Iam unaccustomed to reading crumpled newspapers, more so when they are supposed to be complimentary copies. However, last week, on my way from Bangladesh to Myanmar, the flight attendant handed me a copy of the English edition The New Light of Myanmar and I used the creases as clues to what had attracted the attention of the previous reader.
My visit to Bangladesh had been an official one. The mission related to the tragic situation of a third of a million Rohingyas, stranded, abandoned and helpless on the frontier between Bangladesh and Myanmar. It was with them in mind that I planned to go to Myanmar, hoping that the brief visit would help me understand the refugees' country of origin.
The newspaper lived up to its name of throwing a new light on the country. It gave prominence to the achievements of the state and its ministers. The latter are all members of the armed forces, styled as Minister Major General or Minister Brigadier General according to their rank. My attention was also caught by declarations like: "Objective of the 56th anniversary of Armed Forces Day - to work hard with national people to a successful completion of elections".
Such language, as well as the fact that Myanmar has international sanctions imposed upon it, predisposed me for a country whose public services and infrastructure were run down. I could not have been more mistaken.
From the airport, I was surprised by both the aesthetics and the cleanliness. The former capital, Yangon, is a beautiful city, clean and orderly, of over five million inhabitants, so unobtrusive one would not guess the city is so densely populated. Even the roads are uncongested. I was told there were only about 400,000 cars, half of which were over 20 years old. The many colonial buildings such as the law courts, the general hospital and the ex-government ministries are in pristine condition. They date from a period when the country was known as Burma and formed part of the British Empire. Greenery abounds, while the Yangon River flows lazily along its edge.
Close to the river is one of the most astounding sites I have ever seen - the complex of the Shwedagon Pagoda. Gold-encrusted domes and innumerable jade Buddhas. The only distraction are the technicolor lights radiating from behind the heads of the said Buddhas.
The country is striking even demographically. In this population of 56 million, the largest community, 10 per cent of the population, is made up of Buddhist monks. The second largest group is the military, with an estimated four million soldiers, which must make it one of the largest armies in the world.
There is an effort to show that there is religious tolerance; the Muslim and Jewish cemeteries are almost adjacent; a Hindu temple, Christian churches and a mosque are in close proximity. However, the prevailing religion is Buddhism and I was discretely informed that one cannot get into the army if one is not a Buddhist, which is why the civil unrest led by monks in 2007 seems to have come as such a surprise to the military government.
It is the nature of the government that has led to international sanctions being imposed on Myanmar. On the day I arrived, the UN special rapporteur on human rights in the country, Tomas Ojea Quintana, was departing. He expressed his dissatisfaction that he was not told the date of the forthcoming election or allowed to meet the leader of the Opposition, Aung Sun Suu Kyi, who has been held under house arrest for 14 of the last 20 years. The fact that the reclusive military leader, Thun Shwe, delivered a snub by not meeting him did not help matters.
There is no doubt that the country needs a democratic resolution of its current tensions. However, it is not clear to me that the sanctions will help change in that direction.
In the first place, experience with sanctions generally suggests that they strengthen the hold of a government over its people. The blockages of normal trade make ordinary people more dependent on centralised distribution. Elites are less affected than the masses.
Secondly, in this particular case, the isolation of Myanmar has made the European Union more dependent on interlocutors, mainly Thailand. Should the EU be dependent on just one country, especially this particular country? We should, perhaps, change our tactics, say by using numerous intermediaries, of which Bangladesh could be one. When I met the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, Dipu Moni, she explained she had already paid two visits to Myanmar and was optimistic about future collaboration.
My personal choice would be a reconsideration of the present strategy by initiating a direct approach. That could be important to exercise some influence not just over the government but also over the people of Myanmar. Indeed, the people wherever I went were not only helpful but polite and extremely hospitable. Otherwise, they might take seriously such declarations as that which appeared on the back page of my crumpled copy of The New Light of Myanmar.
Without quoting the President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, directly, the newspaper repeated his claim that the BBC and the Voice of America are the mouthpieces of MI6 and the CIA.
The current isolationist strategy enhances the prospect of pushing certain states into an alliance or having their peoples, due to the unintended consequences of sanctions, to become more wary of our good intentions.
Dr Attard Montalto is a Labour member of the European Parliament.