Ding Gang
Global Times
June 27, 2012
The development path a nation follows is decided by its history and cultural traditions.
The realities in West Asia and North Africa, as well as many countries that have been swept up by the democratic wave like Iraq, Afghanistan and the Philippines, have demonstrated one thing: a sudden shift to democracy from autocracy will lead to long-term instability and extremely slow development, even bringing it to a standstill.
To date, the aforementioned countries have neither properly addressed ethnic or religious conflict, nor can they see a clear solution to such conflicts.
Will Myanmar become an exception? It’s certain that the Myanmese don’t want to pick between long-term chaos and a return to autocracy. Myanmar needs a third path, although it is still ambiguous at the moment.
This calls for more understanding of the function and role of democracy, a certain restraint in the eagerness for democracy, and more patience in the process of democratization. Meanwhile, psychological preparation for power transfer and compromise during the practice of democracy is needed.
It is not difficult to understand the Myanmese people’s thirst for democracy. But at this pivotal stage, it is difficult to stay cool-headed and beware of the “fever democracy brings.”
Judging from some foreign media reports on Myanmar, their biggest worry seems that Myanmar may halt reform and return to autocracy. They do not care much about whether the long-term chaos in West Asia and North Africa will also repeat itself in Myanmar after its reform. This is a dangerous tendency which may give the Myanmese an illusion that those problems will all be solved by vigorously promoting democracy.
It is not easy to control the process of democratization. Mistakes during this process will definitely lead to chaos and disorder. It remains unknown whether the Myanmese can bring such a process under control.
Historical experiences tell that the tree of democracy won’t thrive if it is forcefully planted in a different cultural soil. Instead, it will either become a dry-neck tree, or die early due to the unaccustomed climate.
The growth of democracy calls for the soil of cultural and historical traditions. Many keep emphasizing that democracy is the least worst choice. However, such argument usually ignores one fact: A democracy that does not suit a country’s domestic soil will lead to equal disasters as under non-democratic regimes.
After being in contact with some ethnic minorities in Myanmar, I find they are widely unhappy about two things.
First is the ruling military junta’s suppression of ethnic minorities. This is related to Myanmar’s system, and it is indeed a problem of a lack of democracy.
But on the other hand, they are more discontent with the chauvinism of the Bamar, the majority ethnic group, which is actually a problem of integration.
In fact, there is a deep link between a nation’s political system and its cultural traditions. The current political system of Myanmar is related to Bamar culture and tradition as well as their attitude toward other ethnic groups. This, I’m afraid, is a problem that deserves more reflection as Myanmar walks on the path of reform.
Without serious thought on ethnic estrangement and the religious chasm, especially upon ethnic awareness from the perspective of cultural communication, and hence some adjustment in the design of the system, I’m afraid no democracy will solve Myanmar’s problems of ethnic harmony.
The biggest difference between the reform in Myanmar and that in West Asia and North Africa is that the former is top-down. On the one hand, it is reform that has to be conducted due to dual pressure from home and abroad.
On the other hand, the current government made this choice because it believes it is capable of controlling the scenario. Therefore, right now Myanmar isn’t likely to witness large-scale chaos.
But such top-down reform is not exempt from risks, and the biggest difficulty is to what extent it is controllable. For countries with an East Asian culture, the importance of order is self-evident. Sometimes, they can tolerate less democracy but no less order.
Some compare Myanmese President Thein Sein to former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. If this is true, it is not necessarily good for Myanmar.
The author is a senior editor with People’s Daily. He is now stationed in Bangkok.
