No sooner did the ASEAN foreign ministers announce their decision on May 31 than the US State Department voiced its regrets, saying: "It (the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council, or SLORC) has violated the rights of its own citizens. It has taken actions that undermine stability in the region by producing refugee flows and allowing (Myanmar) to remain a major source of narcotics." In anticipation of the ASEAN move, US President Bill Clinton passed new sanctions against Myanmar on May 20, prohibiting new US investment in the country.
Myanmar's admission to the ranks of ASEAN is a setback to Suu Kyi's student-based democracy movement, which had drawn inspiration from the recent pullout of a string of foreign investors from the country. US soft drink giant Pepsico severed ties with Myanmar in January. Before that, several other companies withdrawn their investments. For instance. London Fog, Motorola, Apple Computer, Hewlett Packard, Walt Disney, J.Crew and Wente Vineyards, who joined other Western corporates like Levi Strauss, Eddie Bauer and Liz Claiborne in pulling out their stakes.
Even as these divestments gathered pace, the SLORC said foreign investments were, in fact, on the rise. As of last November, there were 226 foreign projects in Myanmar worth $5.27 billion. The three major investors are Singapore, with investments worth $1.17 billion, Thailand with $960 million and the United Kingdom with $1.01 billion. Now that Myanmar is an ASEAN member, these numbers are set to rise further.
Although Yangon may be the flavour of the month among ASEAN businessmen, it appears that the shadow of the Myanmar junta will divide public opinion within ASEAN for a long time. Suchit Bunbongkarn, a political scientist at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, says ASEAN Should use its influence to make Myanmar improve its domestic scenario. He notes that ASEAN'S non-intervention policy needs to be reconsidered. "Non-intervention does not mean we cannot intervene at all. Giving advice is necessary," Suchit opines.
Protests against Myanmar's induction were most visible outside the Regent Hotel in Kuala Lumpur where the ASEAN foreign ministers met in end-May to admit new members. Nine demonstrators were arrested by the Malaysian police as they tried to elbow past policemen to petition the ministers meeting inside.
The strongest criticism of ASEAN has come from the press in Thailand and the Philippines, arguably the freest in Southeast Asia. The English-language Thai daily Nation said in an editorial: "ASEAN will never be the same again. By embracing (Myanmar) as a member it has itself become a pariah organisation.... (The) ASEAN leaders' decision was a triumph of evil over humanity. There is a Thai saying that one rotten fish can spoil the whole basket of fish." In the Philippines, the Manila Standard ran an editorial entitled "ASEAN: Partners in Crime". The newspaper said "democracy has taken a step backwards".
The mood among the ASEAN foreign ministers was, by contrast, one of jubilation over Myanmar's admission, along with Cambodia and Laos, thus fulfilling their dream of creating the ASEAN 10, as outlined in the Bangkok Declaration when the group was founded in 1967. This, they said, was in the best interests of the region. Dissident Suu Kyi thought otherwise. A secretly recorded videotaped message she sent to the ASEAN foreign ministers, urging them that the junta would become "more obdurate and oppressive in nature", had no impact.
Diplomats in Thailand and Singapore said that the admission of Myanmar was in keeping with ASEAN'S longstanding belief that economic emancipation ought to precede political liberalisation. But they added that ASEAN would not force Myanmar to take to a democratic path. It would, rather, continue to pursue its policy of "constructive engagement", a reference to ASEAN'S traditional policy of engaging, not isolating, Myanmar. ASEAN argued that isolating the country would make it more hostile and, worse, push the junta closer into Beijing's arms.
There is a growing number of takers for such thinking, based on a fear among ASEAN defence planners and strategists that an isolated and impoverished Myanmar would be forced to barter its oil fields and mineral resources to the Chinese in return for military hardware and, more ominously, for Beijing's military protection, and ultimately, become a client state. But can they convince the US?
