Relations with the West and Japan

Abstract

Against the background of its problematic human-rights record and the military regime's continued extra-constitutional rule, Myanmar has faced mounting diplomatic pressure from the international community since the renewed detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in May 2003. This Adelphi Paper examines Myanmar's foreign policy, which is predicated on state-building and development, as well as defending the regime's decision to give priority to establishing an enduring constitution over immediate national reconciliation and democratisation. It discusses how the regime has been able to take advantage of the economic, security and geostrategic interests of both China and India in the country to achieve developmental and security goals, and how its relations with Beijing in particular have assumed ever greater significance as Western capitals have sought to place Myanmar under the scrutiny of the UN Security Council on the grounds that its domestic circumstances have regional security implications. It discusses the regime's objectives, concerns and challenges in its relations with the US, Japan and Europe; details the difficult decisions of the leadership as ASEAN has started to relax its application of the non-interference norm when dealing with Myanmar; and examines its interaction with the UN, particularly the secretary-general and his special envoys. The paper concludes by analysing the likely regional and international implications of intensified political pressure on the military regime.

Notes

¹ In line with the development of the situation in Myanmar and the refinement of policy in Washington, repeated adjustments have been made to the language in which US foreign policy objectives towards Myanmar have been couched; see the semi-annual Reports to Congress on the Conditions in Burma and US Policy Toward Burma, for the period 2001–2005 at: http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/burma/; for the period 1996–2000 see http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/us-burma_report.html.

² For US activities to support democracy in Myanmar, see US Department of State,‘Report on activities to support democracy activists in Burma as required by the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003’, 30 October 2003: http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/burma/26017.htm.

³ The Generalised System of Tariff Preferences was recommended by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in 1968. Under this scheme industrialised countries would grant trade preferences to all developing countries. The European Community first implemented its GSP scheme in 1971.

⁴ For details on Japan's temporary ‘freeze’ of ODA see Yuki Akimoto, ‘A Yen to Help the Junta’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 12, no. 10, October 2004, p. 18.

⁵ Toshihiro Kudo, ‘The Impact of the United States Sanctions on the Myanmar Garment Industry’, Discussion Paper no. 42, (Chiba: Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organisation, December 2005): http://www.ide.go.jp/English/Publish/Dp/pdf/042_kudo.pdf.

⁶ Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State, ‘Conditions in Burma and US Policy Toward Burma for the Period March28, 2004–September 27, 2004’: www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/36721.htm.

⁷ ‘Interview with Colonel Hla Min’ by Channel-J News Agency, printed in Hla Min, Political Situation of the Union of Myanmar and its Role in the Region (Yangon: Ministry of Defence, 2004), p. 151.

⁸ This draws on Selth, ‘Burma's Muslims and the War on Terror’, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, vol. 27, no. 2, March–April 2004, p. 117.

⁹ Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State, ‘Conditions in Burma and US Policy Toward Burma for the Period September 28, 2003–March 27, 2004’: www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/31335.htm.

¹⁰ See Ardeth Maung Thawnghmung, ‘Preconditions and Prospects for Democratic Transition in Burma/Myanmar’, Asian Survey, vol. 43, no. 3, May/June 2003, p. 453.

¹¹ Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State, ‘Conditions in Burma and US Policy Toward Burma for the Period March 28, 2002–September 27, 2002’: www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/burma/19283.htm.

¹² Steinberg, ‘Myanmar: Reconciliation-Progress in the Process?’, Southeast Asian Affairs 2003, pp. 173–4.

¹³ Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State, ‘Conditions in Burma and US Policy Toward Burma forthe Period, September 28, 2002–March 27, 2003’: www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rpt/burma/19554.htm.

¹⁴ Powell, ‘It's Time to Turn the Tables on Burma's Thugs’, originally published in the Wall Street Journal, 12 June 2003: http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2003/21466.htm.

¹⁵ Hla Min, Political Situation of the Union of Myanmar and Its Role in the Region, p. 16.

¹⁶ ‘Burmese Woo Congressional Aides’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 12 December 2002, p. 10. The contract, it is argued, was not extended due to the failure to win certification on narcotics cooperation. Myanmar also does not have the resources required for a long and intensive lobbying campaign on the hill.

¹⁷ Matthew P. Daley, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, US Department of State, ‘Response to Question submitted for the record by Dana Rohrbacher’, in ‘Developments in Burma’, Joint Hearing before the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and the Subcommittee on International Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Human Rights of the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, 108^th Session, 25 March 2004, p. 99.

¹⁸ Steinberg, ‘Burma/Myanmar: A Guide for the Perplexed?’, in Badgley, ed., ‘Reconciling Burma/Myanmar: Essays on US Relations with Burma’, pp. 50–1.

¹⁹ ‘Unimpressed By Burma's War on Drugs’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 5 December 2002, p. 10.

²⁰ McConnell, ‘Sanctions are the most effective weapon against Burma's military regime’, Time Asia, 23 January 2006: http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501060130/burma_vpt.html. Senators McConnell, Richard Lugar and Dianne Feinstein as well as Congressman Tom Lantos participated in the Burma: Time for Change, Report of an Independent Task Force, sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations, 2003. For their additional views see pp. 34–6 of the report: http://www.cfr.org/publication/6054/burma.html.

²¹ US Department of State, ‘Conditions in Burma and US Policy Toward Burma for the Period March 28, 2004–September 27, 2004’.

²² Ibid.

²³ Thet Khaing, ‘US report riddled with errors: Govt’, Myanmar Times, vol. 11, no. 207, 8–14 March 2004.

²⁴ ‘Aung San Suu Kyi not on hunger strike, Thai FM’, People's Daily Online, 5 September 2003: http:English.people.com.cn/200309/05/eng20030905_123761.shtml; ‘U.S.criticizes Suu Kyi treatment’, CNN.com, 7 September 2003.

²⁵ Thet Khaing with Agence France-Presse, ‘Sanctions and isolation are a ‘lose-lose’ strategy for all, USA must adopt fresh approach: Govt’, Myanmar Times, vol. 10, no. 189, 27 October–2 November 2003.

²⁶ ‘Myanmar: Versuchs-Kernreaktor, Südostasien aktuell, July 2001, p. 362.

²⁷ Selth, Burma's North Korean Gambit: A Challenge to Regional Security?, Canberra Papers on Strategy and Defence, no.154 (Canberra: Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University, 2004), p. 27.

²⁸ Lintner and Shawn W. Crispin, ‘Dangerous Bedfellows’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 20 November 2003, p. 22–4.

²⁹ ‘Concern Over Burma–North Korea Ties’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 16 October 2003, p. 14.

³⁰ ‘Myanmar-North Korea Nuclear, Missile Cooperation Alleged’, Asian Export Control Observer, no. 1, April 2004, p. 11: http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/observer/asian/pdfs/aeco_0404.pdf; Keith Luse, the aide in question, raised the point again in a speech at the Heritage Foundation on 9 April 2004. See Paul Kerr, ‘US accuses Burma of seeking weapons technology’, Arms Control Today, May 2004;www.armscontrol.org/act/2004_05/Burma.asp.

³¹ Quoted in ‘Burma denies Korea Nuclear Link’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 11 March 2004, p. 9.

³² Quoted in ‘North Korean Nukes in Burma’, Far Eastern Economic Review, 15 April 2004, p. 10.

³³ Daley, Prepared Statement before the House Committee on International Relations, Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific and the Subcommittee on International Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Human Rights, House of Representatives, 108^th Session, Washington DC, 25 March 2004: http://wwwc.house.gov/international_relations/108/dale032504.htm.

³⁴ Myanmar has signed and/or ratified the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; it signed the 1972 Seabed Treaty and the 1995 Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapons Free Zone. See Selth, Burma's Armed Forces, chapter 10 (‘Burma and Exotic Weapons’).

³⁵ Selth, Burma's North Korean Gambit, p. 34.

³⁶ Personal Communication, August 2005.

³⁷ See Sergei Blagov, ‘From Myanmar to Russia with love’, Asia Times, 12 April 2006: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/HD12Ae01.html.

³⁸ ‘Myanmar agrees to restore ties with North Korea-sources’, Reuters, 11 April 2006: http://asia.news.yahoo.com/060410/3/2iu5l.html.

³⁹ The United States Security Strategy for the East Asia-Pacific Region 1998: http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/easr98/.

⁴⁰ Cohen, DoD News Briefing, 01 October 1999: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/1999/t10011999_t001bang.html.

⁴¹ Aung Zaw, ‘The Upturned Chair’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 13, no. 8, August 2005 p. 17.

⁴² Paula J. Dobriansky, Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs, US Department of State, ‘Toward a Free and Democratic Burma’, Remarks at Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement with National Endowment for Democracy and Church World Service, Washington DC, 26 October 2005: http://www.state.gov/g/rls/rm/2005/55844.htm.

⁴³ The US administration repeated the claims, but the military government rejected them unequivocally, admitting only to isolated cases of rape.

⁴⁴ On the background, see ‘US to Intensify Pressure on Burma’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 14, no.1, January 2006, p. 8.

⁴⁵ Briefing with US Trade Representative Rob Portman, Busan, South Korea, 16 November 2005: http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/56940.htm.

⁴⁶ ‘President Discusses Freedom and Democracy in Kyoto, Japan’, 16 November 2005: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051116-6.html.

⁴⁷ Hill, ‘Asian Pariah’, Wall Street Journal, 4 January 2006: http://www.burmanet.org/news/2006/01/04/wall-street-journalasian-pariah-christopher-hill/.

⁴⁸ Hill, ‘Burma: Update and Next Steps’, Statement before the House International Relations Committee, Washington DC, 7 February 2006: http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/60553.htm; Eric G. John, ‘Burma: Update and Next Steps’, Statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, Washington DC, 29 March 2006: www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/63839.htm.

⁴⁹ Hill, ‘East Asia in Transition: Opportunities and Challenges for the United States’, Statement to the Asia and the Pacific Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee, Washington DC, 8 March 2006, http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/62755.htm.

⁵⁰ Cited in ‘Myanmar's Military is “Impervious” to Criticism, Kelly Says’, Bloomberg, 3 June 2004.

⁵¹ ‘Junta Hits Back at US’, The Irrawaddy, 24 May 2004.

⁵² Samuel Blythe, ‘Myanmar's junta fears US invasion’, Asia Times, 28 April 2006.

⁵³ Lintner and Crispin, ‘Dangerous Bedfellows’, p. 24.

⁵⁴ For this and other explanations see Aung Zaw, ‘Dreams of a Rat Hole’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 13, no. 4, April 2005, pp. 8–10; ‘Retreat to the Jungle’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 13, no. 12, December 2005, pp. 28–9.

⁵⁵ Burma UN Service Office, National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma and The Burma Fund, The Crisis in Burma: An Agenda for the United Nations Security Council? (Washington DC: The Burma Fund, October 2003): http://www.kus.uu.se/Burma/Burma_UNSC.pdf.

⁵⁶ A comprehensive analysis can be found in Steinberg, Burma: The State of Myanmar (Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 2001), chapter 9.

⁵⁷ Guyot, ‘Myanmar: Several Endings, No Clear Beginnings’, in Daljit Singh and Liak Teng Kiat, eds, Southeast Asian Affairs 1996 (Singapore: ISEAS, 1996), p. 265; personal communication, August 2005.

⁵⁸ Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan on the Lifting of the House Arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, 11 July 1995: http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/announce/archive_2/suukyi.html.

⁵⁹ Steinberg, Burma: The State of Myanmar, p. 258.

⁶⁰ Patrick Köllner, ‘Japan's Engagement in Myanmar: Zwischen Demokratieförderung und Geschäsinteressen’, Südostasien aktuell, January 1999, pp. 64–71.

⁶¹ Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Japan-Myanmar Relations’: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/myanmar/index.html.

⁶² Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Yoriko Kawaguchi's Visit to Myanmar (Overview and Evaluation)’, 6 August 2002: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asiapaci/asean/fmv0207/myanmar.html.

⁶³ Burma Information Network-Japan, ‘Is Japan really getting tough on Burma? (Not likely)’, 28 June 2003: http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs/bi_on_oda.htm.

⁶⁴ For an overview of Japan's ODA to mostly non-governmental recipients in Myanmar see Yuki Akimoto, ‘A Yen to help the junta’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 12, no. 10, October 2004, p. 18.

⁶⁵ See Karen E. Smith, ‘The EU, human rights and relations with third countries: “foreign policy” with an ethical dimension?’, in Smith and Margot Light, eds, Ethics and Foreign Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 185–203.

⁶⁶ European Commission, ‘The EU's Relations with Burma/Myanmar’: http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/myanmar/intro/; European Commission, DG Trade, EU Bilateral Trade and Trade with the World: Myanmar, 9 March 2006.

⁶⁷ Personal communication, Yangon, August 2005.

⁶⁸ European Commission, ‘Burma/Myanmar – Council Conclusions: General Affairs Council,9 April 2001: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/human_rights/doc/gac_conclbm.htm.

⁶⁹ European Union, Council Common Position (2001/757/CFSP) of 29 October 2001, extending and amending Common Position 96/635/CFSP on Burma/Myanmar, in Official Journal of the European Communities L 286/1, 30 October 2001.

⁷⁰ European Union, Council Common Position of 21 October 2002 amending and extending Common Position 96/635/CFSP on Burma/Myanmar, in Official Journal of the European Communities L285, vol. 45, 23 October 2002.

⁷¹ European Union, General Affairs and External Relations Council, ‘Burma/Myanmar-Council Conclusions’, 14 April 2003.

⁷² European Union, Council Common Position of 21 October 2002.

⁷³ Council Conclusions, 16 June 2003: Burma/Myanmar, http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/myanmar/intro/gac.htm#bu160603.

⁷⁴ European Commission, ‘Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner in Kyoto for the ASEM Foreign Ministers Meeting, 6–7 May 2005’, 03 May 2005: http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/news/ferrero/2005/sp05_534.htm.

⁷⁵ European Commission, Humanitarian Aid Office, ECHO Decisions 2005: http://europa.eu.int/comm/echo/information/decisions/2005_en.cfm.

⁷⁶ UK Department for International Development, Country Profiles, ‘Burma’: http://www.dfid.gov.uk/countries/asia/burma.asp.

⁷⁷ For Total's overview of its activities in Myanmar, see ‘Total in Myanmar: a sustained commitment’: http://burma.total.com/en/publications/sustained_commitment.pdf.

⁷⁸ Jörn Dosch, The Changing Dynamics of Southeast Asian Politics (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, forthcoming), chapter 6.

⁷⁹ Among the European institutions, the European Parliament has been the SPDC's sharpest critic.

⁸⁰ Shada Islam, ‘Europe plans more engagement in Burma’, The Irrawaddy, vol. 13, no. 4, April 2005, pp. 15–16.

⁸¹ Hervé Jouanjean, Deputy Director General, External Relations, European Commission, ‘National Reconciliation and Foreign Assistance – The Future of the People is Our Challenge’, Burma/Myanmar Day, Brussels, 5 April 2005: http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs3/Burma_Day_KeyNote_Speech.htm; Taylor and Morten Pedersen, ‘Supporting Burma/Myanmar's national reconciliation process: challenges and opportunities. An independent report for the European Commission’, January 2005: http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs3/Independant_Report-Burma_Day.htm.

⁸² ‘2006 State of the Union Address’, Washington DC, 31 January 2006: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/wh/rem/60153.htm.