Canada Putting Sanctions on Myanmar

[FlamesAddiction]

I'm not sure how many people even know about this, but Canada is planning to put sanctions on Myanmar in July this year.

My brother-in-law works in Myanmar (spends about 1/2 a year there from January to December every year). He found out that the company he works for (one of the few foreign and/or western companies allowed by the Myanmar government to do business there) is being forced to pull out by July because of sanctions the Canadian government is putting on Myanmar.

He is pretty bummed out about it because he is set to go back there for 6 weeks on Monday, and now he has to tell the locals who work for the company that they are going to be out of work... people who don't have a lot. These are prime jobs, and now these people will be out of work at probably the most inconvenient time imaginable.

Sanctions against the people of Myanmar are a horrible idea. It's the common people who suffer and their government won't care one bit. I thought Harper would be smarter than to use this kind of tactic in foregin policy.

[Daradon]

So how do you help then? They're not allowing international aid through, and any trade deals really just help the ruling class.

How is taking away what the people don't have anyway that much worse than what is going on now?

[keratosis]

I'm sure they are quaking with fear.

[Displaced Flames fan]

They are allowing some aid in. The USAF and Marines have been flying one plane in a day for the last 3 days, that's as much as they will allow at this point. That's straight from the USAF pilot too. The problem is that once the aid is there you basically have to hope the Myanmaran government gets it to where it needs to go. Probably not a great bet.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Daradon

So how do you help then? They're not allowing international aid through, and any trade deals really just help the ruling class.

How is taking away what the people don't have anyway that much worse than what is going on now?

It won't help anything that is going on now. It's not like the Myanmar government is going to lose sleep over sanctions. They'll just take what they need from the mouths of the people.

The only thing it serves to do is cut off any influence we might have in the region and basically give a death sentence to the locals who are employed by the company. In Canada, if a person gets laid off, there is a safety net.... in Myanmar, you can die from hunger and disease, especially considering their situation right now.

[icarus]

There are something like 15-20 main cultural groups in Burma and the only the one that the ruling military junta belongs to gets any sort of fair treatment. All the other groups are pretty much restricted to where they can go and what they can do. The government doesn't help these people anyway so any sanctions won't have much of a difference on the populations that already have nothing.

BTW, Myanmar is a name used by the cultural group to which the military rulers belong. Thus most other cultural groups would rather call the country by its British colonial name, Burma. This I learned from a great and very friendly group of Burmese refugees in Calgary when I was with Amnesty called the Mon cultural group.

[Devils'Advocate]

(A) Your brother-in-law should be ashamed of working for a company earning money for the military dictatorship. Foreign investment in Burma is just what the military needs to ensure equipment for the soldiers to oppress the citizens.
(B) I have been pushing for complete and total sanctions against Burma since the house arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi in 1990. I participated in the boycott of Pepsi that forced them to pull their bottle factories out of the country. In no way should we as consumers be giving our money to military dictatorships (though many of us have no choice when it comes to China, but I am doing my best - everything I am wearing today was made in Canada except my shoes which were made in the US).

Just because some crumbs fall down to the people doesn't mean we should be handing millions over to a brutal regime.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

(A) Your brother-in-law should be ashamed of working for a company earning money for the military dictatorship. Foreign investment in Burma is just what the military needs to ensure equipment for the soldiers to oppress the citizens.
(B) I have been pushing for complete and total sanctions against Burma since the house arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi in 1990. I participated in the boycott of Pepsi that forced them to pull their bottle factories out of the country. In no way should we as consumers be giving our money to military dictatorships (though many of us have no choice when it comes to China, but I am doing my best - everything I am wearing today was made in Canada except my shoes which were made in the US).

Just because some crumbs fall down to the people doesn't mean we should be handing millions over to a brutal regime.

So tell me this...

When have sanctions ever helped make difference?

Iraq, where hundreds of thousands died from lack of food and medicine due to sanctions?

Cuba, where sanctions allowed the dictatorship to further isolate it's population and strengthen its iron fist?

They don't help. It's nothing but a chance for politicians to puff out their chests and act tough.

For the record, the area he works in is popluated by ethnic minority buddhists - so those are the people who will be effected when the company pulls out. Currently, the company is negotiating with the government to loosen some of it's sensorship. In fact, they were recently allowed to have email in more locations, so if anything, they are trying to bring change. Maintaining foreign relations is the only way to bring change.

[Resolute 14]

To flip the question - when has investment in such a nation led to a change in the political environment?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

To flip the question - when has investment in such a nation led to a change in the political environment?

Well, right now I can tell you that at least living standards have improved in the town where he works. People moved there from impoverished areas and were able to work.

It's easier to keep a population down when you make them destitute and desperate. With wealth comes hope for positive change. Not to mention, the company has also improved sanitation and the locals learn English from the workers. There is a steady transfer of knowledge from Canadians to the locals. If you want positive change, then contact is better than isolation (imo).

[Traditional_Ale]

Sanctions only work if the government is actually representative of the common people.

When was the last time ANY government was representative of the common people, with the exception of possibly Churchill?

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by icarus

BTW, Myanmar is a name used by the cultural group to which the military rulers belong. Thus most other cultural groups would rather call the country by its British colonial name, Burma. This I learned from a great and very friendly group of Burmese refugees in Calgary when I was with Amnesty called the Mon cultural group.

My girlfriend is volunteering for the Calgary Immigration Society, and is helping a refugee Karen family from Burma. They have shown us DVD's of the way the current governement treats them; rapes women, burns villages, kills for no reason and forces the Karen to live in fear running thru the forest trying to find food. It brings a tear to the eye everytime.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

So tell me this...When have sanctions ever helped make difference?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/...nion/edsuu.php

Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese democrats in exile have been asking us for years to take three practical steps: economic sanctions, an intervention by the UN Security Council, and greater vigilance from Southeast Asian countries. There is no better way of supporting Aung San Suu Kyi's struggle than by doing everything we can to achieve these three goals. For it should be remembered that Aung San Suu Kyi has been the only legitimate representative of the Burmese people since 1990. Economic sanctions are called for by the Burmese themselves, who are in a position to assess the country's socioeconomic situation. Sanctions would not affect the population, mostly made up of peasants living in conditions of extreme poverty. If sanctions were targeted at major export sectors, such as gas, oil, timber and precious stones, their effect would financially weaken the junta and their allies in Myanmar, who are the only ones to make vast profits from those exports. Myanmar allocates more than 40 percent of its budget to the military - that is, to repression of its own people, since Myanmar is not at war with any of its neighbors - although it ranks last but one out of 191 countries in terms of health expenditure. Investments in Myanmar are therefore helping to fund the repression. Desmond Tutu draws a parallel with the South African people under apartheid: The Burmese people need the same kind of support that gave South Africans access to democracy. The U.S. administration has already imposed sanctions; it is now urgent that the European Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations decide together to ban all investments in Myanmar.

It is the Burmese THEMSELVES calling for the sanctions. And note that it is Desmond Tutu speaking - South Africa was forced to end apartheid due to sanctions. Do I think the SPDC is going to be brought down by sanctions? Not on their own. But as Aung San Suu Kyi points out, it is one tool of many that the international community should be wielding. Her National League for Democracy is 100% behind the international community uniting in bringing sanctions against Burma as a means of weakening the SPDC.

[Flames in 07]

I'm a little confused, I thought there already was only one country on earth that Canada had a sweeping trading embargo with and that was Myanmar.

I know the US has them with 3, Cuba, Sudan and Iran, and am quite sure Canada companies can deal with all three of those ... but not Myanmar

[Table 5]

Sounds to me like Mayanmar is due for an Iraq-style invasion from America and Co. You know, if the whole "free the people from the evil dictatorship" mantra is really what drives the current administration....

[peter12]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

My girlfriend is volunteering for the Calgary Immigration Society, and is helping a refugee Karen family from Burma. They have shown us DVD's of the way the current governement treats them; rapes women, burns villages, kills for no reason and forces the Karen to live in fear running thru the forest trying to find food. It brings a tear to the eye everytime.

Hey... My family and I have been helping a Karen family this year through the Catholic Immigration Service. Same story. Driven from their country, half their extended family killed by the state.

It's a terrible tragedy that so many in the West don't know anything about.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/...nion/edsuu.php



It is the Burmese THEMSELVES calling for the sanctions. And note that it is Desmond Tutu speaking - South Africa was forced to end apartheid due to sanctions. Do I think the SPDC is going to be brought down by sanctions? Not on their own. But as Aung San Suu Kyi points out, it is one tool of many that the international community should be wielding. Her National League for Democracy is 100% behind the international community uniting in bringing sanctions against Burma as a means of weakening the SPDC.

I'm not sure if you read your own link or not, but nowhere does it say that "the Burmese people" want sanctions. It says that the president who was deposed 18 years ago and her colleagues want sanctions. It's sad what happened to her, but despite being illegally overthrown, I have trouble accepting that someone elected 18 years ago with little contact outside her home, speaks for all Burmese people.

Anyway, you never answered the question. Nevermind who wants what, give me some examples of where sanctions work positively. The only way they can work is if the leaders actually care about their citizens as sanctions only serve to weaken the populace.

I can think of numerous examples of positive change in dictatorships without full blown sanctions. For example, more countries in the Iron Curtain fell because Western democratic and liberal ideals were spread through increased contact. People sought what we had because they knew about it. If not for contact between Burmese and Westerners, they will have no idea about the world outside their borders.

For another example, look at the Dominican Republic. The Dominican Republic has a history of dictatorship but was brought along by increasing ties, not by sanctions.

[killer_carlson]

My family has strong ties to Thailand. The stories in thailand of what is happening in Burma is consitant with what we are seeing on the news. The military takes the best of everything - food, supplies, money, opportunities - and gives utter garbage to the people, assuming there is even garbage left over.

This is a place that needs a regime change. Hopefully the people step up now that the international eye is on them and force such a change. It will be bloody and violent, but if they don't I fear many more years of even further bloodshed without as much hope for success.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I'm not sure if you read your own link or not, but nowhere does it say that "the Burmese people" want sanctions. It says that the president who was deposed 18 years ago and her colleagues want sanctions. It's sad what happened to her, but despite being illegally overthrown, I have trouble accepting that someone elected 18 years ago with little contact outside her home, speaks for all Burmese people.

Err, uhm... right in the snippet that I provided it says that the Burmese want the sanctions. Many Burmese pro-democracy groups are calling for these sanctions - Canada is not moving in a bubble here.

As for the "18 years ago", Nelson Mandela was in jail for 28 years and waited 4 more to become President. I think Aung San Suu Kyi knows what is best for her people and knows the situation better than you or I.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Err, uhm... right in the snippet that I provided it says that the Burmese want the sanctions. Many Burmese pro-democracy groups are calling for these sanctions - Canada is not moving in a bubble here.

The snippet you provided only gives an example of some Burmese special interest groups. It is an opinion pice that implies and generalizes. Since most don't have access to the internet, media, or ... anything, I doubt they were consulted.

As for the "18 years ago", Nelson Mandela was in jail for 28 years and waited 4 more to become President. I think Aung San Suu Kyi knows what is best for her people and knows the situation better than you or I.

South Africa is a crime haven now and barely resembles a free country. Nelson Mandela was a good person, but not good at policy making. Wanting what's best and knowing how to make it happen are 2 different things. If she was running the country, she would probably do a good job, but I don't think sanctions are the way to go about it.

Aung lives relatively comfortably (despite being under house arrest) compared to most of her countrymen and is probably the only one who might gain anything from sanctions. She doesn't worry about whether or not she eats, just put it that way. I know from 1st hand information that people like having having Canadians there and don't want sanctions. I wonder if they were polled... And where are these pro-democracy groups based?

Do you support sweeping sanctions in general (like against Cuba and Iraq), or just Myanmar? And if not, what is your criteria for choosing?