Min Khin Kyaw

30/10/2009

Likely the future engagement with Burma of the regional countries, especially ASEAN members, seems to become more positive approach than as it has been economic profiteering. This change should be welcomed gladly.

The ASEAN’s establishment of a new approach to human rights and the possible aids to the needy people of Burma are indeed for changing the established view of the world on ASEAN. Both human rights groups and NGOs need to encourage these new approaches of ASEAN by given necessary supports ideologically.

The good actions of this agonising struggle for making another good country on earth must be recognised in history.

Yet ASEAN will be largely non-apolitical over Burmese issue. As long as ASEAN is fulfilling its way of humanitarian engagement effectively, indeed the world will change its views and give respect to the ideology of the ASEAN’s leadership. They will definitely follow the ASEAN footsteps toward Burma’s democracy.

The main point is to make things achievable.

If meat is for the dinner, cook it or fry it, doesn’t matter. As long as the action serves the dinner for the family of ten, who are the people of the ten ASEAN countries, then that action must be appreciated and must be recommended for its continuity.

So that is the part of the engagement policy. It has to be win-win approach as the goal is the people of Burma must win. Burmese people shouldn’t get just bones. Leave the bones for dogs.

But can ASEAN do it all alone? What if the positive potential of ASEAN is ignored by both China and India and go a separate way? As long as the two large rivalling countries only concentrate on trade with the junta and the natural resources of Burma – but not the true development of the 52 millions Burmese people, the ASEAN’s effort would be just undone by the actions of the two countries. Which one of them would break their a-decade-long locked tradition and join ASEAN?

For a long time to come, the engagement policy might keep Burma at limbo as ever. Immediate outcomes would be expected only by the greenhorns. But the effort of ASEAN won’t become just vanity. Through difficult tasks, if ASEAN can engage with the Burmese people as needed, then we will see the dinner when the meat is properly cooked. The meat will become beautiful finally if it is really being cooked.

And India cannot prove its engagement policy is effective. It should get along with the ASEAN cooperatively.

Actually, engagement policy should have meant the improvement of the lives of the ordinary people. Singling out trade and natural resources as engagement only benefits none other than the corrupt.

For now, we don’t need to ask ASEAN how it will get through 2010 with the junta. But we have to ask this question to China, India and the UN. The UN has the condition to persuade China.

2010 election is approaching. Has the junta started establishing new parties with its thuggish organizations? Have these thuggish organizations started campaigning illegally? If they are not going to campaign, then they will steal the votes. If they are not politically active, they are going to be active in other ways to compete unfairly. Well, we can predict what are going to happen in the 2010 election – if it is ever to happen.

If the junta is sincere at heart, it won’t use the thugs for its party but with the intellectuals who have the ambitions to improve the lives of all Burmese spontaneously it should establish a realistic party that doesn’t need to have a puppet master hidden behind the curtain in the dark. The junta must express its intention and even its plans by December 2009. It must not repeat its cheating works used at its referendum. Yet the people have to know what they voted for at the referendum. Likewise, the people need to know when the election will come and who the candidates are.

What would the junta promise this time? It would but only for psychological warfare?

I believe the West can do something at the UN to highlight the needs in Burma that the junta need to fulfil. As consequence, hopefully the UN would be able to filter the unclean votes.

Assume the 2010 election was held.

China must not intervene in Burma’s politics against the will of Burmese people if the UN had to say something with the election practice of the junta. And India would have a unique opportunity to show the world it is above the regional politics.

The democratic leaderships of Burma need a lot of energy for coming events.  After the election, they will have to find the proofs of improvement of the lives of ordinary Burmese people. They will have to go into the people and become the voices of the people. They have huge sacrifices ahead.

One thing the UN will have to achieve in Burma is the freedom of press. The UN and ASEAN will have to use their free media for the voices of ordinary Burmese people generously. Whatever the junta does, the UN would need to seek answers from the junta. Likewise, the concerned world leaders should raise their voice vigorously.

Before the election is held, the civil war must be halted and that must last till the junta breaks the ceased fire agreement. During the election, the rebel groups should be just vocal and protect the people living in their areas they control. The rebel groups should avoid the conditions in which the soldiers of the junta can abuse the people with the reason of war.

As conclusion, the UN should be reminded that Burma has been actually at war over 60 years. Is there any other type of war that can make the situation worse? The people need to rest and will certainly rest when their lifestyle had improved. But they can only rest in the peaceful time. We can safely believe that the people would like to see this achievement by any means.