Burmese democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s readiness to consider calling for the lifting of sanctions on Burma is likely to force Western governments to reconsider the measures, which have been widely criticised as uncoordinated, poorly targeted and ineffective.
But analysts, campaigners and diplomats said that while her moral authority meant she would be closely listened to, it would take time and argument — and more improvements on the ground — to change longstanding policies.
On Saturday (October 13) Suu Kyi espoused a message of dialogue and on her return to business that following Monday, she was true to her word, meeting representatives from other pro-democracy organisations and members of her own party, the recently banned National League for Democracy (NLD).
Everything is said to be up for discussion, including sanctions. She reiterated her wish to sit down with Burma’s junta, emphasising that she hopes to see a peaceful end to military rule.
“I think we also have to try to make this thing happen … velvet revolution sounds a little strange in the context of the military, but a non-violent revolution. Let’s put it that way,” she told the BBC.
Mark Farmaner, of the Burma Campaign United Kingdom, pointed out that Suu Kyi and her party have never supported blanket sanctions that could affect ordinary people.
“Governments will follow her lead but they won’t do anything until she decides after consulting her own people — and that will be a long process,” Farmaner said.
The European Union (EU) would not lift punitive measures “until genuine progress is made on the ground” — and much depended on what happened next to Suu Kyi herself.
Canada said that it would keep sanctions to maintain pressure to restore civilian rule in Burma, while Australian opposition parties called for tougher measures. But big changes were afoot before the release.
Ten days ago Suu Kyi’s NLD ended support for a 15-year tourism boycott — opposed by many anti-regime Burmese because it hurts taxi drivers, guesthouse owners and souvenir vendors more than the regime loyalists who run the airline and big hotels.
“Suu Kyi has heard enough to understand that the sanctions are targeting the wrong people,” suggested Derek Tonkin, chairman of Network Myanmar and a former UK ambassador to Rangoon.
“If she can be seen as supporting a fresh look, that’s a good thing. Western governments will now have to open a line of discussion with her. But I doubt whether they will do anything in the short term.”
Britain has been reluctant to address concerns that the sanctions are ineffective, with the Foreign Office insisting that they “are designed to target regime members and their associates, not to harm ordinary people”.
Sanctions were first imposed by the United States in 1993, with the EU following three years later, suspending all bilateral aid other than humanitarian assistance. In 2007 EU measures were extended to include a ban on imports of gems, timber and metals after troops suppressed anti-government protests. But there was no monitoring Âmechanism to enforce them.
The measures were tightened again last year when Suu Kyi’s house arrest was extended. President Barack Obama also renewed existing US sanctions. The United Nations has no sanctions, not least because of China’s opposition.
“Many sanctions have been introduced in a random, uncoordinated way and have largely missed the target. They are too weak to have much impact on the generals, let alone ordinary people,” said Farmaner. “But even the fairly weak sanctions in place obviously do have an impact, as the generals complain so Âvigorously about them.”
Marie Lall, an Asia expert at the Chatham House think-tank in London, pointed out that Western governments are under pressure from campaign groups to maintain sanctions, adding: “It’s difficult to turn such a huge juggernaut around, especially when something looks morally principled.”
Suu Kyi’s release continues to generate huge excitement on the ground in Burma – she arrived at the NLD headquarters on Monday morning to rapturous scenes.
When she left in the afternoon the number of supporters had swelled and party members formed a human chain to enable her to leave without being crushed by well-wishers.
While there are no restrictions on her freedom, her movements were closely watched by plain-clothed members of Burma’s security police. They also kept a close eye on party members and others visiting the NLD headquarters.
Nyan Win, her lawyer and party spokesperson, said Burma’s high court would decide on Thursday whether to hear a case from the 65-year-old Nobel peace laureate arguing that her party’s dissolution is unlawful.
The NLD was disbanded under a new law earlier this year because it failed to reregister for the November 7 elections, complaining that conditions set by the junta were unfair and undemocratic.
Full results from the November 7 elections, the first in 20 years, have yet to be released, but figures so far give a party backed by the military a solid majority in both houses of Parliament. — Guardian News & Media 2010