Street demonstrations alone are unlikely to bring down Burma’s ruthless military junta. They have been tried before, notably in 1988, when about 3 000 civilians reportedly died in the resulting crackdown. Nor will any amount of huffing and puffing by Gordon Brown and other Western leaders have much impact, especially if (as in the past) it is unsupported by concrete, punitive measures.
Similarly irrelevant for all practical purposes is the Association of South-East Asian Nations, the regional organisation that has repeatedly failed to take firm action on Burma despite myriad embarrassments over its behaviour. Asean’s calls for democratic reforms and the release of political prisoners, reiterated by Indonesia and the Philippines this month, are treated with ill-concealed contempt in Rangoon. And after last year’s coup, Burma’s southern neighbour, Thailand, has its own military junta problem.
In the Asian century, regional experts say, it is China and India, not the colonial and imperial powers of yesteryear, who hold the key to Burma’s future — a fact that the US, Britain’s successor as global policeman, is loath to admit. Only Beijing and Delhi have sufficient political and economic clout to twist the junta’s nose. And only if they call time and pull the rug are the generals likely to topple.
”Change in Burma can be achieved by a combination of internal protest and international pressure,” said Mark Farmaner, of the pro-reform Burma Campaign United Kingdom. But the attitude of China and India was crucial, he said. Both countries were pursuing significant investment in oil and gas projects in Burma and, with Russia, were leading suppliers of arms, bypassing an EU embargo.
”It would be a mistake to think that China is happy with the junta. It sees Burma as an unstable tinpot regime causing growing cross-border narcotics and HIV/Aids problems for China when it has more important things to do,” Farmaner said.
Chinese officials had said privately that they would like to see change, he added, but for the present Beijing remained the junta’s main political backer. That apparent contradiction was partly explained earlier this year when energy-hungry China won a big gas deal despite bidding $2,5-billion less for the project than India.
For its part, India, competing with China for influence, was putting its economic interests and its concerns about cross-border insurgents active in north-east India ahead of human rights and democracy, said Zoya Phan in a Burma Campaign report. ”The world’s largest democracy has abandoned Burma’s democrats. India should be ashamed of what they have done, supplying money and weapons to one of world’s most brutal regimes.”
Although they have remained largely silent so far, neither China nor India is immune to international opinion, as Beijing’s recent policy shifts on Sudan and Zimbabwe indicate. And political and diplomatic support for the Burmese pro-democracy movement has been building rapidly in recent weeks.
”The UK government has continually pressed the Burmese regime to stop their oppression and intimidation and called for a robust international response,” said the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, after a UN security council meeting last week. Following a critical report on Burma in July by the UK House of Commons international development committee, Britain is expected to increase bilateral humanitarian aid. Additional pressure is being exerted by the US, the European Parliament, and via the UN general assembly.
Despite past failures, it may be that this growing external firestorm will help to tip the internal balance in the demonstrators’ favour. Inside Burma, what looks different this time around is the broad-based alliance that is emerging between the ’88 Generation opposition loyal to Aung San Suu Kyi, influential Buddhist leaders and militant young monks, students, government workers, media celebrities and ordinary civilians.
What looks frighteningly familiar are the generals’ reported preparations to infiltrate and crush the demonstrations before they turn into a fully-fledged national uprising. That raises a practical question of Brown and other concerned leaders: If mass murder begins in Burma, what will ”we” do? — Â