For the first time in my academic career I am seeing a sustained re-alignment of the understandings that prevail about contemporary Burma. Something similar happened for Thailand in the days, weeks and months immediately after the September 2006 coup. I recall watching — occasionally with astonishment — as the assumptions, arguments and analysis of the Thaksin era were unceremoniously upended. Check out New Mandala from September 2006 to revisit those busy days.
Short, sharp shocks have a tendency to obliterate old analysis and replace it with something new.
But the situation in Burma is different. We have not seen a revolution on the streets. Nor a coup. Nor have we observed any one event that catalyses abrupt transformation. Instead there is a process of incremental political change, galvanised by tentative economic reforms and a healthy serving of web- and media-driven hype.
Burma is becoming hot. It is generating buzz in all sorts of previously unlikely quarters. The entire situation is now poised, we tend to believe, for an even greater transition, especially once Aung San Suu Kyi wins the 1 April 2012 by-election. Perhaps this is the time when the country leaves behind its dictatorial legacies, and its status as a global pariah, once-and-for-all.
But building up our Burma analysis requires more than just an appreciation that further positive changes are in prospect. There are all manner of risks, and not just the obvious ones emanating from aggrieved and disenfranchised ethnic minorities. Burma has so little experience of this type of transition that it is hard to predict how key institutions and sectors will respond.
We also know that in any major political recalibration the sequencing of changes can be crucial. It is not merely a matter of how much, and how soon, but also of in what order, and particularly what should come first. If the process is managed effectively then Burma may avoid the revolution that many have secretly hoped is (still) in the stars.
For now, there is much debate to be had about the new systems, norms, rules and politics that will replace the old ones. It promises to be a challenging time ahead and one that will do nothing less than set a revised framework for analysis of Burmese society and politics.
Agreed, many risks, yet still for Burma watchers this is an interesting time.
0
0
Not long ago, it was asked whether Vietnam could serve the Burmese government as an example of how to develop the country without giving up power. Now, it seems that Vietnam can learn something from Burma, not about economic development but about political “liberalization.”
0
0
Just a pet peeve of mine. Nothing directed at the author. But perhaps with these changes taking place, can we now please begin referring to Burma as Myanmar?
0
0
STU
I think everyone will call things what they want to whether it is acceptable to you or not
0
0
Thanks STU, thanks Ron,
I wrote about these name games last month. Of course, this will be an issue for the foreseeable future and you will see in that post how I tend to deal with it. Sooner rather than later Myanmar will reign supreme. I expect the tipping point will come in 2012…let’s see…
Best wishes to all,
Nich
0
0
Thanks for your kind reply, Nich, and for pointing me to your post on the subject. Much more useful than Ron’s comment.
0
0
P.S. Rosalie Metro over at Cornell wrote an excellent article on this topic recently. I guess I fall into the “Myanmar” camp. You can read her article here: http://seap.einaudi.cornell.edu/system/files/The_Divided_Discipline_of_Burma_Studies.pdf
0
0
“We also know that in any major political recalibration the sequencing of changes can be crucial. It is not merely a matter of how much, and how soon, but also of in what order, and particularly what should come first. If the process is managed effectively then Burma may avoid the revolution that many have secretly hoped is (still) in the stars.”
A very important observation I think. Especially if rule of law, and therefore the judicial system, is not a high priority for reform, including aggressive anti-corruption, real change is unlikely to come forward for the people at the grassroots.
0
0
Nicholas Farrelly: “We have not seen a revolution on the streets. Nor a coup. Nor have we observed any one event that catalyses abrupt transformation.”
That may be what the popular imagination built of emotionally cathartic film scripts expects, but it may never happen. The old inner-machiavelli says events might unfold otherwise.
The next episode might rather be called something like “Aung San Suu Kyi and the generals holding hands” ….. to give their country some much-needed rest from divisive politics and grow the economy for a while. Possibly controversial hypothesis: The best way to alleviate poverty over the long haul is to grow the whole economy, even the wealth of the evil generals. 🙂
0
0
Jon,
For once I might agree with you, but it seems to me the crucial question is how the generals grow their wealth. Care to expand on that interesting suggestion
0
0
“The next episode might rather be called something like “Aung San Suu Kyi and the generals holding hands” ….. to give their country some much-needed rest from divisive politics and grow the economy for a while.”
http://www.mizzima.com/business/6635-burmese-businessmen-tell-surin-sanctions-hurt-growth.html
jonfernquest
As much as I have respect your good will and well wishes, the true situation on the ground is disheartening. The West absolutely empty talk has no bearing on relieving the BURDEN on Myanmar Citizenry in mind.
Still propping DASSK, that has been around together with NLD for decades and have NOTHING substantive to offer beyond photo op and SOS.
It is the East that is now charging ahead with trades albeit to benefit the military cronies more. Remembering the first Burmese billionaire was created thanks to the West Targeted Sanction.
AS for the Generals, they will have their cake and eat them too. No thanks to DASSK? West useless careless interferences.
Not until the focus is directed to help the humanity within Myanmar ground up as opposed to up down, as this farce is, will remain just a farce that westerners delude themselves as redemption thinking “Things are getting better”.
0
0
aiontay: …how the generals grow their wealth…
I have no idea. That annual Burma Info conference that ANU most gracefully shared the proceedings of with the world in the past was the best source for that sort of info. Hope they do that again.
My only point: Won’t immediate push for people’s power street revolution and seizure of general’s wealth just trigger a coup and end of progress made so far? 🙂
0
0
“My only point: Won’t immediate push for people’s power street revolution and seizure of general’s wealth just trigger a coup and end of progress made so far?”
This idea crossing anyone’s mind be it seriously or tongue-in-cheekly, as a remote possibility is a testament to how far from reality, the understanding of the mind of the dictators in Myanmar.
The tenacity and brilliance of this regime again is not taken seriously knowing well at the time:
1) That SG Than Shwe and cohorts have prevailed over the west useless careless policy.
2)That DASSK is no more than this regime will allow her to be.
As further proof:
http://blogs.cfr.org/asia/2012/02/13/what-david-petraeus-should-ask-in-myanmar/
This nefarious west pleasing, put the Generals in front of the interrogation fantasy, all indicate that the west has not come anywhere close to reality.
A reality it help created over 5 decades that these present dictators participated and survived at the cost of the humanity within Myanmar.
Talk about partners in crime again Myanmar citizenry.
0
0