ALTSEAN-BURMA
Alternative Asean Network on Burma
campaigns, advocacy and capacity-building for human rights

Home

Research

Multimedia

Links

About Us

KEY ISSUES - INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
The biggest ongoing debate among countries seeking to bring about democratic reform and national reconciliation in Burma is the appropriate method to use to pressure Burma’s military regime to initiate meaningful democratic reform and national reconciliation.
United States

The US has been an ardent supporter of using economic sanctions against Burma’s military regime and has followed through in this position with the most comprehensive legislation and executive action against Burma’s junta. The US has also been the strongest advocate in the UN Security Council (UNSC) for the adoption of a resolution in Burma. In January 2007, the US introduced a Chapter VI Resolution on Burma before the UNSC. The resolution was co-sponsored by the UK. Current sanctions in place against the military regime under the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 include:

• Suspension of economic aid and ban on new investments.
• Prohibition on importing any Burmese product into the US.
• Arms embargo.
• Visa restrictions on SPDC members, USDA senior officials, SPDC, military above the rank of colonel, and civil servants above the rank of director-general.
• The freezing of assets of designated SPDC institutions and the barring of US funding for SPDC officials or employees in educational and cultural exchange programs.
European Union
The EU has also utilized sanctions as an economic weapon against the SPDC. However, the EU position has been inconsistently applied in some instances. Current sanctions in place against the military regime include:
• The delivery or supply of arms and related materiel, as well as equipment which might be used for internal repression, to Burma, from Member States' territory, by their nationals, or using their flagged vessels and aircraft.
• The provision of technical assistance, brokering services and other services related to military activities and to the provision, manufacture, maintenance and use of arms and related materiel and equipment which might be used for internal repression to any person, entity or body in, or for use in, Burma.
• The provision of financing or financial assistance related to military activities including for arms and related materiel and equipment which might be used for internal repression to any person, entity or body, in or for use in, Burma.
• A travel ban preventing listed individuals and their families from entering the EU.
• An assets freeze against individual members of the SPDC and a prohibition on making funds and economic resources available to those individuals.
• Suspension of non-humanitarian aid or development programs.
• The withdrawal of GSP privileges withdrawn because of forced labor.
ASEAN
ASEAN countries have advocated for “constructive engagement” with the SPDC since Burma was admitted to the group in 1997. But Burma has been a continuing embarrassment and problem for ASEAN, especially in its relations with the US and EU.
• The deteriorating human rights and economic situation led to the formation of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC) in late 2004 with MPs across the political spectrum to lobby ASEAN leaders about the situation in Burma.
• The political pressure applied by AIPMC member resulted in numerous achievements including: the SPDC decision to forgo ASEAN Chair in 2005; the Philippines support for putting Burma on the UNSC agenda; the ASEAN Summit decision to designate a special envoy to visit Burma to assess efforts for political reform and national reconciliation in December 2005.
• When the UNSC was considering a resolution on Burma, ASEAN countries rejected the notion of UN intervention and many ASEAN leaders said that the situation in Burma can be best addressed by ASEAN not the UNSC. Indonesia, a UNSC member at the time, abstained in UNSC vote.
United Nations
The UN has been actively involved in promoting democracy in Burma and addressing the serious human rights violations that are perpetrated by the SPDC military.
• The UN General Assembly has adopted 15 resolutions on Burma.
• The UN Commission on Human Rights has passed 14 resolutions on Burma.
• Two Special Envoys, three Special Rapporteurs, and one independent expert have been appointed to Burma beginning in 1990. Ismail Razali, the most recent UN Special Envoy, resigned in January 2006 after being kept out of Burma for two years. Likewise, Sergio Pinheiro, the current UN Special Rapporteur, has not been allowed in Burma for more than two years.
• SPDC allowed the visit of UN Under-Secretary for Political Affairs, Ibrahim Gambari to visit Burma in May and November 2006. Gambari was the first UN official to meet with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi since 2003.
• In September 2006, the UNSC put Burma on its agenda. In January 2007, China and Russia vetoed the UNSC resolution on Burma.
China
China is the SPDC’s strongest political ally. China provides the SPDC with significant amounts of military and economic aid. In return, the SPDC has given China contracts for oil and gas and plans are in the works for a pipeline to be built from Akyab to Kunming. In January 2007, China vetoed a UNSC resolution on Burma.
India
In the last several years, India has changed its relationship with Burma’s military regime from that of a detractor to that of a supporter. India is supplying a significant amount of military aid in exchange for SPDC attacks on Indian separatists groups using bases inside of Burma. India also wants Burma’s oil and gas resources and wants to maintain good relations with the SPDC so it can continue to invest and exploit these resources. India also wants to counter China’s influence in Burma.
Japan
Japan provides Burma with its largest source of development aid. Japan has been inconsistent in is approach to human rights issues in Burma.
South Korea
South Korean corporation, Daewoo, is a major player in Burma’s oil and gas industry. In late 2006, Daewoo was involved in a major scandal of providing illegal weapons technology to Burma. South Korea has not criticized of Burma’s military regime.
North Korea
Burma and North Korea have constructive relations with each other and diplomatic relations were re-established in April of 2007 after a 14 year break. There have been consistent, but unconfirmed, reports that North Korea has been assisting the SPDC with the construction of a nuclear reactor.
Russia
Russia provides the SPDC with significant amounts of military hardware and is viewed as a major political ally of the SPDC. In May of 2007, Russia and the SPDC entered into an agreement for the construction of a nuclear research center in Burma. Russia is also involved in oil exploration in joint ventures with the SPDC. In January 2007, Russia vetoed a UNSC resolution on Burma.
Australia
Australia is vocal critic of the SPDC’s human rights violations and the slow pace of implementing any meaningful measures of democratic reform. Australia provides development and humanitarian aid to the SPDC because of its partnership with ASEAN.