Myanmar General Discussion (non military)

I don't know how long this will last. Maybe make it sticky? I hope the other Burmese guys contribute to this as well.

There were two pieces of news last week that I think are very important for the future of Myanmar:

Myanmar confirms controversial Rohingya plan - Asia-Pacific - Al Jazeera English


Myanmar confirms controversial Rohingya plan

The plan stipulates Rohingya should register as Bengali, which implies they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

Myanmar has confirmed to the United Nations it is finalising a plan that will offer minority Rohingya Muslims citizenship if they change their ethnicity to suggest Bangladeshi origin, a move rights groups say could force thousands into detention camps.

"An action plan is being finalised and will soon be launched," Wunna Maung Lwin, Myanmar's foreign minister, said in an address to the UN General Assembly on Monday, requesting the United Nations to "provide much-needed development assistance there".

"We are working for peace, stability, harmony and development of all people in Rakhine state."

It was the first public reference to the controversial plan, which the government has been drafting largely in secret, to the extent that humanitarian workers have until recently been shown only hard copies.

The Rakhine State Action Plan outlines projects including rebuilding homes for displaced people, improving health care and education, and promoting reconciliation, according to a draft obtained by the Reuters news agency.

Controversial section

Rohingya would be required to register their identities as Bengali, a term most reject because it implies they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh despite having lived in the area for generations.

The plan proposes that authorities "construct temporary camps in required numbers for those who refuse to be registered and those without adequate documents".

It states that the government will ask the UN Refugee Agency, the UNHCR, for help to resettle overseas those who fail to obtain citizenship.

But a UNHCR spokeswoman told Reuters it would be impossible for the agency to do so, because they would not be "recognised refugees who have fled persecution and conflict across international borders".

That raises the possibility that Rohingya could be forced from their villages and detained indefinitely, warned Phil Robertson, deputy director for Asia at Human Rights Watch.

"This plan is profoundly troubling because it would strip the Rohingya of their rights, systematically lock them down in closed camps in what amounts to arbitrary, indefinite detention," he said.

Most of Myanmar's 1.1 million Rohingya are stateless and live in apartheid-like conditions in Rakhine state on the western coast of the predominantly Buddhist country. Almost 140,000 Rohingya remain displaced after deadly clashes with ethnic Rakhine Buddhists in 2012.


http://online.wsj.com/articles/myanmar-awards-foreign-bank-licenses-1412141121


Myanmar Awards Foreign Bank Licenses
ANZ, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Sumitomo Mitsui and Mizuho Among Banks to Operate in Myanmar

Australia & New Zealand Banking ANZ.AU +1.35% Group Ltd., three Japanese banks and five others on Wednesday won coveted licenses to operate in Myanmar after decades in which foreign lenders were frozen out of the country.
ANZ, along with Japan's biggest lenders—Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd., Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp. and Mizuho Bank Ltd.—were among 25 applicants vying for licenses to operate in Myanmar.

Other license winners included Thailand's Bangkok Bank Public Co. BBL.TH +1.00% , Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd. 601398.SH +0.28% , Malayan Banking 1155.KU -0.40% Bhd., and two Singapore banks— United Overseas Bank Ltd. U11.SG +0.76% and Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. O39.SG +0.31%

The long-awaited announcement by Myanmar's central bank allows overseas lenders to start doing business in the once-isolated country, part of a sweeping overhaul under Myanmar's new nominally civilian government. Banks now have 12 months to prepare for the opening of their branches in the country.

For ANZ, winning the license is part of the bank's effort to grow its Asian business. The bank plans to serve big multinational companies who operate in the country.

"If you think about our strengths in natural resources, energy and infrastructure, each of these sectors in Myanmar have significant opportunities," said Andrew Géczy, ANZ's chief executive for international and institutional banking.

Set Aung, deputy governor of Myanmar's central bank said that license recipients would be limited to banking for foreign corporations and foreign-exchange services.

Foreign banks will be limited to one branch each, won't be permitted to operate a retail-banking business and will be allowed to lend only in foreign currency, and not in the kyat, Myanmar's currency, unless they partner with a local bank.

Even with the initial restrictions, the move has been praised by analysts as a step toward liberalizing Myanmar's rigid financial sector. The bank's decision is expected to greatly improve access to capital in Myanmar, one of the key hurdles for foreign companies investing there.

"Taking into consideration where the banking industry of the country stands right now, even the current partial opening of the sector to international banks is a major development," said Sardor Koshnazarov, managing director at Silk Road Finance, an investment firm that focuses on frontier markets.

Many of Myanmar's local banks have opposed the granting of licenses, worrying that allowing foreign banks to operate in the country would erode their market share.

"Foreign banks are giants, but we are still very small," said Sein Maung, chairman of Myanmar First Private Bank and vice chairman of the Myanmar Banking Association. "We are not ready to compete with them, not in terms of technology or experience."

Pe Myint, managing director of Myanmar's Co-operative Bank Ltd., said his firm is preparing to upgrade services and has hired consultants to respond to the added competition.

"But we will still face shortage of human resources and skills, because some of our talented staff will move to foreign banks when they start operations," he said.


On the Rohingya front: the ball is in Bangladesh's court.

On the business front: the financial system will finally be overhauled providing much needed competition and much needed channels for capital flows. The Japanese were the real winners. All the decades of low key engagement has really paid off for their banks. 3/10 of the new banks are Jap.

Nice thread

I think you have to tag the mods or admin to ask for sticky.

Usually @Nihonjin1051 says the obligatory "Thanks for the thread" but since you guys are currently going through a domestic violence phase, I'll say "thanks" for him.

P. s. I think mods should merge this and the other military related threads together for the sticky.

Black Flag said:

Nice thread

I think you have to tag the mods or admin to ask for sticky.

Usually @Nihonjin1051 says the obligatory "Thanks for the thread" but since you guys are currently going through a domestic violence phase, I'll say "thanks" for him.

P. s. I think mods should merge this and the other military related threads together for the sticky.

Click to expand...

Thanks! But this isn't intended to be a military thread. As for Nihonjin, I think he's put me on ignore. The precious little thing.

What's Burma's view on the people from northeast India - Mongolid Indians? They are quite close with Burma

Sonyuke_Songpaisan said:

What's Burma's view on the people from northeast India - Mongolid Indians? They are quite close with Burma

Click to expand...

Yeah. Physically they are very similar but surprisingly there isn't much historical contact quite strangely. I know parts of Indian Northeast were once tributary states to Burma but it was only in quite recent history, 250 years or so, that we invaded and did some terrible things there that I'm not proud of. But that was only as a way of appeasement to the king as we were repulsed from Siam. I know a lot of them are Buddhist as I've come across many Assamese and Manipuri pilgrims in Myanmar but truthfully there isn't much awareness about them in Myanmar.

What's the difference between the name "burma" and "myanmar"? do the local people prefer to call themselves Burmese or Myanmarese or something else?

Black Flag said:

What's the difference between the name "burma" and "myanmar"? do the local people prefer to call themselves Burmese or Myanmarese or something else?

Click to expand...

This is quite complicated.

It stems from the difference between written Burmese and spoken Burmese. The way words are written, the proper way, is not like how they are pronounced. Officialy we have always called ourselves 'ျမန္မာ' or 'myanmar' but in the ancient vernacular it was pronounced as 'mranmar'. Now, if you say 'mranmar' quickly enough, it sounds like 'bamar'. So unofficially people started calling themselves 'bamar' or 'ဗမာ' which just stuck. Interestingly, the Thais have always referred us as 'pamarr' and the Chinese as 'Mien tien'.

The argument is in the foreign interpretation. The military claim that Myanmar is a more sensitive name to the ethnics but the opposition have claimed they have no right to change the name. However, everyone now likes to use Myanmar - both the opposition and the foreign press (barring some UK media).

For me, having grown up a lot in the West, I always would here 'bamar' or 'bamar-pyi' because a lot of my parents' generation would use 'bamar'. But this is beginning to change. Since I started coming back, I noted that the majority would use 'Myanmar' when referring to the country but 'Bamar' if they were referring to the language and themselves (if they were Burmans). Not many ethnic minorities would refer to themselves as 'bamar' but they would probably use 'myanmar' and they have been taught in school for 25 years to do this so I'm not going to argue.

Personally, I prefer to call the country 'Myanmar' but will use both 'Myanmar' and 'Burmese' as the adjective form (the adjective of Myanmar is Myanmar, not Myanmarese). I like this for a number of reasons:-
- I buy the idea that it's a more inclusive name.

- it's the correct name (written has always being the correct form)

- it gives us a chance to make a clean break from the some of the history and connotations attached to 'Burma'

- I also think it's important for our international brand that there is only one name. Having a weird dual naming system is hurtful to business IMO.

What do you think of ASSK? I normally have a low opinion of "democracy darlings" championed by western media, because they lack patriotism, only serve western interests, and tend to run their countries into the ground when implanted into power by western arm-twisting. However I think ASSK seems more cautious and composed than others like her, but I really don't know enough about her.

Raphael said:

What do you think of ASSK? I normally have a low opinion of "democracy darlings" championed by western media, because they lack patriotism, only serve western interests, and tend to run their countries into the ground when implanted into power by western arm-twisting. However I think ASSK seems more cautious and composed than others like her, but I really don't know enough about her.

Click to expand...

I used to dislike her. She championed sanctions during the 90's when the military were trying to open the country up. All sanctions did was to take away jobs from regular Burmese. I hated the military government but sanctions were clearly not the way. All it did was push us into China's orbit - not a nice place.

However, she is essentially royalty. Her father, Aung San, is basically the father of the nation - analogous to Mao or Chiang Kai Shek or Suharto for reference (unfortunately he was assassinated in a MI6 masterminded plot) so I respect her in that regard. I also think that she has matured a lot over the last 20 years. She went from an academic housewife from Oxford to a true politician. I respect that she has given a lot of personal sacrifice to be where she is today.'

I also don't subscribe to your anti-West stance nor am I pro-West. But it's important that we have a western recognised figure on the scene. I would have maybe suspected she was a Western stooge a decade ago but now I see she was using her influence in the West as leverage in her push for power and I admire that - very shrewd. I admire how she has kept quiet on the Rohingya issue - a wise move. So right now, I like her for what she is - a shrewd and influential MP. Whether she would make a good President? I don't know.

alaungphaya said:

I used to dislike her. She championed sanctions during the 90's when the military were trying to open the country up. All sanctions did was to take away jobs from regular Burmese. I hated the military government but sanctions were clearly not the way. All it did was push us into China's orbit - not a nice place.

However, she is essentially royalty. Her father, Aung San, is basically the father of the nation - analogous to Mao or Chiang Kai Shek or Suharto for reference (unfortunately he was assassinated in a MI6 masterminded plot) so I respect her in that regard. I also think that she has matured a lot over the last 20 years. She went from an academic housewife from Oxford to a true politician. I respect that she has given a lot of personal sacrifice to be where she is today.'

I also don't subscribe to your anti-West stance nor am I pro-West. But it's important that we have a western recognised figure on the scene. I would have maybe suspected she was a Western stooge a decade ago but now I see she was using her influence in the West as leverage in her push for power and I admire that - very shrewd. I admire how she has kept quiet on the Rohingya issue - a wise move. So right now, I like her for what she is - a shrewd and influential MP. Whether she would make a good President? I don't know.

Click to expand...

Interesting take - I appreciate it. Your distaste for Rohingya is unfortunate, and may see us standing on totally opposing geopolitical faultlines in the future. As the West (esp. USA) encroaches further on Asia and our collective sovereignty, I see China counter-balancing and aligning more towards the Islamic world. The only possible spoiler is the Uighurs, but I think they are a minor irritant and the head clerics in Cairo and Riyadh and Tehran won't really give a damn what we do with our nomads. Anyway, you probably don't care much as you don't care for "China's orbit" anyway. It's something we can live with - we get along fine with US allies like S. Korea and Thailand, after all. But an overtly hostile or obstructionist stance won't go down well with us. Just a friendly warning .

Anyway, wishing you prosperity in the coming future. Myanmar has such great geography and bountiful resources. Its people really should be living it up far more than they are now.

Raphael said:

Interesting take - I appreciate it. Your distaste for Rohingya is unfortunate, and may see us standing on totally opposing geopolitical faultlines in the future. As the West (esp. USA) encroaches further on Asia and our collective sovereignty, I see China counter-balancing and aligning more towards the Islamic world. The only possible spoiler is the Uighurs, but I think they are a minor irritant and the head clerics in Cairo and Riyadh and Tehran won't really give a damn what we do with our nomads. Anyway, you probably don't care much as you don't care for "China's orbit" anyway. It's something we can live with - we get along fine with US allies like S. Korea and Thailand, after all. But an overtly hostile or obstructionist stance won't go down well with us. Just a friendly warning .

Anyway, wishing you prosperity in the coming future. Myanmar has such great geography and bountiful resources. Its people really should be living it up far more than they are now.

Click to expand...

Likewise. I'm not pro nor anti China. It's critical to stay on friendly terms with China.

what is the root cause of Rohingya vs Buddhist Rakhine?

somsak said:

what is the root cause of Rohingya vs Buddhist Rakhine?

Click to expand...

The root cause is simple. Why any two societies don't get along - limited resources.

The the majority of the Rohingya fled Bangladesh during the 1971 independence war. There were pockets of Bengali speaking Muslims in Arakan for centuries but the majority came during this time. Some bribed immigration officials to acquire papers but most didn't. They don't get along with the Arakanese because they come and grab tracts of land and force out Arakanese through force. They are also very insular and confrontational and tensions there are very high. For example, in the capital Sittway, the Muslim areas are no go for Arakanese as they will likely be assaulted.

Arakan is the second poorest state in Myanmar and the Arakanese are a minority ethnic group in Myanmar. For decades they felt that the Burman military ruled government did not do enough to protect them from the Bangladeshi immigrants and did not do enough to stop them coming in. Tensions have always been high but now that Myanmar is quasi-democratic, they are demanding that the government do more to help them from becoming a minority group in their own land and hence the increased levels of communal unrest.

From a national viewpoint, Myanmar is a relatively small country in population terms (50-60 million) but physically a relatively large country (about the size of France), and we border the two most populated countries in the world (India and China) and the most densely populated country in the world (Bangladesh with a population of between 160-200 million, no one knows). These are also countries with alien cultures and beliefs and as a relatively lowly populated country with a traditional Buddhist culture, Myanmar people feel their country is under both physical and cultural attack. Bangladesh needs land. Eventually they are going to try to move into Myanmar. They are already doing this in the Indian Northeast but that conflict gets far less press coverage. The Rohingya are seen as a vanguard of this movement and they have in the past already attempted secession through Islamist movements. Go look around the Bangaldesh forum and you will see that they covet Arakan. This is not a marginal view. There are many extremists and nationalists who feel Arakan should be incorporated into Bangladesh. This is what the government are fighting to stop.

Some of the methods are quite shameful, I admit. It's very difficult for Rohingya to seek medical care because Arakanese doctors simply won't treat them. This is why I think foreign aid groups should be allowed back in but the biasedness of the Western media in covering the conflict has left the Arakanese hostile to Westerners as a whole. The Rohingya have tried to go back to Bangladesh but they are often turned away at the border sometimes through force. I do feel sympathetic to their cause as every society deserves to have a land to call their own but this simply won't be Arakan. That is why they become prey to people smugglers and end up in places like Thailand and Malaysia.

In the future, those with valid papers and legitimate claims should and will be eventually given citizenship and be allowed to reside in Arakan but as of this moment, there are many who do not have legitimate claims and nor are they welcomed by the local Arakanese populace. The challenge for the Myanmar government is to extricate the ones that don't belong and attempt to ease the tensions with the locals for the ones that do. In the meanwhile, I hope Bangladesh shows clemency towards their own diaspora and take in the ones that wish to return.

@alaungphaya Thanks for starting this thread and contributing your perspective. Do you see a reconciliation between Myanmar and the US in the cards, or is there too much bitterness over the sanctions and too much wariness of China's reaction to see such a transformation in relations? What is the opinion of the Myanmar street about the US?

LeveragedBuyout said:

@alaungphaya Thanks for starting this thread and contributing your perspective. Do you see a reconciliation between Myanmar and the US in the cards, or is there too much bitterness over the sanctions and too much wariness of China's reaction to see such a transformation in relations? What is the opinion of the Myanmar street about the US?

Click to expand...

I don't see why there can't be reconciliation. We were never adversaries in the first place.

Obama received a very enthusiastic welcome two years ago and the opinion of the US in Myanmar is generally positive. Remember that there are about 300000 Burmese in America and everyone will likely know someone who knows someone who lives in the US etc.

We never took an ideological opposition to the West as we were never communist. Nor did we align ourselves with the west or see it as saviours. We were a founding member of the Non Aligned League afterall.

One of the motivations for reform was the growing reliance on China. Sanctions were crippling the economy but it wasn't as if we were a market economy before the sanctions were imposed. We were an autarkic closed economy and sanctions prevented the desired market liberalisation goals of the second guise of military rule. However, prolonged isolation would have turned us into a semi-North Korea. A basket case.

I don't think our relations with China are affected. There is more US corporate presence than there will be in Myanmar for many more years and though the US and Myanmar have began cooperating in regional naval drills etc. I don't think the airforce will be flying F16s anytime soon.

US soft power is visible but to a far lesser extent than in most countries. Hollywood movies are easily available and a typical cinema will offer a Hollywood movie, a Burmese movie and a Korean or Chinese movie. You'll be just as likely to tune into Katy Perry as you will a Burmese pop star on the radio. Iconic brands such as Coca Cola and Pepsi have also come back after decades away. To be honest, the average man on the street is largely unaffected by the actions of the US due to the years of isolation so there won't be any strong political opinions either way.

However, there are some issues which cause friction. The US still has selective sanctions imposed so that many US companies can sell to Myanmar but we can't sell back creating a trade deficit. And what we can sell is natural gas which doesn't really develop the country's skills base. Burmese are also a little wary of the way Western media have portrayed the Rohingya issue i.e. it was rather biased and continues the media narrative of the Burmese always being the bad guys. Rambo also contributed to this. We are also wary of organisations such as USAID who are a transparent front for the CIA. An example is the current USAID involvement in microfinance. There are already microfinance banks operating in Myanmar for profit but USAID have come in and undercut them with excessively cheap loans, a form of dumping. In return for access to these cheap loans, borrowers have to become registered members of USAID. Added to this are the inevitable missionary groups and evangelists who are preparing to come and proselytise.

So overall, the US and Myanmar can proceed on friendly terms with a relationship based on positive engagement and trade but we won't become a strategic ally nor will we host US bases. This is pretty much in line with the historic Burmese line of neutrality in international matters. From a personal view, I hope KFC stops dragging its feet and gets there ASAP!