Burmese security forces continued to fire on protesters on Wednesday (March 3), killing at least 38 people. This comes after the military’s bloody crackdown on people protesting the military coup on Feb. 28, which was condemned by the international community. Analysts say the Burmese military was emboldened by its determination that the international community would not have a united position on the coup in Burma. As protesters continue to gather and the military makes renewed threats, there are fears that the situation in Myanmar will deteriorate further.
Defying international condemnation, Burma’s military continues to shoot protesters
Defying Sunday’s bloody crackdown, Burmese protesters regrouped on the streets Wednesday to continue their protests and demand an end to military rule. Burma’s security forces continued to fire on crowds of regrouped protesters across the country Wednesday, killing at least 38 people in the bloodiest day since the Feb. 1 coup.
Khin Zaw Win, a political commentator in Yangon, told VOA that despite the military’s use of tear gas, high-pressure water cannons and even direct fire, the bloody crackdown could not stop the determination of Burmese to protest. Of course, they will run away when shots are fired, but they will regroup and continue to protest,” he said in an email. They are more disgusted by the coup than they are by their own lives.”
He said young people in Burma have formed a “vanguard” to protect the protesters. They wore hard helmets, homemade armor and shields to the forefront. They also wore gloves so they could pick up tear gas canisters and throw them back at the military police.
On Thursday, Burmese people continued to take to the streets in defiance of the violent crackdown, protesting the military’s overthrow of the democratically elected government led by Aung San Suu Kyi. Indeed, protests have been ongoing since the military’s Feb. 1 coup. In towns and cities across the country, thousands of people have poured into the streets, while doctors, teachers and other civil servants have gone on strike to protest the coup.
U.S. and Western sanctions against Burma fall short
Since the military coup, the U.S. and the West have been the most vocal in their condemnation. So far, the U.S., Australia, the U.K. and the European Union have all adopted sanctions. Germany and New Zealand have also suspended financial assistance.
The U.S. Department of Commerce announced trade sanctions against the Burmese government on March 4, targeting the Burmese Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Home Affairs and two companies with close ties to the military: Myanmar Economic Corporation and Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd.
Earlier, President Biden signed an executive order announcing sanctions against senior Burmese military generals, including Myanmar Defense Force Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing, and freezing more than $1 billion in Burmese assets in the United States.
Analysts say Burma’s leaders have gone from a military coup to violence against protesters because they know that the international community, especially the West, has limited sanctions against them.
Murray Hiebert, a senior fellow in the Southeast Asia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a Washington think tank, told the Voice of America: “[The military coup leaders] have calculated the impact of the coup and they know that there will be limited sanctions and pressure from the international community. And they thought that China, Russia, and even ASEAN were likely to be on their side. So they staged a coup. …… They believe that they will not be sanctioned beyond the current level. “
Hunter Marston focuses on Southeast Asian studies at the Australian National University. He expressed a similar view. He told the Voice of America that the Burmese military doesn’t care about outside sanctions.
They want to use it to intimidate the protesters and tell them that they have to stop protesting,” he said. I think the military will respond to the current situation in the same way they have always responded, which is to continue to use violence to silence protesters and demonstrators. I don’t think they’re going to care what the international community does to counter that pressure. I think they realize that there are always countries that will not condemn them, China or Russia, even if China is unhappy with the coup. They believe that as long as they remain in power, there will always be people who will want to deal with them.”
Chritine Schraner Burgner, the U.N. secretary-general’s special envoy for Myanmar, said Wednesday that the Burmese military has made it clear to her that they are not afraid of sanctions or measures such as isolation. Burgner said she has been in close contact with all sides, including the military, since the coup in Burma.
When I spoke with the military, I warned them of the possibility of strong measures by U.N. member states and the Security Council, and they responded that we are used to sanctions and we have withstood them in the past,” Bergner said. I also warned that the military government might be isolated, to which they replied, then we’ll learn to walk a path with few friends.” Bergner said that from past experience, she believes the military will definitely continue on its established course. She believes there must be increased dialogue to resolve the issue.
Khin Zaw Win, a political commentator in Burma, said Burma’s military government will not return power to a democratically elected government at all in the short term after it seizes power. He said the U.S. used to be very popular in Burma, and in recent years its influence has declined. He said Burmese are now watching the Biden government’s moves. He believes the U.S. should act at the International Court of Justice, and that is where the military has a soft spot.
Some analysts have suggested that the U.S. is actually reluctant to sanction Burma too heavily because it does not want to push the military toward China. However, Marston of the Australian National University argues that the U.S. should not worry too much about potentially pushing the military into China’s arms, because the Burmese military does not really want to rely too much on China, and they now prefer to deal with Russia and India. He said the U.S. U.S. should increase its diplomatic efforts and strengthen its concerted action with Japan and Singapore.
I think the Biden Administration‘s current policy toward Burma makes more sense given the limited checks and balances that the U.S. has,” he said. Diplomacy is necessary in addition to the current targeted sanctions. I think the U.S. government is working, and should work, with international partners, particularly in Asian countries like Japan and Singapore, to put pressure on the military. “
Singapore is Burma’s largest investor, but it has made it clear that it will not impose sanctions on Burma.
The military coup in Burma also poses a dilemma for The Japanese government. If the military is sanctioned in the name of a values-based foreign policy, as the U.S. and Western allies have done, Japan could lose access to and use of Burma’s military leaders. As a major foreign investor in Burma, Japan could also lose commercial interests, having invested tens of billions of dollars there over the past decade. In addition, Japan could lose out on geopolitical competition with China.
In mid-February, Japan joined the U.S. and other members of the G-7 in condemning the coup, but it did not impose new sanctions on Myanmar’s military rulers, as the U.S. has done.
If the U.S. Biden administration were to categorically impose sanctions, Japan would likely be asked to take the same step. Sources at the prime minister’s residence noted, “It would be quite distressing to be called upon to impose sanctions together.”
There have been recent reports that Japan is exploring the suspension of new government development assistance (ODA) programs to Burma. However, this claim has been denied by the Japanese government.
Analysts believe that how Japan responds to Burma will have a major impact on the Biden administration’s emphasis on democratic values and ally-based foreign policy.
Evan Medeiros, a former special assistant to President Obama and chair of the Asian Studies Department at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, has said at a seminar, “If the U.S. government can demonstrate a degree of consensus with its Asian allies and partners on resolving the Burma [coup] issue, I think that would be an early indicator of a willingness to expand the alliance. “
The Burmese military is determined to bring down the democratically elected government led by Aung San Suu Kyi, and current pressure from the international community will hardly work unless China, Russia and ASEAN act in concert, said Hebert of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But, that is almost impossible.
Without condemning the military, China is careful to maintain a balance among all sides in Myanmar
China is Myanmar’s largest trading partner and should have crucial influence over the situation, but since the military coup, China has tried to avoid any critical words in its public statements, with the official Xinhua news agency initially describing the coup as a “massive reshuffle of the current Myanmar government” by the military.
China and Russia have teamed up to block any major action the UN Security Council has wanted to take against Burma so far, and on February 3, China also teamed up with Russia to block a UN Security Council statement condemning the Burmese military. At a special session of the UN Human Rights Council on February 12, China and Russia both stated that they “oppose the convening of this meeting.”
Following the bloody crackdown on protesters by the Burmese military government on February 28, China’s Foreign Ministry said it was imperative to push for the situation in Burma to cool down, and that China had neither condemned the crackdown nor urged the return of a democratically elected government to power. Instead, China called on the international community to respect Myanmar’s sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity and national unity.
Since the coup, however, China appears to have slightly changed its position after the Burmese public questioned and protested China’s role in the coup. Reports that China first acquiesced to the coup and assisted the Burmese military with cyber control after the coup have proliferated, prompting Burmese people to petition the Chinese Embassy in Burma and in some cases to protest outside the Chinese embassy in the United States.
Khin Zaw Win, a political commentator in Yangon, told the Voice of America that Burmese distrust of China was already deep, and this current crisis has exacerbated that distrust.
On Feb. 15, Chinese Ambassador Chen Hai said the current situation in Myanmar was “totally unwanted by the Chinese side” and dismissed claims that China was involved in the coup as “totally nonsense. China later joined other UN Security Council members in calling for Aung San Suu Kyi’s release. This was in fact a sign of China’s discomfort with the coup.
The Australian National University’s Marston says that China has been taking a two-pronged approach in Myanmar, maintaining close ties with the military while also investing heavily in Aung San Suu Kyi’s government. China is actually more comfortable dealing with a government led by Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy than with the Burmese military government.
Beijing has invested a lot in its relationship with Aung San Suu Kyi and the democratically elected government,” he said. I think they have worked very well together in the past. The Burmese military is actually more worried about Chinese influence in Myanmar than the National League for Democracy.”
In September 2018, China and the government led by Aung San Suu Kyi signed a memorandum of understanding to jointly build the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor. In December of the same year, Myanmar established the Belt and Road Implementation Steering Committee, chaired by Senior Minister of State Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and vice-chaired by First Vice President Myint Swe, which includes a number of federal government ministers and provincial and state chief ministers. The two countries also signed a memorandum of understanding on cooperation on the feasibility study of the Mandalay-Kyaukpyu railroad during Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit to Myanmar on Jan. 10 this year.
Conversely, the military’s scrutiny of the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor, which runs through Myanmar, has also exceeded that of Aung San Suu Kyi’s government. The Burmese military has a long history of wariness of Chinese influence, especially as it believes China has been supporting some ethnic armed insurgent groups along the China-Myanmar border. When Chinese leader Xi Jinping visited Burma last year, the military reportedly complained to him about Chinese funding of the insurgents.
The Burmese military’s first coup in 1962 took place during the ethnic insurgency, and the military had defended the coup as a measure necessary to keep the country united. Burma’s border regions have seen an increase in ethnic conflict in recent months.
In the 1990s, as Western sanctions intensified and Burma’s economy deteriorated, the military sought to liberalize its economy to move away from its dependence on Chinese aid.
In 2011, Myanmar’s transitional government leader and former junta member U Thein Sein suspended construction of the Chinese-aided Myitsone hydropower plant. The project remains on hold.
The fierce democratic opposition to the coup in Myanmar has also raised concerns about long-term instability in the country, which threatens China’s vital economic and strategic interests, said Marston of the Australian National University. Beijing prefers a stable and peaceful environment in Myanmar so they can continue projects in the country that are critical to the Belt and Road and China’s strategy in the Indian Ocean.
At a regular press conference on March 4, following the escalation in Myanmar, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin continued to emphasize China’s consistent position that Myanmar is a “friendly neighbor” and called on all sides to exercise restraint. Wang Wenbin also highlighted the “ASEAN approach,” known as “non-interference in internal affairs and the principle of consensus,” to help cool the situation in Myanmar.
ASEAN countries are reluctant to sanction the military despite their divergent positions
In the face of weekend atrocities by the Burmese military, Association of Southeast Asian Nations foreign ministers held a special videoconference with representatives of the Burmese military on March 2. Although in a joint statement following the meeting, the foreign ministers agreed to call for restraint on all sides in Myanmar, only Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and Singapore called on the military to release Aung San Suu Kyi and others. The joint statement even avoided using the term “military coup”.
Singapore, Myanmar’s largest foreign investor, was tougher this Time, expressing “grave concern” in a statement and describing the use of lethal force against protesters as “inexcusable,” but even so, Singapore was reluctant to impose sanctions on the Myanmar military. But even then, Singapore was reluctant to impose sanctions on the Burmese military.
Asked in a March 2 interview with the BBC why Singapore had not imposed sanctions on the Burmese military, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said, “Outsiders have little or no influence. Whether it’s ostracism, condemnation, or passing a resolution or not, it actually has limited impact on what the Burmese side will do.”
He stressed that it is not the Burmese army or generals who will suffer from the imposition of sanctions, but the Burmese people, as it will deprive them of Food, Medicine, necessities and access to Education. He added that sanctions would also bring Burma back to those who are willing to talk to them, let’s say, China.
I think we have to be realistic about the situation,” he said. We have to express our disapproval of what has been done so far, because it goes against the values of many countries and, indeed, most human beings. But to claim action against them, what would that lead to? Some protesters saying military intervention in Burma? Will the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division come?”
Analysts point out that U.S. military intervention in Burma would be nearly impossible. In his first major diplomatic address Wednesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken already said, “We are not going to spread democracy by expensive military involvement or by trying to overthrow an authoritarian regime by force.”
Among the 10 ASEAN countries, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and the Philippines even initially refused to criticize the coup in Myanmar, describing it as an internal matter.
A Bloomberg article on Tuesday said Asian countries have reacted with indifference to authoritarian rule. This has preserved a lifeline for these military rulers in Myanmar as Asia refuses to act in concert with the U.S. and the West on sanctions. It was also the decision of Asian countries that allowed Burma’s military regime to survive broader Western sanctions before it embarked on the path to democracy a decade ago, the report said.
Indonesia is the largest country in ASEAN and has played a leading role in resolving issues such as the Cambodian conflict in the 1980s. Now, Indonesia has moved to find a way to resolve the Burma crisis. The special meeting of ASEAN foreign ministers was convened as a result of Indonesian efforts. Wunna Maung Lwin, the foreign minister appointed by the Burmese military government, was also present at the video conference.
However, one detail of the plan for the meeting has caused controversy and angered Burmese protesters. Under the program, Burma’s military government is to keep its promise to hold new elections within a year and to release Aung San Suu Kyi and other National League for Democracy politicians and allow them to run for office.
Burmese protesters argue that the elections won overwhelmingly by the NLD last November must be respected and that support for new elections would be tantamount to recognizing the military’s reversal of the last election results and would only encourage them to stage more coups. They also argue that in dealing with the junta, ASEAN risks legitimizing these coups.
Recent Comments