The US government aid agency USAID has denied charges levelled by a Burma campaign group that it is breaching US sanctions on the military-ruled country.
The prominent Washington-based US Campaign for Burma (USCB) said in March that USAID funding of the ASEAN Competitive Enhancement (ACE) project, which looks to promote the tourism and textiles industries of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries, was “not in line with US-Burma policy”.
Burma is a member of ASEAN, but is subject to strict US trade and financial sanctions. A campaign to boycott tourism in Burma has received strong backing from various campaign groups, although this has not been factored into the US sanctions package.
But USAID’s funding of the ACE remains a “violation” of US policy and should be challenged by Congress, USCB advocacy director Jennifer Quigley has told TTR Weekly travel website.
“The spirit of [US Burma sanctions] was to keep American dollars out of the hands of the Burmese regime,” she said. “The way the Burmese tourism economy is structured, it is not a stretch to assume the regime would benefit financially.”
USAID communications director, Hal Lipper, defended the charges by saying that ASEAN had requested funding to Southeast Asia “as a region”.
One of the main arguments against tourism in Burma is that, with the majority of property and services owned by the ruling regime, tourist money would eventually find its way into government coffers. Moreover, rights groups have said that many tourist resorts and services were built using forced labour.
Detained Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi had previously urged tourists to stay away from the country whilst it remains under military rule, although this stance appears have softened in line with growing international engagement with the junta.
The pro-tourism lobby argues however that interaction with locals, although often highly restricted by the government, can contribute towards pulling the country out of decades of isolation.
Tourism currently only contributes to around 0.7 percent of Burma’s GDP, meaning that the boycott is largely symbolic and would have little tangible effect on the country’s economy. The impact of sanctions has also been lessened by Burma’s growing trade with ASEAN countries, as well as China and India.
Tags: ASEAN, sanctions, tourism, US
MPs returned to Parliament in Burma’s capital Naypyidaw
The blog owner requires users to be logged in to be able to vote for this post.
Alternatively, if you do not have an account yet you can create one here.
Powered by Vote It Up
A useful and timely report.
In fact, less than 10% of property and services are owned by the ruling regime. They were all privatised back in the early 1990s. Most of the international class hotels are 100% foreign owned, a small number are Joint Ventures with a minority Burmese partner and one or two only are owned by the regime – and avoided like the plague because the service is not good. There is a fair sprinkling of “crony” hotels at resorts like Ngwe Saung, but – until developed – tourism tends to be a loss maker in the early years, so no one really is making all that much money, or indeed any at all. Few hotels in Burma have recorded an operating let alone an overall profit since 1990. The regime quietly complains that they are owed US$ millions in back taxes and land rentals, but international groups are struggling to service their debts which are typically 40% of capital invested,
Tourism and textiles are labour intensive industries, Indeed, 70% of Burmese exports to the USA used to be garments and textiles until the embargo cut in around 2003, and many workers were made redundant. Some 550,000 Burmese are directly employed in the tourism industry, and as many again indirectly e.g. as boutique and handicraft shops, postcard sellers, taxi-drivers. The US however does not seek to sanction tourism like the EU because the US recognises that well-heeled intelligent middle class visitors and idealistic young back-packers are a vital way to expose the country to international influences and to bear witness on their return to what they have seen.
I cannot understand why the US Campaign for Burma would like to force workers in the tourism and textile industries into unemployment. I suppose it’s all due to their ideological conviction that smashing the Burmese economy and compelling the ordinary workers into bloody revolution is the best way to bring peace and democracy that that unhappy country. But it seems to me that this is an extremist position and not one which I would wish to take.
In the garment and textiles industries, by the way, of 171 factories still surviving, 35 are 100% foreign owned, 130 are owned by private (not State, military or crony) interests, 4 are joint ventures between foreign and private Burmese companies, while only two South Korean subsidiaries are JVs with the regime, one with UMEH and one with MEC, both military companies, but the Burmese stake is a minority holding.
Middle class entrepreneurs are one of the major supporters of pro-democracy parties in Burma like the NLD. The US Campaign for Burma should not be seeking to undermine NLD supporters at the present difficult time. They should also support Burmese workers by lobbying Congress to eliminate forthwith the 70% of US sanctions which primarily affect the workers.
To Derek Tonkin,
Sir,
I would like to add that the Marina Residence is 100% owned by local owners, with a Japanese Management as a front…many local businesses hire foreign expertise, like the above mentioned Marina Residence owners…
Please look again closely….
[...] USAID is accused of breaching US sanctions [...]