:
26/08/2011
I'm glad we agree on the main point that "Burma needs to get rid of military rule", only you have a funny way of showing it.
The long and windy way with a few surprises, nasty or pleasant, along the way necessarily involves appeasement and collaboration with the regime. You can be proud of, I guess, the kind of intellect and support you get in your fellow travelers like Myanmar Patriots.
ASSK/NLD's principal weakness is the absence of a plan B which the generals have in their trigger fingers, and the complete lack of a real fighting spirit that will consider all options to achieve real change. I agree it's been a waste of time playing chicken and beating about the bush.
Adam Selene Wrote:
25/08/2011
Moe Aung wrote: "Your sympathies nonetheless remain plain to any of us following your posts here.[...] Apologist 'crap' dressed up as pragmatism at every opportunity."
I share the same goals as you. Burma needs to get rid of military rule. I sympathize with everybody who wants this, not with the generals. Ok? It's very sad that disagreeing with you means being a devil's child or something...
I do think that the opposition has been very ineffective. May I please? I know all these people personally by now. And they're good people, but not necessarily good politicians. The level of policy thinking is low and strategically the NLD/ASSK have failed miserably. That makes me sad, partly because it helped create a situation in which the only feasible way forward is going along and trying to push the boundaries as far as possible.
Is there any other way to make the most out of a bad situation?
Myanmar Patriots Wrote:
25/08/2011
Dear Adam Selene,
Is it worth it? :-)
Burmese saying: 'playing the harp to the buffalo'. Know your buffalo.
Moe Aung Wrote:
25/08/2011
Adam Selene,
Good on you that you don't pull any punches. Your sympathies nonetheless remain plain to any of us following your posts here. So your objectivity pretense falls flat on its face. Apologist 'crap' dressed up as pragmatism at every opportunity.
Adam Selene Wrote:
24/08/2011
Okay, Zarni. Lets make it plain and simple.
My original post was about the fact that the new national budget doubled and that defense expenditures went down as a percentage. You told me I shouldnt believe that.
So why exactly do you wanna keep on believing the old numbers? The source - the military - is the same, right? If you believe the old percentage, you should believe the new one also and use it in your piece.
The answer of course is that your piece has nothing to do with scientific analysis. Your objectives are political. The wrong numbers fit your bill better.
I hope the readers understand why this is wrong.
And please: no more responses that I am just a fool. Please reply to my point.
Adam Selene Wrote:
24/08/2011
Moe Aung wrote: "So you are that kind of journalist who enjoys official blessing. Thanks for the disclosure. A step in the right direction my foot. If Zarni is inclined to 'foul mouth' the regime you are too transparent in being an apologist."
I travel in Burma as a tourist and publish under a pen name. I was behind the lines during Nargis and I didn't pull my punches when they cracked down on the monks in 2007 (I was there too). During that time they raided my room when I was away, to find out what I was doing.
So please don't give me that "if you don't agree with me you are with the generals" crap. Leave that to George Bush.
Adam Selene Wrote:
24/08/2011
Zarni wrote: "No amount of standard professional conventions, ah, like 'balanced reporting', in your pseudo-scientific journalism."
I don't say I adhere to scientific principles. I just like you to do so if you use your "Dr. Zarni" pen name. Your pieces have nothing to do with science.
You try to use the same "you foreigner, you don't get Burma" stuff on me. Well, I guess I spent at least ten times as much time in Burma as you did the last ten years. And my judgement is not clouded by rage, because I am an onlooker not a victim.
Nobody can ever be really 100% objective. We're humans after all. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist that I come a lot closer than you.
You still didn't reply to a single point I made...
Moe Aung Wrote:
24/08/2011
Adam Selene,
So you are that kind of journalist who enjoys official blessing. Thanks for the disclosure.
A step in the right direction my foot. If Zarni is inclined to 'foul mouth' the regime you are too transparent in being an apologist.
Shall we see how someone like U Myint makes a dent on their policies? Let's see how they pick and choose to suit themselves. Your generals are smart enough to realize they needed to change tack, and thus was born a 'civilian' govt, and all the right noises and going through the motions of 'good governance'.
Some journalist, eh? Sure you have no ax to grind?
Terry Evans Wrote:
24/08/2011
If you go home remember what is happening in Tunisia, Egypt & Libya - spread the word that you don't have to take it any more.
George Than Setkyar Heine Wrote:
24/08/2011
Thein Sein's NO PRESIDENT OF BURMA than a BABOON in the wilds of Africa as far as I am concerned.
He and his outfit have just STOLEN an election and he is also SELECTED for the post by that PUPPET MASTER Than Shwe no less.
Hence, the BABOON has NO CLOUT much less CREDIBILITY to MAKE THINGS HAPPEN in Burma as well.
We EXILES have no MIND to GANG UP with Than Shwe/Thein Sein and his baboons, not to mention subjecting ourselves to be USED in this SCAM - economic and development projects in Burma - least of all.
And Burma's economy,political stability, territorial integrity and national sovereignty as well would be FARTHER to ACHIEVE than GETTING TO THE ENDS of the UNIVERSE as long as Thein Sein and his lot hold the reins of the country I say.
zarni Wrote:
24/08/2011
Mr/Mrs/Miss Selene, again -
No amount of standard professional conventions, ah, like 'balanced reporting', in your pseudo-scientific journalism -- tell that to the Murdochs who give humanity 'news' -- will and can ever make your interpretations balanced or "scientific". You need not worry about yourself getting kicked out by the regime - they love western journalists who will give them the undue benefit of the doubt while the non-chattering classes of the public at home have written them off as a bunch of delusional, power-crazed, self-aggrandizers. perhaps your "western" and "journalist" backgrounds blind you from understanding and appreciating the neo-totalitarian and neo-fascist nature of the regime in question. You obviously don't have any intellectual, existential or experiential framework within which Burma - and the associated popular rage against the open-air prison called Burma - can best be understood and debated.
zarni Wrote:
24/08/2011
Mr/Mrs/Miss Selene, You keep using the word 'science' 'scientific' - obviously not understanding the nature of analysis about the social world. We - human analysts - are part of their analyses; analyses are simply INDIVIDUAL interpretations - some value-driven and subjective (like rage, outrage, disgust, defiance etc) , and other components are empirically verifiable. You can't see the wood from the tree, judging from you harping away with 'facts'.
Adam Selene Wrote:
23/08/2011
Hi Zarni,
Thanks for the reply. I just wanted to point out that for the first time oil and gas money are represented in the national budget somewhat accurately.
I don't like the regime, but fair is fair: this is a step in the right direction and one of the advantages of the elections and the "new" system. You could be a bit more balanced in your writings. All this black and white stuff is getting tedious.
And please consider a more scientific approach in your replies. The ad hominem attack on me is a bit silly. Some facts in your replies would be nice next time.
As with regards to my pen name. I am a western journalist. I travel to Burma frequently and I don't want to risk getting kicked or refused entry. Ok?
zarni Wrote:
22/08/2011
Adam Selene - What do you have to hide since you are writing under a fake name, and not using your own real name, whatever it may be Mr or Mrs, or Miss? I have been in Burmese politics for more than 20 years, in all camps, and I have never come across anyone by that name in the category of certified and certifiable regime apologists. You treat those regime-released statistics at face value, and yet you conveniently overlook the fact that the military and those in charge of the military are above the "elected" body in Naypyidaw - the parliament.
Ah, serious counter-analysis from one Adam Selene!
Htun Aung Gyaw Wrote:
20/08/2011
Thanks for sharing your experience Nyi Mg Zarni. It is good that you have learn your bitter lesson which enlighten you to deal with the regime in the future course. Prepare for the fight. Every one deserves second chance.
Adam Selene Wrote:
19/08/2011
Zarni writes: "...didn’t result in any appreciable shift in the regime’s budget priorities—which allocate more than 50 percent for armaments and defense.."
Did he see the national budget for 2011-2012? I thought one of the (mostly unnoticed) interesting changes in Burma after the elections is that gas/oil money is finally accounted for in the national budget, which means that after years of siphoning off this money, finally the people will enjoy some benefit of it.
The national budget more than doubled as a result, so the percentages Zarni is mentioning are not accurate anymore...
In 2010-2011 defence was 51% of the total budget. In 2011-2012 it is 21% (with also a small absolute decrease)
It's not good enough, but it's a step forward.
I know Zarni wants to foul mouth the new government at every opportunity. But as a "scientist" he should at least do his homework and get his numbers right.
COMMENTS (28)
E-MAIL
PRINT
