[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

Junta fears precision bombing



"Burmese Military Junta fears precision bombing"
 by U Aung Kin (22-4-99)

  Seven days after the 19-nation Nato started bombing Yugoslavia the
Burmese military junta called on "all parties" to respect the country's
independence and sovereignty in the Kosovo crisis. "The Government of
the Union of Myanmar has been following with great concern the current
situation in Yugoslavia..." an official statement of 1st April said. And
27 days later on 20th April Lt-General Khin Nyunt,the chief of military
intelligence and a senior member of the ruling military council, said
Nato's action violated principles of the U.N.Charter and international
law. The regime that intimidated,tortured,and killed thousands of
unarmed civilians in Burma has now accused "big neo-colonialist
countries" of bullying smaller nations in apparent reference to Nato's
bombing of Yugoslavia. "At present, some big neocolonialist countries
with their greater financial and firepower are bullying small nations,"
Khin Nyunt commented in a speech to teachers on 20th April in Rangoon.

  It really is one of life's little ironies that the regime that has
driven tens of thousands of Karen, Karenni, Shan and other ethnic
minorities out of the country at gun point is now saying that the Kosovo
crisis should be resolved "through peaceful means" with "respect for the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia". But Khin Nyunt has neither mentioned the plight of the
refugees nor the problems they have posed for other countries. The junta
is unable to understand the fact that it is this threat of humanitarian
disasters that finally brought about Nato's political and military
intervention. In spite of its association with the Asean, the Burmese
junta still seems to have a strong inclination to do certain things in a
certain way from force of habit. Old habits die hard.

  Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein is the only Muslim leader who come out
strongly in support of Serb dictator Milosevic and his anti-Muslim
operations. The rest of the Muslim world condemned the Yugoslav
government for its ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. Having considered Nato's
action as another example of the West's attempts to impose its will by
force many Muslim countries have initially been reluctant to support the
outside military intervention in Kosovo. But the TV pictures of fleeing
refugees and the suffering of fellow Muslim have changed public opinion
in the Islamic world. Malaysia, supporting the Nato action, is reported
to have been considering offering shelter to the displaced Kosovan. The
Jordanian Royal Family had led a relief effort from their Middle East
Kingdom with a planeload of supplies for the Kosovan refugees.

  But the Burmese junta is still unable to make out or deal with the
Kosovan problem because the junta itself is deeply involved in its own
style of ethnic cleansing in Burma. Distinguishing the wood from the
trees has always been and still is the very difficult task facing the
successive Burmese military juntas when dealing with whether the
genocide in Cambodia or the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Although
they do violence to anyone who stands in their way but they do not want
to find themselves having to take a dose of their own medicine in a form
of precision bombing by superior forces.

  Nowadays,there is an ample precedent for such a measure. The cases of
Bosnia and Iraq have shown that precision bombing and cruise missiles
could also change the course of history, degrade the military
capabilities of dictators and sap their strength. The small number of
American casualties in the gulf created the myth of the high-tech war
with clinical intervention, while the Somalia debacle in 1993 and
prolonged involvement in Vietnam War underlined both the danger and
risks in comitting ground troops and the hostile public reaction. The
international community?especially Western demoraciies?could, and
should, intervene in what had previously been regarded as internal
conflicts when these threatened humanitarian disasters. Because human
rights is now considered to be as important as sovereignty. 

  The motive behind the junta's seemingly "neutral" policy was to have
their hands completely free in Burma's internal affairs. Thats why they
made it their business to issue a policy statement on the Nato bombing
in Yugoslavia on 1st April and Khin Nyunt went out of his way to condemn
Nato on 20th April. The Burmese regime, however, must understand that
if  Milosevic and his murderous cronies see the cruise missiles and the
smart bombs getting repidly closer to their own home and offices, they
would start negotiating for peace. Senior officers in the Yugoslav army
with a sense of honour proper to military men may not be able to put up
with the actions of their leadership or with the daily sight of their
soldiers, equipment and military facilities being destroyed by a largely
untouchable superior forces from the sky. Nato's bombardment has begun
to make a considerable dent in the military as well as the economy.
Taking stock after the four week of air campaign, the Nato ministers
said "Nato's air strikes will be pursued until President Milosevic
accedes to the demands of the international community". The minister
also warned Milosevic that Nato would respond severely to any attack on
neighbouring countries. They also accused him of "appalling violations
of human rights"and"criminally irresponsible policies".

  Since the incursion of several thousand Chinese troops into Burma in
the early 1970s the military's stance on non-interference remains
unchanged. The junta has always adopted non-interventionist
attitude;because a group of military officers led by Ne Win? determined
to rule as they wish without limitations? have long held that "no state
has the right to interfere, directly or indirectly, in the internal
affairs of any other state". The junta had been a persistent proponent
of the rights of Pol Pot's regime to govern Kampuchea even when the
latter was killing millions of Cambodian citizens. Burma was among the
first countries to recognize Pol Pot's Democratic Kampuchea. And Ne Win
was the only head of state to visit Pol Pot in 1977. Rangoon had, like
Asean, viewed that the establishment of the Hun Sen regime in Cambodia
through intervention of Vietnamese forces could not be tolerated. But
the similarity ends here as Burma had never joined Asean's vigorous
diplomatic campaign on behalf of the government of Pol Pot. Now you can
see for yourself  whatever has happened to Pot Pot and Hun Sen.

  Long before Burma become China's "vassal state" in 1990s the China
factor has always loomed very large in the Burmese military mind.
Burma's withdrwal from the 88-nation non-aligned movement in September
1979 was motivated by Cuba's stand and manoeuvres on behalf of the
Vietnamese and the Soviet position vis-a-vis China. The Havana Summit
was dominated by Cuban efforts, strongly resisted by Burma, Yugoslavia
and others. Since then, Burma's longstanding character as a regional
oddball has never faded away.  But much to their chagrin, while using
"non-interference policy" as a shield against outside intervention the
Burmese military has finally succumbed to the Chinese pressure.

  The Burmese government's persistent media attack on the West has also
shown that the junta seems to have realized that external forces
significantly helped processes of democratization and the major sources
of power and influence in the world?U.S.A, European Community,and
Christian organizations? have been actively promoting liberalization and
democratization in developing countries. In fact, democratizations in
the 1950s were brought about by the military victory of the established
Western democracies and decolonization by those democracies after the
war. It was the victorious Western Allies that imposed domocracies on a
West Germany, Italy, Japan and South Korea.

  Although Burma has now become a controversial member of Asean its
military rulers still want, more or less, to be left alone in order that
they may be able to do whatever they want without outside interference
and to protect their group interests. For all its routine rhetoric of
goodwill,cooperation and maintenance of peace, the Burmese junta has not
been able to resolve outstanding issues with neighbouring countries
since 1962. If the foreign policy of a country is geared only for the
survival of a military group, it would be doing a great disservice to
the people of other Asean countries.

  It is no longer tenable to argue that Kosovo is domestic matter only
and that nobody has the right to intervene in Yugoslavia. There are
direct risks to the stability surrounding countries and a massive influx
of refugees threatens social and political stability in the region.
Nobody lives in complete independence of others. All nations are
interdependent. In the face of Western economic sanctions, Burmese junta
has to play a new game with internationally acceptable rules and norms
which are different from any time in the past. Otherwise those who come
to power by virtue of military machine should not complain conspicuously
nor protest publicly if they eventually face the danger of being crushed
by it. The defeat of all dictators must be a moral imperative for
powerful democratic countries.(end)

[This is the update of the radio talk in Burmese by broadcast by DVB?on
8th April 99]