Page 1 of 2 COMMENT
How Australia can help Myanmar
By David Scott Mathieson
BANGKOK - The long-anticipated review of United States policy towards Myanmar
was rolled out recently, and it was anti-climactic. Announced in February by
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who argued that neither engagement nor
sanctions had worked, the review dragged on for months before concluding that
the US would begin tentative "pragmatic engagement" with the ruling State Peace
and Development Council (SPDC). It would also keep in place sanctions and other
punitive measures. Senior members of the US State Department have already begun
initial talks with various members of the regime.
Australia has an often overlooked key role to play in drawing military ruled
Myanmar out of its isolation, and is well placed to play a prominent supporting
position in international efforts to engage the SPDC. Australia's Myanmar
policy [1] is
"well-rounded", with its emphasis on rigorous, principled diplomacy, generous
humanitarian assistance, a ban on defense exports, and targeted sanctions
against hundreds of key Myanmar military leaders and their close family and
business associates.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Foreign Minister Stephen Smith are tough talking
and principled on human rights in Myanmar, especially after the September 2007
Buddhist monk-led uprising was brutally crushed, the initial official blocking
of foreign relief aid after the May 2008 cyclone, and the political show trial
this year of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Kevin Rudd called Nobel Peace Prize winner Suu Kyi's conviction and sentencing
to a further 18 months under house arrest in August a "new low for the Burmese
[Myanmar] regime". Stephen Smith raised the "need to put even more pressure on
the [Myanmar] regime to move down the path of democracy" and promised to update
Australia's extant sanctions on the regime "and keep them focused for maximum
impact".
This is precisely what the SPDC needs to hear. The message roughly is: "We
don't like what you're doing, but we are dead-set on continuing to help your
people." This is also what the dithering optimism and business-focused
engagement of Myanmar's neighbors China, India, Thailand and other Southeast
Asian countries need to recognize, and modify their approaches. Engagement is
urgently needed with many facets of Myanmar state and society, including, and
in many respects especially, the military itself.
There is a long list of issues that Australia and the rest of the international
community must not concede. The immediate and unconditional release of more
than 2,100 political prisoners in Myanmar [2], including Suu Kyi, and serious
steps taken to make the scheduled elections in 2010 genuinely fair and
inclusive are core concerns that must remain atop of the agenda.
The cessation of military operations against ethnic nationalities along
Myanmar's borderlands is crucial, as is opening up the space for foreign and
domestic humanitarian assistance programs, especially the resumption of all
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) activities [3] in the country,
most of which have been suspended since early 2006.
Emphasize teamwork
Australia can recalibrate its Myanmar policy for more bilateral effect and
multilateral influence in three key areas: diplomacy, humanitarian assistance
and sanctions.
Australia is already on the outspoken end of international frustration with the
SPDC. This must continue, and can in an important way if the government
appoints a specific Myanmar envoy to coordinate bilateral diplomatic efforts,
Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) programs, and
multilateral initiatives in the United Nations, Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) and with other key states such as China, Japan, India, the US,
European Union member states and Russia.
A potential Australian Myanmar envoy, ideally an eminent Australian who wields
the sort of international gravitas the prestige-conscious Myanmar military
respects, can coordinate with other country envoys and the efforts by the UN
secretary general's (UNSG) special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari.
Someone with solid regional experience like former Australian army General John
Sanderson, who led the UN peacekeeping operation in Cambodia in the 1990s, or
even General Peter Cosgrove, the leader of the international intervention in
East Timor, would likely impress the military-led SPDC and certainly gain
support from key ASEAN states.
The US has congressional legislative provisions to appoint their own Myanmar
envoy and policy advisor, but nearly two years after it was announced as part
of the JADE Act the administration has yet to name anyone to that post.
Australia can set an example by taking this important initiative first.
The appointment of country-specific envoys would not just bolster the "Good
Offices" mission of the UNSG, which has unfortunately shown little progress so
far with the SPDC, but could also propel the formation of a "Contact Group" of
key states on Myanmar: China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Australia,
to move beyond the perception that international criticism of Myanmar just
emanates from Western countries.
Currently, most multilateral efforts reside in the so-called "Group of Friends
of Myanmar" in the United Nations, a limp sounding and largely supine
collective predicated on less confrontational approaches to dealing with the
Myanmar government. These feckless multilateral initiatives need to be
bolstered by a more hard-core grouping, with less vocal US leadership and more
multilateral solidarity.
The SPDC thrives on divide and rule, domestically and internationally, so more
purpose must be shown in speaking with a unified voice. Australia and
Indonesia, as key middle-ranking states in the region, and largely of similar
mind if different public statements on Myanmar could take the lead in forming
such a Contact Group.
One of the most important considerations for Australia's regional security
concerns is Myanmar's links with North Korea and the long speculated but
unverified collusion on a nuclear program in Myanmar. Kurt Campbell, the US
State Department Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific
Affairs, gave a briefing on the Myanmar policy review on September 28 in which
he said, "Concerns have emerged in recent days about [Myanmar] and North
Korea's relationship that require greater focus and dialogue", and specifically
cited UN Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874 on North Korea's
proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction as points of cooperation with the
SPDC.
Australia too has deep concerns about the possibility, even if at this point
very distant, of Myanmar acquiring a nuclear capability. Taking diplomacy more
seriously should not just work towards a better human rights situation inside
Myanmar, but it should also address the numerous unknowns of the SPDC's
military buildup.
Donate generously, but fairly
On humanitarian assistance, Australia is already one of the best donors
addressing Myanmar's immense developmental challenges of poverty alleviation,
deteriorating health conditions, and in human rights protection. AusAID
provisions to Myanmar [4] are an annual A$29 million (US$26 million), with an
extra A$55 million for post cyclone relief.
Much of this funding goes in the right direction. If anything, Australia could
be more generous, something that could be said of most international
humanitarian donors who are only now realizing the immense needs inside
Myanmar. The reality is that with all the impediments and ineptitude placed in
donors' paths by the SPDC, a lot of good can be done by supporting communities
survive the capricious and self-centered regime, which must take the blame for
most of the humanitarian misery produced by military rule.
Australia is also very generous in its acceptance of refugees from Myanmar,
resettling thousands of mostly ethnic-Karen from long standing camps situated
on the Thailand-Myanmar border, while also continuing to fund agencies
supporting an estimated 140,000 civilians still languishing in those camps.
However, there appears to be reluctance within the Australian bureaucracy to
support urgently needed humanitarian assistance to Myanmar civilians in
conflict zones, often erroneously termed "cross-border assistance".
In fact, supporting health and livelihood initiatives "cross-border" is
actually providing humanitarian assistance to Myanmar: all of the existing
programs in conflict areas are conducted by ethnic Myanmar groups, often on the
run from the SPDC army, and necessarily clandestine, but definitely needed.
Providing financial assistance to these projects from Thailand, China, India or
Bangladesh is more efficient, realistic and practical than going through
Yangon, as most UN and other international aid groups must do.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road,
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
