news details |
|
|
| DRESSING UP AS A DEMOCRACY | | | Sukanya Natarajan
Five years after Myanmar voted in a
quasi-civilian regime, as it now prepares for the next general election, many doubt if the military-dominated regime's reforms process has really taken the country towards democracy and an open market
An uncertain political era has be
gun in Myanmar, bringing both
opportunities and challenges. Ultimately, political solutions have to be forged, for which it is vital that ethnic issues are prioritised, political activities are broadened at the community level to strengthen the participation of civil society, and transparency peace strategies and initiatives be made the bedrock for all political, military and economic actions. This is a tall order for reforms given economic hardship, ethnic conflicts and a history of media censorship that Myanmar faces.
The political reforms ushered in through international pressure have been a work-in-progress in Myanmar. President Thein Sein, whose quasi-civilian regime took charge in March 2011 launched a series of political and economic reforms that helped break Myanmar's international isolation. The regime has been keen to engage with foreign Governments and companies, as well as diversify business opportunities and aid sources, after years of relying solely on China.
But off late, there have been apprehensions about the reforms process. In the past year, General Thein Sein has cracked down on the Press and curbed the freedom of assembly as well as that of religious minorities. Some believe that his Government has been window-dressing reforms to please Western Governments. They argue that the Government has a vested interest in holding on to power and has no incentive to make true democratic reforms.
In early 2014, after the World Bank published an unflattering report on Myanmar's negative economic reality, US President Barack Obama extended executive orders that prohibited US businesses and individuals from investing in Myanmar. Despite the US censure, members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Myanmar's main trading and investment partners, seemed un-encumbered by General Thein Sein's dull reform efforts. In fact, they seemed to support them.
Myanmar's regional partners enjoy distinctively protected positions in its resource-rich economy. True economic and political reforms may jeopardise these rewards if they lead to an increase in market competitors. As the US tightened sanctions over 20 years, China, Germany, India, Japan, Malaysia, and Thailand became Myanmar's main trading partners, accounting for over 90 per cent of the nation's trade by volume. Multinational corporations from these countries conducted business in the nation through preferential trade deals established by the secretive military regime.
According to Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the present Constitution is undemocratic and requires amendment. But changing the Constitution is difficult, requiring more than 75 per cent support in Parliament, where 25 per cent of the seats are held by appointees of the military. Notably, an overhaul of the Constitution is key to ending ethnic conflict because the current Constitution is not acceptable to many ethnic groups.
Myanmar's Army is entangled in border hostilities, its peace process with 16 armed ethnic groups and alliances hangs in the balance, students are protesting against the education system and the recently-freed media is discovering the limits of the Government's tolerance. The general election is scheduled for November this year, and it is questionable if the military-dominated Government of General Thein Sein will deliver on its promise of free, fair and inclusive elections.
The US-based Carter Center and the European Union will be invited to monitor the election.
Foreign observers were not allowed in the 2010 general election which ushered in Myanmar's first semi-civilian Government after almost half-a-century of military rule. Only observers from South-East Asian nations were invited to the 2012 by-election, which brought Ms Suu Kyi to Parliament.
Before 2010, the last time a general election was held in Myanmar (then known as Burma) was in 1990. At that time, the military did not allow newly-elected Parliament to convene. At the election prior to that, in 1960, it was not clear if foreign observers were invited.
To settle ethnic strife, the Government of Myanmar and the armed ethnic rebel groups have recently agreed on the text of a nationwide ceasefire agreement. The draft was seen as a significant development after 16 months of talks, but it still needs to be signed by the leaders of more than a dozen armed groups. It also comes amid intensifying conflict between the Myanmar Army and a northern rebel faction that has spilled across the border into China, raising questions about the viability of any ceasefire agreement. A historically weak Central Government has signed bilateral ceasefires over the years with different ethnic militias who represent about a third of the population, but the agreements have routinely fallen apart. The Myanmar Government and Western diplomats are hopeful that the rebel leaders will sign the accord by the end of April. More contentious issues, such as the disarmament of the ethnic militias and the Government's demand that they be folded into the national Army, have not been discussed yet. Whether the current reforms are a means for Myanmar's Government to ensure the continuity of military power in a different guise or is it really a case of democratic reform for the sake of democratisation itself, only time will tell.
(Courtesy@daily Pioneer.com) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
