Myanmar's path to openness

By Jusuf Wanandi

YANGON (JP): The Myanmar government has made the decision to open up the country, although some parts of the leadership are still ambivalent about this.

This could be because of historical burdens, namely anti colonial sentiments, or due to isolation under the former military regime for over three decades, but could also be due to the vehement criticisms of the international community, especially the western countries and their mass media.

That is why they think that ASEAN's membership could give them a safe and gradual entry into the international community. In addition, they are also worried to being squeezed again as a buffer between India and China.

This is apparent from seminars and dialogs between ASEAN Institute of Strategic and International Studies delegate here on Oct. 27 to 30 with the Myanmar Institute of Strategic and Security Studies (MISIS) of the Foreign Ministry and the Office of Strategic Studies (OSS) of the Department of Defense.

Some 50 Myanmar participants were present and besides officials from government departments there were scholars, business and some NGO representatives. From the seminars and individual meetings some interesting conclusions can be drawn.

ASEAN provides some counterbalance, and by joining ASEAN they could even become a bridge between South Asia and Southeast Asia, a role which they always look forward to play.

For the first time after independence the country is now at peace and the government has been able to end almost all the minority armed insurgences through negotiations and a peace agreement, which is not a small achievement. But they have to do more to help the minorities to develop their economies and regions, and for that they need more resources. Otherwise in the next few years there might be relapses.

Another political challenge to the leadership is how to balance their policies and achievements towards the minorities with their policies towards the Burman majority which constitutes 70 percent of the population, and which makes up most of the country's middle class, especially in Yangon. This challenge means the need for political development as well as dealing with international public opinion.

First there is the question of finalizing the constitution, but it should be recognized that the participation of the minorities in the last few years has slowed down the pace of the efforts in the Constituent Assembly.

There must be greater transparency in the deliberations and a final date in the not too long a future has to be set to make the effort a credible one. In the meantime more dialogues need to be established between the government and the various social and political groups, including the National League for Democracy (NLD).

It is obvious that a general elections should be held following a few years of dialogues and preparation based on the new constitution. The role of the armed forces as a unifying force in the country and for the nation is widely recognized since it is the only national institution that encompasses all the nationalities and upholds a common ideal, namely the unity of Myanmar. It is also imperative that the NLD should participate in the future elections.

Although some dialogues and small compromises have been made between the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) and the NLD, including Aung San Suu Kyi, a lot more has to be done in the near future in order to achieve a compromise on future political developments. Hopefully this necessity is gradually being appreciated by both sides.

In the end, if the Myanmar government would like to develop the vast and rich country, they need capital and technology, which they only can get if they are willing to open up the country. One of the preconditions to make this credible to the international community is some movement on the political front in Myanmar.

ASEAN could help to give them a more balanced image in the international community, provided some real changes are being undertaken.This is completely their decision to make.

One very unbalanced view from the West is the allegation that they have done nothing on drug trafficking, even exacerbating it. This is very painful to them because their efforts to eradicate drugs in Myanmar is really serious and has been done with their own resources.

The West does not give them the credit for these efforts. That smuggling is still going on is not government's policy as it is mostly practiced either by the minorities or corrupt officials. Here ASEAN can really cooperate with them.

On their economic development, some lacunas have been observed in their macro economic policies, such as fiscal policies, currency and exchange rates. On foreign investment their policies have improved, although in the implementation the ambivalent attitude toward foreigners is still often felt, and consistency has not always been maintained.

The government should make up its mind on this, because economic development is a prerequisite for political stability and some legitimacy although it will not be adequate in the medium term without some political development. Here again ASEAN economists could assist in laying down a sound and consistent macro-economic foundation.

In conclusion, it should be recognized that despite the image problem that Myanmar has caused to ASEAN when it became a member, in the medium term it should be to ASEAN's advantage to have Myanmar in. It is a country of 48 million people with a high literacy rate (86 percent) and endowed with abundant natural resources, with a very unspoiled nature and above all with bright and beautiful people.

As soon as they can overcome their historical burdens and get their system right, they will again become a leading country in Southeast Asia as they have been immediately after World War II.

The writer is Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta.