The Thai capitalist economy might not any time soon be replaced by the “suffiency economy.” I am not so sure about the (agricultural) “subsidy economy”, though. Let’s turn the state budget into a price-guarantee mechanism! The EU provides a good example of the consequences. The Samak government seems to be on the defensive on so many fronts…
Steinberg, David I, “The United States and Its Allies: The Problem of Burma/Myanmar Policy,” Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, Volume 29, Number 2, August 2007
Abstract: Significant differences in policies towards Burma / Myanmar are apparent among the United States and its allies: Japan, Australia, Thailand and the European Union (EU). The most restrictive sanctions have been imposed by the U.S., followed by the EU, while Japan and Thailand have been more liberal in their policies. The sanctions regimen, which to date has failed to achieve its goal of regime change, is based on a set of assumptions that opponents of such policies believe to be erroneous. International efforts through the UN to censure Myanmar have been more theatrical than likely to achieve their objective. There is evidence of increased frustrations with the policies that concentrate on political change as a prior condition for greater humanitarian assistance, but changes are unlikely without a significant shift in internal Myanmar policies. The alliances themselves will not splinter because of these differences in approaches to Myanmar. Most likely, changes in Myanmar may evolve slowly within that country from its internal dynamics and contradictions. Myanmar will likely be changed by an internal dynamic that may evolve from the military’s dissatisfaction with its own leadership, its own role, or its own sullied reputation. The possibility of violent change in the streets can never be completely discounted. However, it would take an economic catastrophe or some egregious act of ignorance or villainy by the authorities at some level to trigger a popular response.
Oooohhhh! yuh gotta look beyond the hyperbole.
The comment was not written to be taken literally, but in spirit. The spirit of rooting out the crooks continuously, educating the public about what they are missing out on, and working to put the fear of God into crooks.
The problem here in Thailand is that these ‘elected’ and bought politicians get right to work cheating, raking off and hiding without any fear of losing their chair. Once in office they can do what they want and the non-interfering Thai public have traditionally let the fraud go on until it becomes an embarrassment. The PAD is getting the embarrassment right out in front at the beginning, and this is where it belongs. If guys (and girls) want to keep their jobs, be transparent, honest and prepared to answer the tough questions. This Khao Preah Vihear business, for example… You have at least two sets of maps involved, neither of which the Army or MOFA wants to let the public see until things are settled between Cambodia and Thailand. It is understood that Thaksin’s natural gas interests are at work here, but for some reason the PAD is really the only one spearheading a frank look at things like this. An elected politician in Thailand has – by some measures – the same market value as Chalerm’s Ph.D.
Rather more on topic is that it in regards to prosecuting Than Shwe under international law, the crimes he is responsible for, even if they were obvious and accounted for and not shrouded over by his supporters- because Burma/Myanmar is not 1 of the 106 countries to have ratified the ICC, the ICC has no jurisdiction over Myanmar/Burma. Additionally, because the ICC only came into effect in 2002 and even if Myanmar/Burma had signed the treaty, crimes committed before 2002 are especially difficult to prosecute because there would have been no agreement amongst nations who have signed the treaty in regards to how to prosecute the offender at the time the crime was committed. This may be confusing, but it is argued that if the accused knew of the punishments the ICC could hand out, they would have acted differently – and that to impose the ICC as a standard of justice on all of history would be impossible… It is worth mentioning that Jean Kambanda was tried under a special tribunal set up for Rwanda and that for this to happen in Myanmar/Burma the state would have to essentially collapse. So yes, Myanmar/Burma and Than Shwe has little to fear from the international community unless someone invades and physically brings him to the justice of the citizens of Burma/Myanmar. I feel that this is more appropriate, because I doubt someone who was raped along the Ledo Road, is going to feel vindicated about seeing Than Shwe in the stark white corridors of The Hague.
Also, if Than Shwe has watched what has happened to Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot and is determined for something similar not to happen to him, doesn’t he admit his own guilt? Living in such a hell would far outweigh the comfort of any luxuries he may be able to afford.
Moe Aung: Thank you for the nice post. Good point about capitalist China being a greater threat than a purely Communist China.
I believe that a capitalist economy coupled with a Communist government will pose a real threat to the region and world. I don’t necessarily mean a military threat.
As to regional domination not equating with friendly regimes that would depend on what one means by “friendly”.
Look at the history of my country, the USA. We set up friendly regimes in South America and SEA. The USA put their choices in power and the elite and powerful Americans derived massive benefits.
By the way, I’m a Capitalist but I do disagree with one country controlling other countries for economic reasons — or any other reason for that matter. I’m also a patriot, which is why I despise Bush and the present actions of my government.
I do hope that Than Shwe and the rest of the SPDC thugs get deposed and tried for their crimes.
Unfortunately, sometimes that does not happen. Meo died peacefully in his bed. Idi Amin and the President Marcos didn’t do too bad either, or the Shaw of Iran. Money always seems to talk.
I don’t post much, because I don’t have the time. Let me completely stray from the subject of this article, which it seems I continue to do.
You are probably from Burma. I live near your border and come in contact with many ethnic minority organizations. The Pa-O, Shan, Arakan, Karenni, Karen are the main ones.
I used to think that when the SPDC was deposed there would be a federation of states with Aung San Suu Ki as president. All would be peaceful after a brief interim of spats over land grabs.
A guy in the know who works the border completely disagreed with me. His opinion is that because of the history of these minority groups, there will be civil war for quite a while.
After attending some meetings with the ethnic minority representatives and reading up on their history, I now tend to agree with him.
You seem very well informed and a concerned person.What is your opinion on this issue of civil war? I sincerely hope I have a flawed opinion.
What is this rambling all about? PAD in every class room, at every street corner, in every government office? How could one turn the resultant political-administrative anarchy into an institutionalized democracy then–one that would supposedly be better than the “undemocratic elections” the result of which everybody is entitled to ignore?
It is not a “style” of blogging. I lived in the country for two years and experienced it first hand what economic sanctions did to real flesh and blood people, particularly when my own family got sick and I had to look after them in hospitals.
I do not derive one cent of my livelihood from writing about Burma, so I feel free to speak what I actually believe, unlike others.
One of the best investigative journalists on Burma who I bumped into last week and spoke to last week (wrote the best piece on the Wa situation that I ever read) is of the same mind and literally refuses to read anything that comes out on contemporary Burmese politics because most of it is a repetitive rehash of the same points that have been made for the last 20 years, and which…have not worked at all.
Don Jameson says it all:
“…political motives on the part of western governments and a number of Burmese opposition figures, some of whom get monetary support from these same governments, is making it more difficult to address the humanitarian situation which now exists in Burma. It is also creating a misleading picture of the situation in Burma and rendering political solutions even more difficult”
NKPVET, why should I lighten up on someone who is propagating such a ridiculous opinion that serves to promote a civilisational clash? Sure, as you say, everyone is entitled to an opinion – even me, and even if my opinion is to belittle another! My position is simply, that people who have nothing directly to do with running the state (ie – Chinese people who are not communist party members, which number over 1 billion) should not be held guilty, the reason being — they would most probably continue to live the lives that they live presently even if the CCP folds – ie. a plumber can always be a plumber.
The 73,500,000o who claim CCP membership and two-hundred million others who have partisanship, OK they are as guilty with supporting the Junta as Republicans and other are for supporting the illegal coalition of the willing War with Iraq. If we take the thaicrisis line, the USA is the enemy too, infact all brothers who do not feel accountable to the greater utility of other brothers welfare are guilty and are the enemy. What happened after the Second World War? Would thaicrisis blame all Germans as the enemy? None were ignorant? All were Nazi party members through willful choice? Are the majority of people aware of their ability to exorcise liberal judgment with all aspects of decision making? If not, then how can one hold “China” as guilty, unless one has confused China as the CCP and Germany as the Nazi party and the USA as the neo-conservatives?
thaicrisis and you, NPKVET, have not countered my position that it would be more economically fruitful for the CCP to be engaged with a Myanmar/Burma not in the clutches of the Junta. Sure China benefits. So does the British oil company Premier, the French oil company Total and the US oil company UNOCAL because they pump oil in a fairly unexploited, uncompetitive geopolitical region. Do you use Junta oil? Maybe you do!! It would be more beneficial for everyone if Myanmar/Burma was liberal and open to a free market — why not China? You say NPKVET, why would the CCP want to rock the boat? International politics takes time, ie pulling troops out of Iraq takes time because rocking the boat is exactly what causes a chaotic world — and that’s not fruitful l for anyone, even those of us who are able to eat three meals a day. How long do you think it takes for a law or a policy to become a social normality?
What has an utterly superficial comparison that China under Mao is comparable to Myanmar/Burma under the Junta got to do with China post the economic reforms of 1979? Are you saying that current CCP foreign policy is guided by some sort of long march sentimentality? Wow. Sure the CCP engages in an arrogant and rampant industrialisation policy and it’s not a globally positive thing, but equally bad is declaring that anyone is an ‘enemy’, as such reactionary politics will lead to worse problems.
NPKVET, you say I, and many Thai people, have to agree with ThaiCrisis. Mainland China is now an adversary and in reality a potential enemy. It is precisely because the public can believe in such a simplistic argument, that one should not believe it and actively seek arguments against it — and avoid the consequences of engaging in the false-prophetic world of Samuel Huntington. Moe Aung says it better than me because I have engaged in a ridiculous argument and have consequently become ridiculous.
To be on topic, irrespective of facing trial, Than Shwe will have his comeuppance because the reasons behind his veil of intolerance are so obviously weak – as seen with the recent submission to Ban-Ki Moon. Pol Pot? Look how he died. Loved by all?? What sort of legacy is important to Than Shwe? What dictator ever got away with a clear conscience?
I do think that Jon Fernquest and Don Jameson raise an important point about being sceptical of the motivations and practical benifits of the US government’s ‘loudspeaker’ diplomacy with Burma. The hypocritical application of human rights criticisms have severely discredited the US government’s claims to be supporting human rights, as such, rather than particular allied regimes. However, I also think it’s problematic if this scepticism leads to the conclusion that external actors can not and should not attempt to engage in political solidarity with a clearly indigenous opposition to abusive military rule.
Michael Aung-Thwin appears to be suggesting in his letter that this opposition is entirely ‘bogus’, marginal and externally created. However, the evidence suggests that resistance to the military is widespread in Burma and goes far beyond the organised poltical opposition. Although there is a risk that some organisations may shape their programmes to fit with the funding requirements of Soros and others, I think it would be wrong to suggest that 1) there would not be any indigenous agreement with the human rights arguments of Soros, the US government and others if it wasn’t for the funding received from these sources, and 2) the opposition to miltiary rule would not exist if these sources were not providing funding.
Interestingly, Michael Aung-Thwin concludes his article on ‘Mranma Pran: When context encounters notion’ in the latest issue of the Journal of Southeast Asian Studies with a criticism of what he sees as the “anti-elite” trend in contemporary Burmese historiography. The slogan for Workers World, the website where he published his criticism of external support to indigenous Burmese opposition to abusive military rule, is “workers and oppressed peoples of the world unite.” I wonder what the readers of Workers World would think of his opposition to “anti-elite” tendencies. It seems to be a case of Michael Aung-Thwin going so far to the left, he’s ended up on the right.
Last night Dr. Jermsak standing on the stage at the PAD rally in Bangkok did show old video clips of the Takbai massacre. Of course, there was an accompanying narration underlining the roles Samak and others played in such violent put downs of public gatherings.
If I can raise a point or two without seeming to go off the deep end…this professing that the PPP victory was not a sham but a legitimate democratic election really begs everyone to keep on their rose-colored glasses and ignore the obvious. Elections in most of Thailand (perhaps Bangkok is an exception) are a sham from the word ‘go.’ They are represented as being democratic but people vote for who they are told to or for who they are paid to or who they are threatened by if they don’t. Qualifications of candidates mean very little here. It’s a game, and that’s why Thais call it “len karn meung,” playing politics.
The so-called sham of a referendum, by the way, I would contend was at least as good and even more democratic than any discussions in public that took place under the repressive Thaksin regime. I do not agree with all the PAD does or is involved with, but Thailand needs that mentality on every street corner, in every classroom and every government office. Sondhi is no angel and has his own agenda, and in some respects even this activist group does not understand the big picture.
Anyone seen such anti-government discussions on any of the Thai state-controlled stations yet? That’s what makes ASTV so popular. When I first started watching it, I did not see it as credible because it so conflicted with what the state was showing everyone, including the foreigners. But as time went by, the volume and depth of material exposed on ASTV was no longer able to be discounted so easily. That is what brings a lot of people to these rallies, by the way, is finally learning something that the Thai people are entitled to learn – what their elected leaders are involved in.
Bit Brother here in Thailand sits in Parliament and as most of you will admit, has very little interest in legitimately dealing with their fellow countrymen. They are mostly there for number 1 and no one else.
Gentlemen, I think we are in danger of reviving the old “Chinese Question” here. True, Burmese and Chinese rulers are in a symbiotic relationship, and I mean rulers. I don’t think either party wants it otherwise given the long history. Don’t for a moment think the generals are beholden to the Chinese let alone a proxy of any sort. China on her part does realise that despite widespread misconception in the region and the world at large. The only time they well and truly fell out was when violent anti-Chinese riots broke out in Rangoon in 1967 and consequently the Chinese government openly armed and funded the CP of Burma for the next 10 years.
The junta is cleverly playing off and manipulating India and China and of course ASEAN. Trade and arms? Sanctions? No worries. If you won’t Jones will. They are still sitting on substantial gas and mineral resources and a long coastline on the Bay of Bengal. There’s also Russia, and the West is simply missing out.
The CCP did support communist struggles all over the planet not just in the region – an open secret. Regional domination does not quite equate with friendly or fellow communist regimes. Besides the CCP under Mao did not embrace capitalism. Capitalist China of today was always going to be a greater threat not just to the region but the entire planet with its rampant profiteering and resource and market grabbing than Red China ever was despite all the scaremongering and demonising.
Yes, Than Shwe will have his comeuppance one way or another. The Burmese will have their revenge, China notwithstanding.
Interesting discussion. I’m sorry to have come so late to it.
Re: the use of missionary literature. Long, long ago, when I was writing my B.A. honors thesis at the University of Iowa on millennial/revitalization movements in SE Asia, my most useful sources came from the full set of the American Baptist Mission records at the University Library. Most of these missions were to Karen in Burma. They were full of ‘field reports’ from missionaries (husbands and wives), loaded with details of everyday life. One of their great joys was how rapidly they were able to convert Karen; one of their great sorrows was the constant rise of millennial movements of one kind or another that took people from what the American Baptists saw as the true path.
There were, of course, also millennial movements among the Buddhist Karen. I surmised that these movements were an expression of desires for cultural and political autonomy (I was working from Peter Worsley, seeing religious movements as inherently political).
For a little about Catholic Missions in Yunnan, see the following:
Gros, Stéphane
1996a Terres de Confins, Terres de Colonisation: Essay sur les Marches Sino-Tibétaines Due Yunnan ├А Travers l’Implantation de la Mission Du Tibet. Péninsule 33(2):147-211.
2001a-b Ritual and Politics: Missionary Encounters in Local Culture in Northwest Yunnan. In Legacies and Social Memory: Missionaries and Scholars in the Ethnic Southwest. Eric S. Diehl, chair. Association for Asian Studies Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, March
22-25.
Magnus Fiskejo also tells me that the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago has got some great information on Lisu and other Tibeto-Burman speaking peoples in SW China in their archives, again from the mission work of people such as Isobel Kuhn and, of course, James Fraser, author of Handbook of the Lisu (Yawyin) Language.
That helped! Joking apart I would love to read an English translation. Why not give it a try, Yuzo?
I ‘ve read in English a Burman’s account of the Shan struggle he joined in the 70s titled “Burman in the Back” – interesting role reversal on the receiving end as a minority person teaching Burmese and acting as an interpreter.
Srithanonchai and Frank: The documentary was rebroadcast today (17 June) on the German documentary channel “Poenix”. I transcribed the German translation of what Bhumibol said since his original voice is drowned out by the German narrator. The respective part of the documentary is taken from an unidentified documentary from 1980.
Here is the original German transcript:
Als ich ankam, war er tot. Man hatte ihm in den Kopf geschossen. Lange hat man versucht, Fakten zu sammeln, die Hintergr├╝nde aufzukl├дren. Es war ein politischer Mord. Ob die Mörder Thais waren, oder ob die internationale Politik dahinter steckte wird man wohl nie erfahren.
My English translation would be:
When I arrived, he was dead. Someone had shot him in the head. For a long time it was tried to gather facts, to elucidate the backgrounds. It was a political murder. If the murderers were Thais, or if international politics was behind it one will probably never know.
I’m not quite sure if the German translation in the documentary is correct since they seem to translate more than Bhumibol actually says.
Grasshopper, you have obviously taken your name from the young Kung Fu character in the long ago TV series. So, please be as he was. In other words, lighten up on ThaiCrisis. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
My two cents. China does benefit from the SPDC being in power. China is the major exporter of goods, services, and “hard rice” (as we used to call it) to Burma. By the way, the second largest exporter of military equipment to Burma is India. And of course, our good friend Israel also does a lucrative arms business with the SPDC. Another fact of interest is that Mossad trained Burma’s military intelligence .
Back to the point. Mainland Chinese now occupy almost half of the Shan state. They are also co owners with the SPDC of businesses and government projects. If the SPDC were suddenly deposed, the new government might change to a new weapons vendor or change to different trading partners. Unlikely, yes. But the CCP’s view is probably, “Why rock the boat?”
It is in the interests of Mainland China to keep the SPDC intact. In fact if you think about it, the SPDC is close to what the CCP was under Meo.
I, and many Thai people, have to agree with ThaiCrisis. Mainland China is now an adversary and in reality a potential enemy. The CCP’s long range plan has always been to dominate all of SEA with proxy governments. Tiawan, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. have long known this to be a fact.
I have an open mind. If you can offer an opinion or facts to my post, please do. But do so in a polite manner.
Happy 2nd Birthday NM!!!
And a big congratulation to Andrew and Nich for creating a medium that brings in contents/debates/discussions of very high quality and diversity – from what can be classified as extreme elitist to on-ground, in the field commentaries. Can it get better than that?
[…] books or even recognise it to be honest. I wonder what would happen if they did catch you with it. Interview with Paul Handley Handley interview here. […]
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Privatise the profits. Socialise the losses.
The Thai capitalist economy might not any time soon be replaced by the “suffiency economy.” I am not so sure about the (agricultural) “subsidy economy”, though. Let’s turn the state budget into a price-guarantee mechanism! The EU provides a good example of the consequences. The Samak government seems to be on the defensive on so many fronts…
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
Read:
Steinberg, David I, “The United States and Its Allies: The Problem of Burma/Myanmar Policy,” Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, Volume 29, Number 2, August 2007
Abstract: Significant differences in policies towards Burma / Myanmar are apparent among the United States and its allies: Japan, Australia, Thailand and the European Union (EU). The most restrictive sanctions have been imposed by the U.S., followed by the EU, while Japan and Thailand have been more liberal in their policies. The sanctions regimen, which to date has failed to achieve its goal of regime change, is based on a set of assumptions that opponents of such policies believe to be erroneous. International efforts through the UN to censure Myanmar have been more theatrical than likely to achieve their objective. There is evidence of increased frustrations with the policies that concentrate on political change as a prior condition for greater humanitarian assistance, but changes are unlikely without a significant shift in internal Myanmar policies. The alliances themselves will not splinter because of these differences in approaches to Myanmar. Most likely, changes in Myanmar may evolve slowly within that country from its internal dynamics and contradictions. Myanmar will likely be changed by an internal dynamic that may evolve from the military’s dissatisfaction with its own leadership, its own role, or its own sullied reputation. The possibility of violent change in the streets can never be completely discounted. However, it would take an economic catastrophe or some egregious act of ignorance or villainy by the authorities at some level to trigger a popular response.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/contemporary_southeast_asia_a_journal_of_international_and_strategic_affairs/toc/csa29.2.html
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
Oooohhhh! yuh gotta look beyond the hyperbole.
The comment was not written to be taken literally, but in spirit. The spirit of rooting out the crooks continuously, educating the public about what they are missing out on, and working to put the fear of God into crooks.
The problem here in Thailand is that these ‘elected’ and bought politicians get right to work cheating, raking off and hiding without any fear of losing their chair. Once in office they can do what they want and the non-interfering Thai public have traditionally let the fraud go on until it becomes an embarrassment. The PAD is getting the embarrassment right out in front at the beginning, and this is where it belongs. If guys (and girls) want to keep their jobs, be transparent, honest and prepared to answer the tough questions. This Khao Preah Vihear business, for example… You have at least two sets of maps involved, neither of which the Army or MOFA wants to let the public see until things are settled between Cambodia and Thailand. It is understood that Thaksin’s natural gas interests are at work here, but for some reason the PAD is really the only one spearheading a frank look at things like this. An elected politician in Thailand has – by some measures – the same market value as Chalerm’s Ph.D.
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
To our knowledge, this is the ONLY comment King Bhumipol has EVER made regarding the death of King Ananda.
Might one of you kind people make a copy of this TV programme and post it to us for further analysis?
Thanks so much.
facthaiATgmailDOTcom
Does Than Shwe have anything to fear from international law?
Rather more on topic is that it in regards to prosecuting Than Shwe under international law, the crimes he is responsible for, even if they were obvious and accounted for and not shrouded over by his supporters- because Burma/Myanmar is not 1 of the 106 countries to have ratified the ICC, the ICC has no jurisdiction over Myanmar/Burma. Additionally, because the ICC only came into effect in 2002 and even if Myanmar/Burma had signed the treaty, crimes committed before 2002 are especially difficult to prosecute because there would have been no agreement amongst nations who have signed the treaty in regards to how to prosecute the offender at the time the crime was committed. This may be confusing, but it is argued that if the accused knew of the punishments the ICC could hand out, they would have acted differently – and that to impose the ICC as a standard of justice on all of history would be impossible… It is worth mentioning that Jean Kambanda was tried under a special tribunal set up for Rwanda and that for this to happen in Myanmar/Burma the state would have to essentially collapse. So yes, Myanmar/Burma and Than Shwe has little to fear from the international community unless someone invades and physically brings him to the justice of the citizens of Burma/Myanmar. I feel that this is more appropriate, because I doubt someone who was raped along the Ledo Road, is going to feel vindicated about seeing Than Shwe in the stark white corridors of The Hague.
Also, if Than Shwe has watched what has happened to Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot and is determined for something similar not to happen to him, doesn’t he admit his own guilt? Living in such a hell would far outweigh the comfort of any luxuries he may be able to afford.
Does Than Shwe have anything to fear from international law?
Moe Aung: Thank you for the nice post. Good point about capitalist China being a greater threat than a purely Communist China.
I believe that a capitalist economy coupled with a Communist government will pose a real threat to the region and world. I don’t necessarily mean a military threat.
As to regional domination not equating with friendly regimes that would depend on what one means by “friendly”.
Look at the history of my country, the USA. We set up friendly regimes in South America and SEA. The USA put their choices in power and the elite and powerful Americans derived massive benefits.
By the way, I’m a Capitalist but I do disagree with one country controlling other countries for economic reasons — or any other reason for that matter. I’m also a patriot, which is why I despise Bush and the present actions of my government.
I do hope that Than Shwe and the rest of the SPDC thugs get deposed and tried for their crimes.
Unfortunately, sometimes that does not happen. Meo died peacefully in his bed. Idi Amin and the President Marcos didn’t do too bad either, or the Shaw of Iran. Money always seems to talk.
I don’t post much, because I don’t have the time. Let me completely stray from the subject of this article, which it seems I continue to do.
You are probably from Burma. I live near your border and come in contact with many ethnic minority organizations. The Pa-O, Shan, Arakan, Karenni, Karen are the main ones.
I used to think that when the SPDC was deposed there would be a federation of states with Aung San Suu Ki as president. All would be peaceful after a brief interim of spats over land grabs.
A guy in the know who works the border completely disagreed with me. His opinion is that because of the history of these minority groups, there will be civil war for quite a while.
After attending some meetings with the ethnic minority representatives and reading up on their history, I now tend to agree with him.
You seem very well informed and a concerned person.What is your opinion on this issue of civil war? I sincerely hope I have a flawed opinion.
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
Serhat: Vielen Dank!
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
What is this rambling all about? PAD in every class room, at every street corner, in every government office? How could one turn the resultant political-administrative anarchy into an institutionalized democracy then–one that would supposedly be better than the “undemocratic elections” the result of which everybody is entitled to ignore?
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
“Fernquest’s style of blogging”
It is not a “style” of blogging. I lived in the country for two years and experienced it first hand what economic sanctions did to real flesh and blood people, particularly when my own family got sick and I had to look after them in hospitals.
I do not derive one cent of my livelihood from writing about Burma, so I feel free to speak what I actually believe, unlike others.
One of the best investigative journalists on Burma who I bumped into last week and spoke to last week (wrote the best piece on the Wa situation that I ever read) is of the same mind and literally refuses to read anything that comes out on contemporary Burmese politics because most of it is a repetitive rehash of the same points that have been made for the last 20 years, and which…have not worked at all.
Don Jameson says it all:
“…political motives on the part of western governments and a number of Burmese opposition figures, some of whom get monetary support from these same governments, is making it more difficult to address the humanitarian situation which now exists in Burma. It is also creating a misleading picture of the situation in Burma and rendering political solutions even more difficult”
Does Than Shwe have anything to fear from international law?
NKPVET, why should I lighten up on someone who is propagating such a ridiculous opinion that serves to promote a civilisational clash? Sure, as you say, everyone is entitled to an opinion – even me, and even if my opinion is to belittle another! My position is simply, that people who have nothing directly to do with running the state (ie – Chinese people who are not communist party members, which number over 1 billion) should not be held guilty, the reason being — they would most probably continue to live the lives that they live presently even if the CCP folds – ie. a plumber can always be a plumber.
The 73,500,000o who claim CCP membership and two-hundred million others who have partisanship, OK they are as guilty with supporting the Junta as Republicans and other are for supporting the illegal coalition of the willing War with Iraq. If we take the thaicrisis line, the USA is the enemy too, infact all brothers who do not feel accountable to the greater utility of other brothers welfare are guilty and are the enemy. What happened after the Second World War? Would thaicrisis blame all Germans as the enemy? None were ignorant? All were Nazi party members through willful choice? Are the majority of people aware of their ability to exorcise liberal judgment with all aspects of decision making? If not, then how can one hold “China” as guilty, unless one has confused China as the CCP and Germany as the Nazi party and the USA as the neo-conservatives?
thaicrisis and you, NPKVET, have not countered my position that it would be more economically fruitful for the CCP to be engaged with a Myanmar/Burma not in the clutches of the Junta. Sure China benefits. So does the British oil company Premier, the French oil company Total and the US oil company UNOCAL because they pump oil in a fairly unexploited, uncompetitive geopolitical region. Do you use Junta oil? Maybe you do!! It would be more beneficial for everyone if Myanmar/Burma was liberal and open to a free market — why not China? You say NPKVET, why would the CCP want to rock the boat? International politics takes time, ie pulling troops out of Iraq takes time because rocking the boat is exactly what causes a chaotic world — and that’s not fruitful l for anyone, even those of us who are able to eat three meals a day. How long do you think it takes for a law or a policy to become a social normality?
What has an utterly superficial comparison that China under Mao is comparable to Myanmar/Burma under the Junta got to do with China post the economic reforms of 1979? Are you saying that current CCP foreign policy is guided by some sort of long march sentimentality? Wow. Sure the CCP engages in an arrogant and rampant industrialisation policy and it’s not a globally positive thing, but equally bad is declaring that anyone is an ‘enemy’, as such reactionary politics will lead to worse problems.
NPKVET, you say I, and many Thai people, have to agree with ThaiCrisis. Mainland China is now an adversary and in reality a potential enemy. It is precisely because the public can believe in such a simplistic argument, that one should not believe it and actively seek arguments against it — and avoid the consequences of engaging in the false-prophetic world of Samuel Huntington. Moe Aung says it better than me because I have engaged in a ridiculous argument and have consequently become ridiculous.
To be on topic, irrespective of facing trial, Than Shwe will have his comeuppance because the reasons behind his veil of intolerance are so obviously weak – as seen with the recent submission to Ban-Ki Moon. Pol Pot? Look how he died. Loved by all?? What sort of legacy is important to Than Shwe? What dictator ever got away with a clear conscience?
JSEAS special issue on Burma is out now
I do think that Jon Fernquest and Don Jameson raise an important point about being sceptical of the motivations and practical benifits of the US government’s ‘loudspeaker’ diplomacy with Burma. The hypocritical application of human rights criticisms have severely discredited the US government’s claims to be supporting human rights, as such, rather than particular allied regimes. However, I also think it’s problematic if this scepticism leads to the conclusion that external actors can not and should not attempt to engage in political solidarity with a clearly indigenous opposition to abusive military rule.
Michael Aung-Thwin appears to be suggesting in his letter that this opposition is entirely ‘bogus’, marginal and externally created. However, the evidence suggests that resistance to the military is widespread in Burma and goes far beyond the organised poltical opposition. Although there is a risk that some organisations may shape their programmes to fit with the funding requirements of Soros and others, I think it would be wrong to suggest that 1) there would not be any indigenous agreement with the human rights arguments of Soros, the US government and others if it wasn’t for the funding received from these sources, and 2) the opposition to miltiary rule would not exist if these sources were not providing funding.
Interestingly, Michael Aung-Thwin concludes his article on ‘Mranma Pran: When context encounters notion’ in the latest issue of the Journal of Southeast Asian Studies with a criticism of what he sees as the “anti-elite” trend in contemporary Burmese historiography. The slogan for Workers World, the website where he published his criticism of external support to indigenous Burmese opposition to abusive military rule, is “workers and oppressed peoples of the world unite.” I wonder what the readers of Workers World would think of his opposition to “anti-elite” tendencies. It seems to be a case of Michael Aung-Thwin going so far to the left, he’s ended up on the right.
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
18 June 2008
Last night Dr. Jermsak standing on the stage at the PAD rally in Bangkok did show old video clips of the Takbai massacre. Of course, there was an accompanying narration underlining the roles Samak and others played in such violent put downs of public gatherings.
If I can raise a point or two without seeming to go off the deep end…this professing that the PPP victory was not a sham but a legitimate democratic election really begs everyone to keep on their rose-colored glasses and ignore the obvious. Elections in most of Thailand (perhaps Bangkok is an exception) are a sham from the word ‘go.’ They are represented as being democratic but people vote for who they are told to or for who they are paid to or who they are threatened by if they don’t. Qualifications of candidates mean very little here. It’s a game, and that’s why Thais call it “len karn meung,” playing politics.
The so-called sham of a referendum, by the way, I would contend was at least as good and even more democratic than any discussions in public that took place under the repressive Thaksin regime. I do not agree with all the PAD does or is involved with, but Thailand needs that mentality on every street corner, in every classroom and every government office. Sondhi is no angel and has his own agenda, and in some respects even this activist group does not understand the big picture.
Anyone seen such anti-government discussions on any of the Thai state-controlled stations yet? That’s what makes ASTV so popular. When I first started watching it, I did not see it as credible because it so conflicted with what the state was showing everyone, including the foreigners. But as time went by, the volume and depth of material exposed on ASTV was no longer able to be discounted so easily. That is what brings a lot of people to these rallies, by the way, is finally learning something that the Thai people are entitled to learn – what their elected leaders are involved in.
Bit Brother here in Thailand sits in Parliament and as most of you will admit, has very little interest in legitimately dealing with their fellow countrymen. They are mostly there for number 1 and no one else.
Does Than Shwe have anything to fear from international law?
Gentlemen, I think we are in danger of reviving the old “Chinese Question” here. True, Burmese and Chinese rulers are in a symbiotic relationship, and I mean rulers. I don’t think either party wants it otherwise given the long history. Don’t for a moment think the generals are beholden to the Chinese let alone a proxy of any sort. China on her part does realise that despite widespread misconception in the region and the world at large. The only time they well and truly fell out was when violent anti-Chinese riots broke out in Rangoon in 1967 and consequently the Chinese government openly armed and funded the CP of Burma for the next 10 years.
The junta is cleverly playing off and manipulating India and China and of course ASEAN. Trade and arms? Sanctions? No worries. If you won’t Jones will. They are still sitting on substantial gas and mineral resources and a long coastline on the Bay of Bengal. There’s also Russia, and the West is simply missing out.
The CCP did support communist struggles all over the planet not just in the region – an open secret. Regional domination does not quite equate with friendly or fellow communist regimes. Besides the CCP under Mao did not embrace capitalism. Capitalist China of today was always going to be a greater threat not just to the region but the entire planet with its rampant profiteering and resource and market grabbing than Red China ever was despite all the scaremongering and demonising.
Yes, Than Shwe will have his comeuppance one way or another. The Burmese will have their revenge, China notwithstanding.
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
Interesting discussion. I’m sorry to have come so late to it.
Re: the use of missionary literature. Long, long ago, when I was writing my B.A. honors thesis at the University of Iowa on millennial/revitalization movements in SE Asia, my most useful sources came from the full set of the American Baptist Mission records at the University Library. Most of these missions were to Karen in Burma. They were full of ‘field reports’ from missionaries (husbands and wives), loaded with details of everyday life. One of their great joys was how rapidly they were able to convert Karen; one of their great sorrows was the constant rise of millennial movements of one kind or another that took people from what the American Baptists saw as the true path.
There were, of course, also millennial movements among the Buddhist Karen. I surmised that these movements were an expression of desires for cultural and political autonomy (I was working from Peter Worsley, seeing religious movements as inherently political).
For a little about Catholic Missions in Yunnan, see the following:
Gros, Stéphane
1996a Terres de Confins, Terres de Colonisation: Essay sur les Marches Sino-Tibétaines Due Yunnan ├А Travers l’Implantation de la Mission Du Tibet. Péninsule 33(2):147-211.
2001a-b Ritual and Politics: Missionary Encounters in Local Culture in Northwest Yunnan. In Legacies and Social Memory: Missionaries and Scholars in the Ethnic Southwest. Eric S. Diehl, chair. Association for Asian Studies Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL, March
22-25.
Magnus Fiskejo also tells me that the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago has got some great information on Lisu and other Tibeto-Burman speaking peoples in SW China in their archives, again from the mission work of people such as Isobel Kuhn and, of course, James Fraser, author of Handbook of the Lisu (Yawyin) Language.
A Japanese tale
That helped! Joking apart I would love to read an English translation. Why not give it a try, Yuzo?
I ‘ve read in English a Burman’s account of the Shan struggle he joined in the 70s titled “Burman in the Back” – interesting role reversal on the receiving end as a minority person teaching Burmese and acting as an interpreter.
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
Srithanonchai and Frank: The documentary was rebroadcast today (17 June) on the German documentary channel “Poenix”. I transcribed the German translation of what Bhumibol said since his original voice is drowned out by the German narrator. The respective part of the documentary is taken from an unidentified documentary from 1980.
Here is the original German transcript:
My English translation would be:
I’m not quite sure if the German translation in the documentary is correct since they seem to translate more than Bhumibol actually says.
A Japanese tale
Yes, it is ( kind of ) a very famous book on Karen struggle those want to join the Kare(especially KNLA) issues.
I’ve known him long time and he has passed away in 1997 becaue of malaria(not in action)
I posted up all his web data in my website(what he had done andwhat he had thought,then)
http://www.uzo.net/notice/lin/freedom/freedom1/freedomj/index.htm
But all are in Japanse, though….
Does Than Shwe have anything to fear from international law?
Grasshopper, you have obviously taken your name from the young Kung Fu character in the long ago TV series. So, please be as he was. In other words, lighten up on ThaiCrisis. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
My two cents. China does benefit from the SPDC being in power. China is the major exporter of goods, services, and “hard rice” (as we used to call it) to Burma. By the way, the second largest exporter of military equipment to Burma is India. And of course, our good friend Israel also does a lucrative arms business with the SPDC. Another fact of interest is that Mossad trained Burma’s military intelligence .
Back to the point. Mainland Chinese now occupy almost half of the Shan state. They are also co owners with the SPDC of businesses and government projects. If the SPDC were suddenly deposed, the new government might change to a new weapons vendor or change to different trading partners. Unlikely, yes. But the CCP’s view is probably, “Why rock the boat?”
It is in the interests of Mainland China to keep the SPDC intact. In fact if you think about it, the SPDC is close to what the CCP was under Meo.
I, and many Thai people, have to agree with ThaiCrisis. Mainland China is now an adversary and in reality a potential enemy. The CCP’s long range plan has always been to dominate all of SEA with proxy governments. Tiawan, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. have long known this to be a fact.
I have an open mind. If you can offer an opinion or facts to my post, please do. But do so in a polite manner.
Two years of New Mandala
Happy 2nd Birthday NM!!!
And a big congratulation to Andrew and Nich for creating a medium that brings in contents/debates/discussions of very high quality and diversity – from what can be classified as extreme elitist to on-ground, in the field commentaries. Can it get better than that?
Interview with Paul Handley
[…] books or even recognise it to be honest. I wonder what would happen if they did catch you with it. Interview with Paul Handley Handley interview here. […]