For
businesses, the suspension of sanctions by the European Union and Canada could
lead to the possibility of cheaper production bases and a new stock of natural
resources (Businesses Cautiously Optimistic…).
Foreign investment from 2010 to 2011 was 9
times the cumulative foreign investment between 2006 and 2010, mostly in
the energy and extractives industries (Not Open for Business, 2).
Investing without investigation into
the current conditions in Burma could also mean the exacerbation of human
rights abuses and poor living conditions including mass poverty, electricity
blackouts, and violent confrontations between civilians and the Burmese
military. Another risk factor to take
into account would be the lack of infrastructure that would inhibit any new
economic development.
The
current business climate is hardly conducive to productive practices. According to the current constitution, there
does not exist any judiciary assurances that will protect property or
investments. In addition, the military
continues to dominate the largest sectors of the Burmese economy. For
example, it controls the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings which manages
the gem trade and the banking and construction industries. It also
oversees the Myanmar Economic Corporation which controls economic
activities as varied as tourism, trading companies and billions of
dollars worth of petroleum and natural gas (Not Open for Business, 2).
Meanwhile the average Burmese wage is $1.1 USD per day.
Foreign businesses should be aware
of Burma’s history of disregard for the rule-of-law and a lack of transparency
and accountability. For example, “a
budget drafted in 2012 by the president was submitted to Parliament for some
debate on allocation decisions, which was an improvement over the previous
year. However, the source of budget revenues, including revenues from the sale
of oil and gas, remain undisclosed. This makes it impossible to calculate
whether all gas payments have been entered into the budget and, if so, at what
exchange rate. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to allocate gas
revenues for specific expenses, such as social spending” (Burma’s
Resource Curse, 5).
Those
that choose to blindly invest in Burmese companies may be inadvertently funding
the military, which will to continue abuse its dominance of the civilian
populace through tactics such as land confiscation, forced labor, etc. There is probably no guarantee that local
authorities and the military will uphold the rights of civilians when it comes
to their interests in growing industries, projects and corporate
activities.
In a May 2012 letter from large sustainable
business advocates, they “do not believe that a broad, immediate
relaxation of U.S. sanctions would best serve the goal of achieving progress
toward democracy and respect for human rights in Burma” (Investor
Letter to the White House).
Non-US corporations set to or already operating in Burma can take
the opportunity to positively impact average Burmese from new job
opportunities, investing in local communities and ensuring respect for
human rights and environmental protection.
Burma has vast oil, gas, hydropower and
mineral potential, located mainly in the ethnic minority
regions which continue to be areas of conflict. This
together with increasing foreign presence coupled with the lack of local
benefits from such projects is contributing to rising local resentment, putting
investments under threat of retaliatory attacks. The abuses associated with
such projects have led to lawsuits, consumer boycotts, and withdrawal of
shareholders, ruining the reputation of investing companies. (Resource
Curse, 6).
No comments:
Post a Comment