Should International Sanctions on Burma be lifted?

Image source: WikiCommons Credit to: Htoo Tay Zar

On Monday the European Union (EU) lifted its economic sanctions on Burma (Myanmar), although an arms embargo is still in place. This act comes inline with other international institutions and states that have over the last year or so lifted their own sanctions on Burma. For instance, last year the United States, suspended some sanctions and relaxed trade restrictions between both countries. Much of these sanctions have been in place for a number of decades, ever since Burma has been under military rule. During this time, the Burmese people suffered under the sanctions, which prevented any direct foreign investment and trade with the international community, and slowed economic development.

Since 2011, the military junta has been on a campaign of economic, political and social reforms, culminating in the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who had been under house arrest for almost 19 years. On top of Suu Kyi’s release, the military generals progressed with a new constitution, allowing for the first time, opposition groups to hold seats in parliament. Even though, the military still hold over half the seats and govern over state affairs, Aung San Suu  Kyi  has become a member of parliament and has a voice in national decision making.

I agree with the lifting of some of the economic sanctions by the international community, but I am a little sceptical of the future intentions of the military junta in Burma. Foreign placed sanctions on countries over a long period, such as the one in Burma, has some short term effects to pressuring regimes to reform and tackle issues of human rights, but in the long term, the sanctions can bring further misery on the people, not the authorities which the sanctions target. On my second point, the Burmese government have began showing signs that they will begin a process of reform, but I do think that the international community needs to be vigilant in how much leeway to give to  the Burmese government in regards to carrying out the planned reforms. Before more international institutions or countries start lifting sanctions on Burma, further reforms, especially in regards to human rights abuses needs to be actively addressed.

Will gun control ever be achieved in the U.S?

U.S. President Barak Obama gets emotion as he address the nation on the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting
(Image source: Wiki Commons, credit to: Lawrence Jackson) 

Since last December's mass shooting of 20 children and 6 adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary school in Connecticut, President Obama has been on a campaign to bring tougher laws into universal gun controls. 

The main obstacles to his plans have been a number of Republican Congressmen and women, and members of the National Rifle Association (NRA), who argue, that they will not support any legislation which contravenes their constitutional right to bear arms.

Obama’s plans are for universal background checks, a ban on automatic assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition cartridges. The problem that the President has is although 90 percent of the population support the need for tougher laws on gun controls, many Republicans in Congress, will only support universal background checks, as to prevent criminals and the mentally ill accessing a weapon. Republican Senators have come out this week and stated that they will try every political trick available, including filibusting the legislation, meaning it will need 60 percent approval rather then a simple majority vote.

I think, if 90 percent of Americans who have cherished the right to bear arms for over 300 years, but are now willing to compromise for the shake of preventing any more mass killings because of ideas of liberty, the U.S should not call itself a democracy. I do not understand the argument of the few who fear losing the right to bear arms, it is not like they will not be able to own a gun, all that Obama is proposing is for eliminating weapons that can kill many innocent men, women and children in one short moment.  

In Australia and other parts of the world, governments have legislated into law tough gun controls similar to the proposed ones in the US, which of course have not fully eliminated the use of guns in crimes, but have prevented mass killings on almost monthly bases as seen in the US. I hope in the end Obamas campaign, with the support of majority of the nation will be able to persuade the reluctant few to say yay on the floor of Congress.

North Korea is playing dangerous games

Over the last few weeks North Korea has been playing dangerous power politics with the international community, especially with South Korea (ROK) and the United States (US). Pyongyang has been releasing statements declaring renewed hostilities against the South. North Korea has back up their verbal rhetoric with a buildup of military forces along the border with South Korea and threats to strike at US military bases in the region.

In the past few days, North Korean authorities have further increased tensions with the South by closing the border to South Koreans who are working at the joint Kaesong industrial facilities just inside North Korean territory. About 50,000 North Korean workers and a few hundred South Koreans managers work at this facility, that was set up to foster better relations between the two nations, and to allow the manufacture of cheaper South Korean goods.

These incidents show the same old rhetorics and threats that seem to occur every time there are joint ROK-US military exercises and/or new sanctions placed on the regime, although on this occasion North Korea has stepped up its rhetoric by actively threatening to attack both the US and cross the border into the South. 

Pyongyang have declared a ‘state of war,’ by actively cutting of communications with the officials in the South and amassing troops on the border  the North would be unwise to further the tensions with South Korea and the US, an active conflict would not benefit both the regime and the people of North Korea. 

It seems to me that Kim Jong-un, who has only been in power for less than 15 months, is trying to show the rest of the world and his fellow countrymen  that North Korea are not threatened by the US and its allies and have the will and capability to defend its territory. 

I think that the actions of Kim Jong-un is just verbal rhetoric, even a protest against new sanctions placed on the regime after last year's Nuclear tests and the annual joint military exercise just taken place on their doorstep. It's another case of North Korea barking louder, but a bite is unlikely.