The Burma trail
Daniel Korski 3:59pm
Foreign policy specialists have been confused about how to categorise the coalition. Is
it neoconservative, given its backing for the Libyan rebels? No, says no less a figure than the Prime Minister. Is it realpolitical, given the PM’s willingness to make up with Russia and
court China? Most No.10 officials would wince at such a description. So what is it?
To answer the question, look no further than William Hague's trip to Burma last week. Not only was it the first visit by a British foreign minister since 1955, but it was also the culmination of little known, high-level, behind-the-scenes outreach to Aung San Suu Kyi by No 10 and concomitant pressure on the Burmese junta. And it seems to be paying off. Though the hard-line Burmese foreign minister sought to push back against reforms during Hague’s visit, the reformist part of the junta — including president Thein Sein — appears to be marching on. As Hague pointed out after several meetings and dinners with Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese government still needs to do more, especially if they want sanctions relaxed. But progress, however slow, seems to be happening.
This is what the government wants its promotion of democracy to be like — often behind-the-scenes, careful not to appear imperial, but potentially more effective than the Blairite version. As the then Foreign Secretary said in the Aung San Suu Kyi Lecture three years ago, ‘I understand the doubts about Iraq and Afghanistan… But my plea is that we do not let divisions over those conflicts obscure our national interest… in supporting movements for democracy.’
Previous
Rhoda Klapp
January 9th, 2012 4:12pm Report this comment"So what is it? "
Unprincipled, inconsistent and to the detriment of UK interest?
Jeremy
January 9th, 2012 4:23pm Report this commentBy the old Moulmein Pagoda
Lookin' eastward to the sea
There's a Burma girl a-sittin'
An' I know we thinks o'she.
I have taken the liberty of re-writing some Kipling for Aung San Suu Kyi, who I know is a reader of 'Kim'.
Hexhamgeezer
January 9th, 2012 4:58pm Report this commentIn a purely altruistic sense our Burmese policy (during the last and current govts) has been something of a (temporary?) success - not widely known to be sure - but not a complete disaster, which counts for something these days. NGOs have had little to complain about for instance.
Shame that 'our national interest' doesn't have trade high on the list though. The Chinese are already there siphoning off the oil, as are the French (bless 'em) and the Thais.
David L
January 9th, 2012 5:22pm Report this commentI'm pleased to seee Hague's approach to Burma. The military has run the country for 50 years. There is no infrastructure of government other than that of the military. Therefore if there is to be change, it will need to be achieved with the military on board. There simply isn't an "opposition" as such. Smart Burmese people long for change, but know the military won't simply up sticks and hand over to anyone else.
So Hague's explicit endorsement of "The Lady", and more low-key encouragement of the steps towards liberalisation by the regime (which so far have been small but very striking), hits the right note.
Ostrich (occasionally)
January 9th, 2012 5:48pm Report this commentYou catch far more bees with sugar than with vinegar.
Verity
January 9th, 2012 9:35pm Report this commentAung San Suu Kyi has looked absolutely beautiful for at least the last 30 years, for half of which she was in prison. And, if memory serves, her husband died after she was released to house arrest. And now she is being included in government talks.
I am pleased to see The Speccie using the name Burma, which has such resonance (maybe that's why they changed it) instead of Myannmar.
I wonder how she does it.
Dimoto
January 9th, 2012 10:50pm Report this commentThis is the easy part.
"Upper Burma" (about half the country), was not part of the Kingdom, but was incorporated by the British.
The "hill tribes" (peoples of Upper Burma), fought bravely beside the British against the Japanese invader, whilst the Burmans, lead by Aung San, actively collaborated with the Japanese (Burma National Army).
Dimoto
January 9th, 2012 10:52pm Report this commentBritain promised the hill tribes autonomy as a condition of independence, and belatedly, Aung San agreed.
Aung San was assassinated shortly afterwards and the suppression and execution of tribal leaders began.
It has been going on, on and off, ever since.
What will Aung San's daughter say when Hague asks for justice for the Chins, Kachins, Karens and many more ?
David L
January 10th, 2012 12:05pm Report this commentDimoto, it was a classic, and not very distinguished, end of empire gambit to make promises that we knew we would be in no position to deliver. Think Kashmir....
That said, the continuing low-level insurgency among Burma's minorities has been a welcome thorn in the side of the military junta, and an inspirational display of courage and steadfastness.
For what it is worth, the NLD (The Lady's political party) have always said that there has to be a democratic settlement involving the minority peoples. And even the new regime-lite has allocated seats in its new Parliament for the minorities - recognition, I think, that it knows it cannot defeat them and can no longer afford to be on a permanent war footing.
Verity
January 10th, 2012 4:21pm Report this commentDimoto and David L - Thank you for those comments. It is encouraging that she has a voice today in the goings on. God knows, the lady has perseverance! She could have taken a hike and been granted asylum in Britain or the US before she was ever arrested, but she chose to stick it out.
Back to top