Clara

Following the release of hundreds of political prisoners in Burma, the US has reached out to reinstate diplomatic relations. In a speech given today by Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, as democratic processes are implemented in Burma, a ceasefire is considered between the government and the Karen National Union, and the civilian leadership gains more legitimacy, sanctions will be lifted and ambassadors exchanged between the two countries. There have not been diplomatic relations between the US and Burma since 1990 and Clinton is the first US Secretary of State to visit Burma in over fifty years. This will be a long and involved process, according to Clinton, but the exchange of diplomats bodes well for an involved future with Burma.

President Obama made a statement backing Secretary of State, Clinton’s  remarks and reinforcing the commitment to Burmese democratic development. He declared that although, “much more remains to be done to meet the aspirations of the Burmese people…the United States is committed to continuing [its] engagement with the government in Nay Pyi Taw.” The forgiveness by Western governments may seem shocking in the face of such immediate openness after decades of harsh military rule, but I think it is important to re-establish these diplomatic relations in order to continue to monitor and influence regimes that have for many years completely dominated their civilian populations. The real test in my opinion is to see if the released protesters, once regrouped, will be able to continue to challenge the government. The by-elections that are scheduled for April this year will be another test of Burmese commitment to an open society.

Only time will truly tell if these changes are here to stay, or just a facade, but there are many developments that lead one to believe in a hopeful future for the Burmese people.

President Assad’s recent (and rare) public speech blamed almost everyone around the globe, except himself, for the ‘terrorists’ undermining his regime. Claiming that his rule was based on the will of the people and that he would only step down through the same means, seems a little thin in light of the recent exposure of his policies towards his citizens. His father ruled Syria for three decades before giving his son power.

President Assad has felt his sovereignty increasingly threatened, not just from the usual suspects, but from the Arab League nations. He feels sovereignty has been undermined throughout the League from western nations and his surprise that these countries did not stand by Syria throughout these protests (including the monitors who toured the country) is apparent.

Sovereignty has been a fallback excuse for bad behavior as well as human rights violations throughout history. These new claims that Assad has presented, have nothing to do with respect for sovereignty. The definition from 1648 has long since become conditional on the actions a government takes to deserve it. It is becoming clearer and clearer, with technology and information leaks, that some leaders do not deserve the power that comes with the responsibility and their claims to protection and defense of their actions through ‘sovereignty’ should be null and void.

5,000 dead since last March, does not translate into a responsible government that should be left alone. It does however, beg the question, what should we do now to help?

In Homs, one of the most dangerous and secret conflict zones for protesters in Syria, has been somewhat exposed. This morning, CNN released footage from an unidentified man on the ground there. Bullets rained in the background as he explained the “unofficial curfew” of 4pm to 8am, enforced by snipers lining the street. http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/29/world/meast/syria-unrest/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

With the only observers allowed in the region being a handful from the Arab League, it seems unlikely that they will support the victims of the military crackdown. The mission has lost some monitors due to disagreements with processes and purposes–a telling sign. I think the most important thing that this event highlights for itself and for others like it, is that the powers that be like to be blind to the worst kinds of offenses. It must help them sleep at night. I’ve always wondered what people in a position of power, dependent upon violent oppression, think to justify the outright slaughter of their citizens. I grant the societal differences that are out of my grasp, but at the end of the day, governments (all of them, of all kinds) claim to protect their citizens. Why then, do they always seem to turn around and protect themselves? What kind of recipe is it that changes the purpose? How can it be altered?

The monitors on the ground in Syria are visiting three more hot-spots today–let’s hope they don’t again report that things look promising in those regions, too.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/12/27/a-new-force-in-latin-america/

As per the article, we American’s do have a lot to gain from a stronger Latin America, less influenced by Washington. But why? What benefits can US citizens expect to see from an organized Latin America, out from under the influence of the OAS and politically independent from the previously menacing northernmost states in the western hemisphere? For one, organic politics always seem to work better than imposed regimes, for obvious reasons. But along with less paternalism will come more stable relationships from which to build better business practices across the continent. Stability, especially in this particular economic crisis, would be a welcome relief and help to build a reliable working force, with some disposable income.

The advances for human rights could be great, however, there is concern in my mind for indigenous populations across Latin America. Never one to face it’s own past nor to let others get away with the same heinous acts, the US has prevented some-not all-incredible human rights violations from happening. Out from under the influence of the OAS, CELAC has the oportunity to make or break policies regarding the many indigenous groups. There is something to be said for the chance to rid governments of the pesky need to destroy leftist groups because the US is hovering over their shoulder, breathing down their necks.

No matter what, this new organization will be one to watch.