Burma

Burma, like many other Southeast Asian nations, is a land of much culture and diversity of ethnic groups. Unfortunately, unlike the people of other nations, the people of Burma have been stripped of their human rights. Since the military junta had overtaken the Burmese government in 1988, the people of Burma have been among the most oppressed people in the world. The continuation of the government’s brutality has caught the attention of many outside nations around the world who increasingly have been intervening in Burma’s issues to help its people. As these occurrences are a major issue for the people of Burma, these problems are not restricted to its boundaries. They are also becoming a problem for some of Burma’s neighboring countries such as Thailand. With a quick look at current events, it is clear that the oppression of the native people in Burma is still in its most intensive state. But first, an introduction of Burma’s background will spark interest as to how a culturally rich country could turn into a land full of people in search of their basic human right -- freedom.

Burma is considered the land of rice and teak wood, in addition to its being rich in many other natural resources. The official language is Burmese and the major religions include Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam. A population of 49.5 million inhabits the land, in a 261,789 square mile area. The ethnic composition consists of the Burmans, the Shans, the Karns, the Mons, the Chins, the Kachins, as well as a significant population of Indians and Chinese who have migrated from their respective homelands. (Compton’s Encyclopedia) Three-quarters of the population live in rural areas.

In recent decades, Burma has been a nation that has had a very volatile history of events regarding the stability of its country. It has been a nation that has endured constant political upheaval ever since its independence was gained in 1948. Before that time, they had been a British colony since 1885. After fourteen years as an independent country, they removed their government in 1962 and finally adopted a new constitution in 1974, becoming a socialist republic. Shortly thereafter in 1988, the country’s welfare turned into a brutal military government and the military established a State Law and Order Resolution Council (SLORC) to govern the country. Finally, in 1989 the country’s name changed from Burma to Myanmar, a name change that would parallel a change in the way the people of Burma would appreciate their lives prior to 1988.

The Problem

Ever since Burma’s government turned into a military power, the devastation that the people have had to endure has led to intense oppression. This has become a problematic issue for Burma including its neighboring countries such as Thailand. The government has acted inhumanely towards its people. The oppressive acts include forced unpaid labor among its people, including its children and the elderly. Specifically, children have been forced to labor in the fields of beans, bricks, chilies, corn, pineapple, rice, rubber, sugarcane, and teak. Also, the government has also forced nearly half a million of its people to move from their homes so that various projects of construction and resource extraction can be conducted. An example of such a project is the construction of an oil pipeline (The Burma Campaign). Ethnic groups such as the Karen, the Mon, and the Tavoy have been forced to evacuate their homes for this project to take place. Subsequently their land on which they used to live was declared the “pipeline area.” The gas pipeline project is considered one of Myanmar’s worst human rights violations (Tammachatwichit). If the people do not cooperate, they face violent punishments such as physical abuse, beatings, rape, torture, and financial payment. Another instance of forced labor is the fact that some villages in Burma have been ordered by the SLORC troops to gather necessary pieces of rock in order for roads to be built. The SLORC authorities warned the people that if a village could not send a certain ratio of rock to a certain area they will be punished (Burma Net News). Military oppression also extends to the imprisonment and torture of over 1,500 political activists (The Burma Campaign). In retaliation, the people of Burma have courageously protested in peace, but these efforts have been met brutally with tanks, bayonets, and other forms of violent attacks. Many Burmese have few options and end up fleeing the country to seek refugee in other nations such as Thailand.

So far, the government has been able to fund its activities, but has been close to bankruptcy many times since 1988 when democratic efforts were overcome. A major source of funding for its survival is foreign investments. From one source, the Foreign Direct Investment supports Burma, “largely for tourist infrastructure and natural resource extraction projects (The Burma Campaign).” Additionally, this foreign investment-funded financing of the government has largely contributed to building up its military. In recent years, they have increased their army from 180,000 people to a staggering 450,000 people, 50,000 of who are children. This statistic ranks Myanmar with the largest army in all of Asia, and with the largest number of children in the army than that of any other in the world (The Burma Campaign). Interestingly, with an army of that size, Burma has no external enemies. Sources also show that by 1993, “military spending from the state budget had reached the peak level around 50% (Burma Campaign).”

While foreign investment has been funneled to benefit its military prowess, the welfare of its people has suffered immensely. The country’s public health, public services, and education have deteriorated. Because of this, it is not surprising that the people of Burma have become “some of the poorest and most oppressed in the world…Burma is the next South Africa. Its people are engaged in an epic struggle for freedom (The Burma Campaign).” A United Nations agency, the International Labor Organization (ILO), has charged Burma’s government with a “crime against humanity” for its abuse of power over its people. The ILO has also labeled their abuses as a “modern form of slave labor (The Burma Campaign).” The clear recognition of the problems in Burma has raised awareness of the issues to the world community. This has led to effective interventions of these human rights violations.

The Solution

The events in Burma are clearly a problem for its citizens; therefore, many efforts have been made to overthrow the current military government and to establish a democracy by the people and for the people. Firstly, as mentioned previously, their military government survives mainly off the foreign investment from other countries and established companies. Knowing this, activists have targeted their efforts towards decreasing this foreign investment. Groups in Asia, Europe, and North America have tried to pressure a number of companies to withdraw their business from Burma. This lengthy list includes companies such as Texaco, Levi Strauss, Motorala, Pepsico, Amoco, Heineken, Liz Claiborne, Triumph International, and many more (The Burma Campaign). US involvement has also helped by imposing sanctions on Burma; more than twenty states and cities such as San Francisco and New York have made efforts to cease to award contracts to various countries that continue to support Burma. As a result, the foreign investment has decreased considerably since 1998. Within the past few years, several companies have discontinued to operate in Burma because of “difficulties in working with the regime, consumer boycotts, damage to company reputation, or incompatibility with corporate values (Burma Campaign).” Despite the influence of the large number of companies that have pulled out of correspondence with Burma’s government, some companies still ignore the economic sanctions placed by other nations. As a result, their business with the military regime continues to “fuel the oppression” among the people in Burma (Burma Campaign). Additionally, Myanmar has been hit hard by the 1997 Asian Economic Crisis and has not been able to recover fully since. In addition to fighting Burma’s military government through financial and economic means, it is also important to have a leader who can act as a source of support and guidance for the people of Burma as well as have an impacting threat to the government.

One influential leader in opposition to the military government is a woman named Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been fighting for the right of the indigenous people of Burma for many years. Interestingly, her father was General Aung San, who was the nation’s independence hero in 1948. Her official title is the party leader for Myanmar’s National League for Democracy. In 1991, she won the Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts to bring democracy to Burma (Jagan). Aung San Suu Kyi’s active role includes organizing rallies and demonstrations around Myanmar as well as arranging secret meetings with the military junta in order to discuss Burma’s political future. The military government continues to suppress any opposition to their regime. In 1990, a multi-party general election was held in Myanmar, and the National League for Democracy party won by a landslide, winning 82% of the seats. In spite of this, however, the military government refused to hand the power over to Aung San Suu Kyi. As a very influential and powerful leader of the people, she clearly was seen as a threat to the government. In the government’s efforts to further suppress the opposition the government put Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest on many occasions. Her history of house arrests includes being arrested in 1989 where she was released six years later in 1995. She was put under house arrest yet again in September of 2000, with the reasoning that she had violated her traveling restrictions. They finally released her again May 6, 2002 (Jagan). Since her last release, she has met with United Nations representative Paulo Sergio Pinheiro in order to discuss some compromise between the military government and her National League for Democracy (BBC News: World Edition). Following this meeting, the situation did not look any brighter for the people of Myanmar; however, that did not mean the end of Aung San Suu Kyi’s opposition efforts.

Aung San Suu Kyi is considered the best fortune that has happened to the Burmese since the military began brutalizing its people. President George W. Bush said recently in April 2003, “There are moments in history when great people emerge to shine a bright light on a dark path. Aung San Suu Kyi is such a person (Washington Post).” One article also quoted that “For the Burmese on the street, Aung San Suu Kyi represents their aspirations for freedom from military oppression (Jagan).” In one speech she gave to her people in 1988 she declared. “I could not, as my father’s daughter remain indifferent to all that was going on (Jagan).” She was then motivated to lead the people against the government of then dictator General Ne Win. Aung San Suu Kyi represents the people’s hopes that these proactive oppositions will lead, one day, to some form of democratic reform and a better life for the Burmese. Until this happens, however, this situation will continue to have implications on the neighboring countries.

Effects on a Neighboring Country

When conflicts arise within a nation, it also becomes a problem for neighboring countries. One such country that has endured the effects is Thailand, which is Burma’s most important neighbor. Thailand and Burma share a common border that is 1,700 kilometers long, some areas of which are ambiguous and vulnerable to territorial conflict. Because of problems of oppression in addition to other conflict in Burma, Thailand is finding many people from Burma seeking refuge in its nation. This huge influx of refugees is causing a problem for Thailand since it is increasingly becoming a burden to care for them, particularly since the refugees refuse to return to Burma. In 2002, Thailand declared to send all the refugees back to Burma. They have also made efforts to negotiate with other countries, such as the United States, to aid in taking in of refugees as well (The Nation). In attempts to improve the situation for Thailand, the Thai Deputy Prime Minister, Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, made an official visit to Burma on January 27, 2003. His main goal was to discuss a solution to the high number of illegal Burmese workers in Thailand and to discuss the developmental projects along their borders (Srivalo).

After much discussion and thought, a few solutions were planned to help ease Thailand’s situation with Burmese refugees. First, since a lot of the refugees are looking for jobs in Thailand, the Thai Prime Minister thought it would be best to create more jobs in Burma. In light of this, one proposed plan is “to promote investment in Burma, and sell those products back to Thailand (Theparat).” Second, another approach involves the establishment of economic zones in the Northern parts of Thailand, close to the Thai-Burma border. This would push back Burmese refugees to work back in these economic zones, closer to the border. This plan seems effective since it creates jobs for workers “and the investors of factories in the economic zones benefit from the low cost of raw materials due to the inexpensive transportation of raw materials (Theparat).” Since these plans have been proposed recently, it will be interesting to examine the current status of the issues in Burma to see if these plans are, in fact, effective.

An Update

Regarding the internal issues in Burma, the events remain very volatile and intense for the people and the military government. Aung San Suu Kyi continues to fight for her people and oppose the brutality of the government. Last week on May 30, 2003, she was arrested along with 18 of her supporters after a fight broke out between her supporters and a government-run organization. Four casualties were reported, along with many injuries including Aung San Suu Kyi herself (The Nation). Prior to her arrest, her National League for Democracy’s Rangoon headquarters was sealed by the military government. (The Nation) The junta refuses to release information on the whereabouts of Aung San Suu Kyi and her supporters. The military deny that she was harmed in any way. In response to these occurrences, President George W. Bush has firmly requested that Aung San Suu Kyi and the members of her National League for Democracy be released immediately and to reopen their headquarters (Mydans). The European and United States governments have been putting more pressure on Asian nations to take part in reforming Burma’s military junta, in the junta’s treatment of Burma’s people. As the US and western nations continue their political and economic sanctions against Burma, they are in need of other Asian nations’ cooperation in order for any efforts to be fully effective (Jagan). In opposition to Western government pressure, Burma’s junta has responded boldly that they are not afraid of any of the economic sanctions that have been put against them. They declared that they can get all the foreign investment they need from their Asian neighboring countries (Jagan). In light of these remarks, it appears that efforts made by the US and other Western nations must focus on stopping the flow of business from the Asian countries that deal with Burma. This will impede the growth of Burma’s military strength and more importantly weaken the oppressive control that the military exerts over Burma’s people. Ultimately, the main point is to stop the oppression.

Human rights violations are among the most atrocious of offenses that any human can commit on a fellow human being. Regardless of financial or military benefit, every human being has a right to live a life of equality, peace and opportunity. The people of Burma have been stripped of their rights for doing nothing wrong, except for having the ill luck of being born within a country ruled by an oppressive military government. The life rich in tradition and culture could have offered a pleasant and fulfilling life if it were not for the abusive rule of the junta’s military government starting in 1988. Many outside nations and companies have recognized the military government’s brutal practices, and they have agreed to act on the violent nature of the Burmese regime. Although the oppression of the indigenous people in Burma continues, the government’s resources have diminished considerably over the past few years. In light of the events that have recently unfolded in Burma this past week, the efforts made by the United Nations, the United States, Europe countries, Asian countries, and Aung San Suu Kyi, are needed more than ever. Hopefully the world community will come together enough to allow people in Burma to live in freedom once again.

Work Cited

Anonymous, “Burma Violence: Suu Kyi under arrest.” The Nation. 1 June 2003. 2 June 2003. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/page.arcview.php3?clid=1&id=79638&date=2003-06-01&usrsess=1

Anonymous, “The Burma Net News.” 31 October 1995. 15 May 2003. http://www.burmanet.org/bnn_archives/1995/bnn111995.txt

Anonymous, “The Burma Campaign.” 15 May 2003. http://www.burmacampaign.org.uk/

Anonymous, “Act on Burma.” Washington Post. 27 May 2003. 30 May 2003. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42269-2003May26.html?nav=hptoc_eo

Anonymous, “UN envoy meets Aung San Suu Kyi.” BBC News: World Edition. 22 October 2002. 21 May 2003. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2350089.stm

Compton’s Encyclopedia. Chicago. Division of Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. 1982.

Jagan, Larry. “Profile: Aung San Suu Kyi.” BBC News: World Edition. 6 May 2002. 21 May 2003. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1950505.stm

Jagan, Larry. “ASEAN under pressure to use its influence.” Bangkok Post. 15 May 2003. 21 May 2003. http://www.bangkokpost.com/150503_News/15May2003_news24.html

Mydans, Seth. “Officials in Burma deny that dissident was hurt.” International Herald Tribune. 4 June 2003. 4 June 2003. http://www.iht.com/articles/98436.html

Srivalo, Piyanart. “Drugs to top Thai-Burma talks.” Asian Tribune. 30 December 2003. 14 May 2003. http://www.asiantribune.com/show_news.php?id=1745

Tammachatwichit, Tavorn. “The Pipeline.” 17 May 2003. http://www.ibiblio.org/freeburma/boycott/oil/pipeline2.html

The Nation, “Door to shut on refugees.” Asian Tribune. 20 December 2002. 14 May 2003. http://www.asiantribune.com/show_news.php?id=1748

Theparat, Chatrudee. “Thailand to unveil hub aim at summit.” Bangkok Post. 5 May 2003. 21 May 2003. http://www.bangkokpost.com/050503_Business/05May2003_biz45.html