Non interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state is a basic principle of non alignment and is widely upheld by most Third World countries in these times when the big powers are attempting to change the rules governing international relations in the name of enforcement of human rights. Right to Protect (R2P) is the euphemism given for interference and is quite popular with industrialised countries although it is not so among poor nations. 

But this very praiseworthy principle at times can be double edged such as what has happened in Myanmar (earlier known as Burma). The country is under the firm grip of a military junta which has shown scant respect for democracy. The people are under the jackboot of the army which has brutally crushed two popular uprisings against the regime. In 1990 Aung San Suu Kyi scored a landslide victory at the polls but instead of being made prime minister she found herself placed under house arrest by the khaki clad thugs.

Now for almost 20 years she has been under house arrest and big Western powers have not effectively moved against the military regime. Noises have been made in the name of democracy, some sanctions have been moved against Myanmar but they do not seem to be very effective. Meanwhile the frail woman by herself continues to defy this ruthless regime although not very successfully.

Fake trial

Right now she is facing a fake trial, being charged for violation of regulations governing her house arrest. An American man who had arrived swimming down the river flowing past her house had entered her house without an invitation being extended. Suu Kyi faces the prospect of a five year jail sentence.

Silence of the non aligned and Buddhists

Her supporters within the country see the transparent ploy of the military. It is a strategy to keep her locked up till the elections scheduled for next year are held.

The reason for raising this issue of the principle of non interference is that the non aligned world is silent on the atrocities committed by this military regime for more than two decades. Is it because it would result in the interference of the internal affairs of Myanmar?

This is indeed a pathetic state to be in. Sri Lankans keep recalling the religious and historical ties that existed between the two countries for centuries. True enough we cannot intervene militarily. In the non aligned world the only country that has made such interventions and is capable of doing so is India. But shouldn’t Buddhists of this country rally round the suffering  Burmese Buddhists and criticise the brutal regime?  

In 2007 protests by the Burmese people against the escalating price of fuel resulted in widespread demonstrations against the government. It was a widespread protest against the military junta who crushed the peaceful protests with all severity. There were a few demonstrations staged in Colombo in support of the Burmese protestors but these protests were very feeble and went unnoticed. In contrast were the demonstrations of Tibetans in capitals around the world against staging the Olympics in Beijing.

Government patronage

Even more discouraging is that Sri Lanka is developing close relations with the Myanmar junta. The recent visit of President Rajapakse to that country could have been taken as an endorsement of the anti-democratic policies of the Burmese junta where the democratic opposition is crushed. Shouldn’t the Sri Lanka government have instead expressed sympathy with the Buddhists under the heel of a military regime? Or are we so impotent to that we are not expected to express an opinion against foreign nations except perhaps those like Israel?

Ineffective

On the other hand the United States as well as other European powers even though they speak out for democracy in Myanmar and for Aung Suu Kyi, are extremely ineffective with their criticism. In May this year the Obama administration extended a one year ban on US investments first imposed in 1997 and last week the American government extended sanctions targeting imports from Burma. Some reports indicate that there are many American and European companies prospecting for oil and gas in Myanmar.

Myanmar it appears is not being isolated but coveted by many nations including its neighbours. A column in a recent issue of The Economist says: Myanmar is, rich in natural gas, timber and gems. China and India strategic rivals to the east and west chummy up to the junta. The Burmese elite has second homes and bank accounts in Thailand. Russia sells arms to the generals as does China and both provide cover for the generals on the Security Council.

So Myanmar does in fact not engage with the world but its engagement takes the form of a rapacious capitalism with amoral partners. Hilary Clinton on her first trip to Asia said that isolation hasn’t influenced the junta. An American review of Myanmar policy is under way but official silence over Miss Suu Kyi’s trial hints at certain confusion, The Economist says.

Whither Suu Kyi

Poor Suu Kyi! The Third world countries cannot or does not want to go to her rescue. Whether it is the principle of non interference or some other issue we cannot say. But what will America and the West choose: A democratic Myanmar in the long run or short term agreement for riches of oil and gas with the junta?