Thayer Consultancy Background Briefing:

ABN # 65 648 097 123

U.S. Opens Dialogue with
Burma
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 1, 2009

[client name deleted]

Question: What do you think about Sui Kyi's new stance on sanctioning Burma, and do you
think that the policy of both "engaging and sanctioning" that Hillary Clinton mentioned is easy
to achieve?
Answer: Aung San Suu Kyi recent comments supporting a dialogue between Burma and the
United States came with a rider, that the military regime must also open a dialogue with the
democratic opposition. She is reacting to the revelation that Burma has taken the initiative to
suggest a high-level dialogue with the United States. This development occurred at the same
time as a seven month Burma policy review by the Obama Administration concluded. The
President has already indicated a new approach to the legacy of dealing with difficult
countries left by the Bush Administration. President Obama has offered an open hand.
The President’s more conciliatory approach has now been applied to Burma policy. The US
policy review found that neither isolation nor engagement had had any measurable impact on
the behavior of the Burma regime. Secretary Clinton put it these words, “engagement versus
sanctions is a false choice, in our opinion.” The US found that there was widespread
international consensus that it was time for change and that regional states looked to US
leadership. The US in turn asked regional states to sound out Burma. Washington quickly
learned through these indirect contacts as well as directly that Burma was ready to participate
in a dialogue.
Burma has been more forthcoming in dealing with the UN sanctions regime against North
Korea and has pledged its support to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1874. Kurt
Campbell noted that Burma played “a positive role behind the scenes” in recent efforts to
enforce sanctions against North Korea. This probably refers to the military junta’s refusal to let
a North Korean ships suspected of carrying weapons dock in Burma. The US quickly picked
up on this positive development.
The US and Burma have now held their first meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations
General Assembly in New York. Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell met with a
cabinet-level official from Burma. Campbell has made clear in public remarks and testimony
to the Senate Foreign Relations sub-committee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs that
dialogue with Burma does not mean the lifting of sanctions. Campbell made clear that that US
will not conduct dialogue just for dialogue’s sake and the US reserves the right to impose
further sanctions if warranted. According to Campbell, “we need additional tools to augment
those that we have been using in pursuit of our objectives. A policy of pragmatic engagement
with the Burmese authorities holds the best hope for advancing our goals.” In sum, the US
would “change its methods not its goals.”
The US seeks a sustained dialogue. Initially, the US hopes to see the dialogue address
several areas where American interests overlap with those of Burma, such as counter-
narcotics, health and environmental protection. The US would also like to press for
cooperation in searching for the remains of US servicemen who died during the Second
 2

World War. And finally, the US would like to continue to provide humanitarian assistance to
the Burmese people who are still suffering the after effects of Cyclone Nargis that struck in
2008 – as long as this aid goes directly to the people affected.
The US-Burma dialogue, from Washington’s point of view, aims to address harder issues
such as freeing Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners, opening a credible domestic
dialogue with ethnic minorities and pro-democracy groups on political reform and
reconciliation, and conducting free and fair elections in 2010. The US has also muted
punishment for officials guilty of gross violations of human rights.
It would be wildly optimistic to expect that the US-Burma dialogue will achieve quick results.
The US also indicated it cannot change Burma’s policies alone. The US needs support from
China, the ASEAN states, Australia, Canada, Japan and Europe to set in place an incentive
structure that will encourage change. Campbell has noted that in the absence of dialogue it
has been difficult to discern what are the perceptions of Burma’s aging leaders. The top two
leaders are in their 70s. US-Burma dialogue may result in contact with a younger generation
of Burmese officials who are more amenable to change.
Under US law the Administration must appoint a coordinator for Burma. The next step will be
for that person to be appointed. From the US perspective it is up to Burma’s leaders to follow
through. Each positive step towards reform that they take will be reciprocated. But, according
to Assistant Secretary Campbell, “we expect engagement with Burma to be a long, slow, and
step-by-step process.”