The Guardian view on Burma’s president: wanting it both ways
|
Version 0 of 1. President Thein Sein’s affirmation that the armed forces in Burma should ultimately come under civilian control is to be welcomed, although it would be hard to claim to be in favour of a transition to democracy, as he does, without admitting such a principle. But almost everything else in his interview last week with a BBC correspondent is far from welcome. He gave no hint of the flexibility that will be required of him if the parliamentary elections expected in November, and the indirect elections for the presidency which will follow, are to mean anything. Instead, he combatively defended the army’s role in politics, said it could only change very gradually as the political parties “matured”, and seemed to invoke Burma’s strategic situation between two great powers, India and China, as a sort of blanket justification for caution in domestic affairs. Thein Sein did repeat a statement he had made earlier this year on it being desirable that no citizen should be prevented from seeking the presidency, a reference to the notorious clause in the Burmese constitution which bans candidates who have foreign spouses or children from that office. He denied that it was drafted with Aung San Suu Kyi in mind, but did say that it could be changed. He offered no specifics on how this might be done, but in truth it would be quite a simple business, if the will was there. All that the Burmese military establishment of which Thein Sein, although now a civilian, is still a member, has to do is to instruct the army officers who occupy by right a quarter of seats in parliament not to oppose such an amendment. These officers are, evidence has shown, entirely biddable. If they and the government party voted for it, it would clear the hurdle that any constitutional change requires the vote of 75% in parliament. The president and his army colleagues could do the same over other, equally desirable, constitutional changes, including the provision that gives them their stranglehold on the legislature. All could then go to a popular referendum in which, given Aung San Suu Kyi’s popularity and the desire for a democratic new start among the Burmese people, they would almost certainly be approved. President Thein Sein is only one among the group of senior military and ex-military men at the top in Burma. He cannot dictate to them, and they are probably quite divided among themselves about how far to go down the democratic road. But he can urge a course of action on them. A clean sweep of all the objectionable elements in the constitution before the November elections is, to say the least, unlikely. But unless some changes are made, especially on the qualifications for the presidency, the democratic “transition” is going to look more like a democratic “regression”. That would be disastrous. Thein Sein’s period in office has brought significant improvements – the release of some political detainees, more freedom of assembly and association, a lively press – but these are not enough. He now needs to do what a president should do and take a more forceful lead. |