Thein Sein Visit

7/30/2019 Thein Sein Visit

1/6

Will President Obama emphasize R2P on Thein Sein?Kanbawza Win

Americas new Burma policy adopted by the Obama administration, a combination of

increasing engagement and maintaining economic sanctions, was the prime mover in urgingThein Sein to introduce reforms after more than half a century of repressive military rule, when

he became an elected head of state in 2011 November. Obama became the first sitting U.S.

president to visit Burma, a step in his administration's efforts to end decades of diplomatic

isolation of the country as a reward its shift from authoritarian rule.It is no denying that sanctions imposed by the U.S. and other nations had throttled

Burmas economic growth, which can led the people to rise again en masse as in 1988, besidesthe country is slowly becoming an autonomous region of China, whom the entire Burmesepeople hates and hence there was little choice for quasi military regime. So, naturally Thein Sein

was eager to win Washington's favour by freeing political prisoners, changing laws to open the

political field to the pro-democracy movement of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Daw Aung San Suu

Kyi, and undertaking financial liberalization, and implementing cease fires with ethnicnationalities among other measures. For this the 55 million plus people of Burma covey theirheartfelt and sincere thanks to America and President Obama. Full stop.

While there's still broad bipartisan backing in Congress for the administration's efforts tosupport reformer Thein Sein,

1the unrest in Burma and the ethnic cleansing of Kachin, Shan and

Rohingyacombined with Burmas security forces failure to prevent it, has deepened concern

about the human rights situation in the country. An explosion of communal violence between themajority Buddhists and Muslims minority has spread in recent months to other parts of thecountry that has left 100s killed and more than 100,000 displaced and most of them were

minority Muslims. The graphic, grisly scenes shown by the BBC and VOA taken by non other

than the Burma police, who has a secret orders not to prevent the carnage has shattered theconscience of the people of Burma and that of the world.

The US and the international community have the moral responsibility to prevent the

impending genocide in Burma. Signs of coming Genocide in Burma written by Sai Latt of theSimon Fraser University of British Columbia, Canada has systematically draws the hypothesis of

the impending genocide in Burma.2

There is no denying that Burma is trying to imitate the

Khmer Rouge, another Buddhist regime led by Pol Pot of Cambodia in 1975 where it killed off

nearly 4 million people. Will Obama put some sense on Thein Sein that he got the responsibilityto protect? R2P.

1A bipartisan group of 32 senators urged the White House to increase the effectiveness of its Burma policy, and

nearly 60 members of the US House of Representatives also wrote in to President Obama urging him to raise the

issue of crimes against humanity in Burma before the UN Security Council

2Sai Latt Signs of Coming Genocide in Burma? 8-5-2013


2/6

Burma and RwandaWhat happened in Rwanda in 1994 is at least 800,000 Rwandans were killed, mostly

from the Tutsi ethnic nationality. Rwandas genocide was not a sudden outbreak. Theconditions for full-scale killing were developed over many years, particularly the 40 months

prior to April 1994. At that time the signs were explicitly clear, but the international community

simply ignored them. Prior to April 1994, the international community was congratulating theethnic Hutu-dominated government for improved state capacity, and awarding it with aid money.

Millions upon millions of dollars of developmental aid were channeled to the country. The

government had complete control over foreign aid money in Rwanda. The government boughtarms from abroad; 581,000 machetes were imported from China. Hate messages against Tutsis

were openly broadcasted on radio stations. Thousands of Tutsis were already being massacred.

The international community not only failed to react, but continued to present an image of the

governments reform initiatives.3

Now, all these signs are visible in Burma, as Thein Sein who previously got a prestigious

Peace Prize from Brussels and US not only welcome President Thein Sein but also the

Tatmadaw for military engagement and the world at large eulogize the quasi military regime to

change for the better. The Buddhist criminals includingBurma Bin Laden and the fiery monksroam free with the tactic approval of the security forces blessed by the government, while the

Muslims were single out for persecution tantamount to indirectly encouraging the genocide ofthe Muslims.Genocide could not happen without turning a large portion of the population into

thugs and killers, genocide is a campaign to which potential killers are recruited over time. But

people did not simply become killers. They were turned into mass murderers by propaganda thatdrugged their mind with misinformation and lies.

4There has been a precedent in Depaeyin

Incident in 2003, initiated by none other than the ruling party USDP (United in Slaughtering

Depaeyin Participants) at that time was USDA officially acknowledged by the Junta itself. So

some key points from the report are worth paying attention to, as similar signs can be seen in

Burma.

Before the genocide in Rawanda, there were two reports published in 1993, one by fourNGOs and another by the UN special rapporteur of the impending genocide and detailed massive

arms distribution, extreme anti-Tutsi rhetoric, and government-backed killings mainly targeting

Tutsis. No one reacted. So also in Burma the recent report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) andstatements by UN envoys to Burma, Mr. Tomas Quintana and Mr. Vijay Nambiar, detailing mass

killing, systematic and widespread violence against ethnicRohingya nothing was done. The

scenario is very similar to Rwanda.

In Burma, local media is stirring up resentment ofRohingya and Burmese Muslims. InRwanda, Tutsi were described as foreigners who stole the land from the rightful owners, the

Hutu. Hutu propagandists accused Tutsi Unity to be the idea that facilitated Tutsis past

conquest and helped in their quest for domination. So also in Burma, ethnicRohingyas, and now

Burmese Muslims, are widely portrayed as foreigners. They are said to be taking over the land,race and Buddhist religion. Equivalent to Tutsi Unity was the number 786 used by Muslims.

According to anti-Muslim preachers, 786 stand for Muslims takeover of Burma and the world in

3Sai Latt Signs of Coming Genocide in Burma?Irrawaddy 8-5-2013

4Refer to Alison Desforges detailed in a Human Rights Report on Rwanda


3/6

the 21st century. But in fact represents a Quranic phrase: In the name of God, most Gracious,

and most Compassionate.

Tutsis in Rwanda were labeled cockroaches. In Burma, followers of thesepropagandists have called theRohingyasviruses and dogs. Denying the warning signs is not

really serving their purpose; it only blocks attempts to take preventive measures so that

unimaginable cruelty is not unleashed. It is a good thing that tropical Cyclone Mahasen missedWestern Burma where thousands ofRohingya displaced persons are camps. The Thein Seinagainst the advice of experts has deliberately placed in the lowland so that they will be the first to

suffer whenever the cyclone came. Now even when help was offering to evacuate most of them

prefer to die with the Cyclone than to live a life like animals. Such is the prevailing situation inButhidaung, Maungdaw area of Burma.

US Moral AptitudeThe US government should have insisted that good governance and human rights reform

is essential operating principles for new investments in Burma. By allowing deals with Burmas

state-owned oil companies such as oil the US looks undercut Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and othersin Burma who are promoting government accountability. The US must be careful not to sacrifice

its committed principles of democracy and human rights and jeopardize long-standingrelationships with democratic and civil society forces in Burma as no Burmese want to say the

word Hypocrisy to America.The White House has always been a strong ally of the democratic resistance in repressive

Burma but a series of political reforms beginning last year has led to plaudits from the

international community and Western nations in particular. Burma soon became a darling of theWest and even lauded as a prodigal son. Ongoing ethnic and sectarian violence continues to

undermine progress toward national reconciliation, stability and lasting peace. And fundamental

reforms are required to strengthen the rule of law and increase transparency

There are still serious human rights-related risks when investing in Burma, not only weakrule of law, poor regulation and enforcement of labor and environmental standards, and the lack

of an independent judiciary, but also Tatmadaws extensive involvement in the economy as wellas its use of forced labor and other abusive practices linked to providing security for businessoperations. Government corruption and mismanagement is widespread and Burmas 2008Nargis

Constitution enjoys legal supremacy over civilian authorities.

But every Burmese knew that USs strategic refocus on the Asia-Pacific region is one ofthe driving forces behind embracing military-dominated Burma in order to advance its foreign

policy goals. Located between rising China and India, who boast nearly half the worlds

population between them, resource-rich Burma is more attractive than ever. There are several

reasons why the White House, invited Thein Sein as it wants to move itself closer. Firstly, theincentive to continue to encourage further democratization. Secondly, Washington has long been

seen as a strong supporter of Burmas opposition movement. Thirdly, Burma has long been seen

as satellite state of China. While in the past, India was always the main counterbalance toBeijings growing clout in Burma, nowNaypyidaw wants to instead restore normal relations withWashingtonreceiving aid, military training and assistanceto perhaps forge closer strategic

ties. The key is Burmas direct access to the Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean.

This also perhaps matches US foreign policy in the Asia Pacificits ascendancy in theregion to counter the might of China. It will not be surprising to see Washington wanting to

revive its military assistance to Burma. Burmese soldiers, including intelligence officers,


4/6

received training in the US until the late 1980s.There is no doubt that the US is coming back to

Asia and form Americas pivot towards Asia as a whole.5

Whether the nascent reforms instigated were real and significant, the barometer shouldbe human rights violations in Arakan, Kachin and Shan states as well as acknowledging the need

for further political, social and legal development. Now it is time to see how the US will balance

its policy toward Burma during the ongoing fragile political transition, as this remains anethnically divided nation where repressive measures are still applied and ordinary people do notfeel they are free.

Tyranny of the MajorityThe tyranny of the majority is used in Burma since before 1962 meaning the majority

rule, envisions a scenario in which decisions made by a majority place its interests so far above

those of an individual or minority group as to constitute active oppression, comparable to that

oftyrants and despots.6

In many cases a disliked ethnic, religious or racial group are deliberatelypenalized by the majority element acting through the democratic process. This is exactly what

the Thein Sein Administration has been doing to the Burmese Muslim minority. The one

pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the

majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.7

The very essence of democratic government consists in the absolute sovereignty of the

majority; for there is nothing in democratic states that is capable of resisting it. In any

constitutional state in Europe every sort of religious and political theory may be freely preachedand disseminated; if he is unfortunate enough to live under an absolute government, the people

are often on his side; if he inhabits a free country, he can, if necessary, find a shelter behind the

throne. The aristocratic part of society supports him in some countries, and the democracy inothers. But in Burma there is no such thing.

Burmas past regimes have spent decades refining what some call a "Thugocracy forProfit". Tatmadaw dominated government has secured its power by stealing ethnic lands super-

abundant in natural resources. Profit from this has fueled the power of Burmese's general officer

corps, which has secured other business monopolies, as well as political power assurances in itsnew constitution.8

Over the years, the generals have had to cozy up to China as their chief

benefactor and backer. This has come at considerable cost in terms of China's encroachment intoalmost every facet of Burmese life. The Myanmar elites are now fearful of being totally

dominated by China and so, out of necessity, must engage the West as a counterbalance. This is

the crown aspects of Thein Sein coming to the White House. They also feel that Western

business practices may be much more profitable for them than China's, which tend to beexploitative and monopolistic. The point here is that this may be just realpolitic for survival, not

the enlightened reform that much of the world hopes for.

While international attention focuses on the good potential of Myanmar, the generals arecontinuing business as usual in the shadows and on the frontiers. Thein Sein does not control

these active and retired power brokers, who have always "run the show" managing a massiverepressive apparatus that has been based on bloody tribute from the bottom up. These generals

5Zaw; Aung, US Increases Pivot towards Burma 18-10-2012

6 John Stuart Mill.On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7

7The History of Freedom in Antiquity, 1877

8Heinermann; Tim, A need for balance in Burma in Asia times
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scenariohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotismhttp://books.google.com/books?id=f14SAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22John+Stuart+Mill%22+%22On+Liberty%22+%22tyranny+of+the+majority%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=9QotTKaHO5CTnQetrpS1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=f14SAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22John+Stuart+Mill%22+%22On+Liberty%22+%22tyranny+of+the+majority%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=9QotTKaHO5CTnQetrpS1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=f14SAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22John+Stuart+Mill%22+%22On+Liberty%22+%22tyranny+of+the+majority%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=9QotTKaHO5CTnQetrpS1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=f14SAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22John+Stuart+Mill%22+%22On+Liberty%22+%22tyranny+of+the+majority%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=9QotTKaHO5CTnQetrpS1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=f14SAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22John+Stuart+Mill%22+%22On+Liberty%22+%22tyranny+of+the+majority%22&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=9QotTKaHO5CTnQetrpS1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scenariohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_rulehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_rule


5/6

insist on retaining all stolen ethnic lands rich in oil, natural gas, gold, precious gems, uranium,

hydro-power potential and strategic ports and international trading routes. They know of no other

way to make money and stay in power. International corporations and governments, meanwhile,are looking the other way at human-rights abuses across the land, because the profitability of

doing business with military-linked elites has been so lucrative. Will President Obama

overlook all these negative aspects? Perhaps Dr Zarni is correct when he said that Obama willnot be talking to Thein Sein about these ethnic conflict or attacks on Muslims in any seriousmanner because the United States is desperate to hold the hands of the Burmese generals and ex-

generals out of its undeclared designs against China.9

Aftermore than half a century Burmeses generals have never beaten ethnic resistanceforces, which by some estimates kill government soldiers at ratios of up to 100:1. While it is

unlikely that continued political manoeuvring will produce enduring solutions under a

constitution rigged to favor the generals, it makes much better sense for all stakeholders to focus

on shared economic development as their common bond. The hope of prosperity for all, insteadof profit for a few elites, is fertile ground to be explored as the way forward.

10

Everybody knows that Thein Seins main motive for withdrawing the military from

power is probably to end the countrys pariah status. But there are several reasons why he wouldwant to keep the armys influence high. The main reason is that his fellow generals would

overthrow him if he did not protect them from future prosecution for their past crimes. The

military does not believe that a strictly civilian government would be tough enough to hold the

country together, so they have no intention of giving up power completely. The army has to findsome way to make it more popular politically, and the obvious way is to position itself as the

defender of Burmese unity against treacherous ethnic nationalities and religious minorities. Then

it might win support from the majority population. There is no doubt that the Tatmadaw is nowcomplicit in anti-Muslim violence elsewhere in Burma. The military is clearly hoping that Daw

Aung San Suu Kyi will speak out in defence of the Muslim Burmese, and thereby lose her

popular support among the highly nationalistic majority. Knowing this, she has chosen to remain

silent, presumably thinking that all this can be fixed after she wins the 2015 election.11

SadlyBurma was following Yugoslavia in 1991, when the Serbian communist elite, led by Slobodan

Milosevic, tried to keep its hold on power by playing on Serbian resentment of the other

nationalities. The result was a decade of war and the fragmentation of the former Yugoslavfederation into seven successor states.

President Obama must have recollect that when theMayflowercarrying 102 Pilgrims set

sails from Plymouth in 1620 to find a new country call America on this side of the Atlantic, wasbased on freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, democracy and human rights. That is why

America became the superpower today. Now the road between the two countries has been paved,

what in Burmese we call (ye;ci;aomvr ;) by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, her endeavours should notbe discarded as just one of the stones on the road to be trample, as the Burmese vocalistZaw One

sings (ud,rSmawmvr;ci;wausmuc) with Thein Sein walking gleefully to shake the hands ofPresident Obama.9Roughneen; Simon, On and Off the Table for Thein Seins White House Visit Irrawaddy 17-5-2013

10Heinermann; Tim, A need for balance in Burma in Asia times

11Dyer; Gwynne, Burma: The silence and the damage done.


6/6

President Obama must reaffirms America's commitment to human rights, democracy, and

governance, there will be several consequences in Asia that even hard-core realists will lament(not to mention the idealists who would normally be comfortably at the core of a Democratic

Foreign Policy): Change agents within repressive states who matter most will be demoralized,

disempowered and possibly endangered. Repressive regimes will continue to think that they canget away with much lower standards than the administration could sell to the Congress or theAmerican people if they want to lift sanctions or advance engagement. Repressive regimes will

continue citing evidence of a higher U.S. tolerance for human rights abuses and the importance

of addressing human rights and democracy will subside; America's greatest source of soft power-- American values -- will suffer even though he has diplomatically relented that dictators can

change the name of the country according to their whims and fancies, without the consensus of

the people.

Thein Sein Visit

Documents

Transcript of Thein Sein Visit