There is no shortage of news and daily accounts of human rights abuses and human tragedies in Burma (Myanmar) at the moment. International aid groups and governments from around the world are pumping in all forms of assistance while the military junta denies that problems exist and seek to protect themselves at the expense of the country’s people. In light of this situation, it’s useful to take a moment and look at the objective measures used to assess Burma and its government from a governance and human rights perspective.
Background
Since 1962 Burma has been ruled by a succession of highly authoritarian military regimes dominated by the majority ethnic Burman group. The State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), led by Senior General Than Shwe, was the country’s de facto government. Military officers wielded the ultimate authority at each level of government. In 1990 pro democracy parties won more than 80 percent of the seats in a general parliamentary election, but the regime continued to ignore the results.
The military government totally controlled the country’s security forces without civilian oversight.The government’s human rights record worsened during the year. The regime continued to abridge the right of citizens to change their government. Government security forces killed at least 30 demonstrators during their suppression of pro democracy protests in September, and they continued to allow custodial deaths to occur and committed other extrajudicial killings, disappearances, rape, and torture. In addition, regime sponsored, mass-member organizations such as the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA) and regime-backed “private” militias increasingly engaged in harassment, abuse, and detention of human rights and pro democracy activists. The government continued to detain civic activists indefinitely and without charges, including more than 3,000 persons suspected of taking part in pro democracy demonstrations in September and October, at least 300 members of the National League for Democracy (NLD), and at least 15 members of the 88 Generation Students pro democracy activists.
The government continued to prohibit the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) from working unhindered in conflict areas and visiting prisoners privately. The army continued its attacks on ethnic minority villagers in Bago Division and Karen and Shan states to drive them from their traditional land. The government abused prisoners and detainees, held persons in harsh and life?threatening conditions, routinely used incommunicado detention, and imprisoned citizens arbitrarily for political motives. NLD General Secretary Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD Vice Chairman Tin Oo remained under house arrest. The government routinely infringed on citizens’ privacy and restricted freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, religion, and movement. The government did not allow domestic human rights nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to function independently, and international NGOs encountered a difficult environment. Violence and societal discrimination against women continued, as did recruitment of child soldiers, discrimination against ethnic minorities, and trafficking in persons, particularly of women and girls. Workers’ rights remained restricted. Forced labor, including that of children, also persisted. The government took no significant actions to prosecute or punish those responsible for human rights abuses.
Ethnic armed groups allegedly committed human rights abuses, including forced labor, although to a much lesser extent than the government. Some cease?fire groups also reportedly committed abuses, including forced relocation of villagers in their home regions. Armed insurgent groups and cease?fire groups also recruited child soldiers. [1. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2007 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 11, 2008]
Governance Measures
Looking at the Wold Governance Indicators published by the World Bank Institute this year, it is easy to see how Myanmar is failing as anything but a criminal enterprise pretending to be a sovereign nation. Most notably, the Voice & Accountability measure doesn’t even register on the scoring continuum. This is, of course, the most publicised aspect of governance failure in Myanmar as daily press accounts report on government crackdowns on Buddhist monks, oppositions political parties, NGOs and aid workers.
Control of corrpution is nonexistent with the ruling junta being the primary culprit. This measure reflects the massive looting of the country’s economy by the junta. As was noted in its announcement of the most corrupt countries in the world, Transparency International stated:
Myanmar’s business elite thrive by serving the generals, while many in the country go without regular food and electricity, the top U.S. diplomat in Myanmar, Shari Villarosa, told reporters earlier this year.
Reuters reported in JUne that Amnesty International noted that the government conditioned receipt of donor aid to Burmese citizens. “Amnesty has reported several cases where aid delivered by the junta was conditioned on cyclone victims’ willingness to work, or to vote in the May constitutional referendum, or join the military. It has confirmed over 40 reports of soldiers or local government officials confiscating, diverting, or misusing aid intended for cyclone survivors.“
Burma’s Economy
The country suffers from pervasive government controls, inefficient economic policies, and rural poverty. The junta took steps in the early 1990s to liberalize the economy after decades of failure under the “Burmese Way to Socialism,” but those efforts stalled, and some of the liberalization measures were rescinded. Despite Burma’s increasing oil and gas revenue, socio-economic conditions have deteriorated due to the regime’s mismanagement of the economy. Lacking monetary or fiscal stability, the economy suffers from serious macroeconomic imbalances – including rising inflation, fiscal deficits, multiple official exchange rates that overvalue the Burmese kyat, a distorted interest rate regime, unreliable statistics, and an inability to reconcile national accounts to determine a realistic GDP figure. Most overseas development assistance ceased after the junta began to suppress the democracy movement in 1988 and subsequently refused to honor the results of the 1990 legislative elections.
In response to the government of Burma’s attack in May 2003 on AUNG SAN SUU KYI and her convoy, the US imposed new economic sanctions in August 2003 including a ban on imports of Burmese products and a ban on provision of financial services by US persons. Further, a poor investment climate hampers attracting outside investment slowing the inflow of foreign exchange.
The most productive sectors will continue to be in extractive industries, especially oil and gas, mining, and timber with the latter especially causing environmental degradation. Other areas, such as manufacturing and services, are struggling with inadequate infrastructure, unpredictable import/export policies, deteriorating health and education systems, and endemic corruption.
A major banking crisis in 2003 shuttered the country’s 20 private banks and disrupted the economy. As of 2007, the largest private banks operated under tight restrictions limiting the private sector’s access to formal credit. Moreover, the September 2007 crackdown on pro democracy demonstrators, including thousands of monks, further strained the economy as the tourism industry, which directly employs about 500,000 people, suffered dramatic declines in foreign visitor levels.
In November 2007, the European Union announced new sanctions banning investment and trade in Burmese gems, timber and precious stones, while the United States expanded its sanctions list to include more Burmese government and military officials and their family members, as well as prominent regime business cronies, their family members, and associated companies. Official statistics are inaccurate. Published statistics on foreign trade are greatly understated because of the size of the black market and unofficial border trade – often estimated to be as large as the official economy. Though the Burmese government has good economic relations with its neighbors, better investment and business climates and an improved political situation are needed to promote serious foreign investment, exports, and tourism. [2. CIA World Factbook July 24, 2008]
Business Risks & Opportunities
Despite the considerable risks assocated with doing business in Burma, there remains a number of global companies doing business there. As was noted earlier, the U.S. has imposed sanctions on the country and has banned companies from doing business there. However, there have been some notable exceptions to this ban, incluyding a waiver granted to Chevron Corporation. The company has extensive business in the country, primarily related to its joint venture with several other oile companies on the Yadana oil pipeline.
In addition, a number of Chinese companies remain in Burma and have offset their risk through political support from the CHinese (PRC) government, who provides diplomatic cover for their business development.
Though Burma remains a high profile cause for NGOs and social movements globally, the reputational risk associated with continued business activity in the country appears to be acceptable to those companies.
0 Comments.