Five Years On, Rohingya Refugees Face Dire Conditions and a Long Road Ahead
Five Years On, Rohingya Refugees Face Dire Conditions and a Long Road Ahead
Briefing 127 / Asia

缅甸:重大改革进行中

  • Share
  • Save
  • Print
  • Download PDF Full Report

概述

缅甸于六个月前过渡到了半平民化新政府,而今,这个国家正在经历重大变化。总统吴登盛在就职演说中抛出了雄心勃勃的改革计划,并在最近两个月内迅速推进该计划的实施。他正在寻求同上届政权的宿敌进行接触,倡议双方抛开分歧共谋国事。昂山素季把握了这一时机,与吴登盛在内比都进行了会面,并相信他有实现积极改变的诚意。东亚国家联盟似乎也相信缅甸正在朝着正确的方向迈进,并有可能让缅甸于2014年接管该组织的领导位置。这一可能性会鼓舞缅甸的改革派人士,因为该前景为他们进行经济和政治重组真正设定了一个期限。西方政策制定者应该针对缅甸境况的改善作出相应的调整政策,并且准备好对缅甸的重要进步(比如大批释放政治犯)进行回应。

吴登盛总统在8月19日的讲话中阐明了他的目标是把缅甸建设成为一个发达现代的民主国家。此前不到六个月,他发表了内容广泛,坦诚,并另人耳目一新的就职演说。在其中,他表达了对改革的必要步骤的初步看法。一些观察人士对此类演讲不以为然,认为它们不过只是空头言论。但在缅甸经历了长期的政治和经济停滞的情况下,这些演说的意义深远。缅甸经历了50年的独裁统治,吴登盛的演讲令统治基调涣然一新,将几个月前不可想像的言论和行动变为可能,并发出了有力的信号,预示着新的政治领导方式的来临。

这些言论正在转化为实际行动。最近几周,缅甸采取了一系列具体步骤来实施吴登盛总统的改革计划,以实现振兴经济、改革国家政治体系和改善人权状况的目的。这些迹象表明缅甸有着实现根本性变革的政治愿望,但改革的成功不能仅靠一位有决心的领袖。改革预计会遭遇权力机构中强硬派的抵制,也会受到现行机制中既得利益者的阻挠。另外,长期的孤立和独裁统治致使缅甸技术短缺,体制薄弱,这些都会严重制约改革进程。西方国家和多边国际组织最具备给缅甸提供咨询和援助的能力,因此当务之急是给这些机构提供出面参与缅甸事务的条件。

但一些观察人士忽略正在发生的变革,把注意力只集中在需要进行的变革上,仍然敦促国际社会对缅甸采取谨慎态度。毫无疑问,缅甸的改革进程任重而道远。许多必要的根本举措还未得以实施,例如,修复民族分歧的鸿沟,克服数十年武装冲突的遗留问题(而政府仍然缺乏对这一问题的全面认识),同时充分调查时而发生的对武装部队暴行的指控;释放政治囚犯;恢复基本的公民自由;并且进一步放松对媒体的审查制约。

西方国家已经表示随时准备对缅甸的积极发展作出反应。至少,西方国家应放松谨慎的政治立场并鼓励包括国际金融机构和联合国开发计划署在内的多边国际组织在现有权限内尽最大努力提供支持。同样,欧盟成员国应该支持对欧盟理事会就缅甸作出的决定进行最广义的而不是最谨慎的诠释。在缅甸踏上新的道路时,这些微小的政治举措能拓宽思路,为正在进行的改革推波助澜。

目前已经有迹象表明,缅甸可能将很快达到西方国家所坚决要求实现的主要的民主基准。例如,在下议院,军方议员支持了反对派提出的呼吁总统大赦政治囚犯的提案。如果这一巨大的政策转变成为现实,那么早先授权制裁缅甸的国家和机构应该给予相应的回复。反之,如果西方世界毫无反应,或者移动标杆以新的要求代替旧的要求,那么将削弱这些政策的可信度并减小西方本来已经微弱的影响力。国际社会应该肯定和支持缅甸在改善人权和改革经济发面取得的有益国民的进步。

危机组织一直认为,对缅甸的制裁,不管是有针对性的还是全面的,都会起到适得其反的作用。因为制裁会让缅甸领导层产生四面受敌的心理,而受到影响的是占缅甸大多数的贫困人口。缅甸发生变革的脚步越快,就越没有理由维持制裁或者加强制裁。当然,缅甸仍然存在许多问题,仍有充分证据显示缅甸军方仍在用残暴手段镇压叛乱。在国内体系无

力追究责任的情况下,要求国际委员会介入的呼声就不会停止。但这样的机构即使得以组建,也不一定是解决暴行的最行之有效的方法,因为缅甸政府可能因此坚壁自首。

雅加达/布鲁塞尔,2011年9月22日

I. Overview

Six months after the transition to a new, semi-civilian government, major changes are taking place in Myanmar. In the last two months, President Thein Sein has moved rapidly to begin implementing an ambitious reform agenda first set out in his March 2011 inaugural address. He is reaching out to long-time critics of the former regime, proposing that differences be put aside in order to work together for the good of the country. Aung San Suu Kyi has seized the opportunity, meeting the new leader in Nay­pyi­taw and emerging with the conviction that he wants to achieve positive change. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) seems convinced that Myanmar is heading in the right direction and may soon confer upon it the leadership of the organisation for 2014. This would energise reformers inside the country with real deadlines to work toward as they push for economic and political restructuring. Western policymakers should react to the improved situation and be ready to respond to major steps forward, such as a significant release of political prisoners.

In a speech on 19 August, the president made clear that his goal is to build a modern and developed democratic nation. His initial views on what steps are needed were set out in his wide-ranging and refreshingly honest inaugural speech less than six months ago. Some observers have dismissed such talk as “just words”, but in a context of long-term political and economic stagnation they are much more than that. After 50 years of autocratic rule, they show strong signs of heralding a new kind of political leadership in Myanmar – setting a completely different tone for governance in the country and allowing discussions and initiatives that were unthinkable only a few months ago.

These words are now being put into practice. In recent weeks a series of concrete steps have been taken to begin implementing the president’s reform agenda, aimed at reinvigorating the economy, reforming national politics and improving human rights. The political will appears to exist to bring fundamental change, but success will require much more than a determined leader. Resistance can be expected from hardliners in the power structure and spoilers with a vested interest in the status quo. Weak technical and institutional capacities also impose serious constraints on a country emerging from decades of isolation and authoritarianism. It is urgent that those best placed to provide the necessary advice and assistance – the West and multilateral institutions – are allowed to step forward to provide it.

Some observers are still urging caution, putting the focus not on how much is changing but on how much has yet to change. To be sure, a successful reform process is far from guaranteed. There are many fundamental steps that still must be taken, including healing deep ethnic divisions and overcoming the legacy of decades of armed conflict – something the government has yet to fully grapple with – together with addressing adequately ongoing allegations of brutality by the armed forces; the release of political prisoners; restoration of basic civil liberties; and the further lifting of media censorship.

Western countries have indicated that they stand ready to respond to positive developments. At a very minimum, this should include a less cautious political stance and the encouragement of multilateral agencies – including the International Financial Institutions and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) – to do as much as possible under their existing mandate restrictions. Similarly, member states should support the broadest interpretation of the EU Council decision on Myanmar rather than the most cautious. As Naypyitaw sets its new course, these small political steps would help to facilitate the provision of ideas that could add momentum to the reforms now underway.

There are already indications that key benchmarks many in the West have insisted on may soon be reached. Military legislators have, for example, supported an opposition motion in the lower house calling on the president to grant a general amnesty for political prisoners. If such a dramatic policy shift occurs, it would need to be reciprocated by those who earlier authorised sanctions. Failure to do so, or to shift the goalposts by replacing old demands with new ones, would undermine the credibility of these policies and diminish what little leverage the West holds. Internal progress on human rights and economic reforms that benefit the country’s citizens should be acknowledged and supported by the international community.

Crisis Group has long held the view that sanctions on Myanmar – targeted and non-targeted – are counterproductive, encouraging a siege mentality among its leadership and harming its mostly poor population. The greater the pace of change, the weaker the rationale becomes for continuing them – or adding more. Many problems remain. There is ample evidence that the army continues to employ brutal counter-insurgency strategies, and in the absence of domestic accountability, calls for an international commission will remain. But it is far from clear that such a body, even if one could be established, would be the most effective way to address abuses at this time or whether its impact would rather be to cause retrenchment in Naypyitaw.

Jakarta/Brussels, 22 September 2011

Subscribe to Crisis Group’s Email Updates

Receive the best source of conflict analysis right in your inbox.