[lbo-talk] some post-US election recommendations............

[Patrick Bond]

Thanks Kjkhoo, as someone whose grandfather was a serious colonial pig all
over Burma, I'm very sensitive about colonial connotations. But the main
message for people interested in solidarity with Aung San Suu Kyi's National
League for Democracy, or the student radicals, or the ethnic minorities, is
that a) sanctions are still the primary way comrades are asked to give
support (notwithstanding some debate by a renegade part of the movement),
and b) 'Burma' is still preferred jargon.

Our South Africa movement has taken sanctions seriously, and dramatically
decreased SA-Burma trade over the past couple of years. The junta still has
a Pretoria embassy, a great embarrassment... but a good place for periodic
demonstrations.

Would sanctions have a bigger impact? Sure, if the big oil companies can be
forced out, and if Thai comrades build up pressure (though China remains a
huge problem). On the former, the right of US activists to harass big firms
using the Alien Tort Claims Act is an especially important part of the
international pressure campaign, one that even the Supreme Court was
compelled to uphold a few months ago, against Bush attempts to gut it.

Am off-line due to travels the next fortnight, so will miss any follow-ups
here, sorry!

Patrick

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kjkhoo at softhome.net>
To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] some post-US election recommendations............


> At 10:44 pm -0500 4/11/04, Shane Mage wrote:
> >>Patrick Bond wrote:
> >>
> >>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>From: <uvj at vsnl.com>
> >>>>  Why should there be any trade sanctions against Myanmar?
> >>>
> >>>It's called Burma, comrade.
> >>
> >>Huh? What are the politics of the name?
> >>
> >>Doug
> >
> >Some people think that when a gang of thugs takes over
> >a country they can legitimately change its name against
> >the expressed will of its people.  That's their politics.
> >Some refuse to grant the thugs such legitimacy.  That's ours.
>
> IIANM, in the local majority language, it has been Myanma since
> independence -- as in "Pyidaungzu Myanma Naingngandaw", i.e. the
> Union of Myanmar. But, in the international "community" it was
> referred to as "Burma", the official name from British colonialism.
> Not dissimilar to "Nihon/Japan", "Zhongguo/China",
> "Deutschland/Germany". I think in the parlance it's local vs.
> conventional name.
>
> The SLORC promoted Myanmar as the conventional name for international
> use, as also "Yangon" instead of "Rangoon".
>
> So, in Burma itself, I don't think there's any big deal. Speaking
> Burmese, it would be Myanma Naingnandaw. But it's to do with the
> relationship of the international "community" to the political
> groupings in Burma/Myanmar, and taken as a touchstone of the
> relationship to the regime.
>
> As for trade sanctions on Burma -- can it really have any impact? I
> think S Africa was an exceptional case because of the major
> involvement of the international economy. But Burma?
>
> kj
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk