The movement and protests in Myanmar for democracy and freedom remind me of the differences between a country which hungers for freedom and one which has been completely ambivalent. One of the central requirements for democracy, it seems, is this burning desire the people of a nation must have for direct participation in their government and an end to repression and authoritarianism. Democracy always springs from the people because it is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

This is different from self-determination. That simply says a people choose their form of government. It can take many shapes and forms, but as long as the people of a nation are content with their government, it endures. Iraq is a country in the process of self-determination and, from all signs, is choosing an Islamic-republic style of government rather than democracy. It might end up being another totalitarian system if all other efforts fail. The Iraqi people are engaged in self-determination, however.

One of the more massive failures of American foreign policy has been the belief that the United States can impose democracy at the barrels of our guns. This is actually the antithesis of democracy. Freedom and liberty must exist as burning desires in the hearts of a people. Ironically, America spent fifty years fighting a Cold War with the Soviet Union to prevent them from imposing their style of government from the barrels of their tanks. The neoconservatives took over after the Cold War and imposed a foreign policy which said that, as the only remaining superpower, the United States should do exactly what we feared the Soviets would. We’ve become what we feared the Soviets would be.

We proceeded to invade Iraq, supposedly to impose a democratic government. I wrote at the time that this was a fallacious argument because there were no signs whatsoever that the Iraqi people wanted democracy. In fact, there were few signs at all they wanted a major change in their government. In the past, when Shias had been willing to rise up, America encouraged them and then pulled the rug out from under the rebels. Why would we think they’d trust us again? No rational thought process supported this argument.

As a result, Iraq has turned into a foreign policy blunder of historic proportions.

Meanwhile, the people of Myanmar have that burning desire for freedom. They are willing to pour into the streets and face massacre demonstrating for liberty with nothing but their desires, their beliefs, their monks, and their prayers. Their army and police are mowing them down in cold blood. This is how democracies win, however. Masses of people desperate for an end to tyranny are willing to take to the streets to claim their inalienable rights. No force can be victorious over the power of ideas, the desire for freedom.

This is the difference between Myanmar and Iraq. The Burmese want democracy and are willing to do what must be done to capture their freedom for themselves. They aren’t asking Americans to come and die for their liberty; they are willing to do so themselves, and out of such epic strifes freedom is indeed born. It won’t come as the result of an invasion and occupation of a country which made no attempt on its own to overthrow its government.

That’s the difference between Iraq and Myanmar.

I await the day when Americans once again are willing to take to our streets to reclaim the democracy which has been taken from us. The day has come, once again, when the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness has been denied citizens, this time by the merger of corporate America and conservative government. How many more of our rights must be breached before we rise up in protest? Where are our monks?

Print This Article
Email (and more) with