SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER: The Methods of Nonviolent Struggle in Burma
The impact of sanctions Sanctions diminish the regime’s international credibility and legitimacy. Properly applied, sanctions can deny further gains for those currently benefiting from the SPDC’s corrupt policies, which can then generate greater domestic pressure for economic reforms. The majority of Burma’s civilian population is dependent upon the informal economy, including subsistence level activity, which would be minimally affected by sanctions. Sanctions are needed to create significant ‘moderate’ voices within the regime. In order to persuade them to favour reforms, these officials need to be hit where it hurts, in the pocket and in their international reputation. Sanctions levied in a consistent manner by a majority of foreign governments and organizations can have three effects: 1. Reduce SPDC’s financial resources, which will make financing the military difficult. It will reduce waning business confidence, creating a sense of urgency for reforms. 2. Increase the international political commitment to the realization of political and economic reforms. This will make associating with the generals an unpopular measure and place serious pressure on allies to pressure the SPDC to reform. 3. A clear and dignified expression of moral support for the people of Burma and their movement for democracy. These measures will provide them with more political leverage to negotiate with the SPDC in lieu of armed resistance. Source: ALTSEAN, “Ready! Aim! Sanction!” November 2003, pp. 14-15.35
Secretary of the ICFTU, by the Chair of the Global Union Federations General Conference and by the General Secretary of Trade Union Advisory Committee, drawing attention to the ILO decision and to the publicly available information indicating that the company has links with Burma. In the letter, these organizations requested that the companies severe their links. Over 100 companies have so far replied with some of them denying their involvement, some of them admitting their presence, some of them defending their activities as beneficial to the people of Burma and some of them asking to open a dialogue about their Burma links. Some companies have withdrawn from Burma and/or are in the process of doing so.
50