New Mandala readers interested in the development of natural-gas fields off the coast of Burma will be interested in The Economist’s neat article which summarises the current state of politicking and negotiation.
It notes (in part) that:
China has offered to build a pipeline from Myanmar’s A-1 and A-3 gasfields in the Bay of Bengal to the Chinese border, a distance of around 900 km…Although Myanmar accepted China’s pipeline bid rather than the proposals of India and South Korea, companies from the latter two countries already jointly own the rights to develop the fields…
Politically, Myanmar’s prolific energy resources, and its decision to give China access to them, are likely to complicate Western efforts to encourage political reform in Myanmar. Myanmar’s energy-hungry neighbours, especially China, India and Thailand, will continue to prioritise their own energy security above any effort to encourage democratisation in Myanmar. Competition between them for access to Myanmar’s substantial energy resources weakens the impact of US and EU sanctions designed to put pressure on Myanmar’s military rulers.
Thanks to long-time New Mandala reader and Asia specialist, Paul, for drawing my attention to this very useful article.
11 responses so far ↓
1 allani demao // Mar 26, 2007 at 2:46 pm
China won the bid over India and South Korea over Myanmar’s A’s 1 and 3 is that because China’s help in the security of Myanmar is legit and both countries considered each other pohpoh (brothers). What the essence of brotherhood if the materials needed by the other for boosting its prosperity is unattainable because of the other adamant to share its resources such as energy. China influence over Myanmar is tremendously important in the continuation of junta in power.
2 Amateur // Mar 27, 2007 at 9:09 pm
As long there is a dictatorial China, every effort to get Burma on the road to democracy is a mere farce.
This is not to say that India or Korea give big efforts to urge Burma on human rights and democracy, but at least they give better role models.
3 Jon Fernquest // Mar 27, 2007 at 10:38 pm
China and Singapore are the life support systems for the regime in Yangon.
If the United States really valued change in Burma they would have used their relationships with China and Singapore to affect a change long ago.
The real issue is that the United States does not value Burma-Myanmar relations and uses Burma as a human rights show, essentially the only real value that Burma-Myanmar has for American policy makers.
Over the last twenty years Chinese economic interests have become so entrenched in Upper Burma (Kachin and Shan States) that China now probably has more of a sovereign interest in Burma, not just an economic one.
The building of a oil pipeline would merely solidify this sovereign interest. For instance, if in the future some political instability threatened that pipeline, China would have a justification for military intervention. This is essentially what happened to politically insulated Afghanistan in 1979. Add to that Singapore pushing from the south and you have obvious extrapolations for the future.
How many times have I been lectured on the horrible fate of Burma by people who have no absolutely idea of the place besides a long list of disconnected human rights abuses and have no idea of the context which allows these abuses to persist.
End economic sanctions against Burma now.
End Burma’s isolation now.
Reconnect Burma with the world now.
End China and Singapore’s monopoly of influence over Burma now.
4 Amateur // Mar 28, 2007 at 7:44 am
I fully support you, Jon. Unfortunately, there is no place for such a “third” opinion in the American black-and-white ideology. If we are not supporting their blockade approach then we must be supporting the junta – according to the US-Logic.
And ASSK is now petrified as a holy cow who’s opinion is a sacred sermon of the West. Nothing against her personally but she seems to chew on the same old recipe that may have worked ten years ago but is hopelessly out of date. She is now far removed from the reality and the people and victim of her own popularity. If she is the brilliant mind that she is believed to be then she has to prove that she can come forward with a creative idea to break the stalemate and provide with a new perspective. Otherwise she will be just remembered as a “stone lady”.
5 aiontay // Mar 28, 2007 at 9:31 am
Hmmm.. I thought the guy who isolated Burma was one of the Thirty Comrades with a taste for women and horse racing and a fascination with ideas of sacred kingship. And didn’t Burma achieve Least Developed Country status before sanctions were imposed?
As for ASSK, isn’t it a bit hard to stay up to date when you’ve been under house arrest? And what creative idea has the regime that has kept her under house arrest come up with, besides moving the capital to an agricultural university town?
6 Tara // Mar 28, 2007 at 5:21 pm
I have to second the ASSK comment. Amateur, ASSK hasn’t come up with anything new because she’s incommunicado. Blame everyone else for rehashing what she said 10 years ago, but it’s silly to accuse her of doing or not doing anything while under house arrest. There are plenty in the Burmese opposition movements that manage to participate in discourse without ever quoting ASSK. There are big differences between the public democracy campaign in the West and the US’s actions, and what people are doing and saying on the ground, as it were.
7 Jotman // Mar 29, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Based on a Russian news source, this Jotman posting details a specific Russian interest in Myanmar’s oil and gas.
http://jotman.blogspot.com/2007/03/russian-chess-champion-spearheads.html
- Blogger Jotman
8 Tara // Mar 30, 2007 at 4:22 am
It would seem we cannot comment on blogger Jotman’s blog, Jotman. The western media doesn’t report 95% of the news going on in Burma. Anyone interested in the going’s on in Burma would be foolish to try to stay informed via western media, although the IHT does a decent job of covering the big stories. Thanks to the internet though, there are a plethora of foreign based Burmese media sources. Narinjara News (narinjara.com) covers Arakan State, so they report all this wheeling and dealing over the oil.
Russia has had a long relationship with Burma, bartering military training, weapons, and uranium for Burma’s resources. Incidentally, Ukraine has as well, although I haven’t seen them investing in the oil and gas yet.
9 Jotman // Mar 30, 2007 at 6:45 pm
Tara –
I’m sorry Jotman.com doesn’t have comments. Good point about the Western media. I checked out narinjara.com — it looks very informative.
- Blogger Jotman
10 Burma » Blog Archive » WTF, Burma? // Apr 2, 2007 at 6:57 pm
[...] The real issue is that the United States does not value Burma-Myanmar relations and uses Burma as a human rights show, essentially the only real value that Burma-Myanmar has for American policy makers. Over the last twenty years Chinese … – more – [...]
11 Burma » Blog Archive » Sanctions and Burma: Shades of Grey // Apr 9, 2007 at 6:39 pm
[...] I thought the guy who isolated Burma was one of the Thirty Comrades with a taste for women and horse racing and a fascination with ideas of sacred kingship. And didn t Burma achieve Least Developed Country status before sanctions were … – more – [...]
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.