In adjusting its policy toward Burma, the United States must face reality with a clear vision. Therefore, the priority of the United States must be to clarify its fundamental objectives in Burma and the basic means available to promote those objectives. The United States should position itself to work not only with Burma's military leaders, but also with many groups within Burma.
The United States should also develop joint efforts with China, Japan, and India to push the Burmese government in a positive direction. The Working Group supports the United States' decision to maintain these sanctions in the absence of substantial, meaningful changes in the composition and policies of the Burmese government, particularly with respect to its tolerance of political opposition. The Task Force strongly believes that expanding bilateral channels of communication, particularly during a period of potential political change, will enhance the influence of the United States in achieving its objectives in Burma.
In an effort to engage pragmatically with Burma, the United States must continue to develop and even increase resources to directly reach the Burmese population through aid programs. However, the United States should facilitate the provision of educational materials on electoral and parliamentary processes.
Additional measures to be implemented if and when the United States begins to see indications of change on the part of the Burmese leadership
If elections in Burma are held in 2010 as planned and succeed in replacing the current military government—the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC)—with a quasi-civilian government, the United States must be able to communicate with elected politicians and civil servants in new ministries and other government structures. This will allow the United States to assess the nature of the change taking place in Burma and decide where it can make a positive contribution. The United States should prepare to implement measures that will ease the way toward improved economic relations and the eventual removal of trade and investment sanctions.
Accordingly, the United States should gradually relax current bans and work with institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank to advise Burma on reforms. Another measure is for the United States and other relevant countries to provide economic institution-building assistance to Burma. Efforts in other resource-rich countries provide a range of experiences, including measures supported by the United States to improve transparency and accountability of public funds in the face of entrenched corruption, poor governance and autocratic rule.
The third action is for the United States to provide micro, small, and medium-sized finance assistance to Burmese entrepreneurs to help address their severe rural debt crisis, lack of new and affordable credit for farmers, and the absence of viable businesses. businesses in rural areas. Micro, small and medium finance provides an readily available mechanism to reduce these problems in rural credit markets in Burma.
Actions to be undertaken after real progress has been demonstrated on a sustained basis
Either way, the rapid development in Burma could have unforeseen consequences for the rest of the region. 8 See Appendix B, “The Current Path: The 2010 Election and the Economy of the Constitution,” by Priscilla Clapp and Sean Turnell, task force advisors. For decades, the Burmese military apparatus claimed the largest share of the country's output while undermining basic market institutions.
The country is one of the few places in the world where the current generation of students will be less educated than their parents. In May 2008, Cyclone Nargis tore through lower Burma, destroying much of the country's most productive land in the Irrawaddy River Delta. The agricultural sector, which provides more than 70% of Burma's jobs and around 50% of the country's GDP, receives just over 1% of Burma's formal credit.
The heavy hand of the state in Burma's foreign trade is very evident: around 65% of trade was conducted through state-owned enterprises. Even the mandates under which some of the UN agencies operated in the country were subject to restrictions. In fact, the issue now dominates all others when it comes to Burma's relationship with the rest of the world.
Indeed, some of the most instructive examples of economic progress are those provided by Burma's peers and neighbors. It will also provide an early assessment in the United States of the relative merits of engagement with Burma and, in that respect, will influence future US direction. One way to do this would be for the United States to apply the so-called third. party sanctions under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act.
Since the promulgation of the constitution, the military leadership has laid the foundation for the complex multi-party elections called for by the constitution. Several groups oppose this plan and refuse to participate in the elections. For example, the constitution calls for the abolition of the SPDC as soon as the new parliament is in session.
With the right tools and coordination, the international community can play a substantial role in supporting the survival of Burma's elected civilian government.35 The Economics of the New Constitution. The main 'economic' aspects of Burma's new Constitution are contained in Chapter I, which sets out the 'Basic Principles of the Union'. In the past, companies were nationalized and periods of demonetization became characteristic of the country.
She previously served as the Vice President of Global Policy Programs at the United Nations Association of the USA.
Recently Released Asia Society Task Force Reports
