A report by @Beaking_News on @R4today explored possible EU #sanctions on #Myanmar's garment exports, in response to the #Rohingya atrocities. Here's a thread on why I think sanctions would be misguided.
/1
CC @ecfr @eucopresident @FedericaMog
/1
CC @ecfr @eucopresident @FedericaMog
As I argued in my 2015 @OUPpolitics book, Societies Under Siege, where Myanmar was a case study, it's crucial to consider HOW sanctions are supposed to achieve one's desired goals. HOW exactly will economic pain translate into political gain?
global.oup.com/academic/produ…
/2
global.oup.com/academic/produ…
/2
This is rarely, if ever, done. Policymakers typically just impose sanctions in the vague hope that "pressuring the regime" will magically translate into the outcomes they seek. Usually they don't: sanctions fail 2/3 of the time. Myanmar was no different.
/3
/3
In Myanmar, trade sanctions did not end export growth, they just pushed the economy towards resource-exports to neighbouring countries, esp. China. The military regime was never endangered and could have remained in power for many years longer.
/4
/4
On garments in particular, this is what I found:
- the sector was badly hit
- the burden fell primarily on private SMEs, not regime-linked/ foreign firms
- govt export revenues were nonexistent so the state wasn't harmed
/5
- the sector was badly hit
- the burden fell primarily on private SMEs, not regime-linked/ foreign firms
- govt export revenues were nonexistent so the state wasn't harmed
/5
- 100,000s of mostly-female workers lost their jobs, most forced to emigrate/ return to rural areas/ enter sex work
- sanctions thus destroyed the most militant sector of Myanmar's fledgling working class: garment workers were striking even when unions were banned
/6
- sanctions thus destroyed the most militant sector of Myanmar's fledgling working class: garment workers were striking even when unions were banned
/6
In general, by harming workers and employers not beholden to the regime, sanctions merely undermined the emergence of social forces that could have fought for genuine democratisation - not the military-led transition seen in 2010. They were counter-productive.
/7
/7
Today, is there any conceivable causal pathway through which garment sanctions could lead to better treatment for the Rohingya? I struggle to think of any. You would only further impoverish a people struggling to emerge from poverty, oppression and reactionary ideologies.
/8
/8
The atrocities in Rakhine are heartbreaking, but the truth is that Western states have little leverage over events in Myanmar. The military remains the dominant political force. Any attempt to punish/ coerce the govt will arouse violent nationalist reaction.
/9
/9
It also risks undermining the marginal democratic/ social/ economic gains made for some Myanmar people since 2010. Aung San Suu Kyi was never the hero worshipped by the West, but Western govts dare not undermine her now. There is no other game in town.
/10
/10
Anyone backing sanctions in response to the Rakhine atrocities must explain HOW they will benefit the Rohingya: a plausible causal story linking their imposition to desired outcomes is required. Otherwise, sanctions would be reckless, ineffective and counter-productive.
/END
/END
