Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the United Nations, spoke this week on Washington’s Burma policy, which has undergone marked change in recent years, from negligible engagement and a harsh sanctions regime to a full resumption of diplomatic relations, including limited military-to-military ties. The US envoy said “Burma is still a long way from being a rights-respecting democracy,” but had made significant strides toward reforming the once-repressive state under the administration of President Thein Sein. Her full remarks on Burma are here: Jan. 12, 2014 Louisville, Kentucky It is not only protecting American security that unites Republicans and Democrats, but also promoting the freedoms we value most. Leader McConnell has made a profound difference in the lives of the Burmese people. Some 25 years ago, he read an article about a Burmese democracy activist named Aung San Suu Kyi, who had been placed under house arrest for pressing the country’s repressive military junta to allow basic freedoms. Her supporters had been harassed, beaten, and locked up. “From that moment on,” Leader McConnell has said, “I felt compelled in my own small way to make that cause my own.” Together with Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, Senator McConnell helped lead a bipartisan Congressional group that put in place a tough set of sanctions against the Burmese junta, including bans on imports, visas for senior government officials, and U.S. investment in the country; targeted financial sanctions against military leaders and their associates; an arms embargo; and legislation specifically aimed at preventing the regime from profiting from trade in precious gems – a major source of income and a major source of abuse. At the end of 2011, Aung San Suu Kyi was freed from house arrest. In 2012, she and others from her party, the National League for Democracy, ran in a free and fair parliamentary by-election. 44 seats were open; they won 43 of them. Restrictions on the press were eased. The junta announced ceasefires in several longstanding conflicts, and it released hundreds of political prisoners. Burma’s shift was of course driven largely by the brave, unflagging efforts of pro-democracy activists and the Burmese people’s growing demand for change. But the sanctions put in place by Republicans and Democrats in Congress – and by Presidents from both parties over successive administrations – also played a key role. They isolated Burma’s military leaders, denying them access to the global financial system and exacting a significant cost for their repressive measures. The sanctions also signaled to activists under assault in Burma that they were not alone. To get a sense of what that meant to them, walk over to the McConnell-Chao archives in the Ekstrom Library after we are finished here. You’ll see a hand-written letter that Aung San Suu Kyi sent from house arrest in 2002 to the Leader, who she called her “rock-like friend.” She wrote: “I hope very much that we shall be able to see the kind of developments for which we have all been working for too long. Of course there is still a lot to be done, but I am confident that with firmness and perseverance we shall achieve our goal.” When Burma began to open up – when we saw what President Obama called “flickers of progress” after years of darkness – Democrats and Republicans decided to offer Burma a path to a new relationship. As Burma took steps, the United States did too, appointing our first ambassador in 22 years, resuming high-level diplomatic talks, and easing sanctions. As Senator McConnell told Congress when arguing for lifting import bans in 2013, the sanctions largely fulfilled their goal in helping catalyze a change in the junta’s behavior. The vast majority of changes that the United States made were conditioned upon the regime’s meeting specific human rights and democracy benchmarks, such as dialogue with the opposition and the release of prisoners, giving us the flexibility and the leverage to reinstate sanctions if sufficient progress was not made. Of course, Burma is still a long way from being a rights-respecting democracy. The civilian government is still subordinate to the military, and the Constitution continues to give the military the broad authority to dismiss Parliament and veto any constitutional amendment. Attacks against the Rohingya and other Muslim groups have even increased, egged on by extremist monks, particularly in Burma’s Rakhine state. Yet virtually no one has been held accountable, and the humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate, with more than 100,000 Rohingya confined in squalid camps. Making matters worse, the government recently proposed legislation that would force the Rohingya to renounce their ethnicity in order to be registered as citizens. Back in September 2012, Aung San Suu Kyi made her first trip to the United States since she was released from house arrest. In addition to meeting with President Obama and receiving the Congressional Gold Medal, she came here to the McConnell Center. In remarks to a group of students, she spoke of the need to “distinguish and discriminate between what is genuine progress and what is just progress on the surface.” That is the challenge that we face today: ensuring that Burma builds on the areas in which it has made progress, and avoids backsliding. And we have to be prepared to adapt our strategy to the conditions we observe, including setbacks. We – and when I say we, I am confident that Leader McConnell shares this view – we have to examine every tool in our tool kit and ask: How can we take steps that may contribute to empowering the Burmese people and helping the country move toward genuine democratic reform? Our tools include incentivizing continued progress, shining a bright light on the government’s shortcomings, and imposing targeted sanctions on individuals who stand in the way of change. In October, for example, we announced new sanctions against a senior Burmese official and businessman, Aung Thaung, for fueling violence and corruption, and undermining key democratic reforms. His assets in the United States have been frozen, and U.S. companies are prohibited from doing business with him. And we still have great hope for Burma’s future. When President Obama made his second visit to Burma in November, he held a town hall with participants in the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative, a U.S. government program aimed at strengthening and connecting rising leaders in the region. Even a few years ago, the idea that a U.S. president would be able to host an open discussion, in Rangoon, with several hundred youth leaders – and that it would be open to the press and streamed live – would have seemed unimaginable. Yet not only were the young leaders there, but many came waving big protest signs, several of which said, “Reform is fake.” Even more remarkable was the question and answer session. The first student who took the microphone was from Rakhine state, where the worst anti-Muslim attacks and discrimination have occurred. He said, “I’ve experienced some sectarian and racial violence first-hand in my region… How can I be part of educating my generation to promote tolerance and respect cultural differences?” And just like that, a Burmese student asked President Obama about one of the country’s most alarming problems, which the Burmese government bears enormous responsibility for and too often acts as though doesnt exist. That open discussion – and the critical questions it allowed young leaders to raise – was as important for the advancement of Burmese democracy as any closed-door discussion between heads of state. Young leaders who have experienced the freedom of describing the problems that they see are not likely to give up that right without a struggle.
Posted on: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 07:52:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015