Rebuke for the junta in Myanmar
The United Nations General Assembly resolution on arms embargo, and in other senses too, is a slap in the face of Myanmar’s military
The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) passed a resolution on June 19 condemning Myanmar’s military coup and calling upon all member states to “prevent the flow of arms to Myanmar,” which effectively means an arms embargo. It asked the junta to “end the state of emergency, respect all human rights of the people of Myanmar and allow the sustained democratic transition of Myanmar”. It also demanded the immediate and unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, President Win Myint, other officials, politicians and “all those who have been arbitrarily detained, charged or arrested”. It demanded that the military immediately stop “all violence against peaceful protesters” and end restrictions on the Internet and social media.
Its supporters’ hope that it would be unanimously adopted, was belied. Nevertheless, the fact that 119 countries supported it, 36 abstained and only one, Belarus, opposed, is significant. So is the fact that even Russia and China, which have been preventing the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), from condemning Myanmar, abstained and did not vote against the resolution. Thirty-seven countries did not vote at all.
All this clearly indicated that global public and governmental opinion thoroughly condemned the junta’s savagery. As the European Union’s ambassador to the UN, the Swedish diplomat Olof Skoog, said after the vote, the resolution sent a powerful message. “It delegitimises the military junta, condemns its abuse and violence against its own people and demonstrates its isolation in the eyes of the world.”
The UNGA’s adoption of the resolution stands as a welcome contrast to the proceedings at the UNSC’s emergency sessions on February 3 and March 31, respectively. The former failed to adopt a statement condemning the coup and saying more or less the same things as the UNGA’s resolution. According to Al Jazeera, the statement was grounded by Russia and China which had “asked for time [to consider the matter?].” The one on March 31 had also failed to condemn Myanmar’s rogue junta.
Meanwhile, however welcome, the UNGA’s resolution is unlikely to halt the junta’s war against its own people. Also, its capacity to adopt measures that can compel the junta to abandon its repressive course, is limited by the fact that, sans a miracle, Russia and China would oppose it. One does not know how many of even the 119 countries that supported the resolution would support effective against the junta.
Hence, only countries like the US, the UK and members of the European Union can be counted upon to act tough. They have done so. The Biden Administration announced on February 11 the suspension of the 2013 Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, meant to boost bilateral business between the US and Myanmar, until the restoration of democracy there. It also imposed sanctions on 10 Generals, some of them retired who led the coup, and three commercial entities. Besides imposing restrictions on strategic exports, it has prevented the Generals associated with the junta from improperly accessing the Myanmar Government’s funds of over $1 billion in the US. Other measures followed on March 22. Britain, Canada and New Zealand have also imposed sanctions and travel bans, and frozen assets. Australia had announced, on March7, the suspension of its limited cooperation with the Tatmadaw (as the Myanmar’s Army is officially called).
These measures have not ended the savage repression. The rogue Generals, however, will not be able to rule indefinitely. As the UN’s special envoy on Myanmar, Christine Schraner-Burgener, told the UNGA after the vote: “The risk of a large-scale civil war is real.” Armed resistance has begun. Supporters of the ousted legally-elected government led by Aung San Suu-Kyi, and other pro-democracy activists, have cobbled together a militia called People’s Defence Force, which, according to a report by Hannah Beech in the New York Times of June 22, have been receiving military training in the border areas controlled by the ethnic minorities. Beech has also mentioned clashes between it and the Tatmadaw in Mandalay. Earlier, blasts in Yangon had killed two persons and destroyed an army truck on June 18 The Tatmadaw has, doubtless, over-run and destroyed two long-standing strongholds of the ethnic rebels in Chin and Kavah States. But, as Beech points out citing PDF leaders and military insiders, that the Tatmadaw has also suffered heavy casualties in clashes since the coup.
It is, however, just the beginning. The PDF and the armies of the ethnic minorities have a long way to go. They will have to wage unconventional warfare to start with as Myanmar’s military is much stronger. The Chinese and Vietnamese revolutions, which followed this path, succeeded after decades, setbacks notwithstanding. The PDF and allied forces will suffer setbacks, but are almost certain to prevail ultimately given the support of the overwhelming majority of Myanmar’s people who hate the junta. The military will be increasingly isolated like a foreign army of occupation as it responds with escalating savagery. It may take decades but the people will ultimately prevail. What would their attitude then be towards countries that had watched their struggle but did not help? India, which abstained from voting on the resolution, should ponder the question.
(The author is Consulting Editor, The Pioneer. The views expressed are personal.)
Source: The Pioneer
