U.S. Burmese Policy "Yields Little"

Written by Fred Messner on Thursday June 23, 2011

The US has embarked on a policy of "pragmatic engagement" with Burma's military dictatorship. But the initiative has had limited results.

A Congressional panel yesterday criticized the White House for keeping it in the dark about any progress in US efforts to engage Burma's military dictatorship after watching a videotaped appeal from Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi calling for greater American and international pressure on the regime.

The House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific hearing on Capitol Hill was convened to address last November’s rigged elections in Burma. Election laws enacted in March 2010 stipulated that one fourth of the national legislature would be appointed by the military, regardless of the election’s results.

Although the White House pledged to pursue a diplomatic process of "pragmatic engagement" with the country's ruling military junta following the election fiasco, Congress has heard little about the initiative. Democratic Rep. Eni Faleomavaega, the subcommittee’s Ranking Member, suggested the Obama White House had not cooperated with the subcommittee’s efforts.  “I hope we can get someone from the administration down here in the future and have them tell us what the heck is going on over there,” he said.

Jennifer Quigley, advocacy director of the US Campaign for Burma, concurs that engagement with the regime, despite the administration’s good intentions, has yielded little. “There hasn’t been any positive outcome whatsoever from the engagement, she told FrumForum today. "We don’t have a problem with engagement.  But when you have no timeline and you set no benchmarks, it’s just this open-ended thing that goes on and on.  And so you don’t see any changes on the ground.

“As far as the Obama Administration [is concerned], we had problems with them focusing on Burma even before the events in the Middle East.”

Among the witnesses yesterday were Aung Din, executive director of the US  Campaign for Burma and Dr. Chris Beyrer, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health and Human Rights.  But the highlight of the hearing was a previously recorded video address from Suu Kyi, the Burmese democracy activist and former general secretary of the Burmese National League for Democracy (NLD).

The NLD won Burma’s 1990 general elections in a landslide, but were prevented from assuming power by the military.  Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the 21 years since the election under house arrest. She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991.

In recorded address, the first official contact between the Burmese dissident and Congress, Suu Kyi was appreciative of the attention her country has received from the U.S. government and its efforts on Burma’s behalf.

Nevertheless, she expressed disappointment over Burma’s lack of “progress towards democracy”.  Suu Kyi said she was especially concerned with continuing human rights violations and corruption in the Burmese judiciary.

“Without the rule of law, none of our people can be secure,” she said.

Suu Kyi further criticized the regime for refusing to release political prisoners -- even while it publicly promises more open political discourse.

“Why are they still in prison?” she said.  “If [the regime] is sincere in its claims that it wishes to bring democracy to Burma, there is no need for any prisoners of conscience."

But despite wide agreement among the witnesses about the nature of the problems facing the Burmese people, the panel, which never included more than three Congressmen at once, could come up with little in terms of substantive policy suggestions to ameliorate the situation in the former British colony.

All three witnesses praised the reasoning behind the Obama administration’s policy of “pragmatic engagement” with the ruling junta, but criticized what they see as a complete lack of results.

According to Dr. Beyrer, “The situation in Burma has not changed.”

Ultimately, the witnesses agreed that there is little the US can do unilaterally to help the Burmese.  Indeed, the main policy recommendations from the witnesses were for the US to advocate for the enforcement of a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution from March of this year and encourage a UN Commission of Inquiry into human rights violations in Burma.

The March resolution calls on the Burmese government to allow basic liberties, ensure the rule of law, and cease human rights violations.  Suu Kyi sees the implementation of the UNHRC resolution as Burma’s best roadmap to democracy.

“The requests, the urgings, the demands of this resolution are very much in line with what we in Burma think is needed to start Burma on the genuine path of democratization,” Suu Kyi said.

The Burmese general election in fall 2010 was widely criticized for failing to allow political parties to mount any serious opposition to the ruling military junta.

Political parties were also required to expel all members with criminal records, including former political prisoners such as Suu Kyi.  The State Department derided the 2010 elections as “devoid of credibility” and “a mockery of the democratic process.”