By SIRI MON CHAN – It is fascinating and interesting to see an article on economics “Sanctions Debate Among Mon Leaders” written by Lawi Weng and Kyae Goe. It is very interesting because economic issues are equally as important as political, social and other issues in a country. However, not many of our Mon journalists and media have touched on economic issues. Well done, Lawi Weng and Kyae Goe, for handling this controversial but still very essential issue.
Economic sanctions and economics itself are very complicated issues. Economy of a country and economic sanctions are inseparably intertwined with political, social and other essential issues. Therefore, the issue of economy and economic sanctions should not be viewed in isolation and, instead it should be viewed in combination with other issues.
As a result, when the economy of Burma is closely analysed it is found that people in Burma suffer not because of the economic sanctions imposed by the international community but because of the economic mismanagement and the political, social and legal systems in Burma. Burma is a very rich country in terms of natural and human resources. But, Burma in general and Burma economy in particular is poorly managed by the successive military regimes. Economic sanctions on Burma were initially applied only in 1997 by the US and EU. However, Burma has become a Least Developed Country (the LDC Status) since 1987 under the so-called Burmese way to socialism (a closed-door economic policy and centrally planned economy). Therefore, blame put forward by the military regime, the All Mon Regions Democracy Party(AMDP)and other pro-election ethnic political parties on economic sanctions for poverty in Burma are illogical.
If the military regime in Burma made a genuine attempt to improve and develop Burma’s economy, it could still be done even amidst economic sanctions. In order to improve and develop the economy in a country, macroeconomic policies and the economic infrastructures should be firstly implemented and developed. In a modern economy, economic infrastructures such as telecommunication, broadband internet access, telephone lines, and the reliable and secure energy supply (i.e electricity) are critical in facilitating economic transactions and economic developments. The economy in the new millennium (21st century) is totally different from the the 20th century economy. In the 20th century, the railways, highways and sea-liners were built to facilitate the trade and economic transactions. Nowadays, in the new millennium (digital age), the telecommunication and a very fast broadband internet access are required and built to facilitate and develop the economy.
In Burma, there is even no reliable and secure electric supply, let alone reliable telecommunication and broadband Internet access. How can Burma’s economy be developed and improved without the basic economic infrastructures to facilitate economic transactions in the new millennium such as a secure electric supply and telecommunication such as the telephone and reliable Internet access. There are frequent blackouts even in major commercial and industrial capitals such as in Rangoon, and the Internet access is constantly monitored and restricted by the regime. In addition, in order to improve the economy of a country, the investment in human capital (such as in education, technology and skill-development) is also very crucial. How can Burma’s economy be developed and improved with merely 4% of the national budget allocated to education and health combined. In 1950s, both the GDP per capita in South Korea and Bangladesh were around US$250. But since then South Korea has invested in human capital (in education etc.) and Bangladesh has made no substantial investment in education. Now, the GDP per capita in South Korea is US$ 18,340.76 in 2010 and Bangladesh GDP per capita is still US$ 641.00. So, we do not have be an economic graduate from Harvard Business School to objectively analyse whether Burma’s economy has suffered and the country is poor because of the economic sanctions or because of the economic, social and political mismanagement by the successive military regimes.
Therefore, it appears that the claims of the military regime, the AMDP and some other pro-regime ethnic political parties that Burma and Burmese people suffered under the sanctions are totally fraudulent and wrong. It is also economically wrong to analyse just micro-economy (an industry such as garment industry in an economy) to see the full picture of the impact on an entire economy (macro-economy) of a country. The AMDP and other ethnic political parties are acting as a propaganda mouthpiece of the military regime in campaigning to lift the sanctions. At the same time, the claim of AMDP for a social change (rather than regime change) is also equally fraudulent. How can someone implement a social change by means of economic development if the economic development is hindered by the current political, social and economic systems and policies. Under the current political, social and economic systems, there will be still no across-the-board economic development in Burma as a whole even if the sanctions are lifted. As there will still be crony-economy in Burma without a change in the political, social and economic systems, only a few companies and a few people in the inner circle of the regime will reap the economic benefits. A few people in the country will become richer and most of the people in Burma will still be poor if the economic sanctions are lifted but the current political, social and economic mismanagement is still in place. If the regime change is yet unfeasible, a change in politics and the economic system should be at least materialized in order to achieve a social change as claimed by the AMDP.
