Burma Update

The Frontier Post, Peshawar, Pakistan
30 April 2005

Verghese Mathews

The ten ASEAN foreign ministers at their recent retreat in Cebu deferred the decision on the prickly question of Myanmar’s assumption of the chairmanship of the regional grouping in 2006 to the formal ASEAN foreign ministers meeting in Vientiane in July this year.

Many people within and outside the region were most disappointed that nothing more assertive came out of Cebu. It is fair assumption that there were also those who would have shaken their heads and muttered, with some disdain no doubt, that they were not at all surprised by the outcome. However, there is also a small group of close watchers of the ASEAN scene who see the picture from a different perspective and are not unhappy at the turn of events in Cebu. These realists see Cebu as part of a process and not a finality. They see advantage in the time gap between the last meeting in Cebu and the next in Vientiane.

These ASEAN watchers, as they may be called for want of a name, understand well that the Myanmar situation is extremely complex and recognise the imperative need to treat Myanmar with the respect a sovereign nation and an ASEAN member country rightly deserves. At the same time, they know that Myanmar should no longer be allowed to shy away from its regional responsibility, which ASEAN membership demands. The ball is now squarely in the Myanmar’s court and a statesman like response is expected from a country which had a proud tradition of holding its head high.

These ASEAN watchers, who are conscious of the part national pride plays in the psyche of the Myanmarese leaders, take statements from them quite seriously, in particular the recent one that Myanmar “is not a selfish country”. This is seen as a critical and telling statement by the ASEAN watchers who seriously believe that Myanmar has the capacity to harness the political will to demonstrate its sincerity as an unselfish regional player.

As a backgrounder, these ASEAN watchers understand that an ASEAN retreat like the one in Cebu is quite unlike a formal ASEAN foreign ministers meeting, like the forthcoming one in Vientiane, where the ministers are accompanied by their ambassadors, senior officials and experts and a host of note takers and others. At the retreat, there are just the ten foreign ministers present. The only outsider is a note taker. Here the gloves are off. Traditional Southeast Asian subtleties and shadow play are not in fashion. The discussions can be brutally frank as each minister details his concerns. There is no rancour.

The ASEAN watchers believe that that was precisely what had happened at Cebu. At no time before would the nine other foreign ministers have collectively bared their souls in such a manner to Myanmar. At the end of the day, the foreign ministers accepted that Myanmar had to decide for itself the course it was prepared to undertake and, as Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo said, Myanmar would naturally have to bear the consequences of its actions.

To the ASEAN watchers, therefore, deferring the decision to July is a solution that gives “face” to Myanmar. Its foreign minister would have faithfully conveyed the tenor of the Cebu discussions to the other leaders at home. Myanmar has sufficient time before Vientiane to either accelerate its reform timetable or rise above “selfish” national concerns and think regional.

In this context, two extremely important points need to be made. First, about this “bad precedent” card which provides a straw of hope for Myanmar. Some commentators have said that if Myanmar does not assume the chairmanship, it would set a “bad precedent” for ASEAN. The ASEAN watchers note that there is much confusion here. Interfering in the domestic affairs of a member country is indeed a bad precedent; persuading Myanmar to skip its turn as chairman is certainly not. Asking Myanmar to leave the grouping altogether is an unacceptable precedent but, to repeat, asking Myanmar to wait until it has sorted out its domestic problems before assuming chairmanship, is not.

ASEAN chairmanship is an annual alphabetical ritual, not a sacred cow. There is undoubtedly a certain prestige in the position but this is secondary. The basic requirement of the chairman is to be the interface with the dialogue partners and, in effect, with the rest of the world. Which CEO, anywhere, even in Myanmar, would appoint as an interface someone his organisation’s friends and important clients are unwilling or unhappy to relate to?

Second, a word of caution about grandstanding. Here, the ASEAN watchers are concerned and hope that the US and Europe, and their friends, could do better than jump the gun and make threatening statements about non-attendance, etc. This is not helpful at all and is more likely to be counterproductive. Neither the ASEAN watchers nor the government in Myanmar are impressed by these threats. This is just unnecessary distraction at a time when such distractions are not needed. The period between Cebu and Vientiane is better left for quiet diplomacy. In this context, close and trusted friends of Myanmar should quietly and privately encourage it to think big, to be regional and be statesman-like. China and India have each a definite role here. Will they help Myanmar and its people?

Copyright © 2004-5 The Frontierpost, All rights reserved