The Nation (Thailand): Burma: Chinese asset or liability? - Vinit Vithidharm
Mon 6 Feb 2006
If China is to be seen as a responsible and honourable superpower whose “meteoric rise” is no cause for alarm in Southeast Asia, China needs, among other things, to refine its Burmese policy.
Burma has been Southeast Asia’s focus of attention in the post-Cold War era - the largest source of the region’s “non-traditional” threats and the biggest stumbling block in the region’s quest for deeper economic development and integration. How China is perceived in the region depends in large part on its Burma policy.
It is without doubt that the Burmese government, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), is one of the world’s most obstinate, repressive regimes, simply impervious to the views and sentiments of the outside world. It is also without doubt that the SPDC, Than Shwe in particular, is a master of political and diplomatic manoeuvrings and extremely skilful in playing games with the outside world - knowing when to appear soft and when to harden its position. It is also without doubt that Burma is largely self-reliant economically. It has existed in self-imposed isolation since General Ne Win seized power in March 1962, making it extremely resilient in the face of sanctions by the international community.
It is also a plain fact that the SPDC has survived the almost 18 years of international sanctions and other pressure largely out of protection and support in various forms by China and, to a lesser extent, India and Thailand.
China has been the Burmese government’s main guardian, standing ready to ward off any attempt by the international community to subject Burma to scrutiny, whether it is under the framework of the UN General Assembly, the UN Commission on Human Rights, the International Labour Organisation or, most recently, the UN Security Council (UNSC). After almost 18 years in power, the current regime surely could feel comfortable enough to drag its feet even further, as long as it felt sure that China would remain on its side on the UNSC - the council being probably the regime’s only, if any, source of concern. Furthermore, China has been the source of virtually everything Burma has been deprived of by the West - weapons, essential goods, funds for infrastructure development, investment and markets for its products.
It is another plain fact that in return for its role as main guardian and benefactor, China has been given the green light by the regime to establish its sphere of influence inside Burma, creating a buffer state with its chief adversary, India. It has also been given relatively free access through Burma to the Andaman Sea and the Indian Ocean. In return, China has been allowed to expand its economic interests rapidly in this land rich with natural resources - through natural gas, hydropower resources, minerals of various kinds, wood, fisheries and agricultural produce. Chinese goods are flooding markets in Burma. Many areas in northern and northeastern Burma have become Chinese settlements.
All of these activities - but particularly its role as guardian - have severely tarnished China’s image in the region.
China is not only seen as associating with a pariah state. The country reinforces the belief held by many in Southeast Asia that it is just an irresponsible and unreliable superpower simply seeking to exploit the situation in the region for its own self-interest, turning crisis into its own opportunity at the expense of the others in the region and beyond.
More important, this has reinforced the belief in much of Southeast Asia that the region cannot afford to see the United States disengage itself. Surely, as long as China’s image remains tainted by its association with evils of different breeds, the region will continue to clamour for a continued US presence as a more reliable counterbalancing force. This will certainly not be helpful to China’s aspirations for constructive engagement with Southeast Asia and a peaceful environment conducive to China’s rapid economic development.
Certainly, China is not expected to make a U-turn in its Burmese policy - joining the West in putting sanctions and other pressure on Burma. No sane person would envisage that sort of conspicuous pressure on Burma by China or Asean.
China should only be expected to understand that it stands to lose in the long term, in the broader strategic picture, by continuing the policy it has been pursuing since 1989. China should be expected only to contribute where it can to regional and international efforts to bring about positive change in Burma. We believe that simply to be more forceful in persuading the SPDC to move forward, China would gain a great deal more than it would otherwise. And in doing so, China should urge the SPDC to resolve political and ethnic conflicts within the country, stop being a liability to Southeast Asia and work with its friends in the region and beyond.
This is a recipe that would give China’s image in Southeast Asia a big face-lift. Burma should not be allowed to continue to be one of China’s liabilities, one that cramps its style as an aspiring world power.
Vinit Vithidharm is a Bangkok-based academic.
http://www.burmanet.org/news/2006/02/06/th...nit-vithidharm/