| |
Australians debate Myanmar
policy
By Kalinga Seneviratne
SYDNEY - Australia is facing challenges from
within on its policy toward Myanmar, which is closer to
the Asian way of dialogue and engagement than to the
Western approach of harsh criticism and economic
sanctions.
Canberra continues to insist that
further isolating the already reclusive military
government in Yangon has done nothing to hasten
democratic reform in the Southeast Asian country. But
the debate continues on whether dialogue has any more
chance of success.
The latest discussions about
Australia's policy on Myanmar were sparked by Foreign
Minister Alexander Downer's 24-hour visit to the country
on October 2 - five months after Yangon released
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest.
Downer's visit - he spoke to Yangon officials
and to Suu Kyi herself - made him the first Australian
minister to visit Myanmar in almost two decades. He was
also the highest-level official from a so-called Western
country to visit the military-run state in recent years.
The logic behind his visit has been that
Australia is just about the only Western country that
has kept communication lines open with Yangon, along
with a modest aid program. This, the argument goes,
means that Canberra could have unique clout with the
junta.
Analysts here say, however, that Canberra
must listen to criticism of Australia's policies from no
less than Suu Kyi herself, who conveyed her
dissatisfaction with Downer's visit and the
Australia-funded human-rights training for Myanmese
government officials.
"When someone at the
center of a democracy movement [Suu Kyi] criticizes this
program, the Australian government must take this
criticism seriously," argued James Arvanitakis, member
of the management committee of Aidwatch, which oversees
the country's aid schemes. "It's not some white
middle-class human-rights activist who is saying this,"
he pointed out.
But Robert Templer, Asia program
director with the International Crisis Group, welcomed
the Downer initiative in starting a dialogue with Yangon
and said the hardline approach with Myanmar has clearly
not produced results.
"The current line taken by
most Western countries has been to isolate Burma and cut
it off from most international forums and to cut off
contacts with it. That hasn't done much to shift the
positions of a government that is already extremely
isolated," he said, using the former name for Myanmar,
as it has been officially known since 1989. "So I think
a greater deal of engagement is useful, but you can't
expect results overnight with any sort of program like
that," he added.
Arvanitakis was much less
optimistic: "The aid program to Burma on human-rights
education is similar to the one Australia conducted for
Indonesia during the Suharto regime. We had nothing to
show for it."
Australia's human-rights education
involves workshops for middle-level civil servants on
the international norms of human rights. Downer told The
Australian daily newspaper that when he explained to Suu
Kyi that these workshops aimed to help civil servants
better apply human-rights principles in Myanmar, she
replied, "Well, good luck."
Many critics,
including pro-democracy activists in Myanmar, have asked
Canberra not to "waste money" on the rights workshops,
which began in 2000. Australian consultants supposedly
preach human rights, but "how do democracy movements in
these countries benefit from these? We haven't seen any
benefits," Arvanitakis pointed out.
Downer
undertook the visit to Myanmar on the advice of Razali
Ismail, United Nations special envoy for Myanmar and
former Malaysian diplomat, who is trying to encourage
talks between the military junta and the National League
for Democracy (NLD) party of Nobel laureate Suu Kyi.
Ismail's approach has highlighted the quiet way
supported by many Asian nations, who say constant
dialogue with Yangon led to Suu Kyi's release from house
arrest in May.
Australia has taken a slightly
different tack on Myanmar from other Western countries.
For instance, it has not adopted the full list of
sanctions imposed by the United States and the Europeans
on the country. Canberra, which has diplomatic ties with
Yangon, has not banned Australian companies from doing
business in Myanmar or imposed visa restrictions on
senior Myanmese officials.
Thus, Downer believes
that Australia could play an important role in bringing
democracy to the Southeast Asian nation.
"Australia is of interest because we have a
unique approach to dealing with Burma," he said. "We are
perceived to be a so-called Western country, albeit a
regional country ... and I think that gives us a little
more leverage than would otherwise be the case."
After a 50-minute meeting with the generals who
run Myanmar, Downer struggled to explain to journalists
what that leverage is all about.
"At each of the
meetings with the Burmese leaders, I have reinforced the
need for early progress on the political-reconciliation
process," said Downer after his meeting with the ruling
State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) chairman,
General Than Shwe, vice chairman General Maung Aye and
first secretary Khin Nyunt.
He said that while
the military leaders responded positively to having
discussions on constitutional reforms, "when it will
happen, how it will happen and where it will happen, I
was given no indication of that".
During his
90-minute meeting with Suu Kyi, she expressed skepticism
about the junta's mood for change, Downer said. "I think
she is skeptical about any concessions that the generals
may make to her. She is not very confident that a great
deal of progress is going to be made," he told
Australian Broadcasting Corp radio.
Suu Kyi's
NLD swept elections in 1990 with more than 70 percent of
the vote, but the new parliament was never formed, as
the military annulled the results and clamped down on
the democracy movement.
In an interview with
Mark Baker of the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper, Suu
Kyi advised Australia to limit contacts with Yangon -
like the United States and the European Union - until
the generals honor promises to start talks on political
reforms.
"If everybody were to take a united
stand, it would be far more effective than some people
thinking that their way is better than others," she told
Baker. "I've always thought that a coordinated approach
is much better than each country doing its own thing."
(Inter Press Service)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
