• 
• 

Published on October 15, 2007

After 19 years of the Burmese junta's recalcitrance, the UN Security Council (UNSC) has finally come out with a non-binding statement "strongly deploring" Burma's use of violent force against peaceful demonstrators - including monks and students - last month. It was the first time that the council's members have had a meeting of the minds on Burma. Even though they had to soften their words, this was a step in the right direction. Indeed, such a chorus was long overdue.

Thanks to the courage of those monks, international consciousness has been awakened to the fact that something must be done to stop the conflict and violence that has been brought about by the suppression of the junta leaders in Burma since 1988. Apparently, there is also an emerging consensus that the military junta cannot avoid engaging the opposition.

The UN resolution also called for the early release of all political prisoners and remaining detainees. It urged the junta leaders and all other concerned parties to work together towards a de-escalation of the situation and a peaceful solution.

For years, the junta leaders have not kept their promises of national reconciliation and dialogue. Instead, they have led the world to believe that everything is all right and that dialogue and reconciliation would proceed. The junta continues to intimidate the opposition National League for Democracy party and other dissidents. Immediately after the crackdown, the junta severed all online connections with the outside world, depriving outsiders of daily news and video clips that would have shown the true nature of the regime. More monks and civilians were arrested at that time.

Ibrahim Gambari, the UN's special envoy for Burma, has returned to the region for wider consultation with countries in the region. Gambari is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont today.

This trip will allow him to learn first hand what regional leaders are thinking given what has transpired in recent weeks. For years, the role of the special envoy for Burma has been limited and made timid by the circumstances inside Burma. At this point in time, it is hoped that the special envoy will be able to articulate the situation inside Burma and come out with workable UN-led resolutions.

The UN's efforts to solve international crises are many, each with its own special character and rules of engagement specific to different regions. However the one with the most resonance for this region would be lessons learned during the UN's successful operations in Cambodia from 1979 to 1993. Through UN initiatives, Cambodia was able to transform from a war-torn country into one with a dynamic economy and a thriving democracy.

Of course, to sustain a long UN presence, sufficient funding must be guaranteed. Sustained consultations among stakeholders on Burma such as China, Japan, the US, the EU, Asean and India is a prerequisite to finding an acceptable solution for all. Ways must be found to promote national reconciliation.

China and Russia should be applauded for their support of the non-binding resolution. Of course, they could have done more to send a stronger message to the Burmese junta. History has shown that stronger and binding resolutions would bring about a veto, so it is better to have a resolution that brings the Burmese junta to task. As long as the Burmese crisis continues to be featured in the council's agenda, both countries cannot escape public scrutiny. In this case, the UNSC will meet again on Burma in the coming weeks. The agenda will continue to highlight the roles played by these two members, which have backed the regime unwaveringly since 1988.

The fact that the UN is now taking the lead also points to Asean's collective failure to rein in its pariah member. For Asean to have the UN do the dirty work of cleaning up after one of its members is the best way out, as this does not violate the grouping's cardinal principle of non-interference in member countries' internal affairs. Asean must be more assertive when it comes to exerting peer pressure because when one of its family members behaves as Burma has been, other members should be able to warn them and impose punishments if necessary. So far, Asean has avoided any such action.