United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is arriving in Myanmar today. He will be here for 24 hours. He will land in Yangon with his entourage of about thirty people at around the same time that the court will reconvene for Aung San Suu Kyi and John Yettaw’s trials. Details of the UN Chief’s jam-packed schedule are unavoidably murky. Insider sources confirm that within his short time in Myanmar, Ban Ki-Moon intends to:
- Visit Senior General Than Shwe in Naypyidaw;
- Fly down to the Ayeyarwaddy Delta region to assess humanitarian relief efforts one year after Cyclone Nargis;
- Visit Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in Insein Prison / possibly in court;
- Attend an event in Yangon to commemorate Nargis and thank the Myanmar community for their contributions to relief and humanitarian aid.
Ban Ki-moon’s visit to Myanmar comes, of course, with the inevitable criticism from the Burma watchers and members of the exile community who promote isolationism as a strategy. An article in the Times quotes Zoya Phan of Burma Campaign UK as saying:
We have had 20 years of UN envoys going back and forth to Burma and nothing to show for it…We need Ban Ki Moon to personally take the lead, but he must deliver practical results, such as the release of all political prisoners. Talking to the generals is a means to an end, but so far the UN seems to treat talks alone as a success.
I disagree with this type of attitude. Talks alone are a success. While there have indeed been a series of UN envoys to Myanmar, a visit by the Secretary-General is a considerably more substantial engagement. When Ban Ki-moon arrived in Myanmar in May 2008 just after Cyclone Nargis hit, he was the first Secretary-General to visit Myanmar in 44 years. During that visit, he managed to convince Than Shwe to ease restrictions and allow international aid to pour into Myanmar to help survivors of the cyclone.
The idea that “talks” shouldn’t begin until all political prisoners are released and the Lady is allowed to campaign freely around the country is unrealistic. Negotiations are presently non-existent. At this stage, we don’t know who would be sitting at the table, where that table might be, what size the table is, and even what shape the table will be. It might sound silly, but these are important factors. Conditioning talks (about the conditions of talks) on large political concessions is not a smart way to deal with the generals who run Myanmar.
If they don’t get to see The Lady proselytizing in the streets and democracy flourishing overnight, the detractors and isolationists will surely claim that Ban Ki-moon’s visit only “legitimized”‘ the government. While after tomorrow there may not be large explicit agreements, what goes on behind closed doors will certainly be significant.
Ban Ki-moon is coming off some recent criticism for being “too soft” in tricky diplomatic situations in Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Last week, his Special Envoy to Myanmar, Mr. Ibrahim Gambari, was in country to prepare for this upcoming trip. Mr. Gambari would not have advised the Secretary-General to visit Myanmar unless if he was positive that there would be positive outcomes.
We will have to wait until at least Sunday to find out…
UPDATE (3 July 2009): Aung San Suu Kyi’s trial is adjourned until 10 July, as U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon arrives in Yangon. The trial was set to resume today after a month long delay.
11 responses so far ↓
1 sam deedes // Jul 3, 2009 at 4:01 pm
As someone who knows Zoya Phan personally I find this criticism a bit harsh. Saying that talks are only a means to an end is not the same as saying talks shouldn’t begin until all political prisoners are released.
I hope anyone reading the post will follow the link to Zoya Phan to see where she is coming from. Perhaps this might engender a bit of humility. The link was written before Zoya’s father was assassinated.
Mr Gambari is no doubt doing his best but Ban Ki Moon’s getting a major breakthrough in just 24 hours seems very unlikely.
2 Colum Graham // Jul 3, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Good post. In relation to the quote regarding ‘20 years and nothing to show for it’, this represents an equally under siege mentality that the Junta demonstrates and would be totally unlikely to achieve any sort of conciliatory result. Indeed, if anything, this might be Ban Ki Moon’s chance to proselytize the Junta at least a little bit.
3 kyaw kyaw // Jul 3, 2009 at 5:28 pm
I agree… Nothing’s going to happen with that attitude. If you want the country to move forward, you have to give up a little, to potentially gain a lot.
Good work getting hold of the itinerary too. It will be interesting to see if the do let Ban Ki-moon meet The Lady… and what her response is.
Her trial has just been postponed to July 10 (next Friday), by the way.
4 Dylan Grey // Jul 3, 2009 at 6:35 pm
This was meant to be a short opinion piece and not an article about Ms. Zoya Phan. I used a quote from her as she is a spokesperson for the Burma Campaign UK. I take issue with a lot of the Burma Campaign UK’s strategies and opinions and admittedly I was using them as representative of the isolationist strategy that is a central feature of most foreign-based Burmese organizations.
And yes – a major breakthrough in 24 hours will not happen – part of my article was meant to manage/lower people’s expectations…
5 sam-deedes // Jul 4, 2009 at 12:41 pm
It might be instructive for us all if Dylan Grey were to enumerate some of these strategies and opinions that he takes issue with.
6 kyaw kyaw // Jul 4, 2009 at 2:39 pm
According to today’s (July 4) New Light of Myanmar, the trial of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi (and John Yettaw, Daw Khin Khin Win and Ma Win Ma Ma for that matter) was postponed to July 10 because the “case file on Criminal Case No 47/2009 has not been returned yet” following the rejected appeal in the Supreme Court.
Now, I’m sure conspiracy theorists will love this tidbit but, as Andrew Selth has pointed out, if you’ve got the option between a conspiracy and a cock-up, the latter is more likely in Myanmar.
However…. it does seem a little unlikely.
7 Reader // Jul 4, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Of course, Ban Ki-moon trip is getting a lot of important achievements, as widely expected!
http://irrawaddy.org/highlight.php?art_id=16267
Were there no other avaliable “experts” on Burma for New Mandala than Mr. “Generals Friendly” Dylan Grey ?
Regards.
Reader
8 Ozzie // Jul 4, 2009 at 8:57 pm
what is Ban doing there in the first place ?
the predictable results have been achieved and once again the generals have out maneuvered the so called diplomats .
man was nort but a fool for traveling there in the first place
9 Lonely Wolf // Jul 5, 2009 at 12:41 am
sam deedes,
Surely you can have an issue with any narrative. If you knew his issues with Burma Campaign UK, would you really want those issues to interfere with your own narrative?
reader,
What makes you say Dylan Grey is General friendly?
ozzie,
The Generals can’t out maneuver their paranoia. If Ban Ki Moon is a fool for hoping, then he represents a good proportion of the world’s population. Who are you to say they are all fools? One man and the sceptre of truth? Ah. Please find your way back to the hilltop so I can eat you.
*howls*
10 sam-deedes // Jul 5, 2009 at 5:05 pm
OK Lonely Wolf, point taken. Having said that I am here to learn, I am no expert and I certainly don’t have my own website like the OP.
I am aware of differences over sanctions, for instance. But what I come to New Mandala for is reasoned debate in temperate language.
Burma Campaign UK is not perfect by any means and I accept I may have been a little over sensitive. But we are all in the same boat in wanting to see an end to the military dictatorship and I see no benefit in the use of such dismissive terms as:
“…the inevitable criticism from the Burma watchers…” and “If they don’t get to see The Lady proselytizing in the streets and democracy flourishing overnight…”
Language is important, and so is respect for all those trying to solve the same problem, even if they don’t necessarily share the same viewpoint as you.
11 aiontay // Jul 7, 2009 at 12:32 pm
So did he meet Mahtu Naw? That’s a meeting I’d haved loved to have attended.
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.