Burma Digest
The problems of Turkey and the Middle East feel too close to me today, so I'm going to call your attention to an interesting piece in Burma Digest:
So, why does Burma play the little brother role with respect to China? Simply put, it has to. China inked deals for more than US$12 billion in foreign direct investment in Burma in 2010 alone, a massive sum for the recipient country whose government is estimated to bring in annual revenue of US$1.3 billion. And the blame for the present gross discrepancy in political capital rests squarely on the shoulders of Burmese leadership, as protracted political rifts permit Beijing to deal with Naypyidaw from an automatic point of accentuated strength in aggressively promoting broader foreign policy objectives. The new Burmese government, which remains heavily influenced by the country’s military leaders, continues to place skewed domestic security assessments ahead of international security concerns beyond pure military posturing. It is lamentable that the Generals did not comprehend that national security cannot be solely a function of military projection. Rather, it must also incorporate such factors as social, economic and human security.
As far as Burma is concerned the Obama Administration or the Democrats has nothing substantial to show and the people of Burma are looking towards America to move so that the West including EU would follow suit and now it seems that we have to pin our hope on the Republican.
- Comment (1)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
May '11
Re: Burma Digest
Claire,
The title of the Burma Digest article: "Sarah Palin should visit Burma" expresses the sentiment of the article better than your lead but I am sure you were hard pressed to find a portion of the article that could succinctly make an argument. Clearly English is a second language for the writer but his point is valid. China appears to be expanding its influence everywhere it can through economic means. If we had an aggressively growing economy, we could compete.