Will the Foreign Policy Success of Obama place Burma in the Proxy Hot War?
President’s
Obama’s foreign policy struggles in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria,
Palestine and most of the Middle East, not to mention Ukraine and the
Pacific rim nations is a cause for “a palpable sense of disappointment on the world stage as well.”[1] Having
failed elsewhere in the world, Obama finds his foreign policy assailed
by critics, and his legacy on the global stage in doubt. [2] Details of Secretary of State John Kerry’s talks with both Thein Sein and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, were kept Hush
even though Kerry offered a slightly more critical assessment in
remarks at the East-West Center in Honolulu following his trip to Burma,
with the remark that in the end the leadership will have to make the critical choices.[3]
Next
year’s elections will be a key indicator of how Burma want to move
forward, with many an assessment of the reform process hinging on the
outcome “all in” on a questionable hand? [4]Among
those who will be keenly watching the election returns will be no doubt
President Barack Obama, as his stakes are the highest in its foreign
policy barometer, as underneath all the rhetoric of democracy, human
rights, and free and fair elections, land grabbing, crony economy there
is major US commercial and strategic interest in resource-rich country
with a growing energetic young population vis a vis China.
American
businesses are coming to Burma in what looks like an increasingly
unstoppable tide, and to facilitate investment, most of the blacklisted
tycoons will be whitewash as Secretary of State Kerry demonstrated by
putting up in a blacklisted tycoon’s hotel.[5] It
is also known that a senior State Department officials met privately
with some of these tycoons, known by their acronym as SDNs (Specially
Designated Nationals) telling them to put forward a request to have
their names cleared.[6]
At least in name they would have to sever ties with the military, avoid
involvement in land seizures and respect civilian rule. And they will
be removed from the blacklist, having been sufficiently rehabilitated in
the eyes of US officials at the Treasury Department. But whether they
would be posthumously be granted to the two gentlemen of Rangoon (Khun Sa and Lo Hse Han)
is still to be seen. However, Canada has rolled out the red carpet
welcome to Lo Hse Han’s son Stephen Lo. Such is the North-American
standard of “Business always overrules the conscience”, the established arsenal of democracy.
Indeed, many Burmese were counting on the United States to inject some life into a reform program increasingly viewed as stalled.
Whatever lingering moral authority remaining in the administration of
Barack Obama may fell to dust. In a country like Burma; one is
immediately struck by the staggering glibness that tore a great many
people to pieces, among them many innocents, particularly the non
Myanmar ethnic nationalities. As bad as the "some folks" gambit was,
this, this right here, is where the moral authority of the American
president and his administration became a dumpster fire. The moral
failure on Burma in this is so vast as to be bottomless. President Obama
isn't going to get any static from them on the issue; which the Myanmar
had inflicted on their enemies.
President
Obama has done nothing to bring those responsible to justice surely he
knows that former Generals now in mufti, have never admitted their
mistakes, nor asked for forgiveness, let alone punishing them, this
explicitly means that they will repeat the same atrocities, as they had
done for more than half a century, if things doesn’t go their way. Now
by lining up with and defending these Generals, he has added his name to
the roll call of shame that continues to dishonor the American nation
whose hall marks is democracy and human rights. The
cruel and despicable a practice which the Burmese Junta has imposed on
its own people is not yet lost and it acted that these people are the
"real patriots." “The administration can do more on this issue. As we
tie a nice bow on what we call a success story, we need to make sure we
aren’t a cheap date when it comes to human rights.” said representative, Jim McGovern of Worcester.[8] And warned conditions in Burma had taken “a sharp turn for the worse”
and urged more restrictive measures, such as targeted sanctions. More
than 70 lawmakers signed on, including all House members from
Massachusetts. The Worcester congressman pushed a separate resolution
through the House in May that highlighted the Rohingya’s plight, a move
he labeled a “friendly reminder” for the White House.
Unblemished it is no more. The legalised assault on Unity Journal’s brave journalists was just like the bad old days. Courageous journalism who had known all the time that the Tatmadaw has
used chemical weapons against the ethnic freedom fighters was made
bare. Now in Burma suddenly became very much harder to report the truth
because as I have often described that the corner stone of the Tatmadaw was “To tell lies against the very concept of truth.” is their unwritten rule in the Tatmadaw. Now that the sanctions are all gone but the job of reform is only half done?[9] In the past three months, a coalition of opposition forces has been holding rallies to demand radical reform of the 2008 Nargis
Constitution, designed to cut back the dominating role of the military –
they hold 25 per cent of parliamentary seats, and remove the arbitrary
rule that prevents Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from running for president.[10] A petition demanding these changes has gathered five million signatures.[11]
But Thein Sein and his colleagues have shown no interest whatsoever in
even discussing them and yet President Obama is said to be considering a
second visit later in the year to this lonely outpost of presidential
achievement.
As
the United States insists that military engagement with Burma is
crucial to promote political reforms, human rights activists and ethnic
nationalities are raising who will take responsibility if US assistance
to Burma’s armed forces is used to oppress, rather than help, the
Burmese people? The ethnic nationalities combined together which formed
the majority of the population has been victims of brutal military
campaigns and have sent a letter to the US Consulate in Thailand’s
Chiang Mai last month, saying they believed US military engagement in
the country was premature. “We don’t even know what will happen in
2015. We don’t know whether the election will be free and fair. Now,
proportional representation (PR) is being debated and we don’t know how
things will develop,”[12]
said Khun Htun Oo and there is every possibility that the American
technologies will be used for ethnic cleansing as they have done in the
past. The classic example is the Tatmadaw has signed bilateral
ceasefires with most ethnic armed groups since 2012, but over the past
three years clashes in northern Burma have left more than 100,000 people
displaced. Cherry Zahau, an ethnic Chin human rights activist accused the US that it is due to the geopolitical importance of Burma for US national security and that the Tatmadaw has continuously been a hindrance to reforms by waging battles “It is ridiculous that the US is engaging with the Burmese military to encourage reforms,”[13] she said.
Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi is also very disappointed with US policy in Burma,
especially its policy of military-to-military engagement.[14]
Not only the United States, but also the United Kingdom and Australia
appear convinced that military engagement is crucial in this time of
political reform. They have all already sent military leaders to meet
with top-brass officials from the Tatmadaw, Obviously, the Obama administration and other Western countries are eager to work with Burma’s quasi-military government (if they can work with Assad of Syria in face of ISIS threat Burma is a small fry).
After half a century of military dictatorship, their rationale is that
they want to encourage political reforms and more equitable development
for the country’s people. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other dissident
leaders clearly do not oppose these goals, or the diplomatic engagement
that is likely necessary to achieve them. But whether the international
community should go so far as to engage with Burma’s military is a major
question, especially lately, when it increasingly appears that the
government’s political reforms have stalled.
It’s a pity that Obama and his experts did not know what is the crux of the Burmese problem? The Myanmar race which control the imperial Tatmadaw wanted to colonise all the non-Myanmar ethnic nationalities and that is the sole reason of the struggle as every ethnic race in Burma is fighting against the Myanmar dominated central government (note there is no horizontal struggle between the ethnic like in former Yugoslavia). A vertical struggle indicates that all these want some sort of genuine federalism. More than half a century since 1962, the Myanmar military dominated central government refused to grant them and now because of the unsurmountable pressure from China it has no choice but to go along with the Western democratic standards and began to negotiate grudgingly with the ethnic nationalities. The successful “Divide and Rule” policy of the Burmese government was able to coax the Southern Alliance composed of Karen, the Chin, the Mon, the Karenni and the Southern Shan and the All Burma Student Democratic Front to a cease fire after bribing their leaders outright and giving them some autonomy and economic incentives, however, the Northern Alliance composed mainly of Kachin, WA, the Palong (Tang), the Nagas, the Northern Shan and perhaps the Arakanese want genuine federalism and once it is clear that the Myanmar will not grant them may form their North Federal Military Alliance to resist the pressure. What proof is more wanted when the Central Government has waged an all-out war against the Kachin?
It is also a fact that Northern alliance have to rely on the narco-production to finance their war efforts and Burma ranks only second to Afghanistan in narco-production.[16] So with the active support of the US, (now that there is a military cooperation between the two countries of USA and Burma) it may launch an all-out war against the Northern Alliance as the imperial Tatmadaw
has done to the Kachin. But the WA traditional supporters are the
Chinese who has already given them some sophisticated weapons including
helicopters gunships. Hence, there is every possibility that President’s
Obama’s foreign policy on Burma will lead to a proxy hot war in the
impending Cold War with China just like Korea. In an address at West Point in May, President Obama claimed, “We’re
now supporting reform and badly needed national reconciliation through
assistance and investment through coaxing and, at times, public
criticism. And progress there could be reversed, but if Burma succeeds,
we will have gained a new partner without having fired a shot.”
Mr.
President, the ethnic nationalities of Burma desire genuine federalism
within the Union of Burma and does not want to be a slave in an ivory
tower of development but rather be a free man staying in a small hut. We
are not asking development or even democracy what we want is to live a free men and die a free men
even though we may be poor and wretched. Neither your development
scheme prevails or democracy establish as the narco production will not
lack until and unless it is tackle at the source of it by listening to
the local leaders and giving them a better choice. It’s time to rethink
you foreign policy objectives in Burma.
Tags: Opinion
