Myanmar Elections…Did they Deliver?

“It’s an extremely bad sign that this election may actively intensify the root causes of conflict in Burma instead of trying to create some space for reconciliation”

-Stothardt a Democracy Activist.

The Plot

As everyone predicted the elections proved to be a sham and a step by the Junta to legitimise their rule. All remains same and it shall continue to be business as usual in “Myanmar”. Some first reports from the elections. Turnout Appeared Light in Myanmar’s Elections as per a report in New York Times. As per the report, the capital appeared nearly empty in the first Burmese election in 20 years where soldiers outnumbered voters in junta’s widely discredited poll.

Flashback

The announcement of November 7 as the date for elections sparked off a race to boycott the elections by various ethnic groups. This is a troubled path where various ethnic and political groups including the National League for Democracy (NLD) are following to stay away from the elections on the plea that the Junta will manipulate these elections and hence they need to be boycotted. Large areas of Burma are controlled by the Wa and other groups such as the Karen, Kachin and Mon.

The stickers, bearing the message “It is our right to vote or not to vote in the 2010 election,” were part of a boycott campaign launched by the activist movement Generation Wave. They appeared in public places ranging from bus shelters to shopping centers.

The election laws prohibited Suu Kyi and more than 2,000 other political prisoners from participating in the election. Suu Kyi has said the election is “absolutely unlikely” to be free and fair, and political parties will not have enough time to campaign. To make matters worse Suu Kyi has now been debarred from voting as she is under house arrest till after the elections.

The World’s Reaction

UNO, US and UK, amongst other western powers, condemned the elections unequivocally. The US decried that there was “no level playing field” for the polls. UK foreign minister, Jeremy Browne, said that the polls “are set to be held under deeply oppressive conditions designed to perpetuate military rule,” adding that the opportunity for prosperity and an open society “has been missed”. Ban Ki-moon reportedly renewed his appeal to the ruling junta “to honor their publicly stated commitments to hold inclusive, free and fair elections in order to advance the prospects of peace, democracy and development for Myanmar.

The Rules of the Game

Burma’s election proved to be insignificant without the participation of pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi, according to Htay Kywe, one of the imprisoned leaders of the 88 Generation Students group, who is currently serving a 65-year sentence in western Burma.

As the date for registering parties for the election drew close (Aug 30), the political parties who wanted to participate found it difficult to field candidates in at least three constituencies. According to the junta’s Political Parties Registration Law, a party must contest in at least three constituencies and meet the minimum number of party members within 90 days after its registration as a party was approved; failure could lead to its dissolution. Opposition parties complained that, due to the short period allowed for candidate registration and their lack of funding, they will be able to compete for only a limited number of the 498 seats in the national parliament. The regime’s election laws stipulate that if there is only a single candidate in a constituency, then he or she wins the seat—meaning that the junta’s proxy parties are guaranteed victory in many constituencies.

The gagging of media and ban on anti election or anti Junta articles was another major stumbling block towards conduct of free and fair elections.

“We don’t have any freedom of information now, and we won’t have it in the future,” said a journalist in Rangoon. “It is obvious that there will be no media freedom during the election. There is no way that this election will be fair without media freedom.”

In May 2008, the military regime did not allow domestic media to publish any reports critical of the proposed constitution, and it prevented publications from talking to voters and gathering news at polling stations.

The Manipulations

Then there was another twist to manipulating the elections. The election commission apparently delayed registration of opposition parties mainly the Kachin State Progressive Party (KSPP) and other Kachin parties until shortly before the election in order to prevent them from carrying out campaign-related activities. In the meantime, the government-backed Union and Solidarity Development Party (USDP), which has many Kachin members, is free to conduct its activities and campaign in Kachin State. The USDP is also understood to be planning the establishment of an alternative, pro-government party led by Kachin who are members of the USDP.

The Junta reserved seats for itself in both houses. As per latest regulations both houses of parliament reserved a quarter of all seats for serving military officers [110 out of 440 in the national level parliament and 56 out of 224 in the upper house]. In April, Prime Minister Thein Sein and more than 20 other senior generals with ministerial portfolios resigned from the military and registered with the new pro-government Union Solidarity and Development Party to contest the elections. The Burmese Junta undertook a huge military reshuffle, after which 10 officers of the rank of lieutenant general retired to participate in the general elections.

Finally, the three generals wanting to become President and vice Presidents also shed their uniforms on August 28, confirming the charade that the polls are likely to be.

“No one should be fooled. The generals may be exchanging their khakis for civilian clothes, but these polls are still a carefully arranged plan to keep power in the hands of the military junta,” Elaine Pearson, acting chief of Human Rights Watch Asia Division, said. The group said it also had concerns that intimidation of people and political parties would intensify.

The President’s Election Rules

The election of President calls for three candidates with one nominated by the military’s appointees in both houses. The other two have to be decided by the elected members of the upper and lower houses. The winner would become President and the other two will be the Vice Presidents. Through their electoral and preferential policies the military has ensured that atleast one of the Vice Presidents will be their nominee. However, with the votes of the Army representatives and USDP members of the houses combined, the military nominee may just make the cut for the President’s post.

The President will nominate Chief Ministers of the regions and states. The new constitution postulates that the Chief Minister be selected from members of the region/state legislature concerned. Apparently, the President is within his powers to nominate any military appointee in the legislature as Chef Minister of the state or region. The National Defence and Security-Council (NSDC) defined in the constitution will be a powerful body and have a military majority. Six out of eleven members will include the Commander-in-Chief and his nominees. In an extreme situation, the President, in conjunction with the NSDC, can declare a state of emergency and hand over powers to the Commander-in-Chief to govern the country for a specific period of time.

Supremacy of the Military

The basic principles governing the new constitution lay down the objective of enabling the Defence Services to participate as political leaders within the State. It confers extraordinary powers on the Commander-in-Chief while imposing on him no accountability to the legislature. He would nominate the Defence, Home and Border Affairs ministers. He is also the authority for administering and adjudicating all matters pertaining to the military. In effect, the military is above the law of the land.

Amongst such diverse machinations of the election process, it is indeed tough for the international community to participate in monitoring the election process. When viewed in perspective, the elections process must throw open more options for any meaningful solution. Mass manipulation will only marginalize Burma in the international arena with more sanctions, while internally there would be no change in the lives of its millions.

The Indian and Chinese Connections

Than Shwe’s visit to India amidst protests from the world at large was to generate understanding and promote economic viability of Burma.

The visit attracted obvious furor from the international community and the Human Rights groups castigating him for his anti democracy stance and activities in Myanmar. Indian, however, chose realpolitik over emotions. Aung San Suu Kyi supporters staged protests on the eve of the visit to mark their disgust and anger.

Shrewd and astute that he is, Than Shwe let his Indian counterparts know that he was here for promoting his interests and in so doing pitched his resources as the bargaining chip – between India and China. C Raja Mohan argues this succinctly when he says, “Playing India and China against each other and both of them against the West, he has showcased Asia’s new geopolitics on the Arakan coast of the Bay of Bengal.” He of course did not mention Bangladesh, which is also in contention because of the gas row and the India – Bangladesh- Myanmar pipeline to ferry Myanmar gas to India.

Premier Indian interests in Myanmar are the transport corridor to Vietnam through Myanmar, the counter insurgency cooperation through infrastructure development of the North East (Connect Mizoram and the North East through the Kaladan river starting at Sittwe port) and Gas. Connectivity was an important part of the agenda. However what tops the chart is India’s desire to limit Chinese influence in its backyard.

The Chinese want to avoid a trip down the Malacca Strait for their African and Gulf Oil and are laying twin pipelines to transport this oil to Yunnan to what the analysts call their Malacca dilemma. China has signed a long-term agreement with Myanmar for the exploitation of its hydrocarbon reserves and for the transportation of oil and gas through a 1,100 km overland pipeline from Kyaukryu port in Myanmar to the border city of Ruili in Yunnan. This pipeline will reduce the distance by 1,200 km and make China less dependent on the Malacca Straits, also termed in the strategic circles as the Malacca Dilemma. China is also developing Sittwe as a commercial port on the west coast. At Sittwe, both the Indian and Chinese paths seem to cross – a possible zone of conflict. The Chinese project pegged at $ 2 Billion is likely to be completed in two years while the Indian transport corridor may take up to 4 years. Then there are the offshore oil platforms outsourced by Myanmar.

All these developments heighten the probability of greater friction between the two Asian Tigers.  The key to opening their landlocked territories and overcoming the Malacca Dilemma thus lies with Than Shwe. Connectivity in this relationship assumes an important dimension. This is especially so when the dynamics of control of Indian Ocean are interplayed from a strategic perspective. Both India and China are keen to retain sea control here which marginalizes American dominance and creates conditions for greater friction. A sea farer’s assessment would take us into the nuances of the strategy of String of Pearls. India for one does not want Myanmar to be the golden bead in this string. The other worrisome golden bead being Pakistan, which now stands connected through Karakoram Highway to the Gwadar port.

That explains the Indian stance where she wants to limit Chinese influence in Myanmar and promote an arrangement for return of democracy.

Prognosis

Burma’s military government did not open polling stations in several eastern border townships for the elections. As per Burma’s election commission voting had been cancelled in several townships in Kachin, Kayin, Mon and Shan states, as well as townships in the Wa self-administered region reflecting the resistance of several ethnic armies to the government’s plan to convert them into border guards. The Junta expects ethnic groups to subvert the elections and hence have decided to cancel polling in these border townships.

“It’s an extremely bad sign that this election may actively intensify the root causes of conflict in Burma instead of trying to create some space for reconciliation,” Stothardt a democracy activist articulates.

The elections have wider ramifications both at home and abroad. Whether this election will lead to freedom of expression and political thought is suspect. There are currently no inputs to indicate that the state will undertake constructive dialogue with warring ethnic groups and reconstruct the political map of the country in a federal structure with minorities led by their own leadership holding the reins of power.

Nuclear agenda, drugs trade, geo-political relationships and economic policies remain upper most in the minds of the international community, apart from the domestic implications of the polls. Of essence is the big question regarding the future political discourse of Burma – will it adopt a Chinese model and if at all would there be some hope by the time the next elections are held? These elections, considered a sham in the west, based on a biased 2008 constitution, have evoked much negative response and anguish from the domestic and international audiences. However, the current trajectory is indicative of Than Shwe’s resolve to get a better deal than Ne Win at the end of his political career..

To end this piece with an observation from Asia News may be appropriate.

For those who want to look beyond 2010, the New Year will usher an era where Burmese parliament includes 25 per cent army officers, more than 50 per cent from the USPD, and less than 25 per cent from the NUP. Only a lucky few from other parties can hope to seat in the new legislature. All of them will be under the thumb of General Than Shwe in association with Maung Aye. This is the kind of change that can be expected.

The world needs to do more than hope. From the Indian view point our post Western Morals or Another Pakistan on our East remains pertinent.

Related articles

• Suu Kyi sounds conciliatory note toward Myanmar’s junta – Globe and Mail (news.google.com)
• Myanmar democracy icon calls her detention illegal (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• US must keep ‘eyes open’ in Myanmar talks: Suu Kyi (thehimalayantimes.com)