For the second consecutive week, the new history of the great is a dictatorship ruin in the Middle East. Although it is still to soon to say if Hosni Mubarak the Egypt share the same fate as strongman Tunisia Zine el Abidine Ben Ali, yesterday protesters controlled various parts of Cairo. Mr. Mubarak has promised, he will not be removed, and as long as the military stands with him, he was probably right.
The situation is similar to that at home, in Burma, where the likelihood of regime change seem to be much more distant much closer. If anything, the political situation in Burma is more dismal. In Burma, of course, is the military leaders who have the power of decision, despite the pretext to transfer power to a civilian Government through the sham elections last November.
The elected Parliament and then begin his duties in the new capital of Naypyidaw tomorrow, but military leaders have ensured that it will act as a rubber stamp to all they propose.
In Burma, as perhaps in Egypt, it would probably be a mass defection from the lower ranks of the army with a popular revolt to provoke a change of Government. But as reveals the story on page 10 of overview of dissent in the army this week, "Film offers" spectrum, perhaps not many far-fetched people might think.
There are other parallels between the situation in Burma and Egypt. Before democracy leader and Nobel Laureate Mohamed ElBaradei returns to its Egypt native to take part in demonstrations there and has been under house arrest _ as Chief Nobel Prize winner and Aung San Suu Kyi _ democracy promotion, he gave an interview in Austria. Mr. Baradei noted that the Egypt had elections just two months ago, "they have been completely rigged." Party of President Hosni Mubarak has left the opposition with only 3%. Imagine that. And the U.S. Government said it was shocked. Frankly, I was dismayed that anything he might say it's been appalled. "The word was inadequate to express how the Egyptian people felt".
If substitute us the Egypt for Burma and America for ASEAN, the story sounds familiar.
As the United States and other Western countries, Thailand particularly long saw fit to do business with a repressive regime while periodically offering fresh allegations politically and financially.
When Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had gone to Naypyidaw and has been photographed shaking hands with General Than Shwe last October, it was clear from the look on the faces of the PM that it would not be cropped the photo and he stayed over his coat.
But Mr. Abhisit some misgivings he cancelled and thought instead of the benefits that more trade and investment in Burma would bring to the Thai companies, including a contract to develop the port of deep sea in Dawei, Burma in the Andaman Sea stretch. Mr. Abhisit is no different from the previous first Thai making economic calculations similar, just as Barack Obama is no different than its predecessors compromised on the Egypt, although in the case of the United States, considerations were hunted as well as economic security.
The point is not that the Thailand should cut relations with Burma entirely. It's probably better to try to bring about changes through the commitment and particularly to insist on high standards of environmental and the human rights for all projects with the Thai investment.
Ms. Suu Kyi herself not condemned foreign investment in Burma outright. In fact, in a message audio easy crowd at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last week, it encourages, if it is done with a conscience.
"I would ask those who invested or who think investing in Burma to put a premium on compliance with the Act, the environmental and social factors on the rights of workers, on job creation and the promotion of technological skills," she says.
The Thai Government said he considers these areas as a priority, but it is not clear that this was expressed in formal agreements or contracts on Burma.
No comments:
Post a Comment