THE AUTISTIC TALE OF PARIAH STATES
COMMENTARY ARCHIVES, 19 May 2009
Two former British colonies, one formerly «the rice bowl of Asia», another formerly «the breadbas-ket of Africa», Myanmar and Zimbabwe are today among the most destitute and isolated countries in the world. Time for a new approach?
Narrowing Minds
The recent histories of Myanmar (the UN-recognized name) and Zimbabwe are heartbreaking tes-timonies to human inadequacy in dealing with conflict, subsequently producing vicious spirals of misery. As John Virgoe of the International Crisis Group observes in the case of Myanmar, «Gov-ernment repression and economic mismanagement bear primary responsibility for this situation. But 20 years of sanctions and restrictions on aid have made matters worse» (guardian.co.uk, November 1, 2008). The same could be said of Zimbabwe – as could Virgoe’s conclusion that «Megaphone moralizing is not a policy and will not help the people of Burma. The west has tried it for two dec-ades, and it has failed.»
While many underlying issues – the momentous challenges facing either country – are hugely dif-ferent, the Myanmar and Zimbabwe do seem to share a couple of significant commonalities, where there is very little correspondence between the perceptions of reality held by the despised govern-ments and by their opponents abroad.
The Isolationism-Confinement Dynamic
Seen from the outside, looking in at the governments, the core issues might be something like pro-democracy and human rights versus anti-democracy and dictatorship. Seen from the governments’ points of view, they might in large part be questions of sovereignty and national security versus imperialism and national disintegration. Two extreme positions in a struggle over fundamental and apparently irreconcilable goals.
Two decades of entrenched misconceptions and reductionism later, either worldview is utterly unre-alistic and autistic; reflection stopped a long time ago. (Otherwise, how could futile «megaphone moralizing» have gone on for so long?)
The autism of the «international community» leads to progressive confinement of Myanmar and Zimbabwe, and to punishment through horrific embargoes. The autism of the ostracized govern-ments leads to progressive isolationism, and to attempts to fend off outside pressures. The two au-tisms mutually reinforce one another, and are reciprocally harmful – a harmony of harms. This shameful dumbing down of complex conflicts has led Myanmar and Zimbabwe to status of pariah statehood (alias «failed states»), thus freezing an intolerable situation. Similar reflections led UN representative to Myanmar Charles Petrie to conclude, in his 2008 End of Mission Report, that «The ultimate challenge in Myanmar is how to engage effectively and in a principled manner with an authority, considered as ‘pariah’ by much of the international community, on behalf and in the best interest of an oppressed and neglected people.»
Both-And Plus
Understanding and dealing with the complexity of the conflicts is a starting point for constructively to deal with them. Worthy a mention, anyone may have highly understandable, highly illegitimate goals – understanding them is essential anyway, but could also lead to new insights and perspec-tives. Arguing, then, that it is urgent and basic to seek to understand what the governments of either «pariah state» wants, «[…] is not a question of ‘rewarding’ the generals. It is simply a matter of re-sponding to the suffering of the people who cannot wait for the distant prospect of political change» – again in the words of John Virgoe.
Self-interest, greed and reproduction of the status quo surely play a role for Than Shwe and Robert Mugabe alike. The challenge is to identify other issues in play.
Sticking to Myanmar for the remainder of this text, say we want to have democracy, human rights and sovereignty, and to avoid dictatorship, national disintegration and imperialism.
Say that an important aspect of dictatorship is about a fear that, without an iron grip, Myanmar might fall apart, disintegrate into mini-states ridden with new power struggles and new repressions. For democracy and human rights, how about regional autonomies in a federation, with much coop-eration and integration between the autonomous regions, and common policies toward the rest of the world? Plurality within, unity without?
Say that an important aspect of isolationism is about a fear that, without an iron curtain, Myanmar might become a client state of former colonial powers, of neighboring China or India, or of the USA, and be absorbed into their markets. For sovereignty, how about a middle way, not as a full player in the world system, but as an emerging actor in the South East Asian community, with much cooperation and integration within the region?
In addition to fending off imperialism and retaining sovereignty, aiming for deep integration of Myanmar into the region, there are plenty of issues which could only be efficiently addressed through regional cooperation – such as energy and environmental issues, trafficking and infrastruc-ture, to name but a few. Positive engagement with Myanmar, and on a more level playing-field, is also far more likely to have any success in incentivizing an opening of the country than embargoes and megaphones.
Either extremes, those of the generals and those of the international opposition, are dangerous, but there are middle ways – a Burmese Way to Democracy, to Development, etc., where there is room for something of everything.
Out of Crisis, Opportunity
Impossible? Cyclone Nargis flooded Myanmar in May 2008, with new suffering, new problems, but it seems also to have left some new opportunities in its wake. After international aid was initially barred, the UN would soon classify it as «a normal international relief operation». Indeed, since May 2008, the generals ruling Myanmar have opened up the country to an historically unprece-dented extent, and channels of communication have been established between them and the external aid organizations.
In this lies significant opportunity for international actors to act to change the long-lasting deadlock, opportunity to increase communication, to establish permanent bodies of communication, of mutual exploration and learning – first for coordination, but progressively toward more cooperation. Not unlike Cuba and the USA these days.
In this lies, as well, an opportunity that has been wasted so many times, opportunity to invest in de-velopment, by expanding upon the existing framework, and moving ahead at a pace which would have to be negotiated. At the head of the table should be the basic needs of those most in need, pre-siding over the deliberations of those who have disregarded them for far too long. The recuperation of Myanmar’s role as the «rice bowl of Asia» requires hard work, but is entirely within reach – it requires only to stomach talking with a pariah.
_____________________
Adrian Bergmann is an M.A. candidate with the Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies, Eng-land.
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 19 May 2009.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: THE AUTISTIC TALE OF PARIAH STATES, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.
Read more
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article:
COMMENTARY ARCHIVES: