Call it Burmese fixation on numerology. October 10, 2010 is being predicted by many as the date for general elections for the country. The first elections in two decades, it is an occasion that a majority of Burmese living in the country and overseas as self-exiled citizens have waited with bated breath. But the prognosis remains mixed at best and pessimistic and grim at worst.
That the Burmese government aims to win a sweeping majority is without question. The military regime has already launched an election commission comprising school teachers who will aggregate lists of ‘eligible’ voters on government computers - technological progress would be the only positive way of describing the development.
It is difficult to ignore that many Burmese will be excluded from the election process simply by virtue of their political affiliations. Others who belong to ethnic minority groups - there are at least 100 classified ethnic groups in Burma - will be unable to exercise their democratic rights. Many of them are internally displaced within Burma’s borders while others live as unclassified refugees in neighboring Thailand. Thailand has not ratified the refugee convention of 1951 and thereby does not distinguish between refugees and migrant workers (legal and illegal).
Collective Boycott: symbolism vs. pragmatism
Numerous Burmese political activists and student movements are calling for a collective boycott as a clarion call that will relay a strong message to the international community - that the Burmese want real democracy - one that includes the rights and interests of all the peoples of the country.
A product of the 1988 student protests, Jan Ano disagrees with some of his counterparts who are calling for a unified resistance campaign opposing elections. During a conversation in Bangkok, he pointed out that history has attested that collective boycott never works in reality. At least not under the present conditions in Burma. In his experience of living inside and outside of his country, he noticed that politics of exclusion is a common practice where the ruling Junta and the opposition parties have mirrored each other. Clearly it has not been fruitful in elevating Burma from political stagnancy since independence from the British in 1948.
Ano is right in that the boycott does not carry universal appeal to all Burmese. Under Aung Sun Suu kyi’s leadership, the National League for Democracy (NLD) decided not to register for the intended 2010 elections. As a consequence, her political party has been officially dissolved by the government. Following NLD’s decision to refrain from contesting in elections, some members of the party who are in favor of participating, split into different factions to form seperate registered parties. The idea of a nationwide boycott therefore seems a moot point.
People’s Power over Political Power
How will the NLD, considered the strongest voice of opposition fight for democracy and justice without a place in the political system?
The secretary general of the NLD, speaking from his residence in Chiang Mai is reassured. He explains, ”We won in 1990 with an 85 percent majority. We are more than a political party. We are a movement and the people of Burma support us…The change will come in the form of a social revolution within Burma - like the Saffron revolution. Our main objective right now is to support the people in their struggle. And we will do this outside the Parliament.”
A renewed Saffron revolution?
Nyo Myint is convinced that the Fall of 2010 will witness a social mobilization amongst ordinary Burmese. Concurrently, will the elections of October 10, 2010 lead to a mass movement by students and academics similar to that of August 8,1988?
When hundreds of thousands of Buddhist monks took to the streets of Burma in defiance of the ruling Junta on August 15, 2007, the world watched with trepidation. For many, the killings of 1988, when the Junta crushed the rebellion with unabashed brutality, were still fresh in their minds.
This time however, the Saffron clad monks began a relentless struggle, using technology to voice their demands for change. In a feat that would have been unimaginable in 1988, SMS, streaming video, blogs and digital cameras collectively painted a vivid image of the need for democracy in Burma and the consistent failure of the international community in aiding the Burmese.
‘We want three Fs, three Fs we want - Freedom for the future, Friendship between our army and our people, Food to live peacefully.’
Burmese poet Aung Way’s words splash across one of the more popular blogs named ‘Justice, Injustice’ where a digital clock counts the time since the birth of the Saffron Revolution and the beginning of the movement for change.
The Saffron revolution was not about elections but about the basic demands by the people for access to electricity, water and basic amenities. In this sense, it was a movement calling for universal rights that elected bodies are expected to ensure. As per Myint’s opinion, perhaps a call for democratic change will take the form of a social movement with the country regardless of the outcome of elections.
And finally there is the obvious but evaded issue of the rights of Burmese ethnic minorities who progress is an essential prerequisite for any form of democratic growth in the Burma. The Junta will find it increasingly difficult to ignore a burgeoning demand from Burmese of all ethnic groups for democratic rights in the form of equal access to - humanity, peace an economy.