Time for tough love

There are times when protocol and diplomatic doublespeak will not do, and there are times when soft persuasion and quiet engagement needs to be reinforced with strong words and benign intimidation.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has been one of the most loyal and patient partners of the military regime in Myanmar. The other nine members of the regional grouping have endured censure and international scolding for its persistence in sticking to the "constructive engagement" approach with Myanmar. At a time when Yangon is a pariah in the eyes of many around world, ASEAN members have not only acted neighborly, but brotherly toward a regime that remains mired in repressive dogma.

ASEAN has maintained that it has no right to interfere with domestic politics in Myanmar, and that it is better to engage Yangon, while quietly prodding its military regime toward political reform rather than completely isolating them. Economic cooperation, it is believed, will lead to social development, which in turn, will help ease political suppression.

An argument has also made that human rights were not a prerequisite for membership during Myanmar's admittance to ASEAN in 1997, therefore the organization cannot make such demands now on the ruling regime.

Under the deft rhetoric of ASEAN foreign ministers, these opinions seemed persuasive at the time. After eight years of political lethargy in Myanmar these arguments are no longer convincing. Neither are the constituents of ASEAN, who acquiesce to such (il)logic.

The fate of nations are not restricted to the physical boundaries that define their citizenship. Humanity cannot be bound by nationality or ideology. Our strategic negligence of events in Myanmar has not proved beneficial or encouraged fundamental change.

In other words, the political fate of the people of Myanmar has not improved as ASEAN has looked the other way.

It can be likened to the next door neighbor that is physically abusive toward his family. We acknowledge the privacy of each individual family -- chauvinistically speaking, "a man's home is his castle". But as civilized beings we have a moral obligation that overrides misrepresented notions of good neighborliness (sovereignty).

If abuse persists despite soft reminders, then tough words should be used. When all else fails then its time to take action.

We believe that all else has failed.

If Yangon wishes to continue its belligerence then it should do so on its own terms, by itself. It should not continue to taint the good name of ASEAN and its members' relationships with respective dialog partners.

During the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in Cebu, the Philippines, which began on Sunday, Myanmar officials displayed a complete lack of consideration for the anxiety and stresses that the other nine members have had to endure.

Yangon will take over the rotating ASEAN chair, and in 2006, it will host the annual ASEAN meeting, which is customarily attended by its dialog partners. Both the European Union and the United States have, understandably, said they would boycott such a meeting.

ASEAN should not prostrate itself to hegemonic powers, but it should also carefully consider which causes are worth fighting for. Myanmar, simply put, is not worth it! By thumbing its nose at demands for political openness, Yangon is jeopardizing the whole of ASEAN. The irony is that most of the demands made by the EU and the U.S. are actually the same values which Indonesia aspires to.

The start of a "tough love" policy should begin with an ultimatum for immediate political change as a condition of the ASEAN chairmanship. Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam have as much to lose by Myanmar's chairmanship as Yangon itself does.

Finally, it may be good to ask Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs Hassan Wirayuda to remind his Myanmar counterpart, U Nyan Win, that being a member of a team means putting the greater good of that team ahead of individual interests. If the latter responds negatively, then it can only be perceived as confirmation that Yangon is simply using ASEAN as a shield to perpetuate its military regime.

Thus, ASEAN should be encouraged to say "no" to Myanmar's recalcitrance, the way youngsters are encouraged to say "no" to drugs. If "no" is not chosen, in both cases, there will be negative consequences.