On Burma’s ‘Changes’
TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 23 Jan 2012
Dr. Zarni – TRANSCEND Media Service
Why the media coverage and expert yukings on Burma are so fundamentally non-sense.
What might be the motivation of president Thein Sein – who has been part of the junta for years – to initiate those reforms?
Firstly, the greatest misperception and flaw in the current media coverage about Burma’s changes is talking about these reforms as if it were the works of President Thein Sein.
Like the Chinese Communist Party or the former USSR’s CCCP, the Burmese regime in power is a collective leadership with one big guy in the back. Thein Sein is Senior General Than Shwe’s most trusted man and perhaps most pliant and loyal guy, who served under Than Shwe for decades. Therefore, Thein Sein’s efforts reflect or at least bear Than Shwe’s blessings.
The international community should erase from their mind their mis-perception of reforms in Burma as the work of a one good ex-general. The military’s politics is like an orchestra – everyone who is part of this 11-member power center called National Defense and Security Council of which Thein Sein is ONE – has an assigned role to play. The reform moves are like a theatrical production, and there are behind-scene players, which include Senior General Than Shwe.
Therefore the question “what motivates Thein Sein to undertake these reforms” is moot.
What motivates the regime to undertake the reforms is THEIR REALIZATION THAT THEY CAN NO LONGER SURVIVE , LET ALONE THRIVE, in this tightly run dictatorial system.
The evolving system within which some of whom have served since 1962 does not guarantee peace of mind, respectability, and acceptance. In their system which made them very very rich and powerful does not give even the head of powerful military intelligence a sense of security, for themselves and for their families, let alone security and safety of the common people, the dissidents, and the rebels.
The Arab Spring which came 3 years after Burmese Monks’ revolt in 2007 and 2 years after the international outcry against the regime’s callous handling of the Cyclone Nargis victims in 2008 is definitely a major factor in forcing the generals and ex-generals to realize they need to change, if they wish to survive as a respectable group of generals.
Survival albeit in a less controlled environment but a more secure one, is what really drives the generals towards reforms and concessions.
2) How sustainable are these changes in Burma in your opinion? There are still institutional frameworks like the constitution or the censorship apart from culture and sport which are in favor for the military.
To the extent the regime feels changes will be manageable and paced at their will, the changes will move forward. But the minute they feel they are loosing control that’s the minute they will shut down the change process. People keep saying changes are irreversible. That’s non-sense. No authoritarian regime in the world will continue with the change process, if that very process will bring about their demise, if they have a power to stop it.
The Burmese opposition and the society at large need to push for more fundamental changes such as repeal of draconian Emergency Laws – many of them are in place – which date back to the colonial police state the British built a hundred years ago, including sanctioning of the use of Forced Labor by the British in Burma, getting the military (Ministry of Defence) and its parliamentary and executive branches/outposts out of the country’s judiciary system, professionalizing the State bureaucracy, including Foreign Ministry and other technocratic ministries, which has long been staffed with literally thousands and thousands of ex-military officers and officers in service and other ranks from the military.
The Constitution is ABOUT THE MILITARY’S PREROGATIVES to rule the country as it deems fit, including when it decides to stage the coup against any popular government. The fundamental nature of this Constitution needs to be changed so that it reflects popular sentiment, rather than enshrines the military’s position as the Final Arbiter, the Divine Ruler.
3) How strong is Thein Sein ‘s backing in the cabinet / government / military?
President Thein Sein is merely a front man. He is NOT indispensable in the new set-up. As long as the military and other comrades of his feel he is doing his assigned role well and effectively – that is to lead this charm offensive, with controlled, timed and calibrated provision of concessions to the opposition and to the international investors from Europe and N. America he will continue to have their backing. Once he no longer delivers he will meet the fate of any of his predecessors who failed to deliver the military’s collective institutional interests and individual personal interests of POWERFUL figures who will eventually control the military and other powerful security apparatuses.
The key is to remember President Thein Sein is not Burmese de Klerk, nor Aung San Suu Kyi Burmese Mandela.
There is absolutely no honorable and fair deal between the two of President Thein Sein and Daw ASSK, or between her and the entire military establishment.
____________________
Dr. Maung Zarni is member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace, Development and Environment, founder and director of the Free Burma Coalition (1995-2004), and a visiting fellow (2011-13) at the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit, Department of International Development, London School of Economics. His forthcoming book on Burma will be published by Yale University Press.
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 23 Jan 2012.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: On Burma’s ‘Changes’, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.