Investing in a transition to democracy
Sixteen years on, there is still no democracy in Myanmar. Today, a military dictatorship maintains its oppressive rule over a complex nation of 55 million people, and continues to impoverish a country that, not so long ago, was the rice bowl of Asia.
The greatest hope for change was a general election on May 27, 1990. Confounding the expectations of the military elite and the predictions of seasoned observers, Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) won in a landslide. However, the result was never implemented. Instead, a National Convention was formed in 1993 to draft a constitution for a 'discipline-flourishing democracy'. Its work remains unfinished.
External agents have key roles to play in promoting change. China may not need to become a responsible stakeholder in global affairs to pressure a regime it has long supported. It is also in Beijing's interests to secure its southern border. Similar calculations could be made in India, and many Association of Southeast Asian Nations capitals.
More widely, popular concern can highlight the fate of Ms Suu Kyi, held under house arrest for 10 of the past 17 years. It can publicise the plight of ethnic groups targeted by brutal campaigns of national unification. It can prompt the UN and other agencies to pay proper attention to injustices in Myanmar.
Ultimately, however, the key roles must be taken by insiders. For a while, it seemed that the relatively liberal General Khin Nyunt might play South Africa's reformist president, F.W. de Klerk, to Ms Suu Kyi's Nelson Mandela. However, that possibility was denied when the general was purged from the regime in 2004.
Ever since, the likelihood that democracy might emerge from within the junta has been small. Indeed, the recent removal of the capital to a jungle redoubt in Pyinmana appears to set the stage for a restoration of the monarchy destroyed by British imperialism 120 years ago.
Attention, therefore, turns to Ms Suu Kyi and the NLD. For years, the party urged supporters to isolate Myanmar under its military rulers. It favoured stringent economic sanctions and even questioned humanitarian aid. However, it is now shifting its position.
On February 12, it issued a statement of reconciliation proposing that General Than Shwe allow the 1990 parliament to convene. In return, it undertook to recognise the junta as an interim government charged with overseeing a transition to democracy.
On April 20, the party released a second special statement arguing that its offer to recognise the junta as a legal government would facilitate the flow of emergency aid from international humanitarian agencies. In response, the regime claimed the NLD was linked to 'terrorists and destructive groups', and threatened to ban the party.
While senior UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari last week became the first outsider to meet Ms Suu Kyi in almost three years, the NLD continues to face determined attempts to erase it from the political scene.
In such circumstances, the party needs to make one further overture to the generals. The economic sanctions that it has long supported have immense moral appeal. On a practical level, however, inward investment from many parts of Asia means they can never work.
Investing in a military dictatorship is unsavoury. However, to sustain a transition to democracy, Myanmar requires a reasonable level of development. By inviting the world to invest in a long-term project of economic renewal, the NLD can promote eventual political change.
Ian Holliday is dean of the faculty of humanities and social sciences of City University of Hong Kong
