•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   
•    EYEWITNESS   

Burma is at an important juncture this year as its first election in 20 years approaches.

Well known for its charismatic opposition leader, Aung Sang Suu Kyi, and the ruling, military-dominated State Peace and Development Council, it comes as no real surprise that a series of recently announced electoral laws would effectively prevent Suu Kyi and other political dissidents from participating in the upcoming election.

Irrespective of the wave of criticism the electoral laws attracted from pro-democracy forces and foreign governments, it seems clear that the multiparty election will take place with or without the participation of non-junta-supported parties. This includes the main democratic opposition, the Suu Kyi-led National League for Democracy, providing a serious challenge to the NLD and other political stakeholders.

Regardless of the mockery that the 2010 Burma election may make of the democratic process, it would be an even bigger blow for the country if no genuine opposition participates. Under the new laws, NLD will face dissolution as a legal entity if it continues with its current plan to boycott the election.

Despite the undemocratic clauses of the 2008 Constitution on which the 2010 election is based, it will essentially allow a pseudo-civilian government to be formed after the election. This will include the reintroduction of a parliamentary system in Burma, albeit with 25 percent of the seats guaranteed for the military. Despite the unfair practices and challenges any opposition may face, the election also provides an opportunity for opposition groups to challenge the SPDC, by competing for seats against junta-backed proxy parties.

Hundreds of genuine democratic enthusiasts not affiliated with the NLD will still be eager to run in the election. Some may succeed in the polls even in the face of open intimidation and junta manipulation.

By participating in the election, even without Suu Kyi’s approval or the NLD’s involvement, opposition groups may garner enough support to become viable players in the Burmese political landscape. Additionally, from within the SPDC-ascribed framework, opposition politicians will finally have a “legitimate” platform to push for gradual political liberalization, and perhaps even more important, address key pragmatic social and economic concerns of the state when the parliament finally convenes after a hiatus of several decades.

For the last two decades, the NLD and the international community have continued to condemn and dismiss the SPDC. However, continued isolation, Western sanctions and moral condemnation of the generals have done little to sway the junta’s position. Such policies have in fact only strengthened the junta’s resolve to develop the Burmese state at their own pace and on their own terms.

Irrespective of what Suu Kyi stands for, and the noble sacrifices she and others have made in their demand for a democratic Burma, the reality is that Western support and continued focus on Suu Kyi and the NLD, along with their sanctions, have failed to influence the ruling junta.

Participating in the election within the constraints set by the junta may seem like kowtowing to the military regime and falls far short of the international norms in upholding a credible democratic process. However, for a nation that has been plagued by civil war, ethnic tensions, factional politics and bureaucratic inefficiency ever since its independence, participation in the election is perhaps the only viable option at present for any constructive development.

Suu Kyi will remain an important figure for the future of Burma, whether as a living martyr or as a figure for peace and reconciliation in a more politically relaxed Burma. However, the political realities of today’s Burma suggest that pragmatism must prevail over abstract notions of democracy and simplistic moral positions. For the betterment of the Burmese populace, gradual, incremental political changes will be more constructive than continued absolutist positions that insist on vague and unrealistic goals aimed at immediate “democracy” in the Burma state.

As former Burmese UN Secretary-General U Thant reportedly once said, “Governments, systems, ideologies come and go, but it is humanity which remains.” Similarly, in order for Burma to move beyond its current political impasse, strict dogmatism must be abandoned by the NLD and other oppositional stakeholders. As long as the democratic forces survive the 2010 electoral games, hope will remain for Burma.

East Asia Forum

Roger Huang is research development officer at the Center for Asian Pacific Studies, Lingnan University, Hong Kong.