An Extraordinary Moment: Obama Makes History in Burma  (Page 2 of 4)

The “enormously significant” visit to Rangoon, a senior State Department told reporters last week, will represent what “clearly stacks up as a major early success of the Obama administration,” the Wall Street Journal noted in an editorial that coincided with Obama’s arrival in Rangoon.

Aung Din, the head of U.S. Campaign for Burma, a Washington D.C.-based lobby group, notes that the reality of Burma’s coming in from the cold is much more complex and dates back to long before Obama arrived at the White House.

“President Bush responded to the situation on the ground when the human rights situation was terrible,” he said. “At the time, the Burmese government didn’t want to talk to America.”

During Bush’s tenure – eight years that were dominated by a focus on the Middle East and talk of the “Axis of Evil” – the U.S only reached out to Burma once in a meaningful way, says Aung Din, referring to the time that then-Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Eric John met with junta officials in Beijing to ask for the release of Suu Kui in June 2007. Less than a year ahead of a decisive referendum on Burma’s new, carefully manufactured constitution, the military regime flatly refused Washington’s request for the release of the Nobel laureate.

Shortly after these rare U.S.-Burma talks, the junta violently put down monk-led democracy protests prompting stricter sanctions from the Bush administration during the home stretch of its tenure. But it was the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act Bush signed on July 28, 2003, which set the tone for U.S. policy that, until recently, banned Burmese imports among other restrictions, while setting the junta on a course that would push it closer to Beijing and further from Washington.

David Abel, Burma’s former trade minister who by this time had moved into the prime minister’s office as an economic advisor and was close to retiring, says it was devastating for Burma’s economy.

“The whole country was unhappy, not just the government,” Abel said by telephone from his home in Rangoon.

It was during this period that the impact of U.S. sanctions – the tools U.S. officials say helped create the leverage for the ongoing change – became hotly disputed.

Jim Placzek
December 3, 2012 at 13:29

By now the whole dialogue between Jean Paul and John Chan has gone of the tracks and should be halted by the moderator.  Irrelevant and racist personal attacks.

December 3, 2012 at 01:49

Backing a social marxist like suu kyi is easy
Soros backs her and so does the Agenda 21

November 28, 2012 at 11:09

Living here in Thailand, born in the Vietnam war era (I am American) and observing what's going on in SE Asia, what I believe "reforms" boils down to is a long coastline of resorts hotels cheap housing and cheap sex industry for baby boomers planning their retirements and people wanting cheap vacations in these economic hard times–I foresee hotels and resorts and construction lining the Andaman Coast up from Phuket until it reaches the tip of Myanmar/Burma. That's reform all right, it's just been done in increments. First, destroy all anti-Imperialist movements in Vietnam and then the genocide/"revolution" of Cambodia, then break the will and pride of the SE Asians and take over control build exploit and build build build make hotels resorts cheap food for Westerns cheap prostitutes—horrible really. 

November 28, 2012 at 09:26

John Chan wrote: "Using “the bygone is bygone” to cover up the Whiteman’s ugly past, so they can claim moral high ground again? Don’t you think it is rather shameless?".
I think it has less to do with covering up an ugly past as it has to do with understanding that saying the following doesn't help anyone.
"My Grand pappy killed your Grand pappy and therefore I need to kill you." "We dones want the land back that we stolz from the ________ nd youz stolz from us". etc etc etc.
Other than that, what ever. (man, I really love that expression, but only because the way the Yank used it first on me and the sarcasm was dripping off his tongue". At the time he pissed me off, but with hindsight, it is a funny saying.

November 27, 2012 at 06:05

Great counter-arguments, Jean-Paul. You prove  that a smart decent human being always win over a bad program with full of making stuffs  like John Chan.

November 26, 2012 at 00:18

@ John Chan You are right, I should be promoting the french products because I am not ashamed, this was simply my mistake. In this case all you need to do is look at France's newest fighter the Rafale.
This was a fighter developed by the French internal military command and not any cheap rip offs of russian design. In fact India has recently signed a deal to purchase over 100 Rafale aircraft from France, they even chose the Rafale over the Eurofighter typhoon. How many countries are purchasing chinese J-10 junk? Oh thats right no country would want such a cheap toxic rip off when they can get the real thing. 
See John Chan, France is already doing its part to help those poorer nations build a strong military to counter any bully aggression from China. It is only a matter of time before nearly all of China's neighbours are armed to the teeth with western military products, seems like your pathetic dream of asian hegemony is already coming to an end.
By gone is by gone theory is used simply because it works to bring peace and prosperity to our world. No need to bring up 100 year old events, only china is doing that because it is a cry baby and is full of jealousy and fear of the west.

John Chan
November 25, 2012 at 11:10

Making up narrative to white wash their humiliation and embarrassment is a French forte, like the best glory the French has is Napoleon who was nothing but a disaster, no wonder you need the fabrications like the West centered Wikipedia to pop up you self-esteem.
Eurofighter is not a French product, are you saying French products inferior to the English and German’s products and you are ashamed to present them here?
Using “the bygone is bygone” to cover up the Whiteman’s ugly past, so they can claim moral high ground again? Don’t you think it is rather shameless?

John Chan
November 25, 2012 at 10:57

Only China appreciates Burma’s teak and jade and will pay high prices for them, there is nothing in Burma that the American wants, not even the oil. American does like teak and jade, and they have plenty oil themselves, Burma’s oil is American’s competitor.
The only value Burma as well the Philippines and Vietnam have for the American is a pawn to contain China. Burma’s future closely depends on China; it is a fate that Burma, the Philippines and Vietnam cannot escape regardless how many Chinese students and the dependents of rich “naked” CPC functionaries in the USA. It is better for the Burma to distinguish reality from hype, so that it would not be sold down the drain by the unscrupulous snakeoil salesman.

November 25, 2012 at 07:39

@ John Chan and other CCP brainwashed chinese
Please John Chan do not talk about the battle of Dien bien phu, I do not want to compare the military records of China and France….it would simply humiliate your country too much, I will instead save you the embarassment.
Hey John Chan why dont you look at how the French Battalion faired in the korean war against the chinese human wave army? Go have a look at the wikipedia article where french forces encountered the chinese in Chongwon, they not only held those pathetic chinese you call "soldiers" back, but they managed to kill 2000 of them while only 47 french were killed. Simply look at the article to see the humilation, all china had was cheap russian supplied arms.
I think france with its army of eurofighter jets could very easily protect and poor asian nation it needs to in order to contain that bully you call a nation. Eurofighter will prove to be too advanced for your cheap, counterfeit J-10. A sad clone of a 1980s derived russian warplane.
John Chan why dont you try and fix your overpolluted nation before you go on about the history of the white man? Or are you simply so insecure that all you can do is point to events that happened over 100 years ago, in order to gloss over china's shortcomings??

Share your thoughts

Your Name
Your Email
required, but not published
Your Comment

Sign up for our weekly newsletter
The Diplomat Brief