Burma’s elections and A SE A N responses

September 24th, 2010

After the Burmese military regime’s announcement that it will hold
elections in early November 2010, there have been different
responses from ASEAN countries. Some countries support the
elections, while some urged the regime to allow participation from
all parties and to hold free and fair elections.
Since not all ASEAN countries are democratic countries, many are
disinterested in the politics behind Burma’s upcoming elections.
The elections are totally based on Burma’s 2008 Constitution and
aim to legitimize the military’s role in militarized civilian rule.
According to the Constitution, and already widely known, some
military commanders will become party leaders in the Union
Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), and they will contest in
the elections. Another group of military commanders will take
political power in Burma’s legislature, as the Constitution
automatically allocates 25% of union parliamentary seats and 33%
of regional seats to the military. The military commanders will form
a government after elections.
The 2008 Constitution and the breakdown of representation in
Burma’s legislature is similar to the format laid out in the
Indonesian constitution, however, the Burmese army commanders
have never indicated that they intend to withdraw their powers
gradually; instead they plan to hold power for a continuous,
unending period of time. The foreign ministry of Indonesia has
condemned the State Peace and Development Council’s 2008
Constitution, and has encouraged the regime to allow the National
League for Democracy and other pro-democracy parties to
participate in elections.
The Philippines’ government has also encouraged the Burmese
military regime to review the 2008 Constitution and hold a free and
fair election. Just recently, the Philippines held free and fair
elections, and the country’s democratic development sets a good
example for all ASEAN countries.
Thailand remains quiet on the subject of Burma, and does not want
to interfere in Burma’s politics with any official comment on the
upcoming elections. It is clear that even the Thai government has
frequently relied on the country’s army to maintain political
stability in Thailand. Thailand has made its business relationship
with Burma, especially regarding border trade and Burmese energy
purchases, a high priority. This is the main reason that Thailand has
avoided criticizing Burma’s upcoming elections.
The Timorese leaders were strong supporters of Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi and Burma’s pro-democracy movement when they were
struggling for independence of the East Timorese while in exile.
Currently, they do not want to voice any comment on Burma’s
political situation, and they have not openly criticized or analyzed
the current Burmese elections.
Laos and Vietnam both operate under single party rule systems.
Neither country has recognized Burma’s democracy movement and
or understood the importance of holding elections in Burma. So,
they both have kept quiet.
Some ASEAN countries see Burma’s elections as being ‘better than
nothing’, and have claimed that Burma will undergo the same
experience of a democratic transition as many other countries in
Asia. These countries believe that the elections will make Burma to
be open to outside world, and that there will be more space in
Burma for civil society organizations.
Clearly, true democratic development and the creation of an open
society in Burma cannot only depend on neighboring countries. The
Burmese peoples people themselves must use various opportunities
to achieve democratic goals.
Short URL: http://monnews.org/?p=1093