March 4, 2009A. Gaffar Peang-Meth
Pacific Daily News (Guam)
The Burmese student who asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Feb. 17 at Tokyo University about U.S. policy toward Burma, put to the test President Obama's words in his inaugural address: "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."
The clenched fist reference is about all authoritarian regimes, including Burma, Cambodia and China, among others.
"We want to see a time when citizens of Burma and the Nobel prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi can live freely in their own country," answered Clinton. "Because we are concerned about the Burmese people, we are conducting a review of our policy," she said.
A day later, she told reporters in Jakarta, "Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn't influenced the Burmese junta," but "reaching out and trying to engage them has not influenced them either."
On Feb. 19 the Washington Post reported, "Shift Possible on Burma Policy." It published former State Department speechwriter Rena Pederson's "Burma's Agony," about the world community's "failing to produce an effective, moral, organized response" to the Burmese generals who "defy world opinion."
On Feb. 20, Stanley Weiss of Business Executives for National Security argued in the International Herald Tribune's "Whom do sanctions hurt?" that "punitive sanctions" had "failed to moderate (Burma's) behavior"; the U.S. "must find a new way forward" and "should increase humanitarian assistance, channeled via the United Nations and NGOs."
On the same day, the Post editorialized in "Burma's Clenched First: Is it time for the United States to reach out to the junta?": "We hope that the coming policy review is truly realistic. ... The United States and other countries have been supplying food and fuel to North Korea for over a decade, with no appreciable change in that regime's horrific treatment of its people. Mr. Obama should conduct a policy review, by all means. But he must stick to the priorities implied in his inaugural address: If the United States is to extend a hand to Burma, that country's tyrants must first relax their grip on power."
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Jim Hoagland's Feb. 22 "Obama vs. Clenched Fists" summarized Obama's "dominant foreign policy metaphor": "An American hand reaching out to an unclenching authoritarian fist, ... a simile of hope, as the president intends -- but also one of vulnerability, as Obama may discover sooner than he expects."
Clinton's remarks in Beijing that human rights issues "can't interfere" with discussions with China -- the biggest foreign holder of U.S. debt, says the Post -- on other important topics, brought human rights groups' response: This does not eliminate the gravity of Bejing's human rights abuses.
In "Not So Obvious: The secretary of state underestimates the power of her words," the Feb. 24 Post editorialized, "Ms. Clinton's statement ... will demoralize thousands of democracy advocates in China, and it will cause many others around the world to wonder about the character of the new U.S. administration."
Last Nov. 24, the Post editorialized in "The Freedom Challenge" that "the United States can regain and retain the stature to lead in the world, only if it is using its power on behalf of universal ideals."
It seems America's founding fathers' belief in the equality of all men, "with certain unalienable rights," and in the creation of government "to secure these rights," has found an echo in the Chinese human rights Charter 08 that "freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and ... democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values."
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights warns, "disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts," and "it is essential, if man is not to be compelled ... to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."
It cites "the highest aspiration of the common people" for a "world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want."
The nonprofit Global Integrity tracks governance and corruption trends in the world. Its 2008 report reveals concerns about the transparency or the flow of currency between and among governments and the danger that "foreign governments" funnel money to ruling parties "in exchange for economic and commercial concessions."
In its 2008 rankings of corruption in 180 countries, Denmark, Sweden and New Zealand lead the list of "highly clean," followed by Singapore, fourth. Cambodia is 166th and Burma, next to the last. Somalia is the most "highly corrupt."
"Governance ... is as old as human civilization," says the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific; it is a decision-making process and a process of implementing the decisions made.
ESCAP says "good governance" that includes rule of law, transparency, responsiveness, accountability, is an "ideal" -- a topic worth examining.
To "ensure sustainable human development," says ESCAP, "actions must be taken to work towards this ideal with the aim of making it a reality."
A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, Ph.D., is retired from the University of Guam, where he taught political science for 13 years. Write him at peangmeth@yahoo.com.
The clenched fist reference is about all authoritarian regimes, including Burma, Cambodia and China, among others.
"We want to see a time when citizens of Burma and the Nobel prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi can live freely in their own country," answered Clinton. "Because we are concerned about the Burmese people, we are conducting a review of our policy," she said.
A day later, she told reporters in Jakarta, "Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn't influenced the Burmese junta," but "reaching out and trying to engage them has not influenced them either."
On Feb. 19 the Washington Post reported, "Shift Possible on Burma Policy." It published former State Department speechwriter Rena Pederson's "Burma's Agony," about the world community's "failing to produce an effective, moral, organized response" to the Burmese generals who "defy world opinion."
On Feb. 20, Stanley Weiss of Business Executives for National Security argued in the International Herald Tribune's "Whom do sanctions hurt?" that "punitive sanctions" had "failed to moderate (Burma's) behavior"; the U.S. "must find a new way forward" and "should increase humanitarian assistance, channeled via the United Nations and NGOs."
On the same day, the Post editorialized in "Burma's Clenched First: Is it time for the United States to reach out to the junta?": "We hope that the coming policy review is truly realistic. ... The United States and other countries have been supplying food and fuel to North Korea for over a decade, with no appreciable change in that regime's horrific treatment of its people. Mr. Obama should conduct a policy review, by all means. But he must stick to the priorities implied in his inaugural address: If the United States is to extend a hand to Burma, that country's tyrants must first relax their grip on power."
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Jim Hoagland's Feb. 22 "Obama vs. Clenched Fists" summarized Obama's "dominant foreign policy metaphor": "An American hand reaching out to an unclenching authoritarian fist, ... a simile of hope, as the president intends -- but also one of vulnerability, as Obama may discover sooner than he expects."
Clinton's remarks in Beijing that human rights issues "can't interfere" with discussions with China -- the biggest foreign holder of U.S. debt, says the Post -- on other important topics, brought human rights groups' response: This does not eliminate the gravity of Bejing's human rights abuses.
In "Not So Obvious: The secretary of state underestimates the power of her words," the Feb. 24 Post editorialized, "Ms. Clinton's statement ... will demoralize thousands of democracy advocates in China, and it will cause many others around the world to wonder about the character of the new U.S. administration."
Last Nov. 24, the Post editorialized in "The Freedom Challenge" that "the United States can regain and retain the stature to lead in the world, only if it is using its power on behalf of universal ideals."
It seems America's founding fathers' belief in the equality of all men, "with certain unalienable rights," and in the creation of government "to secure these rights," has found an echo in the Chinese human rights Charter 08 that "freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and ... democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values."
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights warns, "disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts," and "it is essential, if man is not to be compelled ... to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law."
It cites "the highest aspiration of the common people" for a "world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want."
The nonprofit Global Integrity tracks governance and corruption trends in the world. Its 2008 report reveals concerns about the transparency or the flow of currency between and among governments and the danger that "foreign governments" funnel money to ruling parties "in exchange for economic and commercial concessions."
In its 2008 rankings of corruption in 180 countries, Denmark, Sweden and New Zealand lead the list of "highly clean," followed by Singapore, fourth. Cambodia is 166th and Burma, next to the last. Somalia is the most "highly corrupt."
"Governance ... is as old as human civilization," says the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific; it is a decision-making process and a process of implementing the decisions made.
ESCAP says "good governance" that includes rule of law, transparency, responsiveness, accountability, is an "ideal" -- a topic worth examining.
To "ensure sustainable human development," says ESCAP, "actions must be taken to work towards this ideal with the aim of making it a reality."
A. Gaffar Peang-Meth, Ph.D., is retired from the University of Guam, where he taught political science for 13 years. Write him at peangmeth@yahoo.com.
11 comments:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WAY ...
don't be afraid of the USA. USA has always been an advocate for human rights all over the world. i think the USA just need to extend its hands to cambodia now that cambodia has changed to a free market, non-communism type of gov't. it's only fair to include cambodia in the sphere of US allies. after all the khmer people had suffered long enough already, and most khmer people want peace, freedom and prosperity in cambodia, so it is natural for the USA to lend a helping hand for cambodia and its khmer people and citizens. thank you and god bless cambodia.
3:15AM,
I think you're damn wrong, dude. Think it over if you are mistaken to say the US extend its hand for a deal in business with Cambodia. It was just a warning if your Hun Sen can imporve himself. What profit will the US gain from Cambodia? You seem to be as proud as Hun Sen is.
3:30am, that's your opinion! aren't you aware that not all people on this planet think like you? it's not so much as the USA have nothing to gain from having a good relationship with cambodia, it should be a new era in friendship, relationship, etc... why are people like you, with defected brain matter, have to sound so pessimistic like that? i suggest you come live in the USA and see for yourself, the good way of life here in the USA, and we do want cambodia to get a taste of the good life, too, in cambodia, you know! god bless cambodia.
I strongly believe that Cambodian shouldn't relie to any country for their human right and for their freedom. They should fight for themself.We must use our basic law from our basic constitution to fight on. They must use their constitution right for their stand against all evils. Areak Prey
You idiot! I have lived in the US for almost 30 years.
I don't understand what you mean, Areak Prey. Cambodia has been run by evils already, and whom did you refer to as evils besides Hun Sen and his cronies?
Yes he is evil to fuck saved your motherfucker your family life ok.
Dear Poster 8:23AM,
Can't you understand my writing whose I refer as evils?
What is an evil?
Areak Prey
If you want to know what evil is, just look at yourself in the mirror, Ah Pleu (9:19).
8:43AM,
I don't konw where you were at the time when the Yuons invaded Cambodia.
It was not Hun Sen who saved Khmers. Hun Sen and his monkeys group were used as a figurehead by the smart Yuons to manipolate the world opinions from accusing them as invaders. I think you ah pleu should should see the truth if you are as blind as Hun Sen, but you can keep barking if you've been hired at the cost of a bare bone.
Post a Comment