Myanmar ‘at a crisis point’
The Sunday Star-Times
Myanmar’s security forces have killed scores of demonstrators protesting a coup. The new junta has jailed journalists, and anyone else capable of exposing the violence. It has done away with even limited legal protections. The outside world has responded so far with tough words, a smattering of sanctions and little else.
The slide from a nascent democracy to yet another coup, as rapid as it has been brutal, opens up a grim possibility: as bad as it looks in Myanmar now, if the country’s long history of violent military rule is any guide, things could get worse.
Protesters have continued to fill the streets despite violence that left 38 people dead one day this week – though they have turned out in smaller numbers than the weeks right after the February 1 coup. They have used smartphones to capture the brutality. Recent videos show security forces shooting a person at point-blank range and chasing down and savagely beating demonstrators.
The military, however, has the clear upper hand, with sophisticated weapons, a large network of spies, the ability to cut telecoms, and decades of fighting experience from civil conflicts in the country’s borderlands.
‘‘We are at a crisis point,’’ said Bill Richardson, a former United States ambassador to the United Nations with long experience working with Myanmar, pointing to the arrests of journalists and the indiscriminate killing of protesters.
‘‘The international community needs to respond much more forcefully, or this situation will degenerate into complete anarchy and violence.’’
Governments around the world, including the US, have condemned the coup, which reversed years of slow progress towards democracy. Before that opening up began, Myanmar had languished under strict military rule for five decades, which led to international isolation and crippling sanctions. As the generals loosened their grip in the past decade, the
international community lifted most sanctions and poured in investment.
Despite the flurry of recent global criticism, however, there’s not much hope that pressure from outside will change the course of events inside the country.
For one thing, coordinated action at the UN – like a global arms embargo, which the world body’s independent expert on human rights in Myanmar, Tom Andrews, has called for – is unlikely. Russia and China, Myanmar’s most powerful
supporter, are still selling arms to its military – and both have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and therefore could veto any such measure.
Myanmar’s neighbours, the countries that make up the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, are generally reluctant to ‘‘interfere’’ in one another’s affairs – a policy that means they are unlikely to do anything more than call for talks between the junta and the ousted government of Aung San Suu Kyi.
That leaves sanctions from the US and other Western countries. Washington imposed sanctions on Myanmar’s top military leaders after the coup. Britain imposed sanctions on three generals and six members of the junta. The European Union is drawing up measures to respond.
But even tough sanctions from those countries are unlikely to yield anything, though they may weigh heavily on ordinary people. Myanmar has ridden out decades of such measures before, and the military is already talking about plans for ‘‘self-reliance’’.
UN special envoy for Myanmar, Christine Schraner Burgener, said she had warned the military that tough sanctions may be coming – and the response was that the generals knew how to ‘‘walk with only a few friends’’.
‘‘Myanmar’s history suggests the military will use everincreasing brutality and violence in an attempt to put down the protest movement,’’ said Ronan Lee, a visiting scholar at the International State Crime Initiative at Queen Mary University of London. ‘‘In the past, the military has been prepared to murder thousands to quell civil unrest or to meet its goals.’’
In the face of such determination, some observers question how long the protest movement can last.
The military was banking on the world going no further than ‘‘harsh words, some economic sanctions and travel bans’’, said Lee. In order to ensure that, it might exercise some restraint in its crackdown – to try to keep violence below a threshold that would compel action – or at least keep it hidden.