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

MAILBAG - Investing in Burmese demo



Subject: MAILBAG - Investing in Burmese democracy is in Thai interest

THE NATION - July 20, 1999

MAILBAG

Investing in Burmese democracy is in Thai interest

THIS is a response to Deputy Foreign Minister MR Sukhumbhand Paribatra's
''Burma, Asean, democracy, dreams and realities'' (The Nation, July 16).
His
presentation could be summed up as follows:

* Democracy is the best form of government, despite its imperfections.
Thailand is ready to lend moral support for all those aspiring to
achieve
democracy but could not go beyond that. Thailand would wish those
striving
to achieve democracy well but could only champion democracy for itself.

* Economic sanctions never work and the ordinary people are the hardest
hit
by such undertakings.

* Thailand is open to all parties regarding the promotion of Burma's
national reconciliation.

* Asean's political, social and cultural differences make the grouping
ineffective.

* The dividing line between purely domestic and international issues --
environmental disasters and problems of drugs, diseases and illegal
migration --becomes a blur due to the recent financial crisis.

* ''Non-interference'' is the glue that holds Asean together.

* Thailand could only opt for engagement with the Burmese military for
it
does not has the ''luxury of distance''.

Considering the points above, one could only have the impression that
Thailand couldn't do much to foster democracy in Burma, apart from
giving it
''lip-service''.

Again, it is astonishing to notice that in mentioning the bluriness
between
domestic and international, the Thai deputy foreign minister failed to
include ''ethnic cleansing, genocide, forced relocations and all forms
of
human rights violations''. These are ''moral issues'' for which the West
has
gone to war in Kosovo, and, like it or not, the oppressed peoples the
world
over are gladdened by the outcome.

One also couldn't help feel that the ''engagement'' the Thai deputy
foreign
minister is talking about might, in reality, mean a peaceful
cohabitation
with the brutal Burmese military regime, at the expense of the Thai
interest.

It is an open secret that the Burmese military is trying to overwhelm
Thailand with all sorts of drugs directly or indirectly. On top of that,
the
repeated violations of Thai sovereignty over the years are still a fresh
reminder of the Burmese military's attitude towards Thailand.


Finally, the only meaningful engagement Thailand could implement would
be to
foster the climate of democratisation in words and deeds, clearly,
loudly
and openly. Unless democratic institutions are allowed to flourish in
Burma,
the woes of having to shoulder the spilled-over-effect of the Burmese
and
non-Burmans' miseries, such as illegal immigration, refugees and
narcotics,
would never stop to burden and haunt Thailand. It is a long-term
investment,
but the only one available which is capable of delivering a lasting
solution
for all parties involved.

Sai Wansai

Shan Democratic Union

Europe Coordination Office

Germany