What about Burma? (Unwinding)

I’m sitting here after Burma VI staring at the screen. I want to do another. My brain says, “You must be nuts. I’m tired!”

There’s a reason this is so exhausting.

Imagine, if you will, watching a movie and feeling like you’re there right in the middle of the action.

Make it 3D.

That’s what is going on while I write this, especially starting now. See, in 1961 when I was 8 years old, some of the events that I speak of here bring back memories of other events, other places in the world, other discussions I remember overhearing that had little or nothing to do with Burma, but had to do with SEATO and the Bandung Conference, things I remember Ethel talking about happening in Pakistan at this time – and her thinly veiled comments about the Western world and their disregard for certain Asian and African nations.

I remember Zhou Enlai. I remember Jawarharlal Nehru. I remember U Thant.

I remember integrity and respect, and sometimes I remember the lack of both.

I remember being so irritated with my mother once when I was 12 that when she said there were starving children in China, I got a shoebox, packed my dinner in it, and was ready to ship it off. If there were children starving, why were we eating so damned much?? I was serious.

My grandfather was once a missionary in Japan. He wrote about that. I have it somewhere in my things.

Aunt Daisy was an ambassador to eastern Europe. Somewhere I still have the letter of introduction from William Jennings Bryan, then Secretary of the State, and something she wrote about Poland prior to World War I.

Ethel worked for the U.N. many places – Pakistan, Israel, Turkey, Egypt, many places in the Middle East. I used to have things she brought back from there. They were stolen.

I remember our friends from Egypt, Korea, and Bengal. I distinctly, in fact, remember what I knew as the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971.

In all cases, I have memories of conversations, discussions, and some very strongly expressed opinions from that time in 1961 through the early 1970s. As I go through this period in Burmese history, up to the present time, they will come flooding back and I will have to stop and breathe. It may take a few days to write because of this, but I am not stopping.

Lael said to me tonight that I have lived a rich life. It has been diverse. It will continue to be diverse because I intend for it to stay that way. God is not finished with me yet, and until he is, I am not finished with the world.

**Additional note:  7 June 2008:

The series will continue.  Since I’ve written these parts, much has happened.  I was not wrong that Americans in particular walked away from the situation in Burma after a couple of weeks, but then they have come back since the devastation of Cyclone Nargia.  America’s appetite for sensationalism has yet to be quenched.  They care only that the U.S. makes it look like an attempt was made to help, and that the U.S. government (in the white hats) has been turned away by the evil junta (in the black hats) while the Burmese (the settlers) suffer.  The truth is that many NGOs and foreign aid workers have been going in from many nations and giving their assistance.  The U.S. could be less stupid about this, give their aid to the NGOs and foreign aid workers and let the process work this way.  How much simpler could that be?  Instead, we take our chocolate bars and go home in a huff.  More on that a little later.

What about Burma? Part Seven

As noted in the previous installment, Burma/Mayanma’s democratic rule ended in 1962 when General Ne Win led a military coup d’état. Very little has been said about his “Burmese Way to Socialism” slogan or the time in which he ruled, except for the anti-government protests which occurred at the funeral of U Thant, former Secretary-General of the United Nations.

I mentioned before that I had access to diplomatic discussions during the period of time U Thant was Secretary-General, and his death in 1974 was very hard for me to take. However, it was not surprising that there would be uprisings, nor a shock that the military would put down those uprisings with unmitigated violence. The protesters used U Thant’s funeral as a platform from which to launch their push for the former democratic rule, as his personal philosophies were representative of that period of time and the thoughts of Aung Wan when the democratic regime was first beginning.

Ne Win, of course, considered this a threat to his reign.

When Ne Win first took power, he declared Burma/Myanma be renamed The Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma. By 1964 he had abolished all political parties and named the only official Burmese party to be the Burma Socialist Programme Party, to which he had, conveniently, been “elected” president shortly after his rise to power in 1962. He claimed to rule in the name of nationalism, Marxism, and Buddhism, but quite frankly, he had no interest in the philosophies of those platforms or religious tenets. His intent was to isolate Burma/Myanma from the rest of the world and rule as dictator. To that end, the economy was nationalised, foreigners were removed, political parties were abolished (as mentioned already), political activists – or anyone perceived to be in disagreement with Ne Win’s rule – were imprisoned primarily at Insein Prison, and any sort of ethnic or socialist insurgency was put down without a shred of mercy. Anyone from outwith Burma/Myanma was allowed into the country only for a period of 24 hours, with a few allowed three days. Any contact with the West was viewed as suspicious and potentially threatening to Ne Win’s government.

Despite the threat of military force at every turn, students continued with periodic protests that would result in the automatic shutdown of the universities. These occurred with most impact in 1965, 1969, 1970, 1974, 1975, and 1987.

Most noted was the unrest in 1974. The effect U Thant’s death had on the nation of Burma/Myanma was telling. Ne Win refused a state funeral for this great man, holding it, instead, at a race course. U Thant’s coffin was stolen by students and raised up in a quickly constructed mausoleum on the grounds of the former Rangoon University Student Union. The military stormed the university and killed scores of students, with the end result of burying U Thant’s body at the foot of Shwedogan pagoda. Also in 1974, a Labour Strike incurred more killings and uprisings. It seemed to be a no-win situation at every turn.

The people were oppressed. Ethnic insurgencies occurred most frequently in the Shan states where the ethnic Karens had been originally promised their independence by the British so many years before. The devaluation of the kyat caused massive insurgencies by the Karens all the way to 1987. By cutting Burma off from the rest of the world, no trade could occur. The ability to survive on resources strictly within their country was impossible. The educated among the people emigrated. The black market and racketeering were rampant (as was also the case in the former Russian states at the time of the breakdown of the U.S.S.R.). In 1963, as a claim to put down the black market – and his further claim that insurgencies were funded with these notes, Ne Win declared the 50 and 100 kyat notes to be illegal tender, offering little or no compensation. In a matter of hours, people’s life savings were wiped out. He later installed the 15, 35, 45, and 90 kyats based on the foretelling of an astrologist that if he did this, he would live to be 90.

Discontent increased, Karen insurgencies were gaining strength, and with the 1987 statement by the United Nations that Burma was one of the poorest countries in the world, Ne Win finally stepped down as chairman of the Burma Socialist Programme Party. His resignation speech can be found anywhere on the Internet and includes these words: [if the protests and disturbances continued the] “Army would have to be called and I would like to declare from here that if the Army shoots it has no tradition of shooting into the air. It would shoot straight to hit.” In addition to that portion of the statement he placed the blame for the destruction of the Rangoon University Student Union squarely on his former deputy Brigadier Aung Gyi, and said that because it had happened and he was leader he had to take responsibility for the orders and thus gave the sword with sword speech (referenced in Burma VI). In essence he was foisting all responsibility for military violence onto others in an effort to leave his position “blameless”.

He was right about the Army’s shooting straight to hit. Thousands of demonstraters were shot, killed, and maimed between the 8th and 12th of August, 1988, the period known as the 8888 Uprisings.

From March of 1988 to September there were brief periods in which it appeared democracy might once again gain a foothold, but – with Ne Win’s orchestration from the background – General Saw Maung staged yet another coup d’état and took over, forming the military junta, State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC).

I am not the only one to believe that Ne Win continued for several years to manoeuvre through General Saw Maung and retain control. Once a dictator, always a dictator, until the day he dies. He fell out of grace with the SLORC ten years later, and eventually found himself under house arrest after some of his children were found guilty of allegedly plotting to overthrow the SLORC (renamed the SPDC) sometime later.

Please note that we do not refer to Ne Win’s time of command as a military junta. It is safe enough to refer to it as a dictatorship. He was a military officer, and he used basic socialist and Buddhist principles as a guise for the operation of Burma/Myanma, but this was not a junta. The junta comes under General Saw Maung with the advent of the SLORC. Unlike Ne Win’s shadowy Burma Socialist Programme Party, the SLORC was a committee of military leaders – a true military junta.

This does not make them any better.

More about the 8888 Uprisings, Karen ethnic states, the SLORC, Aung San Suu Kyi, Than Shwe, and the still pending constitution to come.

(to be continued)

What about Burma? Part Six

The Union of Burma was officially named and became an independent republic on the 4th of January 1948. Unlike most other territories and colonies created by the British empire, the Union of Burma did not become a part of the Commonwealth. There are several schools of thought as to why Burma was not included in the Commonwealth. Some believe that all of Southeast Asia fell outwith the Commonwealth. Others believe that including Burma would be unfair to the independence of the region. Still others believe it was a hotbed of insurgency and strife and the British Empire could well do without it. Then there are those who think that Aung San was just a darned good negotiator.

In any event, a bicameral parliament was formed with a Chamber of Deputies and a Chamber of Nationalists. (Doesn’t that just strike you right there with a bit of foreboding as to what comes later?)

The boundaries for Burma/Myanma today can be traced to the Panglong Agreement, first signed by Aung San in 1947. In that same agreement, the Shan states were promised their own independence 10 years past the date of the agreement. This was to happen before 1957. When Aung San was assassinated chaos ensued and so the promises made to the Shan states didn’t happen. They still to this day say, “Wait a minute. A deal’s a deal, and why do we not have our own nation?” They’re not Burmese. They are essentially closer to being Thai. And yet the land agreed upon, the deal struck, to this day still belongs to Burma/Myanma and to this day the Shan are still there.

This is a clear reminder to me that Israel and Palestine are not alone in their angst over who gets what territory as a nation, do they deserve to be a nation, and so forth. It also is clear to me that the old adage “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” applies in spades. It is the same principle that applies to orphan diseases. They’re not popular, and so receive less funding and less attention. Israel/Palestine – Shan/Burma. You see? More detail about the Shan states will be forthcoming. There is much more to them than meets the eye, as with the Karen.

Burma suffered economically through the many insurgencies by various Chinese communist party groups, the Karen National Union, Arakanese Muslims, all attempting to take over different regions in the early years of its independence. Burma did accept foreign assistance during these times, but became so frustrated with the American support of Chinese Nationalist military forces in Burma/Myanma that it refused to join the Western-sponsored Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) and instead supported and attended the Bandung Conference.

The Bandung Conference was held in Indonesia in April of 1955. The aims of the conference were to promote Afro-Asian economic and cultural cooperation, and to oppose colonialism or neocolonialism by the US, the then USSR, or any other nation that appeared “imperialistic”. What was striking to the Western World was that half the population of the world at that time was represented by the 29 nations in attendance. What a blow that would be/could be to Western civilisation’s egoncentric notion that everyone should “be like them” and bow to their will! This conference was followed by the Belgrade Conference in 1961, and eventually led to the establishment of the Nonaligned Movement. Fifty years later, while many struggles had diminished the value of the original strength these nations had between them, the essential philosophies of this group of nations was rekindled and the New Asian-African Strategic Partnership was developed just a few years ago.

An important public figure in the newly formed government was Aung San’s wife, Ma Khin Kyi, starting before the official date in January 1948 in the areas of social planning and social policy. She continued in this role until she was appointed Burma’s ambassador to India in 1960. It was fortuitous that this happened when it did, as it removed the family from Burma just before the military coup of 1962, and launched Aung San Suu Kyi’s educational experience into a new phase.

One thing we must not forget is the impact Burma/Myanma had on international events. Burma’s Permanent Representative to the UN and former Secretary to the Prime Minister, U Thant, was elected Secretary-General of the United Nations in 1961. This event impacted me greatly. This was the first year I remembered UNICEF. It was the first year I felt a serious attachment to the world in chaos and the world in development. I was eight years old. Probably the most striking feature of this election was that U Thant was the first non-Westerner to stand as head of any world organisation. He would hold this office with the UN for 10 years. He was the Secretary-General with which I was most familiar, the one whose international philosophies formed a great deal of what I believed. Again, Aung San Suu Kyi was an important figure. She worked at the UN during this time.

Do you see how a life in international politics, diplomatic circles, and in a form of ambassadorship can influence one’s view of the world?

While all of this was going on, Ne Win, who had been appointed Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces in 1949, became the head of the “caretaker government” in October 1958. In this position he was able to manoeuver and stage a coup in 1962 and appoint himself Chairman of the Revolutionary Council and Prime Minister of the Revolutionary Government, thus ending Burma/Myanma’s democratic government.

It can happen. Watch our government carefully, and you can see the potential for such things happening here.

In Burma, at the time, it wasn’t as difficult as one would think. When the people are either in turmoil or completely snowed, this happens. It was essentially “bloodless”, according to Western media, but why would the West care? By this point, Burma/Myanma had shown its frustration with the West’s “my way or the highway” form of “diplomacy”.

In fact, the youngest son of then President Sao Shwe Thaik was killed by a soldier that first day, the 2nd of March, 1962. On the 8th of July, more than 100 students and protesters were killed just in Rangoon.  Ne Win’s military force was ruthless; no dissention was tolerated. That same day, the historic Rangoon University Student Union was blown up. Between the time of the massacre and the destruction of the Student Union, Ne Win gave a speech whose final statement was one which, in reading it again today, I remember distinctly: “If these disturbances were made to challenge us, I have to declare that we will fight sword with sword and spear with spear.” What he meant was, we will shoot you in the back faster than you can turn around, and that is what the military under his control did. Until the heat of protests were quelled, universities were closed. They did not open again until the fall of 1964. Two years.

And from here we launch into the “Burmese Way to Socialism”.

(to be continued)

© 2007 Maggie Stewart-Grant and Silver City Press