The United States and Myanmar: from antagonists to security partners

This article provides an overview both of the considerable makeover that relations between the United States and Myanmar have undergone since Naypyidaw ushered in a programme of wide-ranging reforms, and of the main policy areas in relation to which Washington remains keen to induce further change. The article also aims to explain why, notwithstanding the significant improvement in bilateral relations and the Obama administration’s interest in also pursuing military engagement, progress in this field has remained rather limited. Focusing on the politics of US policymaking on Burma, the article argues that while the Obama administration was able to take the initiative on recalibrating US Burma policy, congressional resistance in particular, amid wider concerns shared by non-governmental organisations, has so far constrained the administration vis-à-vis US–Myanmar military-to-military relations

Myanmar and the international community

This workshop aims to create a few reflections on Myanmar. (i) It aims to encourage a debate concerning the ‘dynamics of change’ as well as the ‘inertia to change’ as intertwined processes in Myanmar. (ii) It adds to the general on-going focus on Myanmar, the dimension of a discussion that includes the European Union. The European Union is too often neglected as an actor, which has been constructively operating in Myanmar towards its governance’s transformation; attention will be paid to this aspect. (iii) Furthermore, the United States and China are usually debated in relation to Myanmar and their balancing power in the region, whereas the EU is left aside. The way in which these three powers interact with Myanmar, considered against the background of both the balancing power context and the power politics race in the Pacific Southeast Asian region, is a supplementary aim. (iv)The aim of this workshop is to strengthen the interaction between the area of study of the EU’s external relations and Southeast Asia-led studies that too often develop separately

Not quite the 'Great Britain of the Far East': Japan's security, the US-Japan alliance and the 'war on terror' in East Asia

Japan, in responding to US expectations for support in the 'war on terror', has displayed a degree of strategic convergence on global security objectives, thus prompting policy-makers and observers to dub it the 'Great Britain of the Far East'. This article argues, however, that Japan is far from assuming this role. For Japan, the 'war on terror' serves more as a political pretext for legitimating long-planned changes in military security policy that are often only marginally related to the US's anti-terrorism agenda. Instead, Japan has focused much more on using the terror threat rationale as a means to push forward its response to the regional and traditional security challenges of North Korea and China, even if at times it attempts to depict both as 'new security challenges' or as involving elements of counterterrorism. The final conclusion is that US military hegemony may be weakened by Japan's and the Asia-Pacific's potential divergence from the US global security agenda

Democratization and foreign policy in Southeast Asia: the case of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus

This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Cambridge Review of International Affairs Vol. 22, Iss. 3, 2009 as published in the CAMBRIDGE REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, 2009, copyright Taylor & Francis, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/09557570903104008

Myanmar: now a site for Sino–US geopolitical competition?

After the suppression of political protests in 1988, the Unites States’ Burma policy was primarily focused on the restoration of democracy and support for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy (NLD). The strong anti-regime thrust of this policy meant that until 2011, when the ruling military junta, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC; previously known as the State Law and Order Restoration Council, or SLORC) handed over power to a nominally civilian government, Washington consistently ostracised Myanmar in international society. Moreover, the US systematically applied unilateral, broadbased sanctions, and persistently called for a genuine dialogue with the political opposition that would ultimately lead to a transfer of power. Very much influenced and buttressed by a network of exiled Burmese dissidents and solidarity organisations, various human rights and pro-democracy groups, as well as overwhelming support in both houses of Congress, US policy nevertheless failed to force Myanmar’s leadership to compromise, let alone abandon their own political roadmap, as initiated in 2003. In the face of considerable US pressure, Naypyidaw relied above all on China for diplomatic protection at the UN Security Council, as well as financial assistance and expertise for limited economic development