All hail the Myanmar development miracle

Although it is the poorest country in Southeast Asia and is often described as one of the most miserable places on earth, Myanmar appears to have made good progress in improving the quality of life for its people, according to the latest UN Human Development Report.

An analysis of the UN stats by The Economist (disclosure: I sometimes contribute to it) shows that the quality of life in Myanmar (measured in terms of health, education and wealth) has improved at a faster rate since 1990 than in other nations such as Indonesia, South Korea, Brazil, Russia and South Africa.

Myanmar also fares better than you might expect in the UN's overall league table of human development, coming in at 138, ahead of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Kenya and Ghana (download PDF of full report here).

It is often said by Burma watchers that, unlike almost any other government in the world, the junta have zero interest in improving the quality of life of their own people (see this editorial, for example, by Alison Vicary and Sean Turnell on why the West should retain sanctions).

So what's going on then? Is the UN data merely a statistical outlier?

Firstly, Myanmar has advanced from a pretty low base in 1990 so the improvement needs to be put in that context. Also, there may be question marks over the reliability of the Myanmar data.

Regardless, it's an interesting anomaly. Anyone care to proffer any alternative theories?

Hat-tip to New Mandala for the sanctions piece. Photo courtesy of Flickr user Tianyake.

Is it time for the West to open up to Burma?

Years of international condemnation, economic sanctions and diplomatic machinations have done nothing to dilute the Burmese military's grip on power.

So is it time for Britain, the US, Australia and the EU to follow the rather more pragmatic lead of Russia, China, India and Singapore and deal with Burma as if it were any other country, albeit with a government that you don't much admire?

In a very interesting article, Nicholas Farrelly, an Australian academic and author of the New Mandala blog, argues that it is indeed time for the international community to face up to the reality of entrenched military government in Burma.

Given how strong the position of the Tatmadaw (armed forces) in Burma, there seems to be little point in continuing to pursue the illusory aim of regime change.

Rather, we need to come to terms with how the generals actually run the country. Once you have accepted that getting rid of the junta is not a particularly practicable foreign policy goal, the next logical step seems to be greater engagement with Burma.

The old narrative that pitted evil crazy-eyed generals against saint-like Aung San Suu Kyi and her army of democratic martyrs - beloved by journalists and celebrities without a cause in the West - needs to be thrown out once and for all.

As Mary P. Callahan explained in her seminal work on the subject, Burma is not like some African or Latin American Banana Republic where greedy, power-hungry generals seize control in a coup designed to help them line their pockets. The strength of the military government is the result of the way Burma was forged as a nation, through a succession of internal and external wars.

The West needs to accept the junta and deal with Burma as with any other country run by an objectionable government, such as Belarus or Fiji.