UNABLE to come herself last week to the annual world business leaders' knees-up at Davos in Switzerland, Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of Myanmar's democracy movement, got to address the assembled grandees by audio link instead (or read the text here). The timing, on Friday January 28th, was significant. It might have been Davos week, but it was also just a few days before the opening of Myanmar's first parliament in the country's new purpose-built capital, Naypyidaw.
The country's military rulers would have people believe that the new parliament, along with November's general elections—not to mention the release of Miss Suu Kyi herself from house arrest—all signify a democratic transition under way.
Miss Suu Kyi, however, mentioned none of the above to her Davos audience. Her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), believes that the whole show is a sham, designed to curry support for a repressive military regime that in fact has no intention of fundamentally changing its ways. Indeed, as if to prove the point, that very same day, on January 28th, Myanmar's highest court threw out an appeal against the government's dissolution of the NLD as a political party. The NLD had been banned for refusing to take part in what it regarded as the fraudulent elections in November.
Instead, Miss Suu Kyi's remarks dwelt on the economic hardships that her people have been experiencing, and her own sense of isolation during her years under house arrest. She pointed out how far Myanmar has fallen behind other countries, and how economic integration with the rest of the world is now necessary. Before the junta, when the independent country was still called Burma, its prospects for trade and prosperity looked as rich as any in South-East Asia.
Intriguingly, Miss Suu Kyi asked for more investment in technology and infrastructure, but said that investors “should pay close attention to the costs and collateral damage of our development, whether environmental or social.” Furthermore, she urged “those who have invested or who are thinking of investing in Burma to put a premium on respect for law, on environmental and social factors, on the rights of workers, on job creation and on the promotion of technological skills.”
There is a very lively debate going on among pro-democracy activists as to whether it is yet time to call for the end of sanctions by Western countries; but I don't think these comments of Miss Suu Kyi's were aimed at the foreign governments. Rather, I think she was speaking to Chinese, Thai and other Asian investors who are coming in and, by all accounts, doing great damage to many of Myanmar's minority communities and to its environmental resources—the Chinese in particular. I don't expect Miss Suu Kyi's appeals to change things very much, but I hope it focuses fresh attention on the misdeeds of those investors who are already operating in Myanmar.
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
I am grateful for being reminded that China is not only building sea-ports, airports dams, railways, roads (rebuilding the Burma Ledo road for example), but they actually built the capital Naypyidaw. Than Shwe is surely in enormous debt and deeply grateful to the Chinese.
I also gratefully acknowledge that there are not only many Chinese but also many Indians (millions?) living in Burma. Such a generous country full of hospitality towards foreigners! Perhaps that is the true reason that they even "tolerate" a "colonial elite" like Suu Kyi who as someone said "should be sent back to England". As a dumb Burmese I better learn how to be thankful for all the things I can learn from the other wiser commentators.
@tocharian wrote: Feb 1st 2011 11:47 GMT
“The Burmese government should also let all the recent Chinese immigrant businessmen, who are exploiting and pillaging the country (and buying Burmese brides) return to Zhong Guo where they belong with their families.”
-----------------------
Be real at least if you are incapable of being grateful.
What have you got left in Myanmar modernization had they doing that?
Even your new capital was built with massive "Zhong Guo" assistance.
Haven’t you got enough colonialism from the West? Or may be you don’t care, you probably do your living overseas somewhere in the West, possibly another of those few incubated in the colonial elitism like this Aung San Suu Ky did before.
No wonder you don’t care for the average Burmese people from the way you posted. Even the 2 millions of Indian people in Myanmar care for Burmese more than you seem to do. Just remember her dad fought against West colonialism too.
Remember, bottled up hatred won't get you anywhere. Be a happier person wherever you live.
The Burmese government should also let all the recent Chinese immigrant businessmen, who are exploiting and pillaging the country (and buying Burmese brides) return to Zhong Guo where they belong with their families. They have no business in Burma except create problems for the people.
China-bashing at it's subtlely devious worst! How about focussing for once on Uncle Sam's heinous shenanigans, world wide??
Myanmar government should let lady Aung San Suu Kyi return to London where she belong with her family in London. She has no business in Myanmar except create problems for people.
Aung San Suu Kyi is truly an inspiration to all who long for democracy, a better life, and peace. She is in my thoughts and prayers.
Let me add my 2 cents worth:
1. The corporations in the West are not even investing in their own countries (just look at the US unemployment rate) for short-term "financial" (i.e. profit-making) reasons. So why would they be interested in investing in Burma, except to exploit natural resources (perhaps not just gas and oil), which unfortunately always has some environmental impact (e.g. tar-sands in Canada). Besides, isn't it fashionable for Western businesses and politicians to "cosy up" with China. There is not much the "virtual Davos woman" can do to influence the complicated real greedy world of capital flow. It transcends politics (especially Burmese politics)!
2. China (including Chinese businessmen from Thailand and Singapore) do "invest" heavily in Burma. This fits in well with the strategic Chinese goal of of "sinicization of the periphery" (string of pearls). This economic, political and demographic "invasion" by the Chinese obviously causes a lot of environmental and social damage in Burma (except, of course, for the generals and their cronies). China is building gas/oil pipe lines, environmentally ill-conceived dams (almost all the electricity goes to China), railways (TE had a recent article about this), deep-water seaports (for both commercial and naval use), airports (a fancy one near Naypyidaw), etc. They also like to clear-cut Burmese virgin forests for timber (teak) and mine for gems (jade, gold and ruby) in Burma.
(I'm not getting 50 cents for this post!)
The Economist's obsession with blaming China has truly reached comical proportion!
There is in any case little Western interest in "investing" in Myanmar. Oil and gas, yes, but there is tremendous competition from the region. Otherwise, some niche investments and financial services. But that's about it. The West is no longer into manufacturing, which has already gone East.