Tuesday, October 09, 2007
'Strindent calls to bring down the regime showed a lack of understanding of the problem. It cannot be assumed that, out of the ashes, a new resplendent Myanmar will automatically rise. That the old way persisted in by the military governement since 1988 cannot work is clear. But the way forward is not so clear.'
-George Yeo, Singapore's Foreign Minister

hear hear ! i found this in the review section in Straits Times today. It really brought to my attention the complexity of the stand-off between the militarised govenment and the people. It also very briefly outlined why we should not act rashly just because of our judgemental values. Myanmar cannot do without the strong arm of the military. The entire structure of the state is held together because of its resolute military stance. In order to facilitate a peaceful and smooth transition, there must be a reconciliation between the military and the civilians. If not, the occurence of another Iraq may be possible.

But i like the start of the above mentioned para. For most to keep calling for strindent action taken against Myanmese government would be detrimental to the state's health since it's so precarious already. Yes, the Junta are opressive rulers but they are also key to the survival of the state because of the different disillusioned and disgruntled ethnic minorities in Myanmar. It should be something that is solved diplomatically, not dramatically.

Taking a look around the intenet and in the newspapers. I see the outrageous comments from many in the international community. Outraged at the Junta, outraged at the international watchdogs, outraged at even their own governments. Again, i question - Are you so sure that what you have is that best solution to the problems ? or better yet, do you even have a plausible solution ? Before we get so disillusioned with the UN, ASEAN and etc. have we understood the problem in Myanmar and weighed all the possible repurcussions of any reaction ? We are probably not the best of people to criticise the instituitions because we have never been in their shoes before. They may have been creations based on global ideals, but even ideals can be halted in front of obstacles.

Saying that, it is not that we have no rights to voice our opinions. We should vocalise our disapproval of certain issues pertaining to human rights etc. but when we do so, we must simultaneously check ourselves that we do not get too emotional and lose our objectivity. If we lose our objectivity, our voices becomes dull and we lose credibility. And then we become a nuisance, something which we never thought we'd become.

'We want Democracy'. Is it something we can decide for them ? Is it something they can handle based on their level of mental maturity ? Democracy is theorectically good. It provides the sense of peace and security, enables the people to start enforcing changes that will benefit the majority. Is that true ? Who is clamoring for Democracy ? The ordinary people, but is it by their own volition ? Aung Sun Suu Kyi and the political monks are the two most featured characters behind all the protests and idealism. Thus far, we have not even established the legitimacy of their ideal of a democratic government. It may not be truly what the majority wants but what they blindly rally behind because they may not understand the underlying politics. So how are we going to justify any means of intervenation ?

Provision of support directly in any channel could be seen as imposing our will upon the state and infinging on their sovereignity. How best then can we stick our hand into this beehive ? We speak of Democracy, but is political or military intervenvation morally right ? Democracy by itself is an ideal, but to enforce Democracy on another state (even if it's because we sincerely want to help) can be a form of imperialism. It is irony.

There are so many political, economical, social and moral backlash if we were to consider serious action against the Myanmese government. In what position are we to have considered all the possible options, reasons and ramifications to decide on any form of reaction ? However, we cannot forever remain hesitant about our views. From whatever limited knowledge we garner, we should still be vocal and if we truly believe in ourselves, then be persistent. The important thing we should take note is to always be objective and keep an open mind.

alson
by ~me~ at 12:04 PM ©

---