Myanmar: Be careful what you wish for

Ann Kopuzha

 Myanmarese exiles, the international media, and certain first ladies have painted the power struggle in Myanmar as black-and-white, good versus evil. The reality is much more complicated. Multiple ethnic groups constitute Myanmar and since its independence from colonialization 60 years ago, the nation has faced the world's oldest, constant, ethnic uprising in the world. Furthermore, the army's influence is so pervasive that there is a lack of institutions or people that could govern the nation if the junta were to step down immediately.

As Iraq has shown, overthrowing a totalitarian government and only hoping for the immediate creation of a democracy, but with no concrete plan or timeline as to how to reach that goal, is an equation for disaster. This lesson should be carefully considered in Myanmar where Aung San Suu Kyi, her political party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), and their supporters are calling for democracy.

The international community and the Myanmarese diaspora should stop isolating and vilifying the junta. Instead, the international community should offer the Myanmarese government concessions and security guarantees in exchange for its progress toward a democracy.A major problem facing Myanmar's transition to democracy, like Iraq's, is weak institutional strength. In any nation, institutions like a police force, a civil service, judiciary, and legislature are necessary for the day to day governing of the state. Since the 19th century each of Myanmar's various governments have attempted to create institutions.

Yet, each has failed because each government was brought down by its successor before the institutions could take hold and be strengthened. Currently, the military is the only strong institution within Myanmar and creating a democracy necessitates both creating additional political institutions and loosening the army's control over state institutions in favor of civilian control.

Martin Smith, a British journalist who writes extensively on Myanmar commented that "Even if there is an imminent change of government, the Myanmarese armed forces or Tatmadaw will remain the only real countrywide organization that, in the short-term, is able to plan and implement its own agenda.

That is the day-to- day reality that Myanmar's peoples have long had to live with."Since the military's power is so pervasive and unique, advocates of democracy should seek a gradual political transition and the dialogue surrounding Myanmar should focus on specific points where military control can be relaxed. Some Myanmarese have begun to realize this and are calling for a "third force." This third force is a new political group that believes in working with the military, more so than the NLD has or believes in, to bring political and economic reform.

This group includes urban elites who doubt the NLD's effectiveness, military members who disagree with the junta but do not support the NLD, and members of various ethnic groups who want additional protection and development assistance from the NLD. However, the international community should recognize the limitations of the third force.

The organizational structure of the third force is weak and its support throughout Myanmar is questionable. Some members of the third force are accused of promoting the military's referendum in order to gain financial concessions.If the group proves to be viable, the international community should engage it.

In the meantime, the international community could espouse the basic motivation behind the third force and begin negotiating specific concessions from the military. This process can be initiated by demanding Aung San Suu Kyi's release and allowing the NLD to organize in exchange for lifting sanctions.

There are numerous issues that the NLD has yet to take a stance on, such as how to accommodate various ethnic groups in the national framework, arguing that specific topics can only be discussed in consultation with the appropriate parties under democratic circumstances. Giving the NLD the opportunity to do so will test the organization's capability, expand the political dialogue in Myanmar, and possibly help average Myanmarese economically.

It will also give the regime a face-saving way to begin the process of political transition. Security guarantees are also important for junta members because they fear that if the NLD comes to power, junta members will be placed on trial. As painfully unjust as it maybe to the Myanmarese population, a blanket amnesty coupled with the creation of a truth and reconciliation commission, such as in South Africa, could provide the junta with the protection it seeks while also giving the Myanmarese population a way to express the abuses they have endured.Cooperating with the military is not likely to produce tangible results immediately.

Bringing democracy to Myanmar could take decades. Yet, anything is better than the current dire humanitarian situation in Myanmar. Furthermore, Iraq, has demonstrated that reforming a totalitarian government will have calamitous consequences if done hastily and carelessly.The writer is a Research Intern for IPCS

Ann Kopuzha