Myanmar 1991

The claim that Myanmar (Burma)1 is unique is necessarily, tautologically, accurate when describing history and culture. Its preservation is a constant theme of the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), as this essay will attest below, and no doubt strikes a responsive chord among the Burmans. The admonition, so consistently and loudly articulated, to preserve cultural tradition in the light of what to the SLORC is perceived as foreign political and cultural intimidation, is an appeal for political legitimacy. Myanmar's uniqueness is, however, a misnomer when descriptive of the current difficulties facing the state ? those generic problems that undercut the legitimacy the SLORC seeks: the definition of the role of the military, how far should the tentative openings to the private sector be allowed, resolution of ethnic conflict, the efficacy of centralist government, the nature of the Union, and the personalized use of power. Myanmar shares all these conundrums with many states also con fronting or appearing to wish to confront problems of fundamental political and economic transformation. How such transformations are intended in Myanmar is discussed below. In 1991, there was growing international concern with such broad issues as human rights, democracy, self-determination of peoples, and the role of the private sector. Events in the Soviet Union and its republics, in Yugoslavia and Eastern Europe more generally, and elsewhere highlighted the widespread political and economic liberalization that seems to be a general trend. Linking the two sub sequently or in tandem is a separate and more difficult endeavour.2 The international donor community has also, at least rhetorically, adopted this trend. The European Community was planning to tie foreign economic assistance to political as well as economic liberalization. The United States has newly re articulated this policy. Former Prime Minister Kaifu, in a doctrine named for him, said that Japan would do the same, and monitor military expenditure as well. The SLORC has, however, responded most negatively to external public pressures from the West on this topic. Myanmar in 1991 remained the most authoritarian and rigid of all Southeast Asian states even if openings to the private sector continued. Except for an eph emeral effervescence of liberalization in the summer of 1988 and what has turned out to be the conclusive victory of the National League for Democracy but the military's inconclusive implementation of the results of the 1990 election, there was

Political science · Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography · Global Political and Social Dynamics

• The European Union's Myanmar Policy

  Open Access•Jorn Dosch, Jatswan S Sidhu•Journal of Current Southeast…•2015

  Add to list

• Bureau power in Southeast Asia

  Fred W Riggs•Asian Journal of Political Science•1993

  Add to list