Opinion Obama’s Burma moment

Policy towards Burma has been ad hoc from the very start,even among its neighbours. Talk of Burmese entry into ASEAN first circulated in December 1995,when delegates attended the summit as guests. 1996 saw accession to the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation where Burma acquired observer status; permanent membership was then brought on the agenda. 1997 was beset with disagreements: Malaysia was against early membership,Indonesia spoke out against ASEAN “rushing into” Burma’s participation and Philippines joined in. Eventually the end-of-year ASEAN meet in Kuala Lumpur in 1997 saw Burma and Laos as full members. (The primary concern was Burma’s abysmal human rights record,but practicalities too were worrying.)

The significance of Sunday’s meet is two-fold. First,that there is a president in the White House who has been elected after a campaign where he said he was willing to talk to anyone,leading to expectations of improved ties between the US and Asia. Second,he has markedly departed from the policies of his predecessor: Bush isolated Burma through “non-engagement”,Obama is seen to be agreeable to reaching out to the country.

In fact,Obama’s presidency has given hope to the junta as well. In a rare gesture the junta’s deputy leader General Maung Aye and Foreign Minister Nyan Win congratulated him on his victory. Leniency — by junta standards — is visible towards opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi as well.

A change in Burma policy can be seen by the increased flurry of activity (Kurt Campbell — the US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs — travelled to Burma earlier this month,the highest ranking official to visit the country in 14 years along with Deputy Assistant Secretary Scott Marciel). A re-analysis of the relationship too has been undertaken: the conclusion of the State Department policy review on Burma in September is that a more “inclusive policy” with Burma is required given that past attempts at isolation and heavy sanctions have failed to yield results. The objective is naturally to spur democratisation there.

Isolation has allowed the junta to foster. In The River of Lost Footsteps,Burma scholar Thant Myint-U writes: “What is sometimes hard to perceive from the outside world is just how damaging forty years of isolation — in particular,isolation from the West and the international scene — has been to those trapped inside. If Burma were a country where those in charge wanted to engage with the wider world… then a policy of sanctions would make sense.”

So,what now? APEC and Obama’s participation may well nudge Burma towards international participation,with genuine dialogue as a long-term strategy. Meanwhile,internal changes in Burma have created an environment beneficial for international players.

Burma votes in the coming year. Despite the absence of a set date the voting will create certain clear periods where international players can exert a degree of influence. The elections have been widely viewed as a process by which the junta can gain a degree of legitimacy in the international arena. The Council on Foreign Relations’ Kara C. McDonald maintains that the elections will provide an opportunity for “Washington to identify some concrete steps and benchmarks as a means towards rapprochement.”

Obama’s presence at APEC should thus be viewed as the first step by an international leader in what could be a comprehensive international effort at initiating genuine dialogue with Burmese junta and country without institutions they rule. The political atmosphere the elections have created and Obama’s strategy towards greater engagement with Asian leaders combine to create an opportunity that can’t be missed — and should be used wisely.

Countries that have hitherto followed ad hoc policies have the opportunity to respond in a calculated manner — the junta appears to be willing to talk. The climate for engagement can be sensed; seize the moment,sway the generals.

alia.allana@expressindia.com