Myanmar: A Nation in Crisis Essay

The new government was continuously challenged by communists and under-represented ethnic groups. Home to one of the largest diversity of ethnic groups, it was extremely challenging to please all. With demands of, “protection of ethnic culture, language, and religion, the devolution of tangible executive, legislative, and judicial power to the ethnic states within a true federal union, and a democratic form of government” (ConflictMap.org) not met, the ethnic groups turned to violence. As a result, Burma experienced intense periods of civil war which devastated and destabilized the country even further. As the economy collapsed, U Nu was forced out of office by General Ne Win in order to “restore law and order”. U Nu was re-elected in February 1960, but two years later on March 2nd 1962, Ne Win seized power in a coup d'état and proclaimed himself to be Burma’s new military

Cambodia officially once known as the Khmer Empire is a country located in the southern section of peninsula in the Southeast Asia. It is bordered by the neighboring countries like Thailand to northwest and Vietnam to the east, with a current population of 15 Million +, making the 69th on the most populous country in the world. The current most practiced religion is Buddhism conceiving 95 percent of the population. The capital and largest city of Cambodia is Phnom Penh, the political, economic, and cultural center of this country occur. Most decisions regarding political and economic factors occur in this capital. Its governing methods make it questionable factor for this nation, where the current head of government Hun Sen, who is currently the longest serving non-royal leader in South East Asian and has governed and obstructed this country for 25 years. Its extensive history and background of this nation has poverties it for its people and its current individual economical service, forcing some individual to resolute into trafficking and disruption of its younger generation to other nations by illegal means. By demonstrating the current and previous events that have transcended this nation and its people into using illegal means of disruption of humans for economic value, we can analyze current and future means of stopping this disgusting act constantly occurring in this area. This analysis focuses on the globalization context of this event and through the demands,

The Taiping Rebellion and Indian Mutiny were both revolts caused by Britain's actions, motivated by their wish to control international trade in stride towards their Imperialistic goals of globalizing their trade network to maximize profit and control. As information was gathered on Southeast Asia, Britain became increasingly interested by the potential value of native goods. With the additional help of developing technology at the time, Britain was able to gain control via despotism. The imperialistic rule was successful as encountered regions in Southeast Asia had always easily controlled by global powers, until indigenous voices in India and China were finally heard in their fight to push back against Britain's greedy actions. Britain had found it necessary to expand their reach in India and China for various reasons, some of which being to spread Christianity, creating more ports for sailors, and benefitting trade networks. However India and China found fewer benefits in Britain's motives and their message was eventually heard as the indigenous fought Britain's globalization tactics that were not mutually beneficial but could be found on the agenda of British Imperialism.

This paper investigates and distinguishes, through my opinion, the impacts that Khmer Rouge’s also known as the Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK) had on a global scale. First, by addressing the impacts to the immediate country, Cambodia and the tactics used by this abhorrent organization. Furthermore, the ideologies used by said organization, to instill fear and distrust in the population; which lead to there early demise, but not after 1.7 million people lost or sacrificed there lives for their country, per se. The lesson to be learned from this is, no matter who you are or what power you have, eventually you will have to answer to the international community if you commit such egregious acts of violence.

Cambodia, my small country bordering Thailand, has recently descended into a grisly crisis of outright genocide of innocent citizens, my innocent neighbors. This genocide is very different from any other genocide because it isn't driven by racial or religious reasons, but by poisonous ideology, the ideology of my own neighbors. As of today a little less than a million Cambodians have died either from starvation, torture, disease, execution, and even exhaustion from hard labor carried out by their own families, by my own neighbors.

Humanitarian crises and international politics goes hand in hand. One can cause the other, while the only way to fix the other is to rely on politics. This paper will highlight the cause of genocide, violent massacres and crisis, how to solve them, and key roles politicians and nations must take up wholeheartedly in order to make a difference. Personal and political reconciliation must occur in the parties involved ever want to have a mutual co existence.

Lives will continue to be lost until treaties are established and international law is strengthened to apply to each and every country. Activists and protesters deserve fair and just treatment, and officials need to be monitored appropriately. The UN has officiated more than 560 treaties, and has an International Court of Justice to carry out the enforcement of human rights (UN). Civil action must be taken, and on a higher level than previous years. Growing discipline for all nations and setting the bar higher for everyone will slowly but surely regulate behavior and settle international relations. In an article from The Hindu, written by Nehginpao Kipgen, an ethnic cleansing is reported taking place in Myanmar during 2017. The government felt they had the power to drive 700,000 Rohingya muslims out of the country, and their actions were depicted as “crimes against humanity” by the UN (Kipgen). The ultimate solution was brought upon by the United Nations security council, and scrutinized the government by ordering them to resolve their wrongdoings and check their authority. This source again shows how international organizations have the power to stop unjust fatalities and unproportional governmental

Concerning the ethnic minorities of Burma, I believe that we are in a period where carefully analyzed humanitarian input can have a successful impact. Unlike the genocide in Darfur, we’re aware of a developing situation where large-scale genocide has not taken place yet. History further lends a hand in paralleling the cordoning in society of minorities such as the Rohingya with that of the black African minorities in the Nuba Mountains of Sudan. Lessons gained in the events in Sudan should be considered in defending the minorities of Burma who are facing human rights violation.

The British Empire had taken over Lower Burma for the resources it had to offer. Once the British Empire conquered the Burmese they had to maintain power. The British Empire prohibited the Burmese from having any weapons. With taking the privileges of weapons the Burmese couldn’t revolt against the empire and over powered them. The British Empire had to maintain dominance over the Burmese in order to keep the territory and the resources.

In July 1988, decline in economic conditions led to large-scale and bloody rioting in cities in Burma. In Sept 1988, the army under General U.Saw Maung replaced the Government with the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), a group of military officers. In 1990, SLORC proposed a new government and allowed free elections with the confidence that it would win, but 80% of the seats were won by the civilian opposition party led by Suu Kyi. But it refused to turn over the power to the civilian government. It outlawed

The Burmese Uprising in 1988 and the Chilean dictatorship in 1973 have resulted in a similar case overall but due to the lack of variables Burma's overall objective led to a failure while Chile's objective was met and a sense of revenge was achieved for all the individuals that were killed or missing under Pinochet's dictatorship. Although Burma failed, it is clearly seen where their weak points were. For example, participation was present, but the overall meaning of why they were fighting against their oppressor was not clearly defined. Thus, loyalty shifts became a troublesome because there were mixed messages. Another fact that did not support their case was that General Ne Win was willing to use force at any cost. Lastly, external support

The leaders include the president of Burma, Thein Sein, and a famous politician of the country, Aung San Suu Kyi. The two groups comprise of the Sangha, which is a community of Buddhist monks, and the Rakhine Nationalities Development Group (RNDG), which is a political party in Myanmar. In 1991, Aung San Suu Kyi won the Nobel Peace Prize for forming the National League for Democracy and coincidently disapproved of violence and hoped that all ethnic groups could “cooperate in harmony.” Since then, she has denied any evidence of an ethnic cleansing, when asked about it in an interview and she has talked about the Rohingya Muslims, stating that “They are not our citizens.” The president, Thein Sein, has done many things to contribute to the ethnic cleansing. He has come up with ideas to end the ethnic cleansing, such as “expelling” the muslims from the country or getting the United Nations to “resettle” them somewhere else.

Burma, like many other Southeast Asian nations, is a land of much culture and diversity of ethnic groups. Unfortunately, unlike the people of other nations, the people of Burma have been stripped of their human rights. Since the military junta had overtaken the Burmese government in 1988, the people of Burma have been among the most oppressed people in the world. The continuation of the government’s brutality has caught the attention of many outside nations around the world who increasingly have been intervening in Burma’s issues to help its people. As these occurrences are a major issue for the people of Burma, these problems are not restricted to its boundaries. They are also becoming a problem for

Burma used to be a military dictatorship country for several years. The military dictatorship system was initially led by General Ne Win, who ruled the country with brutality since 1962. In 1974, the government forced people to approve a new constitution for establishing a one-party (Burma Socialist Program Party or BSPP) government with 415 members. General Ne Win changed the name of the country to the Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma. They held a one-party election and General Ne Win turned into Chairman of the State Council and President of Burma U Ne Win. However, the military junta was still controlling. Burma’s economy were facing bankruptcy by 1987 (Background Information).

The land on which modern-day Myanmar stands could be traced back to Pagan Dynasty. Britain gradually took control of Myanmar in 1824. Burma was able to gain its independence from the Great Britain in 1948. Burma became a parliamentary democracy, granting autonomous states to minorities. In 1962 Union Revolutionary Council overthrew the civilian government and suspended the constitution. As a result, the country was under military rule from 1962 to 1988. The military government transitioned to a socialist economy, nationalized all major industries and reduced the foreign influence. Years of military rule and suppression and a failed attempt to move to a multi- party election system led to the imposition of economic sanctions to Myanmar. A new constitution was voted in by the public in 2008, that established a parliamentary system where the military has the 50% of the seats. The military government was officially dissolved in 2011, and a former member, Thein Sein was inaugurated as president and PM, convening a largely civilian parliament and begun political, economic and parliamentary reforms.