ASEAN to rescue Myanmar?

Discussion of current events
neverfail
Posts: 6861
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: ASEAN

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 02, 2021 9:58 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 4:25 pm
Do those Chinese investments contribute to the wellbeing of the Burmese people?
Of course not!

When speaking of the "Burmese people" bear in mind that while the majority of the population are ethnic "Burmese" (or Bamar) the country's periphery is ringed with regional ethnic minorities all of whom find life in Myanmar so undearable that they all want seperation from Myanmar into states of their own of seperate soverignty.

Bamar nationalism combined with having a lawless rogue milirtary in charge of the country has ensured decades of revolt by all who are not Burmese. A politically more astute establishment would have taken pains to ensure that these regional minorities all had an honourable place in the life of this relatively young country (if only to give them as incentive to be loyal to the republic) but alas political wisdom seems to be a gift that this crowd are not endowed with.

So even if ordinary Burmese (ethnic Bamar) were to gain benefit from Chinese investment in their country you can be sure that none of the minorities (especially the much abused Rohinga) ever would.

In fact as even the Bamar are among the poorest in Asia the answer is that no, even they derive no benefit from those Chinese investments.

Only the top militasry brass and the few favoured by them would. That all that Burma's rulers are interested in.

neverfail
Posts: 6861
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: ASEAN

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:57 pm

DavAdmin wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 4:17 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 12:25 am
Out of curiosity, which resources and infrastructures of Burma are pillaged or bound to be pillaged by China? Is it in any way similar to what the US does to its Latin neighbours?...
Deepwater ports, offshore drilling rights, transport and power infrastructure to name a few. Thailand also has a number of hydropower plants in Burma and it has been almost fully taken over by China with them building the new high speed railway, investing in infrastructure, and even supplying Covid vaccines. Of course the Thai generals running the country profit nicely from it as the Burmese generals will. Additionally, nearly everything in Laos is now made by China, it is practically just another southern province now.
Thank's DaveAdmin for that briefing.

In the case of Thailand-Burma: I was not aware until I read your post how similar the internal power politics of the two were. However, you cannot deny one thing: Thailand is economically more mature and its people considerably more prosperous than the people of Burma. So at least ordinary Thais have gained something.

You may like to comment on that?

neverfail
Posts: 6861
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: ASEAN

Post by neverfail » Tue Feb 02, 2021 11:28 pm

DavAdmin wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 4:17 pm


Deepwater ports, offshore drilling rights, transport and power infrastructure to name a few. Thailand also has a number of hydropower plants in Burma and it has been almost fully taken over by China with them building the new high speed railway, investing in infrastructure, and even supplying Covid vaccines. Of course the Thai generals running the country profit nicely from it as the Burmese generals will. Additionally, nearly everything in Laos is now made by China, it is practically just another southern province now.
Cassowary: please see the above briefing by DavAdmin.

Do you remember a post I sent you some time ago in which I divided south east Asia into two broad zones? The first was continental south east Asia comprised basically of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Burma and Thailand. All either had a common border with China or were so close to China it did not matter.

The second zome was archipellago south east Asia comprised of Indonesia, The Philippines, Brunei, Timor Leste, Malaysia and of course Singapore. A century ago writer Rudyard Kipling defined this as The Malay Archipellago.

Reading DavAdmin briefing note on PRC encroachment on the former it occurred to me that, aided by the complicity of local elites this region seems to fall naturally into a Chinese sphere of influence. Compared to that the archipellago region seems to fall more naturally into the Western sphere.

I will leave you to comment if you like but to me right now it presently seems that the West may well in the long run be undertaking a futile exercise, squandering money and other resources, attempting to save it from the clutches of PRC hegemony. Let China have it if it wants it! Better if the West "saves its powder" for the archipellago part where it has more tactical advantage?
...............................................................................................................................

Among the continental part of s. e. Asia I single out but one exception.

As you are aware: philosophically, Vietnamese society and culture is based on the same threesome of Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism as Chinese civilisation. Like the PRC Vietnam also bears the "family resemblance" of being a one-party state ruled by a Communist Party. Despite this the two do not love one another.

The Vietnamese have a long and proud history behind them opposing Chinese hegemony. I believe that centuries ago northern Vietnam was even incorporated into China as a southern provence by one of the dynasties yet the Vietnamese fought back and recovered their soverignty. This has given them a very strong sense of national identity that served them well when they firstly had to fight the French and later the Americans.

It seems to be that while other s.e Asian peoples behave like the bamboo plant when the typhoon wind blows through (they always bob and bend with the prevailing wind) the Vietnamese are a fighting nation who oppose and fight back. I nominate Vietnam as the one and only nation of s.e. Asia who could serve as an ally of the West in the containment of China.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5122
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: ASEAN

Post by Sertorio » Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:59 am

neverfail wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 11:28 pm
DavAdmin wrote:
Tue Feb 02, 2021 4:17 pm


Deepwater ports, offshore drilling rights, transport and power infrastructure to name a few. Thailand also has a number of hydropower plants in Burma and it has been almost fully taken over by China with them building the new high speed railway, investing in infrastructure, and even supplying Covid vaccines. Of course the Thai generals running the country profit nicely from it as the Burmese generals will. Additionally, nearly everything in Laos is now made by China, it is practically just another southern province now.
Cassowary: please see the above briefing by DavAdmin.

Do you remember a post I sent you some time ago in which I divided south east Asia into two broad zones? The first was continental south east Asia comprised basically of Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Burma and Thailand. All either had a common border with China or were so close to China it did not matter.

The second zome was archipellago south east Asia comprised of Indonesia, The Philippines, Brunei, Timor Leste, Malaysia and of course Singapore. A century ago writer Rudyard Kipling defined this as The Malay Archipellago.

Reading DavAdmin briefing note on PRC encroachment on the former it occurred to me that, aided by the complicity of local elites this region seems to fall naturally into a Chinese sphere of influence. Compared to that the archipellago region seems to fall more naturally into the Western sphere.

I will leave you to comment if you like but to me right now it presently seems that the West may well in the long run be undertaking a futile exercise, squandering money and other resources, attempting to save it from the clutches of PRC hegemony. Let China have it if it wants it! Better if the West "saves its powder" for the archipellago part where it has more tactical advantage?
...............................................................................................................................

Among the continental part of s. e. Asia I single out but one exception.

As you are aware: philosophically, Vietnamese society and culture is based on the same threesome of Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism as Chinese civilisation. Like the PRC Vietnam also bears the "family resemblance" of being a one-party state ruled by a Communist Party. Despite this the two do not love one another.

The Vietnamese have a long and proud history behind them opposing Chinese hegemony. I believe that centuries ago northern Vietnam was even incorporated into China as a southern provence by one of the dynasties yet the Vietnamese fought back and recovered their soverignty. This has given them a very strong sense of national identity that served them well when they firstly had to fight the French and later the Americans.

It seems to be that while other s.e Asian peoples behave like the bamboo plant when the typhoon wind blows through (they always bob and bend with the prevailing wind) the Vietnamese are a fighting nation who oppose and fight back. I nominate Vietnam as the one and only nation of s.e. Asia who could serve as an ally of the West in the containment of China.
This idea of yours that the "West" has any role to play in Asia, that Asian countries are eager to get "Western" aid and support, or that the "West" has any business trying to contain China, is a most bizarre one! China can not be contained in Asia, not ever since Japan decided to be just another American vassal state. The containment of China, on a planetary scale, can only be done by means of an Europe-Russia alliance. Such an alliance would be economically, strategically and culturally powerful enough to make sure that China's influence would be limited to Asia. And that should be our objective. Leave China alone as far as Asia is concerned, and build another attraction pole capable of stopping it becoming equally influent in Africa and Latin America.

neverfail
Posts: 6861
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: why did not Europe militarially intervene in Bosnia, Sertorio?

Post by neverfail » Wed Feb 03, 2021 4:12 am

Sertorio wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:59 am
The containment of China, on a planetary scale, can only be done by means of an Europe-Russia alliance.
Europe does not even have a coastline on either the Pacific or the Indian Ocean and therefore no interest in the containment of China. As for taking military action it did not even intervene in the 1990's to stop the Balkan wars of that decade - a conflict taking place within its own subcontinental mass.

During the four year long seige of Sarajevo the suffering inhabitants of that hapless Bosnian city had to await the arrival of US warplanes to bomb the bigoted, drunken Bosnian Serb gunners and their artillary pieces off the mountainside above; thus finally ending the siege and the agony of the city's inhabitants. Likewise the thousands of unarmed Bosnian Muslims mass murdered by the same bigoted, homocidal Serbs at Srebrenica were under the protection of the United Nations and guarded by Dutch troops sent there to protect them. What happened when the Serbs turned up? Their "protectors" walked away and left the Muslims to the tender mercy of the Serb militiamen. The lives of those Dutch national servicemen were apparently considered too precious to place at risk in a gunfight.

What is the use of an army that is too cowardly to fire its guns even in self defence?

Do you really believe that China can ever be contained by a subcontinent that is too narcissist, too much "up itself" wallowing in self-importance; too decadent to even fight a war in self-defence? Or do you visuaslise your imagined Russian ally as having to do all of the fighting (and other forms of heavy lifting) in the containment of China while you Europeans sit back in comfort and just provide the money?

I would hate it for my country to have to rely on such a contemptable paper tiger: which is why we have the USA and not Europe for an ally. The Americans might brag and bungle around quite a bit but at least they fight.

Cease fantasising Sertorio. Your make believe reminds me of that of an overgrown toddler.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5122
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: why did not Europe militarially intervene in Bosnia, Sertorio?

Post by Sertorio » Wed Feb 03, 2021 4:25 am

neverfail wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 4:12 am
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:59 am
The containment of China, on a planetary scale, can only be done by means of an Europe-Russia alliance.
Europe does not even have a coastline on either the Pacific or the Indian Ocean and therefore no interest in the containment of China. As for taking military action it did not even intervene in the 1990's to stop the Balkan wars of that decade - a conflict taking place within its own subcontinental mass.

During the four year long seige of Sarajevo the suffering inhabitants of that hapless Bosnian city had to await the arrival of US warplanes to bomb the bigoted, drunken Bosnian Serb gunners and their artillary pieces off the mountainside above; thus finally ending the siege and the agony of the city's inhabitants. Likewise the thousands of unarmed Bosnian Muslims mass murdered by the same bigoted, homocidal Serbs at Srebrenica were under the protection of the United Nations and guarded by Dutch troops sent there to protect them. What happened when the Serbs turned up? Their "protectors" walked away and left the Muslims to the tender mercy of the Serb militiamen. The lives of those Dutch national servicemen were apparently considered too precious to place at risk in a gunfight.

What is the use of an army that is too cowardly to fire its guns even in self defence?

Do you really believe that China can ever be contained by a subcontinent that is too narcissist, too much "up itself" wallowing in self-importance; too decadent to even fight a war in self-defence? Or do you visuaslise your imagined Russian ally as having to do all of the fighting (and other forms of heavy lifting) in the containment of China while you Europeans sit back in comfort and just provide the money?

I would hate it for my country to have to rely on such a contemptable paper tiger: which is why we have the USA and not Europe for an ally. The Americans might brag and bungle around quite a bit but at least they fight.

Cease fantasising Sertorio. Your make believe reminds me of that of an overgrown toddler.
You keep talking of the past while I am concerned with the future. Europe's ineptitude is not structural, it is the result of circumstances. Europe will unite politically - even if that still seems a remote possibility - and it will become once more active in international affairs. Europeans - now that they have got rid of the UK - have an increasing feeling of identity, they feel increasingly at ease with each other, and they are increasingly willing to cooperate with each other. We finally got a good President of the European Commission, who can be taken seriously, and that will have consequences. Getting together with Russia to create a counterpoint to China is no longer a fantasy.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4910
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: ASEAN to rescue Myanmar?

Post by cassowary » Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:33 am

Sertorio is always supporting the most evil governments. Reminds me of the time when western leftists supported Stalin.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5122
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: ASEAN to rescue Myanmar?

Post by Sertorio » Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:05 am

cassowary wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:33 am
Sertorio is always supporting the most evil governments. Reminds me of the time when western leftists supported Stalin.
If I supported evil governments, I would support both the US and the UK governments, which I don't!... :D

neverfail
Posts: 6861
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: why did not Europe militarially intervene in Bosnia, Sertorio?

Post by neverfail » Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:07 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 4:25 am

You keep talking of the past while I am concerned with the future. Europe's ineptitude is not structural, it is the result of circumstances. Europe will unite politically - even if that still seems a remote possibility - and it will become once more active in international affairs. Europeans - now that they have got rid of the UK - have an increasing feeling of identity, they feel increasingly at ease with each other, and they are increasingly willing to cooperate with each other. We finally got a good President of the European Commission, who can be taken seriously, and that will have consequences. Getting together with Russia to create a counterpoint to China is no longer a fantasy.
Reads like pompous bluster.

As occasional poster Alexis (who, being French, is as much a European as you), once sagely posted "there is no country called Europe".

I agree!

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5122
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: why did not Europe militarially intervene in Bosnia, Sertorio?

Post by Sertorio » Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:53 pm

neverfail wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:07 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Wed Feb 03, 2021 4:25 am

You keep talking of the past while I am concerned with the future. Europe's ineptitude is not structural, it is the result of circumstances. Europe will unite politically - even if that still seems a remote possibility - and it will become once more active in international affairs. Europeans - now that they have got rid of the UK - have an increasing feeling of identity, they feel increasingly at ease with each other, and they are increasingly willing to cooperate with each other. We finally got a good President of the European Commission, who can be taken seriously, and that will have consequences. Getting together with Russia to create a counterpoint to China is no longer a fantasy.
Reads like pompous bluster.

As occasional poster Alexis (who, being French, is as much a European as you), once sagely posted "there is no country called Europe".

I agree!
His opinion, which is debatable but is legitimate. And yours, which is too biased to be worth considering.

Post Reply