Uncle Sam vs. Burma: Principle or P

[Seinkyaw@xxxxxxx]

Dear Burma Watchers,

Recently, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs
reiterated its policy of maintaining economic sanctions on Burma.  For the
Burmese opposition groups, this is really a pretty good deal. In the best
interest of people, I am not so sure to say it's right or wrong at this stage.
The point I like to make here is how moral or immoral is U.S. policy towards
Burma.  We all know how bad is human rights situation in Burma, as it's in
China, Vietnam and some Latin American countries.  Moral pragmaticism is one
of the three patterns of thought and action in setting the American foreign
policy.  The Monroe Doctrine, the best known statement of unilateralist
position and  Roosevelt Corollary, we have seen in the history, were the
influence of moral pragmaticism.

Please do not forget the CIA-sponsored overthrows of the Arbenz government in 
Guatemala and the Allende government in Chile.  What about 1965 invasion of
the Dominican Republic? 1983 invasion of Grenada? And 1989 invasion of Panama?
What are the elements of presto chango in the U.S. foreign policies
toward China and Vietnam? The United States gave China "most favored nation"
trading status. Is this an important matter of principle? What about human
rights situation in China? Vietnam is still one-party communist country, so is
Cuba, so is North Korea.  Why did the Clinton administration make plans to
waive the provisions of a 1974 anti-communism law to pave the way for Vietnam
to obtain
"MFN" status. Why not to Cuban and North Korean people?  I do not think U.S
foreign policy is consistent.  
******** ********** ********* ***********