Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Burma/Myanmar
Picture Credit: GoWay After decades of British colonial rule, Burma gained independence and elected its first president, Sao Shwe Thaik, in 1948. The government was instable and challenged by communist rebels such as the Red Flag insurgents. In 1962, senior military officers took power in Burma, declaring it a “socialist state.” Then, in 1988, widespread pro-democracy protests challenged the military regime. After harsh repression, another military coup took place, followed by martial law. In 1989, the new leaders changed the name of the country to Myanmar.
In 1990, the government promised reform, and multiparty elections took place. The National League for Democracy, lead by Aung San Suu Kyi, won. But the military never accepted the results of the election and stayed in power. Ethnic armed guerilla movements destabilized the eastern border regions, while the urban population remained hostile to the regime. But the military rulers could rely on international economic and political support. The regime had lucrative oil and gas deals with companies from the United States, France and China. Arms supplies came from many sources including China and Russia. Feeling immune, the regime mobilized conscript labor to build a major gas pipeline, giving rise to many international NGO protests.
One of the generals, Kyin Nyunt, eventually agreed on a cease-fire with opposition groups and announced a seven-step "roadmap to democracy” in 2003. But there were no concrete results from this and other official gestures. The US government, for economic and geo-strategic reasons of its own, began to raise the issue of democracy in Burma and to press the UN Security Council for action. But other Council members, including China and Russia, insisted that the matter was purely internal and not a threat to international peace and security. For more than two years, they refused to allow Burma onto the Council’s agenda.
In August and September 2007, a massive protest began in several major Burmese cities under the leadership of Buddist monks. The regime repressed the protesters violently, jailing large numbers. UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon called on the military to stop the violence, release the detainees and start a dialogue with the opposition to promote democracy. The Security Council finally took up the issue, as did ASEAN, the regional organization of South East Asia.
Also see GPF's pages on: Sanctions
Back to: Security Council
Key Documents | Articles Key Documents
Statement by the President of the Security Council (October 11, 2007)
In an October presidential statement, the Security Council condemned Myanmar’s repression and asked for the release of the political detainees. The Council also stressed the importance of the UN special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari. It requested that the military junta accept the UN and Gambari’s recommendations. The statement reaffirmed the need for a dialogue with the opposition and the transition towards democracy. Moreover, it suggested the junta address the political, economic, humanitarian and human rights concerns of its people. Finally, the Council recognized Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s opposition leadership, and urged that a government liaison officer work with her and the United Nations.The Geopolitical Stakes of ’Saffron Revolution’ (October 17, 2007)
The US media has acknowledged that the mass protest in Myanmar was due, in particular, to the extreme rise in gasoline prices, which ironically was a result of IMF and World Bank demands. However, this Asia Times article says that Washington helped orchestrate the protests to increase its influence in the Far East and secure access to oil.Democracy, Democracy, No It Is Oil, Oil in Myanmar (September 28, 2007)
The author of this Daily Mirror article criticizes selective humanitarian intervention and the motives of the international community’s decisions. Myanmar suffers from military oppression, human rights violations, government corruption and a lack of democracy. Yet western countries won’t take active measures against the same military junta that provides significant oil and gas contracts to China, Russia, US, France and India. The UN Security Council has divided opinions as the US and China re-enact an old Cold War battle of geo-political power over Burma and the Asian region and its riches.Security Council Fails to Adopt Draft Resolution on Myanmar (January 12, 2007)
China and Russia vetoed a draft resolution on Myanmar introduced by the US and the UK in the Security Council. The resolution called on the Burmese government to cease violent oppression against the protesters, and begin negotiations towards democracy. China and Russia defended their vetoes, arguing that the Council was exceeding its mandate by interfering in an internal issue of the sovereign state of Myanmar. Exposing the Council’s double standards, the two veto powers pointed out that the Council does not take action on other countries with similar problems as Myanmar. (UN News)
How Strong Is the Military Regime? (December 21, 2000)
This analysis gives an overview of the Burma/Myanmar military regime also known as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). After 1988, the SPDC opened the country’s economic borders, promoting foreign investments especially within the oil and gas sector. The junta profited from these oil deals and relations with China, India and the ASEAN countries flourished. Civilian resistance has increased and international pressure for democracy continues. Despite this, the SPDC shows no signs of releasing its stronghold on the country. (International Crisis Group)
Articles
2008 | 2007
Picture Credit: Economist 2008
Security Council Report Update: Myanmar (May 14, 2008)
France invokes the principle of “Responsibility to Protect” at the Security Council for a military intervention to help victims of Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar. The Cyclone struck the Irradawdy Delta region of Myanmar on May 2, 2008 leaving tens of thousands dead. France criticizes the Myanmar government for an ineffectual response to the crisis, claiming that the ruling Junta prevents international aid workers from reaching affected areas. The French proposal has divided the Council; with China, Indonesia and South Africa claiming that a military solution will not help victims of the disaster. (Security Council Report)Asia Has Interests in Myanmar (April 7, 2008)
Several UN Member States have an interest in preventing democratic reform in Myanmar, says the Jakarta Post. The editorial notes that China supports the military rulers in exchange for natural gas and the construction of a pipeline from Myanmar into its Yunnan province. Furthermore, India and Thailand offer the junta financial support, hoping to gain favorable trade deals in the country’s rich natural resources. The author concludes that free from any effective pressure, “the Myanmarese military regime can continue to thumb its nose at the world.”Burma’s Sham Constitution (March 12, 2008)
Despite claiming to accept a UN “road map to democracy”, the Burmese junta has created a draft constitution barring opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi from standing for office. The document also allows the junta to appoint 110 out of 440 delegates in parliament. The article notes that the regime is able to ignore an international outcry against its human rights record due to political and financial support from China, India and Malaysia; and lucrative oil deals from companies in the US and France. (Guardian)2007
Burma’s “Saffron Revolution” Is Not Over (December 10, 2007)
According to a ITUC and FIDH joint report, the junta’s violent repression of the monks created great resistance from the Burmese population. The report set out four principles of action for the international community in the Burma situation. These principals are: international pressure to stop the violence; national reconciliation; cutting the junta’s economic support, especially in the oil, gas, timber and gem sectors; and support of a peaceful transition to democracy.Burma: Crackdown Bloodier Than Government Admits (December 7, 2007)
Human Rights Watch has released a report claiming that Burma’s government crackdown had more violent consequences than it claims. The report denounces the junta’s large scale persecution of protesters, monks and civilians. It also says that the government still represses the opposition. HRW has called upon the international community, especially the UN Security Council, and countries that have a close relationship with Burma, to effectively pressure the junta to stop.Asian Leaders, Seeking Myanmar’s Gas, May Go Soft on Sanctions (November 20, 2007)
China, one of the major ASEAN countries, does not support sanctions against Myanmar’s military junta. India, once a supporter of Aung San Suu Ky’s democratic movement, recently joined its ASEAN partners, China and Thailand in economic trade agreements with Myanmar’s junta. Only Japan canceled its gas and oil contracts with Myanmar, joining the US and EU in their pro-democratic campaign. Ironically, Chevron Corp, a US oil-giant stated it will keep its natural-gas project in the country even if that means losing US government tax benefits. (Bloomberg)Myanmar Should Agree on Change Timetable, UN Says (November 13, 2007)
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon declared that Myanmar’s junta should work with the opposition and the UN on a timetable for political change. Ban Ki-moon insisted Ibrahim Gambari’s visit to the country ended positively. He believes a process leading to a dialogue with concrete outcomes has started between the parties. Unfortunately, China did not reinforce the need for a timetable, as it believes that pressure may worsen the situation. China and Thailand represent the biggest economic partners of Myanmar’s military junta. (Bloomberg)UN Rights Envoy Enters Burma (November 12, 2007)
Myanmar’s military government allowed Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, UN Human Rights investigator for Myanmar, to enter the country after a four year ban. The government has felt pressure from the international community following repression of protests in August and September 2007. Mr. Pinheiro has a volatile history with the military junta, because he accused the government of making false excuses about its political prisoners. The mission’s objective is to determine the real number of people arrested and killed, and if the government tortured the prisoners. (Independent)Burma: Protest, Crackdown – and Now? (October 12, 2007)
According to this openDemocracy analysis, the Burmese conflict has three different but interconnected tensions. The first stems from disagreements between the military regime and the democratic opposition, in which the monks play an important role as mediators of possible future negotiations. The second demonstrates the division within the military government, as different factions struggle for leadership. The third focuses on excluded ethnic groups that fight the militant government through armed insurgencies. In addition, the author suggests that a transition to democracy should be gradual and all social sectors should be involved in making the constitution.Security Council Issues Its First Official Censure of Burmese Junta (October 11, 2007)
The US and Europe hope for greater action against Burma’s military junta, however China and Russia differ. These two countries only agreed to the Security Council statement because it offers diplomatic support to the mediation efforts of special UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari. According to Human Rights Watch, China and Russia, as well as India, supply arms to and have economic interests with the Burmese military government. (Washington Post)UN Chief Calls Crackdown in Myanmar ‘Abhorrent’ (October 6, 2007)
UN representative Ibrahim Gambari told the Security Council that the violence in Burma/Myanmar continues and that the military junta reports an unrealistically small number of causalities. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon asks for a united stance by the Security Council to support the efforts of the UN special envoy. Unity seems hard to achieve, especially since China believes increased pressure will only lead to confrontations and a loss of dialogue between the UN and the junta. (New York Times)Chevron's Pipeline Is the Burmese Regime's Lifeline (October 3, 2007)
As the junta continues to kill and imprison monks and civilians in Burma, the resource-rich, but sanctioned country stays economically afloat. Burma is rich in natural gas, something that US oil company Chevron benefits from. US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, a former Chevron board member, speaks critically against the human rights violations in Burma, while remaining quiet on who is financing the military regime. (AlterNet)UN Envoy to Meet Myanmar Junta General (October 2, 2007)
The Security Council unanimously requested that Myanmar’s military junta and the opposition, especially the National League for Democracy, start a dialogue mediated by UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon urged the junta to stop civilian repression and to release the imprisoned protesters. He also urged the junta, which controls the country’s natural resources, to respect the rights of the people and promote national reconciliation through democratic reform. (Reuters)UN Envoy Tries to Ease Tensions in Myanmar (October 1, 2007)
The United Nations envoy to Myanmar, Ibrahim Gambari met with the military junta and the opposition leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Gambari and US representative, Shari Villarosa, demanded that the junta stop the violence and reach an agreement with the opposition. Analysts argue that the junta will not change its strategy unless China, its economic ally and political “buffer,” puts pressure through sanctions or economic boycotts, which does not seem likely. (New York Times)Violence Continues in Myanmar (September 27, 2007)
China and Russia vetoed a preliminary UN Security Council draft resolution led by the US to pressure Myanmar’s government into stopping the violence. Although the international community disapproves of the Myanmar crackdown, China and Russia, for economic reasons, insist Council action is unnecessary. Experts monitoring the situation claim that the military response could have been more violent, if not for the presence of the highly revered monks and China’s influence. (Council on Foreign Relations)A Biography of Aung San Suu Kyi (May 28, 2007)
Aung San Suu Kyi, daughter of Aung San, Burma’s independent leader against British colonization, has become a pro-democratic icon. She started to resist the military junta in 1988 when she joined the National League for Democracy (NLD) movement. Even under house arrest, Suu Kyi manages to lead the opposition against the junta and has won several international peace awards. This Burma Campaign article shows the chronology of her fight throughout the years.
More information on the UN Security Council
