The Myanmar junta's latest assault on the democratic opposition led by Aung San Suu Kyi has left observers struggling to explain why the generals have suddenly snuffed out a UN-sponsored peace process.
Hopes for an end to military rule were ignited when UN envoy to Myanmar Razali Ismail persuaded the ruling generals to begin secret talks with National League for Democracy (NLD) figurehead Aung San Suu Kyi in October 2000.
But with the NLD's leaders in detention and its offices shut nationwide over the weekend, the country appears to be back to the dire situation it was in three years ago when the UN was about to condemn it as a pariah nation.
"We are all scratching our heads, especially those who were pinning their hopes on national reconciliation and political dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi," said Aung Zaw, editor of the Myanmar affairs magazine Irrawaddy.
The timing of the crackdown has also caused consternation, coming days before Razali was due to make his 10th visit to Myanmar to invigorate the reconciliation process which ground to a halt months ago.
Razali insisted Sunday that he would go ahead with his trip, but sources in Yangon said the mission may now be in doubt.
Details surrounding the events of the weekend, when Aung San Suu Kyi was detained following a clash between democracy supporters and a pro-junta mob in northern Myanmar which left four people dead, remained sketchy.
Many analysts believe the crackdown was an effort to sideline the opposition leader after the regime became alarmed at her increasingly outspoken comments, and the huge public support she has garnered on a series of political tours.
Others suggested it was a panicky reaction to the violence in the north, when the generals realized the protests they had incited there were spinning out of control and risked infecting the rest of the country.
"A lot of people inside Burma believe that this has been well planned and well organized by the hardline ministers and top army leaders," said Thailand-based Aung Zaw.
After releasing her from house arrest a year ago, the government had become infuriated by her rising public profile and continued support for sanctions against the regime and a ban on tourism, he said.
"They have been very unhappy with her, that's why there hasn't been any formal communication with her since October last year. Since then you can see that tension has been building up," he said.
The last straw came last week when, after demurring on the issue since her release, she again insisted that the regime recognize the results of 1990 elections won by the NLD in a landslide.
Diplomats in Yangon said the government may have realized its decision to give Aung San Suu Kyi complete freedom of movement after her release from house arrest had backfired.
"They agreed she could visit party offices but said `don't draw attention to yourself, no fusses, no speeches and certainly not the crowds,'" said one diplomat. "From reading the government's own statements it struck me that things are not going the way they planned."
Well aware of the public's loathing of the military government, the ruling generals live in fear of the immense popularity Aung San Suu Kyi enjoys and the prospect that she could one day command a popular uprising.
Observers agreed that the protests sparking the weekend's events, which pitted NLD supporters against thousands of members of the junta-sponsored Union Solidarity Development Association, were engineered by the regime.
The heady cocktail snowballed into violence, leaving at least four dead and 50 injured according to the military, and many more than that according to pro-democracy groups who also claimed the Nobel peace laureate was injured.
There was no independent verification of the condition of Suu Kyi, who was being held at a government guest house in Yangon, but the prospect of her being harmed would have alarmed the regime which knows it would be held responsible for her safety by the international community.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS