BBC : East Asia Today -August 5th 1

[hlaing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

East Asia Today 
Latest Edition
August 5th 1998 

What Has Been Achieved Since Democracy Protests Ten Years Ago?

It's ten years (Saturday 8th August) since the start of the general strike
and mass democracy protests in Burma. But as the recent highway protest by
Nobel Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, showed, ten years on, the junta is in no
mood to compromise with her National League for Democracy. Nonetheless,
that incident put the international spotlight on Burma, and there's growing
optimism that the democracy movement that took root in 1988, may at last,
begin to bear fruit. Our reporter, Christopher Gunness, covered the events
in Burma a decade ago, and has continued since to report on developments
there:

Ten years ago this week, the people of Burma decided that enough was
enough. After twenty six years of autocratic socialism under General Ne
Win, they came onto the streets in their millions, demanding democracy and
the right to live in a society that respected human rights. That was in
June and July of 1988. But after a general strike was declared at the
beginning of August, the junta's response was military force. On September
the 18th, the army gunned down hundreds of unarmed demonstrators and
declared martial law. This was the birth of the so called SLORC, the ruling
military council, which ten years on, in its new incarnation, the State
Peace and Development Council, maintains its iron grip on power.

That was most poignantly demonstrated last month, when the democracy leader
Aung San Suu Kyi, attempted to travel outside Rangoon. She had demanded
that the parliament elected in 1990 - but banned by the military - should
be convened by the 21st August. And she wanted to meet members of her
National League for Democracy to discuss arrangements. The reality of
Burma's politics was laid bare in the full glare of the international press
- Aung San Suu Kyi was forced after a week in her car under a sweltering
sun to return to her home in Rangoon. Democracy was once again forced into
retreat.

But despite the apparent hopelessness, that solitary protest could yet
prove a water shed. ASEAN was meeting at the time in Manila, and there was
a genuine sense of outrage among the Thai and Filipino delegations about
the behaviour of the Burmese military authorities. The ASEAN injunction
against criticising the internal affairs of member countries was questioned
as never before. Despite the lack of outspoken criticism, the way seems
open for a more robust policy towards Burma, even though countries like
Indonesia and Singapore, are vehemently opposed to what they see as
interference. 

This gives a greater diplomatic freedom to Japan - a regional giant always
aware of accusations of being East Asia's bully. If there are pressures
within ASEAN to bring about the beginnings of dialogue within Burma, so
some in the foreign ministry in Tokyo argue, then Japan is that much freer
to push a similar agenda. And with a possible convergence of Japanese, Thai
and Philippine policy, with that of the European Union and America, those
who argue against a more robust policy towards Rangoon, look increasingly
isolated. Consensus for change, even after ten years, is slowly beginning
to build. 

But ultimately the solution to a uniquely Burmese problem lies uniquely
within Burma itself. The diplomatic nihilists say that there are no signs
whatsoever that the junta is prepared to give up power - even if the
industries that sustain their rule - and in many cases, personal wealth -
are ground into the economic dust. But economic desperation produces
dissent, even within the most autocratic regimes. And here ultimately lies
the paradox for the regime, that remains a source of hope among those who
espouse change: if it clings to power, it will find itself in control of a
bankrupt and unsustainable economy. Eventually, the optimistic argument
runs, the junta will be forced to cut and run, and seek to accommodate the
opposition as a matter of pragmatism, if not survival.