Burma: International power play?

In the aftermath of the Burmese protests, in which hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets alongside Buddhist monks, there has been mounting international pressure on China and India to pull back their substantial economic support to the country.

Over 2,100 people were arrested last month with over 1,000 still being held after widespread protests against Burma’s ruling junta, sparked by a rise in fuel prices of 500%. The number of deaths is unknown. Deaths by torture are also being alleged. Calls have been made to impose further sanctions against Burma, and the UN have made a unanimous statement ‘deploring’ the violence, while the US has threatened to pull out of the Beijing Olympics should China choose to back the regime’s actions.

But looking at the politics surrounding Burma, a murkier picture emerges of exactly how the crisis evolved, along with the motivations of the west in reacting so strongly to it while in neighbouring Bangladesh mere months ago similar violence drew so little international attention.

Burma, which is massively mineral and gas-rich, has been subject to heavy sanction from the US and EU since 2003. This includes a ban on all military sales and corporate investment, bar a loophole for the extraction of fuel resources which allowed French fuel giant Total to continue operations extracting Burmese gas for export.

The country has also kept its membership of the IMF and World Bank – with the former’s recommendation that the junta ‘wean’ its population off fuel subsidies cited as the main reason for the hikes which sparked the protests.

The World Bank has banned Burma from taking any more loans as it is deemed a HIPC (heavily indebted poor country), but has continued to use its monetary clout to give itself and the IMF influence.

While the IMF and World Bank allow the west a foothold in Burmese politics, and Total’s stewardship of the gas pipeline out of Burma has given the west access to some gas resources, the future of Burma as a supplier is less sure.

Burma has strong alliances with both China and India, who have few sanctions on Burma and provide most of the country’s foreign investment, allowing it to circumvent some economic pressures from the west. Through these two regional powers, a battle has been going on over the direction of future gas pipelines and profits. A project to build a second major pipe through Bangladesh and into India – backed by US company Chevron and Daewoo - ran into trouble earlier this year after project leaders cited strong Chinese and Bangladeshi blocking tactics, hinting at an effective bidding war between India and China, both of which are suffering from chronic fuel shortages.

Massive recent investment from the two powers and some western companies is marking the beginning of a potential explosion in gas extraction in Burma, with new offshore fields worth up to $52 billion due to come online over the next few years.

In looking at the Saffron Revolution, the motivations behind the movement is all-important.
The IMF’s ultimatum to Burma’s ruling class, almost guaranteed to spark protest and violent reprisals, has given the west the perfect opportunity to pile pressure on China and India to pull back their main means of influence, and drive a wedge between them and Burma just as gas profits look set to skyrocket.
In this international power play, it is the working class of Burma which is suffering, and although many big guns are being levelled in the region, it is not the junta they are pointed at. The only saviours the mass can expect are themselves.