BURMA: Calls more diplomatic persuasion on regime
Updated
Australia's announcement to slap economic bans on Burma follows similar decisions by the United States and European nations. But one Burma expert says while economic bans are all very well and good, in reality they don't work and quiet diplomatic persuasion is the way to go.
Presenter: Sen Lam
Speakers: Professor David Steinberg of Georgetown University and visiting scholar at the Institute of Southeast Asia Studies
STEINBERG: The end is to get the regime to change, to liberalise, to be more human and so forth, we all want that, there's no question about that I think. But at the same time the real issue is whether you go public or private? The Chinese have been putting I think pressure on the Myanmar government. But they've been very careful of what they've said in public while actually facilitating things in private. For example they arranged for the deputy assistant secretary of state to meet with the Burmese ministers in Beijing in July I believe. But they are not strident, and once you get to be strident in your approach of which sanctions is a part, then you force the government to have a nationalistic reaction.
LAM: Well ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations of which Burma is a troublesome member, has been trying a softly softly approach for some time, and as you say China has been doing that. But obviously not to any great effect given this very brutal crackdown on the monks in the recent demonstrations?
STEINBERG: Yes well I think that first to talk about the crackdown on the monks, I think that has changed the whole picture, not that sanctions are going to be effective but that this is a really different kind of crisis in the country. I have told Burmese officials, I have told other people in Yangon that this is a watershed event I think. It is something that will result in more cumulative frustration and therefore likely levels of violence in the future that will rise, unless something is done to prevent this.
LAM: Indeed you've been quoted as saying that when you were there recently that there was very much quite visible anger amongst the people of Burma. Can you tell us a bit more about that?
STEINBERG: No, no, not visible anger, but anger expressed to me privately. If you go down on the streets of Yangon like it was before, there's no evidence of soldiers in the streets and that sort of thing. However it does not mean that people aren't really upset, I mean after all the top levels of the military are all Brahmin Buddhists, and it seems to me that it is highly unlikely that senior members of that military are very upset as to what the military has done. Whether that causes cracks within the military is a question, whether they feel they need each other more than they're willing to separate is another issue.
LAM: But the military themselves, the generals themselves they have families, they have friends, they have relatives. Why do you think they're so impervious to such criticisms and indeed to suffering on the ground?
STEINBERG: I think that there is a, there are three factors among the military that we have to understand; first is the hierarchical nature of Burman society, this is beyond the military. Second is a highly structured military command system that reinforces the hierarchy within Burmese society. So the result is you tend to keep from the highest authorities things that are going on that you don't want them to know. So you doctor statistics on the economy, the economic problems you downplay crisis and that sort of thing. I think that you must give any regime, pro, anti whatever face, dignity, you must give them a way out that they can accept.
LAM: They've been given a way out arguably over the past 15 years?
STEINBERG: No we haven't, we've said we want a regime change. That's what the United States has said. Honour the May 1990 elections and we'll talk to you which means get out of power. That is not a formula for successful negotiations. We've got to be able to put very strong pressures, strong pressures which allow them to escape from just surrender, because surrender they will not do.
