November 1, 2023
The View from Myanmar
Since the Myanmar military’s coup in 2021, which threw out the elected civilian administration led by Aung San Suu Kyi, the ruling junta has targeted politicians, activists and journalists in different cities across the country. It has arbitrarily detained opposers and applied heavy punishment, including decades-long imprisonment, torture and killings. One of these prisoners was an Australian, Sean Turnell, an economic adviser to Aung San Suu Kyi. He was released last November after spending 650 days in jail.
After the coup, Australia downgraded its diplomatic relationship with Myanmar. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade appointed a diplomat with ambassadorial experience, Angela Corcoran, to replace the former ambassador to Myanmar, Andrea Faulkner. Before departing in April 2022, Faulkner met with the coup leader, Min Aung Hlaing, in Naypyidaw. Human Rights Watch condemned the meeting, stating it was “lending credibility” to the junta. Australia has also imposed sanctions on the regime, albeit cautiously.
Beyond questions about whether Canberra’s diplomatic response to the Myanmar coup has been too soft, there are ongoing concerns about Australia’s humanitarian response, particularly its approach to asylum seekers.
According to DFAT, Australia granted offshore humanitarian visas to more than 20,500 Myanmar nationals between July 2011 and September 2023. A spokesperson told me that Myanmar citizens remain a key cohort in Australia’s offshore humanitarian program.
But Australia needs to do more to ensure that those who successfully flee Myanmar – especially to Thailand – can resettle without being arrested or sent back.
I spoke recently to Nang Mwei, a thirty-five-year-old mother who lives with her husband and seven-year-old daughter in a room in Mae Sot, a border town in Thailand. They fled their home in Myanmar in late 2021 after the military arrested and tortured Nang and her husband due to their journalistic work.
Nang and her family don’t leave their small room unless necessary because they face potential arrest by the Thai immigration police. They have been confined this way for almost two years, waiting for emergency relocation to Australia as part of the resettlement program. Although she has approval for relocation from the Australian embassy, Nang can’t leave Thailand. “If Thai police arrest us . . . they would send us to the prison,” she said. “Fleeing home was our last option. We were hiding inside Myanmar from one city to another for a long time. We had to leave not only for us but also for our daughter’s future.”
The number of Myanmar asylum seekers at the Thai border who have registered to resettle in countries such as Australia and the United States is unknown. The entire application process – including registering with the United Nations Refugee Agency as asylum seekers, being interviewed by an embassy and then staying at a hotel facilitated by the International Organization of Migrants – takes at least a year, sometimes more than eighteen months. And many refugees then remain stuck in Thailand – at risk of arrest or deportation – because the Thai government won’t issue them exit permits. Thailand is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, so it has no legal obligation to help refugees. It is believed to be concerned that assisting Myanmar refugees to resettle will mean that more refugees will come.
The Australian government and other diplomatic groups should not only pressure Myanmar’s junta over its coup and human rights abuses, but also urge the Thai government to protect refugees, not arrest them.
The continuing atrocities in Myanmar deserve more attention from Australia and across the region. Diplomatic pressure on the junta is crucial, as is assisting those whose lives have been overturned by the military’s rule.
Maung Moe is a pseudonym of a writer in Myanmar.
A free extract from the current issue – The New Domino Theory Inside Labor’s decision to back AUKUS Margaret Simons Tell the story baldly, and it is beyond belief. Over thirty-six hours in September 2021, not only did the Australian government announce a big change of tack on Australian defence policy, betraying the trust of one ally and further enmeshing the nation with the United States and Britain, but the alternative government backed the move after just a two-hour briefing. AUKUS, the trilateral security pact with the United States and the United Kingdom under which Australia will become one of only seven countries with nuclear-powered submarines, became bipartisan policy literally overnight. Or that is what the messy first draft of history – the media’s reporting of these events – suggests. The truth is more complex, nuanced, contingent and contextual. There is a prehistory to AUKUS and how, despite many questions and concerns which have been only partly addressed in the public conversation, it gained the backing of two Australian governments. MONTHLY ROUND-UP ➀ Albanese’s visit settles some US doubts “More and more the true nature of the AUKUS agreement reveals itself: it is a trans-Pacific, and occasionally British, public relations exercise… Moreover, the Labor party, like its predecessor, ties its tongue and refuses to go into the parliament and explain both the strategic rationale of the agreement and how it will unfold.” James Curran, AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL REVIEW ➁ As the world looks elsewhere, China stirs trouble in the South China Sea “China’s long-term policy of taking escalating actions looks set to accelerate... In the near term, the risk of China damaging a Philippine Coast Guard vessel or sinking one of the small Philippine government-charted vessels is high.” Peter Layton, THE INTERPRETER (LOWY INSTITUTE) ➂ Can Jokowi influence Indonesia’s presidential election? “Jokowi’s decision to appoint Prabowo Subianto as his defence minister and endorse him in the 2024 presidential election whitewashes his extensive record of human rights violations.” Made Supriatma, EAST ASIA FORUM ➃ China’s Western Indian Ocean Step Up “When India and France look out into the Indian Ocean, including its western most edges, they see the same geostrategic uncertainty and competition that we see in the Pacific. And if the balance of power in the Indian Ocean changes more in coming years, that will see our partners ask us to consider more, not less, engagement in this complex and diverse region.” Kate O’Shaughnessy, AUSTRALIAN OUTLOOK (AIIA) ➄ Increasing women’s representation in Pacific politics: ‘give it time’ is not the answer “Throughout the region coalitions like the Fiji Women’s Forum and PNG’s ‘Vote Women for Change’ movement are developing innovative and locally led approaches to tackling the issue. Supporting these efforts is important, as is, crucially, maintaining pressure on the male-dominated governments of the Pacific region to ensure the underrepresentation of women in parliaments doesn’t drop off the political agenda.” Kerryn Baker, Theresa Meki, THE STRATEGIST (ASPI) CURRENT ISSUE AFA19 – The New Domino Theory Does China really want to attack Australia? The latest issue of Australian Foreign Affairs examines China’s ultimate goals as an emerging superpower, including the extent of its territorial ambitions. The New Domino Theory looks at Australia's place in China’s long-term plans and at the threat – if any – that Beijing poses to Australian security, politics and society. Subscribe here to read now. |