Results 1 to 12 of 12
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By nelsonone

Thread: Suu Kyi's Presidential Race Bid Blocked

  1. #1
    K2
    K2 is offline
    Super Moderator K2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,543

    Suu Kyi's Presidential Race Bid Blocked

    YANGON (Reuters) - Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi's hopes of becoming Myanmar's president next year have been dealt a blow when a parliamentary committee voted not to change a constitutional clause that bars her from the post, two of the panel members said on Friday.

    The committee tasked with recommending amendments opted to retain the section that prevents anyone married to a foreigner or with children of foreign citizenship from becoming head of state.

    The two sources declined to be identified and did not say why the proposal was rejected by 26 of the 31 panelists.

    Most experts believe the clause, 59 (f), was written into the military-drafted 2008 constitution specifically to sideline Suu Kyi, who became a global icon for her fight against military rule, most of it from house arrest.

    Her late husband was British, as are her two sons.


    Sad to see - would hope this gets overturned.
    Its My Life .....!

  2. #2
    Senior Member geir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Ranong
    Posts
    4,168
    Sad indeed as the people have such great belief in her...........
    A blowjob is better than no job!!

  3. #3
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    Quote Originally Posted by K2 View Post

    Most experts believe the clause, 59 (f), was written into the military-drafted 2008 constitution specifically to sideline Suu Kyi, who became a global icon for her fight against military rule, most of it from house arrest.
    of course it was......this Govt is just mutton dressed up as lamb...the majority of parliament is still appointed by the military junta...for me sanctions were lifted way too soon....possibly western eyes bulging at all of the resources available to plunder
    LivinLOS likes this.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    On a lighter note, maybe they didn't want to surpass Thailand on the democracy front.

    Hopefully the west is ready to tell them (through sanctions) that this is not acceptable.

  5. #5
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post

    Hopefully the west is ready to tell them (through sanctions) that this is not acceptable.
    one would hope so...but the genie is out of the bottle now....hard to ram it back in again once some of your wishes are being met

  6. #6
    K2
    K2 is offline
    Super Moderator K2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,543
    Sanctions now are a utter waste of time and only hurt the general population. Chinese, Japanese and Indian investment flows mean the West has virtually lost any hope of having significant influence on Myanmar's future ... even Obama's visit (as for the the ruling junta saw it) was more about increasing their bargaining position with China.

    Far more effective would be complete lifting of sanctions (perhaps except military) and letting Myanmar's economy grow and thus the general populations well being, then the push from within would become much more powerful. IMO I cant think of a single example where sanctions have really worked in bringing about a better situation for the rank and file.
    Its My Life .....!

  7. #7
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    hmmm...ask a black south african

    and do you not think sanctions had a large hand in the steps the military junta have made to appease the west so far in Myanmar?

  8. #8
    K2
    K2 is offline
    Super Moderator K2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,543
    Didn't think about SA ... you have a point there and doing a hasty bit of digging ...

    Along with the cost of financial sanctions, the cost of economic sanctions against South Africa is estimated to have approximated 1.5% of GNP. Those affected were largely unqualified blacks. Even after 1990 the unemployment rate among whites remained insignificant.
    Even in SA the impact of sanctions was minimal - the unraveling of apartheid came about because the the economic development and industrialisation around the major 'white' cities meant the system could no longer cope with the pressure of increased urbanisation of the rural black majority.

    The same could be said for Myanmar - as it industrialises and the cities expand and the the economic well being of the masses improve - the existing regime will collapse. Sanctions hit the bottom end of society hardest and big corporations and governments are all too able to circumvent meaningful sanctions in any case.

    In respect of the Myanmar junta appeasing the West - no the sanctions had little (if no) bearing on their actions - its the fear of the rise of China thats forcing their hand. Myanmar wanted to push back against increased Chinese economic and strategic domination and need the West as a counter balance.
    Its My Life .....!

  9. #9
    Super Moderator LivinLOS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14,153
    Sanctions of course hurt the population, but in turn that makes it harder to control a poor country raising the chance of some form of regime change..

    No Korea being a poor example !!!

  10. #10
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    Quote Originally Posted by K2 View Post



    Even in SA the impact of sanctions was minimal.....
    Maybe you are only considering economic sanctions here Kev.....Mandela thought economic sanctions were tantamount to the success of disabling apartheid and made many visits to western countries seeking out their support on "disinvestment" in SA companies prior to its fall and thanked them all mightily once he became president...."disinvestment" is credited with causing rampant inflation coupled with a huge fall in the rand (50%ish over just a few years iirc)....so whilst GNP in terms of the rand wasn't so much affected I'm guessing take a look at that figure in $US and you may get a very different picture

    However just as important or maybe moreso was the shunning of SA on the world stage...no place at any table..especially sport which I feel cut deep into the psyche of the white population who great pride in seeing their teams win at the highest level..Mandela knew this and also openly sought the help of western countries in having their national teams withdraw from all competitions with SA (under apartheid)

    Of course there were many internal issues in SA which led to the downfall of apartheid....and urbanisation and empowerment of blacks was one element....but the softening of Mandela's "communist" ideologies and a more conciliatory approach (which were courted by the west in return for sanctions) were also key factors in winning the whites only referendum which saw the motion pass

  11. #11
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    some good reading on the subject here.....

    Impact of Economic and Political Sanctions on Apartheid | The African File


    an excerpt.....



    De Klerk, in his own book, gives credence to the overall international movement. He notes that never before in history had a country had to deal with the “comprehensive international campaign” against the country (de Klerk 114). Not only were the economic stresses demanding, the restrictions on travel, notably on fly-over and landing rights for South African airlines, and the cold-shoulder many white South Africans received while traveling abroad in the 1980s all contributed to the isolation. He then describes how the sanctions net began to tighten in on the country. Later, he stressed the impact that the loss of financial support was taking on the country as a whole and that it became a “source of social unrest” (de Klerk 183). De Klerk then describes the need for financial stability in order to keep everyone, including the ANC, satisfied with the progress of the negotiations to end apartheid. Perhaps de Klerk cannot see the lines between the causes and effects, but it is most obvious that the reason South Africa is in financial doldrums is because of the anti-apartheid movement coupled with economic sanctions. Thus by his own reasoning, it would be safe to assume that the world-wide movement against the National Party had an undeniable and to some extent a very palpable link between the actual removal of the National Party from power and sanctions that were employed.

    The view championed by Nelson Mandela has a significant amount of empirical and scholarly evidence that would support his view that the international anti-apartheid movement against the National Party-led South African government was successful. Despite the campaign against apartheid not always meeting the requirements discussed earlier for successful sanctions, the political and overall isolation felt by South Africans, which was manufactured by the global anti-apartheid campaign, made up for the lapses in economic sanctions. Eventually the ‘total onslaught’ that the government and white society felt they were under, beginning in the 1960s, encompassed the riots caused by students within the country and the ANC’s fight from exile. The international sanction movement against the South African government was the final push that brought the National Party to near bankruptcy and brought them to the negotiating table with the ANC. While each factor of ‘total onslaught’ played a role, the global anti-apartheid movement was a significant dynamic in causing the turning the tide against the white-minority government and eventually bringing to power a true democracy on the southern tip of the African continent.

  12. #12
    Senior Member nelsonone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,862
    Keep the pressure on Myanmar, says Aung San Suu Kyi

    Keep the pressure on Myanmar, says Aung San Suu Kyi








    Amos Aikman



    Northern Correspondent
    Darwin

    https://plus.google.com/+AmosAikman





    Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, in Yangon at the weekend, says real power still eludes her people. Picture: Amos Aikman Source: Supplied


    THE world has been overly optim*istic about political reform in Myanmar, and must now step up pressure to ensure the government delivers real power to the people rather than a “veneer” of democracy concealing ongoing authoritarian military rule, oppos*ition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has urged.
    The Nobel Peace Prize laureate and chairwoman of the Nation*al League for Democracy warned all those interested in the Myanmar democratisation process to avoid looking at the country “through rose-tinted glasses”.“Everybody has been talking about the tremendous reforms that have come to our country, but I think it all has been overstated,” Ms Suu Kyi said.“What has been done in this country is nowhere like enough.”Ms Suu Kyi made the comments in an exclusive interview with The Australian, just days before she is due to meet Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.Ms Bishop will fly to Myanmar tomorrow for a three-day visit to emphasise Australia’s support for the country’s political reforms and to hold out the prospect of stronger economic ties.The meeting this week follows Ms Suu Kyi’s visit to Australia in November, when she held talks in Canberra with Tony Abbott, who described her as an “icon of democracy” who had suffered for her beliefs in democratic freedoms.Yesterday, Ms Suu Kyi said Australia had a special duty as one of Myanmar’s largest aid donors.“I’m sure what the people of Australia would want their money to be used for is genuine democratisation, and not just a veneer,” she said.“Any donor, not just Australia, has a responsibility to the people of the country they help to make sure that it’s the people they are helping and not any particular government or individuals.”The Australian has been told of concerns within Myanmar that Defence Minister David Johnston might ease military sanctions against the country’s regime. Ms Suu Kyi indicated she would oppose any such move.“Defence sanctions are the most sensitive ones, because it has to do with the military,” she said. “Democracy and military dictatorship are total opposites. I think for the time being (Australia) should wait to see how things emerge, because the amendments to the constitution are closely linked to the special privileges that the military has been given under the constitution.”In a warming of relations in January, the Abbott government sent the patrol boat HMAS Childers to Myanmar and then appointed a defence attache in Yangon — the first Australian post of its kind since a similar position was left vacant in 1979.Defence sources in Canberra yesterday played down the likelihood of any substantial change in military relations.Ms Bishop is using her visit to encourage the country’s trans*ition to democracy. “Australia is playing an important role in supporting Burma’s economic development and reform, particularly in promoting greater education opportunities to help achieve peace and stability,” she said.“I will reaffirm Australia’s support for the reform process and for the Myanmar government’s chairmanship of ASEAN this year. I will meet with Australian business representatives to discuss what the Australian and Myanmar governments can do to enhance trade and investment links.”Ms Suu Kyi is eager to find a way to change her country’s constitution, which bars her from running for president in elections scheduled for next year. The NLD is expected to win a majority of seats, if the poll is free and fair. Earlier this month, a committee charged with exploring constit*utional amendments recom*mended against changing the section that bars Ms Suu Kyi from running.The move drew criticism from the US State Department, which said enabling the Myanmar people to freely choose their own leader would help ensure stability.Ms Suu Kyi said countries such as the US and Australia had been right to ease sanctions after the government began political reforms.However, she cautioned against over-optimism and complacency.“Too much optimism simply means that people become complacent, and don’t really get on with what they have to do, because they think that they’ve done enough.”Additional reporting: David CroweOriginally published as ‘Keep pressure on Myanmar’



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •