New Mandala

18 responses so far ↓

• 1 jonfernquest // Oct 24, 2008 at 10:18 pm

  No mention of the willpower sapping Iraq war? Or Niall Ferguson’s exhuberant Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire (2004) that argued that such interventions were feasible and was subsequently proved wrong?

  In and out strategies with 50 million plus states outside your sphere of influence? Rather, try webs of economic dependence created by doing business together over long periods of time. Such shared interests have drawn countries as diverse as Thailand and Korea closer to the western way of doing things.

• 2 Ashley // Oct 25, 2008 at 1:25 pm

  Hi Jon. As you point out, there are literatures on these issues, but the wordcount limit on a short op-ed article precludes lengthier discussion.

• 3 Moe Aung // Oct 26, 2008 at 5:13 am

  There is now the credibility gap to contend with, like you said, Ashley. And true, Burmese simply have to rely on themselves without appearing to be beholden or proxy to any outsiders. A fine line to walk on. And they could do with some concrete help, not just being patronised.

  I feel sorry for you, Jon. You are so fixated with the western way of doing things, you contradict yourself in the same breath by juxtaposing such interventions as the willpower sapping Iraq war and webs of economic dependence as if the two had not been going hand in hand in Western behaviour and action since the dawn of Western imperialism. They just happen to be two sides of the same coin. White superiority complex and liberal angst very obviously on display here.

• 4 Frank // Oct 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm

  That article was pretty well sanitized. No mention of Iraq or Afghanistan. No mention of the fact that the USA would be primarily tasked with doing the heavy lifting – politically, economically, and militarily – during these operations. No mention of the fact that the UN (not NATO) is the only body that has the legal authority to authorize such action. Etc,.

• 5 jonfernquest // Oct 27, 2008 at 2:47 pm

  Ashley: “…there are literatures on these issues…”

  Not much at all on the political economy of Burma. A couple people have attempted to write objectively but they are usually attacked by activists like Moe Aung above, who want everyone to tow their version of the truth, activist group-think.

  Moe Aung: “I feel sorry for you, Jon. You are so fixated with the western way of doing things,…as if the two had not been going hand in hand in Western behaviour and action since the dawn of Western imperialism. ”

  Countries that cut their deals with the West are now able to feed their people. This was almost not the case with Indonesia under Sukarno in the early 1960s or with Burma now, for instance.

  Another socialist “revolution” for Burma? Wonderful.

• 6 Stephen // Oct 27, 2008 at 4:31 pm

  “Not much at all on the political economy of Burma.”

  Jon, Sean Turnell has written quite a bit on economics and finance in Burma. His article “Myanmar’s economy in 2006” is available online. His latest (2009 printing date) book Fiery Dragons: Banks, Moneylenders and Microfinance in Burma I’ve yet to read, but it looks quite informative.

  You might also be interested in State Dominance in Myanmar: The Political Economy of Industrialisation which is available for viewing on Google books.

• 7 jonfernquest // Oct 28, 2008 at 12:27 pm

  Thank you Stephen. I didn’t know about the Sean Turnell book on Burma’s financial sector. The economic overview paper was part of that ANU conference that was an exceptional shining light as far as being informative goes. There is also:

  Kyaw Yin Hlaing. “The Politics of State-Business Relations in Post-Colonial Burma.” Ph.D. Dissertation. Cornell University. 2001.

  And also the following paper being expanded into a book I hear:

  WPS 86 Sino-Myanmar Economic Relations Since 1988
  Dr MAUNG Aung Myoe

  To be fair, there is not really very extensive research on the economic history and political economy of neighboring Thailand either, although some important starts, the latest being Pasuk and Baker’s Thai Capital. If you look carefully there are huge gaps, like industrial development on the Eastern Seaboard, which I want to investigate further. Thanks.

• 8 Stephen // Oct 28, 2008 at 3:01 pm

  Actually Jon, I purchased and read Pasuk and Baker’s Thai Capital book on your recommendation in an earlier New Mandala thread and agree that the nuanced inter-relations of economic development and political change need to be better understood and engaged with by those seeking to improve condition in Burma. This became clearer to me recently when I met a Burmese entrepreneur in Illinois who was on an academic fellowship in the US studying economic development. He quite openly acknowledged that he had a relatively successful business in Burma as well as fairly high level contacts in the SPDC; the latter being quite important for him to be able to carry out his work effectively. He was also involved, however, in Nargis relief efforts using his personal funds. To add to the nuances of political economy, his fellowship to study economic development (without any overt political agenda) was intended to strengthen his entrepreneurial ability and was funded by a foundation supported by the US State Department.

• 9 Ralph Cramden // Oct 29, 2008 at 3:36 am

  jonfernquest: while this is the wrong place to discuss this, you have asserted a couple of times the following: “… there is not really very extensive research on the economic history and political economy of … Thailand either, although some important starts, the latest being Pasuk and Baker’s Thai Capital. If you look carefully there are huge gaps, like industrial development on the Eastern Seaboard, which I want to investigate further.”

  This is not accurate. Where to begin. Political economy of development from various perspectives (and looking at just English-language materials): Skinner, Ingram (still useful), Suehiro, Hewison, Pasuk’s thesis at Cambridge, Deyo, Brown, Doner, Anek, Unger, Hirsch, Sakkarin, Bell, Ungpakorn, Glassman, and many more. Maybe you might be interested in Pasuk and Baker’s now dated syllabus from a couple of years ago: http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ppasuk/others.htm.

  On the Eastern Seaboard, there are some things available in English: see Doner’s work (at http://polisci.emory.edu/Curriculum%20Vita/DonerVITA8-08.pdf). Could also look at TDRI and its catalog of theses (http://www.tdri.or.th/library/quarterly/thesis/thes_con.htm).

• 10 jonfernquest // Oct 29, 2008 at 3:18 pm

  Thank you Ralph for that list of theses on the Thai economy.

  Yes, I have read almost all these people you mention, but…

  If one was to write an sector-by-sector overview of the whole Thai economy focusing on historical background and development, I think you could safely say that there is simply not enough fundamental groundwork research using primary sources such as interviews and the obscure sources you often find in Thai Capital. Thailand’s copper industry and newsprint industry are two interesting little niches I’ve learned about recently.

  Thai Capital was inspired by the work of Suehiro. One of his students authored the key essay on business groups/families.

  Doner’s work focuses mostly on the automobile industry, at least that I’ve seen. Purely economic work that looks solely at gross statistics fails to get at the underlying dynamics of industries, the ways that they are changing and developing. There is also an overwhelming bias in work towards the rural agricultural sector. Muscat mentions in passing a little bit of the planning process behind the Eastern Seaboard during the Prem cabinets, perhaps one of the theses in that list you gave has more. Thanks.

  Certainly, an comprehensive bibliography on Thai political economy would help and the Oxford Consulting group in coordination with the BOI and the Bangkok Post has such a sectoral analysis but I haven’t seen it yet (http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.com/publication.asp?country=43).

• 11 Ralph Cramden // Oct 30, 2008 at 12:14 am

  Still the wrong place but jonfernquest is still not clear on this. Sectoral studies of the Thai economy exist. I am sure that there is no single study of all sectors of the Thai economy based on fieldwork, interviews and archival research. That would be a huge task and would go beyond a single book. In the names provided above, there are sectoral studies that do fit some or all of the criteria suggested by jonfernquest: Doner (on auto sector, electronics, sugar), Sakkarin (on telecoms), Hewison (old now, but has case studies of various sectors), Unger (textiles) and so on. Might look at Brimble as well.

  On eastern seaboard, there are theses in Thai and bits and pieces in English. One of the problems with researching the eastern seaboard (and why Muscat is one of the few in English) is that it was a series of planning decisions made non-transparently at the highest levels in the NESDB during Prem’s prime ministership. That opened up a bit after Chartichai sacked Snoh Unakul and downgraded NESDB, but then it got caught up in the buffet cabinet. More work could be done although my guess is that there has been some Japanese work on the topic.

• 12 Moe Aung // Nov 18, 2008 at 7:15 pm

  Hello Jon
  Afraid you ‘ve made a common enough mistake of confusing opinion with activist or group-think. There never was a socialist revolution in Burma unless again you suffer from another common misconception equating nationalisation and state capitalism with the real thing. It’s not so much the means but the end that matters, who benefits from any of these measures whomsoever you deal with, East or West. Cutting deals with the military regime is certainly the way to riches for all entrepreneurs, domestic or foreign. Feeding the people is quite another matter that takes sufficient political will on the part of the ruling elite to want to share the nation’s wealth. People don’t often see the wood for the trees, and a lot of learned analysis gets bogged down in detail and specifics.

• 13 jonfernquest // Nov 18, 2008 at 10:22 pm

  Moe Aung: “There never was a socialist revolution in Burma unless again you suffer from another common misconception equating nationalisation and state capitalism with the real thing.”

  The real thing? The “real thing” is what people actually do and achieve which unfortunately hasn’t been, comparatively, very much for post-WWII Burma under socialist-inspired ideas. Both before and after WWII many in Burma were inspired by the works of Marx and Fabian socialism (e.g. Furnivall and his Naga Nii book club). This trend culminated in a rainbow of different communist factions in revolt post-WWII (white flag, yellow flag, red flag,…) as well as the “Burmese Way to Socialism” ideology in Nei Win’s post-1962 government that seems to bear great resemblance to other failed socialist Marx-inspired political experiments, in eastern Europe, for instance, and is very different from Thailand where socialist meanderings were put to an abrupt halt in 1976, much to the betterment of the country’s prosperity. For the full story, I guess we’ll have to wait for the following book to see, I guess, due out early next year:

  A History of Modern Burma (Paperback)
  by Michael W. Charney (Author)
  Paperback: 256 pages
  Publisher: Cambridge University Press (January 31, 2009)

• 14 Hla Oo // Nov 19, 2008 at 10:27 am

  John is dead right spot on, Moe Aung. As a son, or a daughter, of a Communist, you know very well that!

  Assassinated General Aung San, the founder of post-independence Burma and the martyr father of revered ASSK, is also one of the founders and the first-ever General Secretary of now outlawed Burmese Communist Party.

  Communist and Fabian socialist influences had undeniably played the huge roles in establishing the miserably-failed Ne Win’s Burmese Way to Socialism in the sixties. Most pre-war Burmese then were, or still are, left-leaning because of that left-wing Nagani books and the progressive ideologies from then colonial brother India. Add the dormant warlike mentality of Burmese to that and Burma got a socialist-military government she really desired and deserved back then.

  Almost all the Burmese writers then were lefties and even then prime-minister U Nu wrote many trashy anti-capitalist, anti-market, anti-landlords, pro-socialist novels and plays. I don’t know about you, but I was hugely influenced by his books back then, and now I am still wondering why the bloody hell U Nu, supposedly the father of democracy and free markets in Burma, had done that silly thing.

  At least the army’s seen the light and rid of that socialist thing from the past. One thing I would like to emphasize is the men and officers of that supposedly thuggish army haven’t abandoned our country and they are still fighting for what they really believe in. Which is the survival of race and religion, and the integrity of the mother country.

  Unlike you and me and many thousands of other Burmese who’ve abandoned the country and settled in the west for the comparatively luxurious lives, they stayed and suffered together with their fellow countrymen in war-torn, sanctions-ravaged, desperately-poor Burma.

• 15 aiontay // Nov 19, 2008 at 1:56 pm

  I think my Kachin friends in Burma wish the guys in the military had joined you Hla Oo.

• 16 Moe Aung // Nov 19, 2008 at 9:20 pm

  Speak for yourself, Hla Oo, and what a giveaway! No, I never believed U Nu, Kyaw Nyein, Ba Swe, Ne Win or Aung Gyi were socialist save in rhetoric and served by renegades in their PR. It was historically convenient at the time and served their purpose of establishing a ruling class bent on acquiring wealth that came with power at the expense of the Burmese nation. Just as the market economy and globalisation is historically in recent times convenient, nay a godsend, to the generals. The agenda remains unchanged.

  Yes, Jon, there can be a yawning gap between what peole actually do and achieve on one hand and rhetoric and PR on the other. I’m sure you of all people do more than merely scratch the surface. It may even be blatantly deceptive and fraudulent as was the case with the “Burmese Way to Socialism” basically seeking ideological legitimacy so they can pursue their own agenda of state capitalism and totalitarian rule.

  And no, though I look forward to Michael Charney’s book I definitely do not have to wait for it to have a good grasp on what’s been going on in my own country.

• 17 Hla Oo // Nov 20, 2008 at 10:10 am

  Moe Aung, you are incredible. Blindly denying that the founders and the whole top echelon of Socialist parties in Burma were not Socialists! What’s next? Carl Marx wasn’t a Communist and Lenin was a capitalist and Stalin was a kind and merciful man!

  Aiontay, it is too late now. Because of the strict sanctions they couldn’t even apply for a tourist visa to the west. But hundreds of Kachins are leaving Burma for the West every year. There are a few halfway houses in Bangkok I know of that specialize in assisting them for resettlement in USA, Australia, and a few European countries.

• 18 Moe Aung // Nov 20, 2008 at 7:41 pm

  Evidently, Hla Oo, you’ve never heard of Marx saying “As for me, I am not a Marxist”. Was Hitler, founder of the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, socialist? What percentage of Buddhists do you reckon keep the Five Precepts? Judge ye not a book by its cover. All that glitters etc. … get it?

Leave a Comment