Day Four. Thursday, 26 May 2016
The most fruitful outcome
Does not depend on force
But succeeds without arrogance
Without hostility
Without pride
Without resistance
Without violence
Tao Te Ching (Book of The Way and its Derivative), Chapter 30
Peace can mean a big change for everyone, including the superpowers.
It will happen when they feel comfortable about it.
Karin Landgren, Representative of UN Secretary General to Burundi
We have 4 meetings today. I will be reporting on only two of them. To be exact, what I have learned from them.
The first one discuss the role of China in the country’s peace process. According to both government and rebel sources, China is eager to be more actively involved.
- Chinese authorities say they are sincere and serious about bringing peace to the country, especially in Shan and Kachin states, where continued fighting has inflicted suffering not only to the people on the Burmese side of the border, but also those on the Chinese side. When there is complaint from the public, the government has to act, they say.
- China therefore has made the following offer:
- It wishes to provide full support for the peace process.
- It is ready to host negotiations between the country’s belligerents
- There should even be a joint mechanism between the two countries to supervise and maintain peace along the mutual border
- At the same time, China doesn’t want involvement by western countries, especially the United States. No country has ever benefitted from American involvement in their internal affairs, say the officials. What’s happening in the Middle East clearly illustrates the point.
- UN’s participation is okay, because China is one of its members. Even so, it must be wary of Americans using it as an agent.
- At present, many foreign NGOs are active along the border areas. China is keeping an eye on them.
- The Tatmadaw appears willing to accept the Chinese overture. However the government has yet to give any definite commitment, according to the sources.
Which reminds me of what David Steinberg said during a VOA interview on China’s 5 point policy vis-a-vis its neighbors on 20 April:
- Peace along the border
- No to refugees
- Economic access for China
- Endorsement of China’s position in the international arena
- No US influence along the Chinese border
As for China’s negative view of the United State, at least Stratfor founder George Friedman, who wrote the bestselling The Next 100 Years and The Next Decade seems to agree.
Having achieved its strategic goals, the United States had the ultimate aim of preventing the emergence of any major power in Eurasia. The United States want to prevent stability in areas where another power might emerge. Its goal was not to stabilize, but to destabilize.
Rhetoric aside, the United States has no overriding interest in peace in Eurasia. The United States has no interest in winning a war outright. As with Vietnam and Korea, the purpose of these conflicts is simply to block a power or destabilize the region, not to impose order. In due course, even outright American defeat is acceptable.
(The Next 100 Years, Page 46)
His prediction therefore is that the world may even see America siding with China, which is facing an economic downturn, against Japan that is expanding its capital in countries in the Pacific-Indian region.
My hope is that the experts have got it all wrong and that China, Japan and the United States are able to sort out among themselves their concerns and reach an understanding that will benefit all countries big and small.
As for the other meeting, I have looked at my notes once again and decided that there’s not much worth writing. Except that, as businesspeople, they see things differently: They think the previous government did a better job.
My response to them is not to be too fast in jumping to conclusions. “After all, they’re still new at the job. Things may improve after 100 days.”
I then try to make some calculations.
8 August is going to be the 100th day, if I still remember my math.
