Japan should reconsider its assistance policy.
Another disheartening event has taken place in Burma. Prime Minister Khin Nyunt, No. 3 in the hierarchy of the military junta, was replaced with First Secretary Soe Win, a reputed protege of Than Shwe, chairman of the State Peace and Development Council and strongman of the junta.
Gen. Khin Nyunt showed some understanding toward the democracy movement by, for example, announcing a plan for Burma's transition to civilian rule. He was also flexible in his foreign policy and was generally regarded as a moderate.
Gen. Than Shwe, on the other hand, has adopted a hard-line policy and attempted to suppress pro-democracy and ethnic groups by force; Gen. Soe Win has been seen as the hardest of the hard-liners.
Speculation is rife over what prompted the latest reshuffle in the junta. It seems certain, however, that behind it lay differences in policy among the generals. Apparently, the authoritarians who have gotten their way because of their sheer power have obtained an even greater voice. Democracy in Burma will in all likelihood recede further into the background and the country will be further left out on a limb in the international community.
Although the pro-democracy force won a landslide victory in the 1990 general election, the junta refused to hand over power, arguing that the country needed a new Constitution. Fourteen years have passed since then.
In the meantime, the junta put Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, under house arrest three times and imprisoned many other leaders of the democracy movement. The preparation for enacting a Constitution has made little headway.
The summit of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) held in Hanoi early this month was bogged down by a major dispute over Burma's entry into the organization. European countries were opposed, saying Burma's suppression of the pro-democracy movement and persecution of minority groups should not go unchallenged, even if the country joins hands with the Europeans in economic development and the fight against terror.
The European countries ended up accepting the participation of Burma's Cabinet ministers, instead of its prime minister. Although the European Union thus compromised at the ASEM summit, its 25 member countries have made their positions clear by refusing to issue visas to Burma's high-ranking officials and their family members as a gesture of sanctions against the country.
How does the Japanese government's position compare to such attitudes of the European countries? Japan has called for ``encouraging democracy through dialogue'' and has alternately provided and suspended economic assistance several times. It resumed economic assistance as the junta held a professed national convention in May this year for enacting a Constitution.
Japan occupied this country during World War II, and backed its independence. It has also been deeply involved in the reconstruction of the country through assistance and investment after the war. Given such a history, it may be impossible for Japan to behave like European countries.
And yet, how far does Japan intend to go in providing economic assistance to a military junta that ignores demands, both within the country and abroad, for dialogue with the opposition? Japan must take into account how its policy is being understood by countries in Asia and other regions.
Japan's policy toward Burma should be reconsidered by taking into consideration the future not only of Burma but also that of all the countries in Southeast Asia.