Rizal Sukma wrote an article titled “ASEAN’s new approach to Myanmar is nothing new” (The Jakarta Post, Jan. 19). He said that because of ASEAN’s long admitted strategy of engagement and its policy of sanctions has failed, there is nothing new about the approach being taken on Myanmar.
Whose policy are we talking about and who has failed? Did ASEAN or any of its members ever take the so called road of “policy of sanctions” on Myanmar? Has ASEAN’s engagement failed in the case of appealing for paying serious attention to and putting political pressure on Myanmar?
The writer’s statement is clearly contradicted by the facts and recent events in Myanmar. And he was confused as well when he said that ASEAN agreed to play both sides. The AMM Retreat in Lombok has, so far, not produced an agreement to combine both approaches — engagement and sanctions.
The world witnessed the military junta finally releasing Aung San Su Kyi and conducting an election, regardless of its quality. Myanmar’s election was held on Nov. 7, 2010, following 20 years of a political vacuum.
This was substantial progress to start policy of sharing power, a degree of shared-representativeness and will hopefully prove to be a good starting point for meaningful reconciliation.
From a total of 325 national parliamentary, or Pyithu Hluttaw, seats, the ruling party, Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) took 259 (79 percent) of the seats, and in the regional parliament, or Amyotha Hluttaw, a total of 129 out of 168 seats, (76 percent), while at the “district Hluttaw level” they garnered 495 seats (making a total of 661) from a total of around 2,000 candidates. Why were people so enthusiastic to participate in this election, despite knowing that the result would put the military regime in power?
One possible reason is that the people wanted at the earliest possible moment to start reinventing political reconciliation by contributing to the process of shared representation. Elections hopefully can be seen as another way to facilitate a new wider political compromise to build a new credible government.
This positive result is part of the product of ASEAN engagement and not a product of imposing “policy of sanctions”. Despite ASEAN’s belief that it does not give sufficient credit for Myanmar for finally achieving their highest level of democratization so far. “Aung San released plus and election plus” as part of new platform of national reconciliation process are still needed to prompt a new gesture of credible political representativeness, political compromise and establishment of a new (Myanmar people-supported) government.
Not only ASEAN believes a policy of sanctions will not work. Many studies have consistently stated that economic sanctions would not be able to fundamentally change a military regime. Democratization can not be built on sanctions and with purely external ingredients.
Going deeper and deeper to change Myanmar politics (read: junta), care must be taken to avoid being trapped or being seen as “elements of intervention” in their domestic politics.
P.L.E. Priatna
Jakarta
