‘We Must Try to Make Things Better’

By KYAW ZWA MOE / YANGON

Aformer second vice-chairman of the All Burma Federation of Student Unions, U Aung Din was jailed from 1989 to 1993 for participating in the pro-democracy uprising in 1988. After traveling to the United States, he worked as executive director of the US Campaign for Burma between 2003 and 2012, and was involved with the Free Burma Coalition for two years. He talks to Kyaw Zwa Moe about reforms, the evolution of the United States’ foreign policy toward Myanmar and the prospects for free and fair elections.

What is your view on changes to US foreign policy on Myanmar since the new government took power?

Many years ago, the United States policy on Myanmar focused on the human rights situation. These days, the US takes three factors into consideration. Human rights is still important, alongside economics and geopolitics. The US would like to have a government that is friendly toward it in Myanmar, while it is trying to counterbalance the rise of China in the Asia-Pacific region.

Considering these factors, they believe that their engagement policy is right. There may be unexpected difficulties and setbacks in pursuing this policy, but they will not reverse from it, they will only push ahead. At the same time, they are expecting a free and fair election in 2015. If the election is free and fair, the legislative landscape will be stronger in 2016. There will be larger democratic forces and ethnic forces in the parliament. The parliament will be stronger than it is in its current term— at least, I expect so. To make it happen, the US administration is taking steps to support the 2015 election.

From Washington’s point of view, what kind of country is Myanmar?

I recently talked with a senior figure in the US administration. He said they regard our country as a normal one. We have a government, opposition, government supporters and supporters of the opposition. There are conflicts, and sometimes violence and crackdowns, but these are quite normal in many countries. There are daily protests in his own country. [He said] they no longer regard our country as a failed state where there is conflict between the oppressed and the dictators; they regard our country as a normal state because things happening in our country are not unusual. [He said] the Myanmar government now understands that they can’t demonetize banknotes or use the army in dispersing demonstrations, and that the army can’t launch a coup, and if they do not break these rules, the international community has no reason to interfere in the country’s affairs.

At the same time, many student protesters have been arrested recently, with the government reacting in the same manner as it did 20 years ago.

The international community, including the US and UN, opposed this brutal crackdown. But their declarations only used words like “regret” and “disappointment.” No statement used the words “condemn” or “denounce.” In declarations, the choice of words expresses severity.

You mean that the international community has completely toned down its voice?

They have changed the way they think. They will engage constructively with the government. They will tell the government secretly that it is doing wrong, but they will not publicly condemn it.

What are the major achievements and failures of the reform process?

There has been the creation of institutional mechanisms. The government is responsible to the parliament; the judicial system is responsible to the president and the parliament. These institutions are not perfect, but there is a framework. This is a very good thing. The military regime in the past was responsible to nobody.

Political prisoners have been released and opposition forces including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi were able to join the political fold. There has been an emergence of civil society organizations. The government has admitted the need for internal peace and to fight poverty.

The bad things are that there are opposing factions within the government and the Union Solidarity and Development Party, even as the top leaders wish for change. The president is not decisive. There are many bad guys in the cabinet. In fact, some of the cabinet members are tarnishing the president’s dignity and he can’t take decisive action against them. Racial and religious tensions are very high and they may break out into riots.

The political atmosphere today is in accord with what was set out by the military regime. In many ways it seems things will not change and those in charge have maintained the upper hand.

It is difficult to say that. They have divided themselves. In the past, the military was a single entity. Now it has divided between the military and the USDP. The USDP has been divided in government. Under the constitution, the president and ministers are not allowed to discharge party duties once they join the cabinet. Even if the influence of former Snr.-Gen. Than Shwe prevails, it is not that big. Now

I see some USDP members who would like to listen to the voices of the people. We need to mobilize more of them. We need to be prepared to cooperate with anyone, if they have a desire for the development of the country.

You are a former political prisoner. During your time in the US, you were very critical of the Myanmar government. How do you assess the government now?

As I became an individual activist, I took a look at both sides—the government and the democratic forces. And I found that there are both good and bad people in the government. Previously, I thought it was full of bad guys and I was surprised to see that there are also good guys. And this is welcoming. Then I take a look at the democratic forces, which I had joined with in the past. In the past, all of them were good guys. Now, there are shades of grey in both sides.

Now is the time we need to rebuild the country. If we go on like this with these tensions, it will only delay the rebuilding of the country. We are obliged to make things better, building on the current situation. We can’t just be sitting and doing nothing but blaming. Now is the time we need to grasp any available opportunity out of the current situation and make things better. We have got breathing space, which is beneficial to both sides.

Do you see any possibility of a true civilian government in the next five to 10 years that will be elected through free and fair elections?

I think it is unlikely. We might need to wait 20 more years. I myself was a hardliner. I studied revolutions in Eastern Europe. In those cases, the dictators were toppled by public uprisings, then elected governments came to power. But those elected governments were not competent and there were corrupt persons among them. The problems left by the former dictators grew larger and the expectations of people diminished. This was followed by economic decline. Finally, people overthrew the governments they had elected themselves and the country became unstable. Egypt is the closest example. I don’t want our country to end up like that. I don’t think it is possible to scrap the entire system and build a new one. Even if a new system could be built, there is a high risk the system will return to dictatorship, like in the case of the Soviet Union.

The two sides must make compromises, coordinate and cooperate. There should not be a “winner takes all” concept any more.