Skip to main content
Support
Event

What Next? Political Developments in Burma and Implications for the Future

Aung Din, executive director, U.S. Campaign for Burma; Ingrid Jordt, assistant professor of anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Priscilla Clapp, former U.S. charge d'affaires in Burma

Date & Time

Wednesday
Nov. 7, 2007
1:30pm – 3:30pm ET

Overview

This past August, Burma's military government abruptly raised fuel prices by up to 500 percent, triggering protests across the impoverished nation. The demonstrations soon blossomed into Burma's largest expression of anti-government sentiment since the pro-democracy protests that rocked the country in 1988. Burma's revered Buddhist monks, marching in their saffron robes, have served as a resounding image of what has been dubbed the "Saffron Revolution." Undeterred, the nation's ruling generals responded violently, firing into crowds and detaining several thousand protestors, with dozens assumed dead. On November 7, the Asia Program convened a panel of Burma specialists to assess the Saffron Revolution and its impact on Burma now and in the future.

Aung Din spoke of lessons learned from the 1988 protests. One such lesson is the importance of dialogue and negotiation. At the peak of the 1988 uprising, democracy leaders would not budge from their demand that President U Maung Maung immediately form a new interim government, and the leaders rejected Maung Maung's offer of multiparty elections within three months. "They didn't realize," Aung Din explained, "that they needed to negotiate with the ruling government." One week later, a new set of generals took power. The result? "Thousands of peaceful demonstrators" were killed, "thousands more" were arrested, and "tens of thousands" became refugees. The pro-democracy movement has learned its lesson, said Aung Din, pointing out that the Saffron Revolution's "clearest and loudest demand" was for dialogue. He insisted that if the international community does not want Burma to become "the Yugoslavia of Asia," then the world must convince the junta that dialogue is necessary "to move the country forward."

Ingrid Jordt sought to debunk common myths about Burma today. One myth is that state legitimacy is based on force or the threat of violence. In fact, she argued, the regime derives its legitimacy by associating itself with Buddhist society. This is done by offering "visible" support (such as by providing donations to monks), and by attempting to control the monks (through purges that disrobe the allegedly corrupt; through cooptation via the state-appointed Council of Supreme Monks; and through the planting of military spies in Buddhist prayer sites). A second myth is that there is little resistance to the junta outside of the monks' acts. On the contrary, Jordt argued, "the most prominent form of resistance" emerging in recent decades has been a "mass lay meditation movement" whose adherents number in the millions. Given the popularity of this form of resistance, she asserted, it is wrong to think of current anti-regime efforts solely as a pro-democracy movement. When Western media resort to such descriptions, she said, "they are distorting" the facts on the ground.

Priscilla Clapp considered how to progress toward political transition in Burma. The first required step, she asserted, is a change in the military's leadership. She described Burma's top general, Than Shwe, as an eccentric man who is "losing his marbles"—as evidenced by his recent decision to relocate Burma's capital city to the hinterland. Nonetheless, during his 15 years as leader, he has amassed immense influence over Burma's governing structures. For this reason, Clapp argued, transition is probably not possible so long as Than Shwe remains in power. Another step needed to bring about transition is a resolution of Burma's "macroeconomic distortions." These distortions, which inhibit Burma's development, are the military's inability to inspire confidence in the national currency (which causes hyperinflation), and the lack of secure and individual property rights. Achieving democratic governance, Clapp declared, will require sustained efforts toward addressing these twin deficiencies.

What next for Burma? Each panelist spoke of the present military leadership's tenuous hold on power, intimating that changes in Burma's political situation might be on the way. This perspective may prove prophetic. One day after the Asia Program event, the United Nations' special envoy for Burma delivered a statement made by Aung San Suu Kyi, in which the venerated pro-democracy leader announced her desire "to cooperate with the government in order to make this process of dialogue a success." Shortly thereafter, she was permitted by the regime to meet with members of her National League for Democracy (NLD) party for the first time in three years.

Drafted by Michael Kugelman, Asia Program Associate
Robert M. Hathaway, Director, Asia Program, Ph: (202) 691-4020

Tagged

Hosted By

Indo-Pacific Program

The Indo-Pacific Program promotes policy debate and intellectual discussions on US interests in the Asia-Pacific as well as political, economic, security, and social issues relating to the world’s most populous and economically dynamic region.   Read more

Thank you for your interest in this event. Please send any feedback or questions to our Events staff.