After the independence
of Myanmar from the Britain in 1948, the civilian government under the military
control by Ne Win, which would give citizens and the country itself about hard
time about for 50 years later on, came into existence. Myanmar controlled by Ne
Win seemed to be so far away from democracy at that time. Not only citizens
there but people all over the world would never imagine the existence of
democracy in Myanmar.[1][2]
However as the military government system was controlling the
country, objections toward its system increasingly arouse from other countries
including U.S.[3] It
also deteriorated relationships with foreign countries, which worsen economy as
well. While neighbor countries spreading stable relationships with other
countries and were growing economically.
As the growth was taking place in countries around Myanmar, the
citizens’ desire for democracy got increased. This will enable the following that
the government realized that the military system would never work on
modernizing Myanmar if they continued the same system and it also acknowledged the necessity of new movements in government itself. It is the movement that is the
way to democratize the country slowly as remaining military system in it. The relation between government and citizens
became well-balanced, which can be thought to create relatively the stable
condition in Myanmar today. Saying it more simply, the existence of military
has made today’s Myanmar under stable condition. The condition of today’s
Myanmar is being democratized with military government which is controlling
citizens moderately.[4]
That kind of dramatic process has started since Thein Sein, a
Burmese politician and former military figure who has been President of Myanmar,
became a prime minister of Myanmar in 2007. Leading with the new system of governing
by him, a national referendum also became be in adaption and further democratization
was getting in process. In 2010 The Burmese military authorities finally
released the pre-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who had been in house
arrest for anti-military activities .Moreover Thein Sein has been a prime
minister of Myanmar since March 2011 and NLD led by Su Kyi was reregistered as
one of political parties.[5] Through
seeing those changes briefly, democratization in Myanmar seems to be in process
gradually with its military government. It is not progressing sharply and
rapidly but it is surely and moderately making steady process. How process for democratization
in the country is being made looks exactly like how a plane is trying to make a
soft landing on ground. Slowly but steadily.
What if people in Myanmar should defeat military government? A
condition would become serious unlike the stable one in the current Myanmar. Here
is a typical bad example. It is Tunisian revolution, a democratic movement
against government taken place in Tunisia from 2010 to 2011. Movements against
government were spread to a whole country and they contributed to the end of 23
years in dictator power. Such demonstrations opposing governments would not
stop and which were expanded to the other nations including Libya and Egypt in
the Arab nations. Dissatisfaction towards dictatorship was into explosion,
which led to the situation no one could control a country at all. Revolutions
can sound to be success since there is no government which annoys citizens. Citizens
must have felt that they finally could gain freedom being away from
governments. However was it really great to them overall? There is no one who
controls, or rather saying organizes a country and citizens fall apart with
their own desires. Therefore a condition would be deteriorated worse than
before. Economy is also stagnant because of it. Under such conditions, there
should be no way to make progress towards democracy.[6][7][8][9]
Myanmar didn’t follow such path
but chose its own path as remaining military power in the government. What’s
more, it has being trying to make great process in making the country democracy
not in a brutal or rash but a sober way by using military power. The new act in
military government itself can be said to contribute deeply to the steady
democratic process. It tells us that initiating a reformation with brutal and
bloody fights is not always a helpful way to solve a problem. Now look at
Myanmar. People there definitely didn’t initiate a dramatic reformation at all.
Nevertheless they are keeping up the present government in order to change a country
gently. It represents a new way of reforming.
[1] Brief information about History of Myanmar http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/myanmar/index.html
Brief history of Myanmar
[3] Relations with foreign countries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Burma
[4] new movements in the government
[5] release of Aung San Suu Kyi
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11749661
[6] Worse conditions after revolutions
In Tunisia
http://www.tunisia-live.net/2011/11/14/nearly-one-year-after-the-tunisian-revolution-sidi-bouzid-remains-a-neglected-town/
[9] In Egypt
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/11/06/egypts_struggle_ahead_111959.html
