Washington’s love affair with Myanmar: It’s the resources, stupid!

<!–Nile Bowie–>

Nile Bowie is a political analyst and photographer currently residing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The ramshackle streets of Myanmar’s capital Yangon, with its ancient Buddhist pagodas and dilapidated colonial-era buildings, are one of the last places in the world where you’d expect to find Colonel Sanders.

If the democratic reforms recently undertaken by Myanmar, a once
dysfunctional and paranoid socialist state turned hardcore military
pariah, could be attributed to a smell, it would probably resemble
a bucket of KFC chicken. Since the dramatic thawing of US-Myanmar
relations following the political ascent of President Thein Sein
and his quasi-civilian regime in 2010, diplomatic figures such as
Hillary Clinton, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague, and even
President Obama have dropped by — and corporate America came along
for the ride too. Multinational players from Ford and Hilton, to
Coca-Cola and Google are now trying to find their place in what the
IMF calls the “next economic frontier in Asia”.

Many have questioned Washington’s fast embrace of this
long-isolated Southeast Asian state, which is still accused of
overseeing vast human rights violations and employing
discriminatory policies toward ethnic minorities. Are we to believe
that after decades of crippling US-EU sanctions and trade
embargoes, which nearly collapsed Myanmar’s manufacturing base and
made anti-retroviral drugs and other medicines unaffordable, the
West is now enthusiastically emboldened to extend a hand in genuine
support for peace and the rights of the population and minorities?
Sure, that narrative is warm and fuzzy, but one should review all
sides of the equation, especially when billions upon billions in
profit remain up for grabs. Myanmar is pristine and extremely
underdeveloped, and it holds abundant natural resources, from gold,
gas, and oil, to uranium, precious gems, zinc, and copper.

It’s not just about the resources though; Myanmar is a huge
potential energy exporter whose transformation promises to have a
major impact on the regional economy. Most importantly, Myanmar
sits on China’s southern border, making the country a vital trade
and energy crossroads for Beijing, which is keen to keep Myanmar in
its economic orbit as the Obama administration ‘pivots’ to the
Asia-Pacific. As the country continues on the trajectory of reform,
it may find itself in a contentious wedge between rival superpowers
sooner than later, especially since the US has shown interest in
expanding military ties with Myanmar as part of its foreign policy
strategy, much to the discontent of China, who has practically been
Myanmar’s sole investor for the past two decades. Observers from
Myanmar took part in annual US-led military exercises in Thailand
known as Cobra Gold for the first time in February 2013, and on a
recent visit to the White House, President Sein boldly called for
direct military-to-military training.

US President Barack Obama and President Thein Sein of Myanmar (L) hold meetings in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, May 20, 2013.(AFP Photo / Saul Loeb)

IMF to the rescue

Nobody doubts the fact that far-reaching economic and currency
reforms were long overdue for Myanmar, where it was once common to
receive loose cigarettes or packs of gum in the absence of small
change; shopkeepers would also receive payment in euros and offer
US dollars and other foreign currencies in change, and the currency
exchange system was in absolute disarray. The immediate question
is, what the kind of economic model Myanmar will adopt, and what
will be the ramifications? It can gradually develop its domestic
industries with capital controls, trade protection and subsidies
until they mature enough to compete internationally, while focusing
on steering investment into manufacturing and services sectors to
train the workforce in skills and technology. Or, it can swallow
the pill of the Washington consensus and the International Monetary
Fund (IMF).

In that scenario, Myanmar would see reduced public investment in
rural development, health and social services, and a reliance on
private international banks that favor multinational corporations
rather than domestic industries by keeping affordable credit out of
the reach of many local companies and start-ups. In other words, it
can place priority on foreign corporations and investors by rapidly
integrating itself into the global economy at the expensive of the
human infrastructure upon which future productivity depends. For
all intents and purposes, it looks like Myanmar has already sided
with the IMF. According to IMF chief Christine Lagarde, her
institution had a direct hand in designing the recent
currency overhaul that ended in the moves to float the national
currency, the kyat.

IMF mission chief Meral Karasulu was quoted saying how Myanmar
could see strong growth if it is willing to “take advantage of its
rich natural resources” and “young labour force”. To the ears of a
cynic, that may translate into ‘sell us your resources on the cheap
by exploiting your unskilled labor base’. It shouldn’t surprise
anyone that the kyat has depreciated and hit record lows against the US dollar, making
that cheap labour all the more cheaper. History tells us that
Western development strategies place much more interest on
extracting raw materials and turning poor countries into markets
for Western goods, rather than advocating policy that fosters
strong national industries that allow countries to take off and
break free of the low-income trap. Myanmar would be wise to avoid
those pitfalls as best it can, if it is allowed the space to do so.
 

An unidentified official (L) of French oil campany Total briefs visiting media at the metering junction of a gas pipeline in Nat-En-Tong, border town of Myanmar.(AFP Photo / Pascale Trouillaud)

The tight-lipped Lady

Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi is the subject of big-budget
blockbuster films and global praise, but inside Myanmar, she’s
garnered a surprising amount of criticism from her rank and file
following her ascension into parliament after more than a decade
under house arrest at the behest of the former military junta. In
June 2012, outbreaks of violence in western Myanmar left nearly 200
dead and hundreds of thousands of the ethnic minority Muslim
Rohingyas displaced following sectarian clashes with Buddhists.
President Thein Sein was criticized internationally for referring
to the Rohingya, who resemble Bangladeshis, as “illegal
immigrants”, although Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party
maintained a near-identical stance on the issue.
Washington, as well as Suu Kyi, remained questionably silent on the
plight of the Rohingya, which the UN classifies as one of the
world’s most discriminated ethnic minorities. Suu Kyi’s silence can
be attributed to the complex chauvinistic and xenophobic nature of
the Theravada Buddhist culture practised in Myanmar.

The pervasive climate of Buddhist nationalism in the country
ensures that she would face a backlash from her future voter base
if she takes the side of the Rohingya Muslims. Suu Kyi is widely
expected to run as a presidential candidate in the 2015 elections,
and she has already disenchanted many activists by praising the
military, despite previously accusing them of heinous human rights
abuses. Since she entered politics, she has curbed her criticisms
of the regime and hasn’t offered comment on the countries ongoing
conflicts with various ethnic minority militias throughout the
country. It should be remembered that Suu Kyi was a hardline
advocate in favor of Western economic sanctions on
Myanmar, which created enormous suffering for the population. It’s
difficult not to see Suu Kyi has disingenuous, as she now frequents
the World Economic Forum calling for foreign investment that could
have benefited her people years ago. It appears she’s had a change
of heart since she now has the prospect of standing for
elections.

Nobel laureate and Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi (L) and Japanese Crown Prince Naruhito posing for photographers during their meeting at the latter's residence Togu Palace in Tokyo. Suu Kyi is on a week-long visit to Japan.(AFP Photo / Imperial Household Agency)

From Beijing’s sphere to
Washington’s Orbit

It’s difficult to ascertain what prompted Myanmar’s flight
toward the West. While the inept and unsustainable nature of the
former political and economic system was clear to everyone, some
say that Myanmar resented China’s stranglehold over their economy,
likening it to a colonial relationship. There is no doubt that
Beijing will look at expanding US-Myanmar military ties as a threat
and a provocation, especially if Myanmar continues morphing into a
US ally. As once anti-imperialist generals become US-friendly
strongmen, and principled activists begin to look more like
calculative politicians, Myanmar’s transformation is key to US
strategies of containing China and resuscitating its economic
muscle through trade with Southeast Asia. As institutional
repression is dismantled, there is a real danger of movements and
leaders that once championed civil liberties and human rights
becoming enablers of neoliberal capitalism, indiscriminate
privatization and deregulation. The fact that nearly all-Western
leaders still refer to the country under its colonial title, Burma,
may be a cynical reflection of prevailing economic attitudes toward
this dirt-poor, resource-rich, and geo-strategically crucial Asian
state.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on : RT