Excellent point. I just finished reading over the article and did not even catch that line. In one sense I think that is because everyone knows it is hyperbole and no one really believes it to be a literal fact. But on the other had the discussion of Than Shwe, from a very personal point of view, seeks like natural corollary to the focus on Suu Kyi. Personalization, an overly stark contrast between “good” and “evil” and the idea that there is a know and workable solution seem like norms of journalistic discourse, at least in the English speaking West. The problem is that when readers know less about the details of the situation, are more distant from it and have fewer non-media avenues to learn about it, it is harder for them look critical at media output. So in the case of Burma we get simplistic narratives of Than Shwe vs Suu Kyi or if only Burma’s “ally,” China, would stop its rapacious exploitation then the SPDC would somehow be forced out and Burma would ride off happily ever after into the sunset.
It was not uncommon in Western societies of the past for one powerful individual to hold all the keys to patronage even if he was not the titular head of state. It’s not necessary for one super-empowered individual to do all the decision making — it’s enough that his will be known and for others to conciliate him because acting contrary to his interests is simply too dangerous.
Somsak:
Do you have a personal photo available? I wanted to use it to refer to your recent suggestions regarding the role and authority of the monarchy.
Thank you!
The “success” of the Burrow/Blake campaigm does mean more suffering for the downtrodden and desperate Burmese mums & dads. As the down-trodden starve to death, the ruling generals gorge themselves in opulance. I encourage Burrow/Blake to make the din ear-shattering, but not to the extent of hurting the livelihood of the poor.
A transcultural psychiatric reflection:
Joke by a ‘psychiatric’ patient: Neurotics build castles in the air, psychotics live in them and psychiatrists collect the rent!!!
Isn’t this just like Thai rule? Built on illusion which makes Thais delusional and schizoid: people know the truth of the evil of Thainess-royalism but nevertheless deny it going on because fear, to tell the truth and change, has been bred into them
Joking aside, hair as an offering has more than pure monetary value. It is personal, indeed the pinnacle of one’s person, and reflects the generosity of and selfless joy the giver receives from this meritorious act, typically and irrepressibly Burmese and Buddhist. The tyrant can’t keep this nation down for much longer.
This is a really shameful decision. When the US imposed sanctions on the garment industry in 1997, an estimated 70,000-150,000 people, almost all young women, lost their jobs. Many were looking after their families. Many ended up as illegal workers in Thailand, perhaps (though there’s no exact information on this) as sex workers.
Why can’t Western companies realize that they need to remain engaged in Burma, help improve labour standards, and provide jobs?
This decision means another few hundred young women out on the streets. Hoping for a handout from the military government that will never come.
Change Burma by being in Burma, not by leaving the Burmese people. PLEASE
Reminds me of a recent article, which quoted a garment worker who lost her job after the US banned imports of Myanmar-made garments.
“Where are our human rights?” the worker asked.
It’s a pertinent question. About 80,000 (mostly) women employed in the sector lost their jobs within a few months of those sanctions being put in place. Many soon found work in the local sex trade instead.
I assume that, for most impact on the junta personally and organisationally with least impact on “ordinary” Burmese, sanctions would best be applied to high value industries and products with relatively low labour content.
Such as the recent gas sales to Thailand and China (?) and I suppose the junta gained healthy overseas bank balances and revenues for their own benefit from weapons purchases, drugs, gems, US anti-communist and anti-terrorism funding, Chinese project kickbacks, etc, etc.
Boycotts of relatively high labour content products such as textiles (fashion is an interesting elitist term in this context I would believe) seem less well targetted and the history of the junta indicates their immunity to symbols (such as democracy and human rights and other philosophic twaddle).
Sex tourism may be the most notorious or at least visible commercial activity, Susie Wong, but its economic impact is almost negligible.
Beginning with perhaps 1 million male sex tourists (as suggested but not assured by the male majority in overall tourism numbers — we should take it as a maximum) multiplied by an average length of stay of 14 days (again a figure from the broader tourism market) and multiplying again by a monger’s average spend of 8000 baht per day in all segments (hotel, food, entertainments), one arrives at a figure just slightly above 100,000,000,000 (100 billion) baht.
This is almost certainly an inflated estimate and while the actual probable figure would be a lower but still considerable sum, there are enough additional strong sectors of the economy that sex tourism would be hard pressed to even place in the top 10. As an example, the value of the food export business for example is well in excess of 700 billion baht per year.
siammiddlepath: The naughty idiom came from the term for flying kites: р╕Кр╕▒р╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕з. They’re not the same by coincidence. If you said р╣Ар╕ер╣Ир╕Щр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕з people would look at you funny. When they mean flying kites they say р╕Кр╕▒р╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕з.
Nicholas Farrelly is looking for tangible and measurable results of the sanctions. Thanks to the Sharon Burrows and Zetty Brakes whose action keeps the junta on notice that the international community is incensed with them and they still need to reform. It is no doubt at a great price to the Burmese mums and dads who need to earn a living to survive but their actions help as a leverage on the negotiating table. This pressure is so needed now, when there seems a glimmer of hope that the junta may be yielding. Psychologically, the junta may not fear so much if the threat as suggested by NF is measurable and tangible, the very fact that the fear is immeasurable and unknown makes it very effective. I had previously believed that Burrow & Brake should keep quiet, now I believe the louder the din, the keener the hearer would be to hear the melody of a sweet song.
[…] that such a sanctions push, particularly at this late hour, does anything but reinforce the “limited, Western, symbolic” character of so much of our Burma policy […]
We might be grateful that the rural areas remain largely agricultural and hollow in terms of private investment. Not that poverty is praiseworthy, but consider that if investment should come that makes a meaningful difference in average incomes at the tambon level, it will require large-scale investment which would almost certainly come from Bangkok. While local wages would rise, the actual expertise would come from and profits would flow to the capital. Experience tells us that business and political interests always work in harness here, so we need to be mindful of where power would accrue.
Should this large-scale investment happen, it would almost certainly reflect an intrusion of yellow-allied interests (they being the capital-holding class generally) into former red-allied areas. Without choosing a side, can we at least say that resolving the tension between the two camps by democratic compromise might be the way forward for Thailand? It’s not too much of a stretch to think that yellow-allied business might use the workplace to disseminate propaganda, or worse, make support of a particular party a de facto condition for employment. Once the economic hook is set and consumption rises to meet the new income levels, this form of coercion could be very hard to resist, and the legitimate concerns in the red agenda swept aside for another generation.
Mass movement is occurring across Thailand ushering a new era of democracy. Majority of Thai people want change. They are disgusting with the status quo old politics because it produces injustice, incompetency and inequality.
The country is now openly discuss about the U.S. presidential system among others for the future of the country. Also, for the first time, the public openly read about Phumipon’s brother death. All the evidences, especially the layout of the bedrooms in relation to each other, had shown clearly what was going on at the time. Now, the elite as well wake up to reality. The propaganda machine of the past 60 years is crumbling.
These are indicators of change. People gather across the land because they have chosen hope over fear. They are united in the purpose of equality, liberty and fraternity — the spirit of the 1932 Coup d’etat— that gave birth to the country’s democracy. I think this generation intends to realize democracy in its sense of the term.
Sex tourism as the main industry in the land of the richest man in the world is morally wrong and unfair. Patriotic Thai have to flee the country while opportunistic men rule. This is wrong and it needed to be end. Young talented Thai are being put in jail for speaking truth and wanting democracy. There is no reason why the country has to tolerate barbaric law that violates the universal right that every human beings should be able to speak their conscience.
Siam’s mass movement is moving forward in its modernization and democracy.
The question is who will outsmart whom, ASSK or the generals who have so far used her as a bargaining chip in the sanctions game with no intention of releasing her. She’ s been in the dock accused of being the perpetrator calling for the sanctions and hence blamed for the impoverishment, declining health/education standards and infrastructure whilst they’ve been running the country – into the ground – at the same time enriching themselves. She has managed to frustrate their move to sideline her in the new phase of ‘detente’ with the West despite her continued house arrest and exclusion from the imminent election campaign.
A well-crafted strategy for re-engaging with key parts of Burmese society, including the military and bureaucracy just to make the generals uncomfortable is pointless unless it can succeed working especially on the military and bureaucracy with regime change as its ultimate goal. The American Center and the British Council have already been condemned as subversive institutions encouraging dissent and sedition, so dealing with ‘civil society’ will have to be more subtle and almost exclusively business and skills oriented. The obvious risk still is the generals succeeding in outwitting and manipulating all comers to their advantage so they can carry on more confident than ever and growing from strength to strength.
Spain might serve as an interesting example. The dictator Franco ruled that after his death the monarchy should be re-established with Juan Carlos as king. In 1975 after Franco finally died Juan Carlos thus became king of Spain. His genealogy (Habsburg) dates back to the middle ages with some famous ancestors as Isabella or Philippe 2 etc. Soon after taking up the position a constitution was promulgated. He saw his main task in helping Spain to transform towards a modern democracy. During the coup in 1981 Juan Carlos announced on TV that loyal citizens should support the elected government and not the usurpers of power! Afterwards the leader of teh communists said. “God save the king”!
There was an interesting incident in 1956. Under still unclear circumstances his younger brother died from gun-shot. Juan Carlos was the only other person in the room when the accident happened.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Success for the Burma sanctions campaign?
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2009/10/12/amanpour.burma.cnn
One man to rule them all
Could MongerSEA please provide examples of powerful, dangerous individuals that informally held all the keys to patronage in Western societies?
One man to rule them all
Excellent point. I just finished reading over the article and did not even catch that line. In one sense I think that is because everyone knows it is hyperbole and no one really believes it to be a literal fact. But on the other had the discussion of Than Shwe, from a very personal point of view, seeks like natural corollary to the focus on Suu Kyi. Personalization, an overly stark contrast between “good” and “evil” and the idea that there is a know and workable solution seem like norms of journalistic discourse, at least in the English speaking West. The problem is that when readers know less about the details of the situation, are more distant from it and have fewer non-media avenues to learn about it, it is harder for them look critical at media output. So in the case of Burma we get simplistic narratives of Than Shwe vs Suu Kyi or if only Burma’s “ally,” China, would stop its rapacious exploitation then the SPDC would somehow be forced out and Burma would ride off happily ever after into the sunset.
One man to rule them all
It was not uncommon in Western societies of the past for one powerful individual to hold all the keys to patronage even if he was not the titular head of state. It’s not necessary for one super-empowered individual to do all the decision making — it’s enough that his will be known and for others to conciliate him because acting contrary to his interests is simply too dangerous.
A hollow rural economy?
For an interesting article on rural resistance in SEA, see
http://www.geog.mcgill.ca/faculty/turner/Turner%20and%20Caouette%202009%20Agrarian%20Angst%20Final%20published%20version.pdf
Thai studies conference open forum
Somsak:
Do you have a personal photo available? I wanted to use it to refer to your recent suggestions regarding the role and authority of the monarchy.
Thank you!
Success for the Burma sanctions campaign?
The “success” of the Burrow/Blake campaigm does mean more suffering for the downtrodden and desperate Burmese mums & dads. As the down-trodden starve to death, the ruling generals gorge themselves in opulance. I encourage Burrow/Blake to make the din ear-shattering, but not to the extent of hurting the livelihood of the poor.
Can Southeast Asia’s royals survive?
A transcultural psychiatric reflection:
Joke by a ‘psychiatric’ patient: Neurotics build castles in the air, psychotics live in them and psychiatrists collect the rent!!!
Isn’t this just like Thai rule? Built on illusion which makes Thais delusional and schizoid: people know the truth of the evil of Thainess-royalism but nevertheless deny it going on because fear, to tell the truth and change, has been bred into them
The maths of building bridges in Sagaing
A hair raising story no doubt.
Joking aside, hair as an offering has more than pure monetary value. It is personal, indeed the pinnacle of one’s person, and reflects the generosity of and selfless joy the giver receives from this meritorious act, typically and irrepressibly Burmese and Buddhist. The tyrant can’t keep this nation down for much longer.
Success for the Burma sanctions campaign?
This is a really shameful decision. When the US imposed sanctions on the garment industry in 1997, an estimated 70,000-150,000 people, almost all young women, lost their jobs. Many were looking after their families. Many ended up as illegal workers in Thailand, perhaps (though there’s no exact information on this) as sex workers.
Why can’t Western companies realize that they need to remain engaged in Burma, help improve labour standards, and provide jobs?
This decision means another few hundred young women out on the streets. Hoping for a handout from the military government that will never come.
Change Burma by being in Burma, not by leaving the Burmese people. PLEASE
Success for the Burma sanctions campaign?
Reminds me of a recent article, which quoted a garment worker who lost her job after the US banned imports of Myanmar-made garments.
“Where are our human rights?” the worker asked.
It’s a pertinent question. About 80,000 (mostly) women employed in the sector lost their jobs within a few months of those sanctions being put in place. Many soon found work in the local sex trade instead.
Success for the Burma sanctions campaign?
I assume that, for most impact on the junta personally and organisationally with least impact on “ordinary” Burmese, sanctions would best be applied to high value industries and products with relatively low labour content.
Such as the recent gas sales to Thailand and China (?) and I suppose the junta gained healthy overseas bank balances and revenues for their own benefit from weapons purchases, drugs, gems, US anti-communist and anti-terrorism funding, Chinese project kickbacks, etc, etc.
Boycotts of relatively high labour content products such as textiles (fashion is an interesting elitist term in this context I would believe) seem less well targetted and the history of the junta indicates their immunity to symbols (such as democracy and human rights and other philosophic twaddle).
Can Southeast Asia’s royals survive?
Sex tourism may be the most notorious or at least visible commercial activity, Susie Wong, but its economic impact is almost negligible.
Beginning with perhaps 1 million male sex tourists (as suggested but not assured by the male majority in overall tourism numbers — we should take it as a maximum) multiplied by an average length of stay of 14 days (again a figure from the broader tourism market) and multiplying again by a monger’s average spend of 8000 baht per day in all segments (hotel, food, entertainments), one arrives at a figure just slightly above 100,000,000,000 (100 billion) baht.
This is almost certainly an inflated estimate and while the actual probable figure would be a lower but still considerable sum, there are enough additional strong sectors of the economy that sex tourism would be hard pressed to even place in the top 10. As an example, the value of the food export business for example is well in excess of 700 billion baht per year.
Chuck wow: How the Thai elite loved flying kites
siammiddlepath: The naughty idiom came from the term for flying kites: р╕Кр╕▒р╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕з. They’re not the same by coincidence. If you said р╣Ар╕ер╣Ир╕Щр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕з people would look at you funny. When they mean flying kites they say р╕Кр╕▒р╕Бр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕з.
Success for the Burma sanctions campaign?
Nicholas Farrelly is looking for tangible and measurable results of the sanctions. Thanks to the Sharon Burrows and Zetty Brakes whose action keeps the junta on notice that the international community is incensed with them and they still need to reform. It is no doubt at a great price to the Burmese mums and dads who need to earn a living to survive but their actions help as a leverage on the negotiating table. This pressure is so needed now, when there seems a glimmer of hope that the junta may be yielding. Psychologically, the junta may not fear so much if the threat as suggested by NF is measurable and tangible, the very fact that the fear is immeasurable and unknown makes it very effective. I had previously believed that Burrow & Brake should keep quiet, now I believe the louder the din, the keener the hearer would be to hear the melody of a sweet song.
Burma sanctions: limited, Western, symbolic
[…] that such a sanctions push, particularly at this late hour, does anything but reinforce the “limited, Western, symbolic” character of so much of our Burma policy […]
A hollow rural economy?
We might be grateful that the rural areas remain largely agricultural and hollow in terms of private investment. Not that poverty is praiseworthy, but consider that if investment should come that makes a meaningful difference in average incomes at the tambon level, it will require large-scale investment which would almost certainly come from Bangkok. While local wages would rise, the actual expertise would come from and profits would flow to the capital. Experience tells us that business and political interests always work in harness here, so we need to be mindful of where power would accrue.
Should this large-scale investment happen, it would almost certainly reflect an intrusion of yellow-allied interests (they being the capital-holding class generally) into former red-allied areas. Without choosing a side, can we at least say that resolving the tension between the two camps by democratic compromise might be the way forward for Thailand? It’s not too much of a stretch to think that yellow-allied business might use the workplace to disseminate propaganda, or worse, make support of a particular party a de facto condition for employment. Once the economic hook is set and consumption rises to meet the new income levels, this form of coercion could be very hard to resist, and the legitimate concerns in the red agenda swept aside for another generation.
Can Southeast Asia’s royals survive?
Mass movement is occurring across Thailand ushering a new era of democracy. Majority of Thai people want change. They are disgusting with the status quo old politics because it produces injustice, incompetency and inequality.
The country is now openly discuss about the U.S. presidential system among others for the future of the country. Also, for the first time, the public openly read about Phumipon’s brother death. All the evidences, especially the layout of the bedrooms in relation to each other, had shown clearly what was going on at the time. Now, the elite as well wake up to reality. The propaganda machine of the past 60 years is crumbling.
These are indicators of change. People gather across the land because they have chosen hope over fear. They are united in the purpose of equality, liberty and fraternity — the spirit of the 1932 Coup d’etat— that gave birth to the country’s democracy. I think this generation intends to realize democracy in its sense of the term.
Sex tourism as the main industry in the land of the richest man in the world is morally wrong and unfair. Patriotic Thai have to flee the country while opportunistic men rule. This is wrong and it needed to be end. Young talented Thai are being put in jail for speaking truth and wanting democracy. There is no reason why the country has to tolerate barbaric law that violates the universal right that every human beings should be able to speak their conscience.
Siam’s mass movement is moving forward in its modernization and democracy.
Rethinking the Burmese sanctions
The question is who will outsmart whom, ASSK or the generals who have so far used her as a bargaining chip in the sanctions game with no intention of releasing her. She’ s been in the dock accused of being the perpetrator calling for the sanctions and hence blamed for the impoverishment, declining health/education standards and infrastructure whilst they’ve been running the country – into the ground – at the same time enriching themselves. She has managed to frustrate their move to sideline her in the new phase of ‘detente’ with the West despite her continued house arrest and exclusion from the imminent election campaign.
A well-crafted strategy for re-engaging with key parts of Burmese society, including the military and bureaucracy just to make the generals uncomfortable is pointless unless it can succeed working especially on the military and bureaucracy with regime change as its ultimate goal. The American Center and the British Council have already been condemned as subversive institutions encouraging dissent and sedition, so dealing with ‘civil society’ will have to be more subtle and almost exclusively business and skills oriented. The obvious risk still is the generals succeeding in outwitting and manipulating all comers to their advantage so they can carry on more confident than ever and growing from strength to strength.
Can Southeast Asia’s royals survive?
Spain might serve as an interesting example. The dictator Franco ruled that after his death the monarchy should be re-established with Juan Carlos as king. In 1975 after Franco finally died Juan Carlos thus became king of Spain. His genealogy (Habsburg) dates back to the middle ages with some famous ancestors as Isabella or Philippe 2 etc. Soon after taking up the position a constitution was promulgated. He saw his main task in helping Spain to transform towards a modern democracy. During the coup in 1981 Juan Carlos announced on TV that loyal citizens should support the elected government and not the usurpers of power! Afterwards the leader of teh communists said. “God save the king”!
There was an interesting incident in 1956. Under still unclear circumstances his younger brother died from gun-shot. Juan Carlos was the only other person in the room when the accident happened.