NEWS ANALYSIS
Burma Sanctions—Losing Both Carrot and Stick
Rangoon's ports may soon be busier than ever once Western trade sanctions on Burma are lifted. (Photo: Reuters)
The rush to lift international trade sanctions on Burma in the wake of pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi’s stunning by-election victory has surprised even the most resolute reformist. It took the West’s biggest advocate of the crippling economic measures, the United States, until April 4 to announce their easing—just two days after the official results were announced.
And now the European Union (EU)will meet to discuss the lifting of some sanctions on April 23—the very day that Suu Kyi has been invited to enter Parliament for the first time—with a senior diplomat revealing last week that concessions were very likely.
While it may not be surprising that Naypyidaw seeks to guarantee good press as the EU sits down to discuss removing restrictions on Burmese trade, it is transparently opportunistic when the second parliamentary session was originally set for sometime in July—last year it began on Aug. 22.
The looming EU debate may well have been what prompted the United States—famously rebuked by liberal political scientists in 1998 for imposing economic sanctions against half the world’s population—to suddenly become so certain that democracy has taken an irreversible hold in Burma.
And essentially every Western government—including Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK—has joined the US and EU in calling for engagement with Burma. Neighboring nations have never sought to isolate the military-dominated country on humanitarian grounds, and Burma’s fast-approaching chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) in 2014 demonstrates the bloc’s economic inclusiveness.
Not only has Asean called for an immediate end to trade sanctions against Burma in the wake of Suu Kyi’s by-elections victory, but Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told a group meeting in Phnom Penh last week that the punitive measures should never have been imposed in the first place.
“We took the right approach in keeping Myanmar in the family and working with Myanmar rather than try to ostracize and penalize it the way some of the Western countries have tried to do with sanctions,” he said.
The IMF has already sent several delegations to Burma and assisted Naypyidaw with unifying its complex system of multiple exchange rates. The World Bank has similarly been on hand for consultation and ready to assist with investment opportunities in the region.
Of course, observers harbor few doubt over what is prompting the international community to so hastily dispense with restrictive measures.
“Myanmar is a gold mine, any way you look at it—natural resources, gas and oil deposits, spatial dimensions, location between China, India, Southeast Asia,” Craig Steffensen, Burma manager for the Asian Development Bank, told reporters on Wednesday.
“It’s a huge market waiting to happen and growth will come from everywhere, not one specific sector. The boom that’s about to begin has brought people from the four corners of the globe,” he added.
Even some humanitarian groups have joined in the chorus and called for a blanket lifting of international sanctions to push for continued reform.
“Myanmar has turned away from five decades of authoritarianism and has embarked on a bold process of political, social and economic reform,” the International Crisis Group said in a report titled Reform in Myanmar: One Year On, which was released on Tuesday.
“Those in the West who have long called for such changes must now do all they can to support them. The most important step is to lift the sanctions on Myanmar without delay,” it added.
US sanctions against Burma are detailed in five acts by Congress plus four presidential executive orders. These include bans on investment, restrictions on money transfers, asset freezes for key figures of the regime, and the purchase of gemstones originating in Burma.
“The United States is committed to taking steps alongside the Burmese Government and people as they move down the road of reform and development,” said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on April 4.
So what changes have been brought about by the April 1 by-elections to see such a remarkable turnaround?
After the ballot, Suu Kyi’s main opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) party now controls 43 out of a total of 664 seats in Burma’s Union Parliament—amounting to 6.5 percent. A quarter of Parliament remains guaranteed for the military while over 75 percent of the legislature is required to enact any change to the widely condemned 2008 Constitution.
By engineering the 2010 general election with a combination of ballot box-stuffing, vote-buying and blatant intimidation, the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party of former generals, together with the military quota, jointly held 554 out of 664 seats. This amounted to 84 percent of the legislature in what was arguably the second most isolated country in the world.
After allowing Suu Kyi’s NLD to win 43 seats through a generally free and fair election, the same military-backed alliance now controls 77 percent in arguably the most tantalizing nation for investment opportunities around today. Plus it has every senior government position from president down filled from its ranks—the very reason for the by-elections in the first place as MPs vacated seats to take up cabinet positions.
Even the most unwavering junta hardliner would struggle to argue against the logic of this transition.
Indeed, Naypyidaw has not been shy in calling for the rewards of this new “democratic renaissance” to be delivered even more expediently. This is again unsurprising considering the commercial connections which government insiders have with the lucrative export, telecommunications and fossil fuels industries.
“They should do more if they want to see us reaching the mission faster,” presidential adviser Nay Zin Latt told Bloomberg financial news agency in an April 7 email. “The government is doing its job, which is national reconciliation and being a democratic society. This is the time giving more carrots will work more.”
But the main concern of many observers is that, by any international standard, there remains a massive amount to achieve to come anywhere close to a real constitutional democracy with respect for human rights and the rule of law.
An end to ongoing ethnic violence—not only in wartorn Kachin State, but all over country including Karen and Shan areas—as well as repealing draconian legislation such as the Electronics Act, ending human rights abuses, and the release of remaining political prisoners are hardly minor matters of quibbling over policy.
Tom Andrews, a former US Congressman for Maine and president of United to End Genocide, said this week that a recent visit to Kachin State convinced him that to lift sanctions would be a terrible mistake.
“A farmer described being apprehended when he, his wife and father-in-law were harvesting corn,” Andrews said. “They were forced to carry the corn to a military encampment but attempted to escape. His wife was caught and he has not seen her since.”
David Scott Mathieson, an expert on Burma for Human Rights Watch, echoes his views.
“The real danger of the by-elections is the overblown expectations many in the West have cast on them,” he said. “The hard work really does start afterward. Constitutional reform, legal reform, tackling systemic corruption, sustainable economic development, continued human rights challenges … will take many years.”
And so the logical question will remain whether Western nations have left themselves enough carrot to entice more reforms from the Naypyidaw administration.
Admittedly, noises emanating from US President Barack Obama’s administration suggest that it will not seek to lift the JADE (Junta’s Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act of 2008, or other legislative sanctions, in the short term. It will instead start by rescinding executive orders, with further progress on releasing political prisoners and resolving ethnic conflicts necessary before further concessions.
Although Obama may leave the JADE Act and other congressional sanctions for the time being, having the newly impoverished EU chomping on the bit may not give him much room to maneuver—especially if business lobbyists start upping the pressure leading up to November’s US presidential elections.
Of course, the crucial matter remains Burma’s 2015 general elections and whether the NLD will be permitted to form a government should they, as expected, win a overwhelming majority of the 75 percent of seats left in Parliament after the military quota.
The current concern is that the world community oversteps itself in a moment of heady optimism. This may leave no carrot to entice further reform, and no stick with which to threaten as the status quo has already been accepted as satisfactory terms for re-engagement.
Wa Rebels Caught Up in Regional Chess Match
Unrest in Kachin Is a Mixed Blessing for China
Pressure and Pragmatism in Burma
Tangled Webs: Kachin, Arakan, Cronies and The Lady
As Burma Turns West, China Looks North19 Responses to Burma Sanctions—Losing Both Carrot and Stick
Talk about the shoe being on the other foot, actually it’s the Burma Gold Rush which is dangling the carrot at the cash-strapped West.
The West must be feeling pretty envious and left out while others are making a beeline for Naypyidaw to join the gold rush.
So now they are looking for an excuse, a political expedient, to dismantle some of their pesky sanctions to get to their pot of gold and conveniently ignore their misgivings about whether real democracy has come to Burma.
As for the lightning US response to the proxy military government’s cold and calculated strategy of allowing the NLD to win almost all seats in the April Fool’s Day by-election, it was in keeping with the US policy of matching each step of the so-called democratic reforms with a positive response of their own; a carrot if you please.
But surely the rainbow of economic reforms with a pot of gold at the end must be what’s revving up the process of easing sanctions. The big business is raring to go and there’s no time to lose; the early birds are catching the worms and nobody wants to be left behind.
I dislike both carrots and sticks!
Are Burmese people all supposed to be dumb donkeys?
They are not in the equation.
Aung San Suu Kyi never asked them. She knows the best. The public simply have faith in her like religion.
She has poened the floodgate. It can still be closed. B ut she is not that wise.
The “carrots and sticks stuff” is decided by and affects basically only the top 1% of the population. It’s more like “sabre-rattling” amongst the elites. The poor 99% doesn’t have much to say anyway. Burma is still very much an oligarchy with about 100 or so families of the upper ruling class controlling 90% of the economy (and politics) of the country. Unfortunately it seems to be the same almost everywhere in the world. The poor can only hope for something to trickle down (the rich would then call that charity or philanthropy lol).
Absolutey right.
In stead of the military and the usual crowd of the last 20 years, now we eill have these advisor people, Egress people, “Exile” think-tank or whatever tank people nad the elite of the NLD. All togethere may be a hundred thousand. The 60 million odd would hjust perish cheering on them.
Please correct me somebody if someone ever asked to these illiterates what they want ever.
Aung San Suu Kyi is not that wise? Maybe you are not seeing the whole equation. Like Hardy said, the western governments can’t wait to get their hands on the business opportunities in Myanmar. Government is showing their reform intentions, and Suu Kyi’s hands are cuffed. If she doesn’t support the suspension of sanctions, she will lose the population who adore her. She has to go with what’s best for the country in this current situation. ASSK is one of the more calculated and discipline leaders in the world. Just because you don’t agree with her, don’t say she’s not wise.
The whole lifting sanction thing arises out of Aung San Suu Kyi’s effusive endorsement of Thei Sein who all know was put there by Than Shwe and who all know cannot even go the toilet without express permission by Than Shwe (leave alone Than Shwe- no one dare look Than Shwe’s grandson in the eyes- talk about “Retirement”).
This “opening up” business is planned and executed to the last dot and hyphen by the military and before that fateful 18th of August 2011 “Family Dinner” at the “Chequers”, no one dare to suggest dropping the sanctions and there would have been no plan for the esteemed foreign dignitaries to pay homeage expecting something in return.
Even the blinds can see that the “Investment Law” is the most “supine” law there is – what with not to tax foreign business with absulute power to evict the public and repatriation of all benefits and right to distribute locally.
Either NLD ( Aung San Suu Kyi)who is trusted by these multitude does not understand the words or she agrees with total giveaway of the whole country with only manual labour and whoring as “Business” for the majority Burmese or is simply dumb.
Truly with friends like these, Burmese do not need any enemy which is the case here.
Agreed. Sounds like a teacher rewarding little kids for good behaviour, and raising the big stick when they get out of line. Or the reward and punishment system used for training animals to do your bidding.
But I don’t think the bunnies in Naypyidaw would mind. They have a big appetite for carrots, and even sticks could be useful as firewood. So keep them coming!
As long as the military remains in government, the stick should remain and reach as far as possible while the carrot should remain fresh.
As long as the military has 93.5% part in government, the stick should remain and reach as much as 93.5% in punitive measures while the carrot seeks to suspend or lift upto 6.5% of the total sanctions.
As long as the military still has 25% reserved seats in government cast in stone, the sick should remain thick and reach 25% in punitive measures while the carrot seeks to suspend orlift upto 75% of the total sanctions.
Only when the military has no part in governing our country, the stck can then be replaced with baskets of carrots.
The people of Burma, I don’t know who are you and what do you think but I understand when the sanction are lift, more or less the people of Burma will benefit. The sanction never effected to the army. Believe me, I grown up in army and its never effected me or my family. And also I don’t think you really love our country like that 25% of military persons. And also do you really know why army put 25% of seat? I don’t think you really do.
The people of Burma are respectable, cultured and civilised people.
But the military are otherwise, and the carrots and sticks are meant for and used on them.
Talking about the shoe on the other foot, this shoe is not even the right size and cannot fit the foot meaning that those ignorant advocates for lifting sanctions do not even have any idea of what Burma’s political process is like and how they can easily be fooled by just a few foot steps that lead to a pit hole.
Lifting of sanctions will only let the junta legalise their illegal monies parked overseas.
The Lady was merely being pushed into the direction of the floodgate by the swarm of advocates wanting to see changes in Burma at supersonic overdrive speed so that these foreign investors can reserve for themselves the front seats and not considering for the welfare of the entire people of Burma.
The people of Burma are thankful to Mr Obama, Mrs Clinton, Mr Cameron and the rest of the International Sanctioning Community for holding the keys to the floodgate.
This article takes it for granted that sanctions are effective in the first place. Anyone who has done their homework knows that the overwhelming majority of both quantitative and qualitative studies on sanctions have shown that they are very seldom effective. Burma’s case is a classic example of when sanctions are NOT effective (due in large part to the presence of several ‘black knight’ states around it: in other words, states which are not party to the sanctions). People who support sanctions need to ask themselves what exactly they hope sanctions will achieve? Do they expect a popular revolution? Do they expect the junta to simply give up all power? Neither of these are a possibility in Burma. The only way change will occur is through gradual normative socialization, as has occured throughout East Asia. These things take longer than a day. What has happened in the last couple of years is remarkable. Continued sanctions will only harm Burmese people economically, while bringing no political change.
Targeted sanctions are not targeted at the ordinary people of Burma but at specific targets to achieve targeted results.
The right perspective is that the people of Burma have suffered not because of these targeted sanctions but at the hands of these rogue military abusing their authorities and positions for corruption gains such as the gang of six ministries; and neglecting the welfare of all peoples in Burma.
If the hidden objectives of the junta is to remain stubbornly in power, then the orchestrated changes in the past one year is obviously nothing else other than trying to hookwink the West to suspend or lift sanctions so that the junta can have the best of both worlds under the pretext of false reform.
It is either one or the other and can neither be both whether by true democratic revolution or transformation and not by socialization which was already the case with Burma before April 1st when socialization used to be the norm.
Not anymore. The world is changing so must Burma.
To begin with, sanctions against Burma have been blanket sanctions, not targeted sanctions. But in any case, the question is not who is responsible for the plight of Burmese people. It is how to most effectively address this problem. Sanctions are a popular tool for states seeking to satisfy domestic public opinion, particularly when there are not very strong trade links with target country, and therefore not very large economic costs to bear. They are very rarely effective, and they have certainly not been successful in this case: Burma has endured two decades of isolation from the (Western) international community as a result. If we assume, as you purport(and I am not at all sure of this), that these reforms are totally empty, then it is very clear that sanctions have manifestly not achieved their goal.
Fortunately for Burmese people, however, authoritarian regimes are significantly more complex internally than they are understood by most outsiders to be. This means that if a reformist faction gains a degree of power within government and institutes policies which are successful and widely seen as beneficial to Burma by both the military and civilians, further reform may be on the way. Of course, these reforms are far from irreversible and it is very easy to imagine their repealment if the military understands itself to be threatened (c.f. Burma’s Eastern neighbour)
If imposing travelling restrictions on some of the military targets and freezing of their assets are not targeted sanctions in the first place, then these sanctions would not have achieved specific results on April 1st.
Sanctions have been effective and there is no denial about it no matter which side of the coin you look at it because of its intrinsic value.
Arguments for the sake of arguments hold no truths while
foreign sanctions are no fools.
What the Burma Campaign UK said, ” “To completely abandon sanctions just as they are working would have been a serious mistake.”
“Burma Campaign UK also warned companies thinking of investing in Burma that they should not think of the country as a place where they can exploit cheap labour and grab natural resources at bargain-bucket prices, thanks to the lack of proper laws protecting workers and the environment. Many sectors attractive to investors, such as mining, timber, oil, gas and dams, have been directly linked to serious human rights abuses and environmental destruction. Any European companies investing in projects where such abuses take place will be subject to high profile boycott campaigns, it said”
Yes indeed. Burma has still a long long long way to go before it can truely become democratic.
Thanks to you all about your fair comments. What will be the Rohingya Muslim Nations bona-fide citizen?
As our Nation pursues freedom for all our peoples and progresses towards genuine democracy, no one, indigenous to Burma, should be left behind.
As our Nation pursues national reconciliation among the indigenous peoples of all Burma, everyone should have the inherent right to live peacefully and participate constructively towards our Nation building and development regardless of race, language or religion.
You are not forgotten.