Research Paper Global Politics Solutions for Cambodia and Burma From Civil War Trap

Passtra University of Cambodia

The Cambodia and Burma: Solutions to Get Out of the Conflict Trap

RESEARCH PAPER Solutions for Cambodia and Burma: To Get Out of the Conflict Trap

Written By: LONG KimKhorn, MA.IRs (Diplomacy)

Passtra University of CambodiaGlobal Politics: The Clashes of Civilization and Bottom Billion

Instructed By: Dr. TROND Gilberg, PHD and Dean of PUC Social Science and International Relations Faculty

Phnom Penh, November 30th, 2012

Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg

1

LONG KimKhorn, MA.IRs (Diplomacy)



TABLES OF CONTENT Abstract .. .............................................................................. 3 3 4 5 9 9 10 12 15 16

Acknowledgement Introduction

. .

Literature Review

Methodology . Scope of Research Facts and Findings . . .

Recommendation and Discussion Conclusion References

. .


2



The Cambodia and Burma: Solutions to Get Out of the Conflict Trap ABSTRACT

Many researches done by Paul Collier, Lani Elliott, HvardHegre, AnkeHoeffler, Marta Reynal-Querol, and Nicholas Sambanis, 2009, mentioned that MOSTWARS ARE NOW CIVIL WARS1. Even though intra-national wars attract international attention enormously, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars normally attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and generally go on for years. This paper would like to prove that civil war resulted in conflict trap is now an important issue for development, especially, for least-developing countries (LDCs). War kills development, but conversely, development retards war. Where development succeeds, may be, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making development easier in general. Where development fails, countries may at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war destroys the economy and increases the risk of waging war. Many of the economic costs, such as high military expenditure and capital flight, remain for years after the conflict. The typical civil war starts a prolonged process of development in reverse. So how and what should they do to get out of the trap and develop their economy. Conflict weakens the economy and leaves a legacy of atrocities. It also creates leaders and organizations that have invested in skills and equipment that are only useful for violence. Some evidence suggests that decade by decade, civil wars have been getting longer. The purpose of this paper is to find out whether Cambodia and Burma are a part of bottom billion and stuck in conflict trap or not. If they are, how they get out of that trap. ACKNOWLEDGES I would like to address thankfully Dr. TROND Gilberg as the instructor of the research paper and thank to the academic research journals and studies both virtual and hard copy using as my sources to write and discuss this paper.

1

Paul Collier, Lani Elliott, HvardHegre, AnkeHoeffler, Marta Reynal-Querol, Nicholas Sambanis, Breaking the conflict trap: Civil War and Development Policy (Washington: World Bank &Oxford University Press, 2003) p.1-4,6-7,&13. Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg3




INTRODUCTION Burma/Myanmar is a multi-ethnic country with an ethnic Bamar majority2. Burma has been afflicted by ethnic conflict and civil war since independence in 1948, and has experience done of the longest running armed conflicts in the world. Several ethnic groups were dissatisfied with the newly formed Union of Burma, which they felt did not guarantee equal rights and autonomy. The political crisis led to a military coup in 1962 that put in place a Revolutionary Council to run the country under the leadership of General Ne Win. The constitution was abrogated, all opposition activists put behind bars and any attempt to organize was severely repressed. The army took over all state functions, controlling all aspects of political, economic and social life in the country (Kramer 2012, KivimKi&Pasch2009, p.2). The conflict in Burma appears to be extremely complicated. However, three main actors can be identified in the Burmese political conflict. These are: (1) the Tatmadaw, which has controlled the state since 1962, and the new military-backed Thein Sein government, which has been in power since March 2011; (2) the democratic opposition, including the NLD and some newly formed Burman political parties that contested the 2010 elections; and (3) ethnic minority groups constituting a wide range of different organizations, some of which have been fighting the central government since 1948 (Crisis Group 2012). Until the end of the 1980s, Burmas economic orientation was socialist. But in the 1990s this orientation gradually shifted towards a more market-friendly perspective. Instead, underdevelopment has fuelled interests in conflict, further highlighting security and encouraging disregard for developmental priorities. This, in turn, has provoked underdevelopment, conflict motives, security problems, a focus on military solutions, a disregard for development. Wars diverts precious resources into fighting, during the civil war military expenditure increases and does not return to normal levels after the fighting stops (Fearon&Laitin 2006, p.3-5).

2

TimoKivimKi, Paul Pasch, The Dynamics of Conflict in the Multiethnic Union of Myanmar (Berlin: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2009) p.214





In case of Cambodia: The Khmer Rouge killed nearly two million Cambodians from 1975 to 1979, spreading like a virus from the jungles until they controlled the entire country, only to systematically dismantle and destroy it in the name of a Communist agrarian ideal. Today, more than 30 years after Vietnamese soldiers removed the Khmer Rouge from power, the first genocide trials started in 2007 a bittersweet note of progress in an impoverished nation still struggling to rehabilitate its crippled economic and human resources (TIME 2009). The Khmer Rouge took root in Cambodia's northeastern jungles as early as the 1960s, a guerrilla group driven by communist ideals that nipped the periphery of governmentcontrolled areas. The flash point came when Cambodia's leader, Prince Norodom Sihanouk, was deposed in a military coup in 1970 and leaned on the Khmer Rouge for support. The prince's imprimatur lent the movement legitimacy, although while he would nominally serve as head of state, he spent much of the Khmer Rouge's rule under house arrest. As the country descended into civil war, the Khmer Rouge presented themselves as a party for peace and succeeded in mobilizing support in the countryside and completely destroyed the market system when they took power on April 17, 1975 (TIME 2009). LITERATURE REVIEW In 2007, Paul Collier published the book titled the bottom billion3 described the total populations, in 2006 around 980m people of 58 countries: most of Africa (but not South Africa or Botswana, and no longer Mauritius or Madagascar) plus much of landlocked Central Asia [and] places like Haiti, Bolivia. . . . Laos, Cambodia, Yemen, Burma and North Korea are part of BB because they were trapped by at least one trap among many. The text leaves me genuinely unsure whether some huge countries Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, and Sudan are in or out and, in particular, Cambodia and Burma got out of the trap or not. So one cannot assess, or check, some of Colliers claims about the BB whether true or not because many BB nationals are not poor (Collier 2007).3

Michael Lipton,Journal of Development Studies Bottom Billion: Countries or People?Vol. 44, No.5.(UK:University of Sussex and Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2008):750-760.5





Let talk about Burma first, despite the fact that Burma is rich in resources, the country is very poor. Decades of war and mismanagement have brought the country, once the worlds largest rice exporter, to the brink of economic collapse. The ethnic minority areas have suffered the worst. Minority leaders complain that while the central government has been keen to extract natural resources from the ethnic states and sell them abroad, the money earned has not been invested to develop these isolated and war-torn areas (Y 2006, p.15). Dudley Jackson in his book Poverty published in 1972, said that in order to live without poverty, people need to satisfy a variety of needs and their abilities to function adequately in society and it depends upon the extent to which these needs are met so-called economic insufficiency. When important needs are not met or fulfilled, individuals or families are said to be in poverty because their lives are not considered to be satisfactory. He regarded the problem in defining poverty as largely a cultural problem in determining what is or what should count as inadequate social functioning. When these aspects of life are in jeopardy a person or family may be considered to be in poverty but the people or country. After 30-year of civil war, Cambodian citizen today enjoy the economy transformation policy from a centrally planned to a market-oriented economy that favors investment, trade and private sector development within sub-regional (GMS), regional (ASEAN and East Asia) and global contexts. Policy reforms along with political stability have fostered dramatic economic growth, averaging 7.8 percent between 1994 and 2010, lifted per capita income from USD248 to USD735 and changed the economic structure from an agrarian economy to a more balanced mix of agriculture, industry and services Growth over the past decade has been driven by four sectors: garments and footwear, hotel and restaurant, construction, and agriculture (CDRP 2012, p.2). According to CDRP, 2012, Sustained growth has led to shifts in the employment structure. In 1995 agriculture employed 81.4 percent of the total labour force; by 2007, its share had declined to 55.9 percent (IMF 2009). Rapid growth has led to a dramatic decline in poverty but widening inequality. The national poverty headcount fell from 39 percent in 1994 to 30.1 percent in 2007.Urban and rural poverty rates likewise decreased, although poverty levels remain higher in rural areas. Income disparities between the rich and the poor


6




increased during the same period, with the Gini coefcient rising from 0.35 to 0.43 (NIS 2010). The economics of survival understanding how such social and political complexity has been sustained requires tracking the underpinnings of post-colonial economic life for Burma. The International Peace Academys research has shown that both greed and grievance can provide causes for civil war. In Burma, both are endemic. Political repression, ethnic divisions, the existence of porous borders and a free riding economy that frequently operates outside state or international legal parameters have created an arena where military-based organizations can carry on their struggles. Burma in 2006 is estimated to have fallen to 18th in the worlds Failed States Index from 23rd the previous year (Smith 2006, p.20). Myanmar has long been subject to economic sanctions and other measures, implemented at different times by various Western countries. The European Union (EU) announced in April 2012 that it was opening a new chapter in its relations with Myanmar and that it was suspending but not lifting all its sanctions, except for the arms embargo. For many years, the U.S. also used its voting power in international financial institutions to in effect prohibit their assistance to Myanmar, but it now supports their limited re-engagement. However, the World Bank is in the process of opening an office in Yangon to begin implementing an interim technical assistance package. This could be important in facilitating foreign direct investment(Ballentine &Nitzschke 2004 Review 2005, p.7). According to Karen Ballentine and HeikoNitzschke, 2005, several of the adverse economic effects of civil war are highly persistent. Recall that during civil war military expenditure rises as a percentage of GDP from 2.8 to 5.0 percent; however, once the war has ended, military expenditure does not return to its former level. During the first post-conflict decade the average country spends 4.5 percent of GDP on the military. Cumulatively over the first decade of peace some 17 percent of a years GDP is lost in increased military spending. This is far from being the only post-conflict cost of war, but alone it is substantial: during the typical conflict the total income loss cumulates to around 60 percent of a years GDP.


7




Moreover, capital during conflict is flight. Recall that during war capital flight increases from 9 percent of private wealth to 20 percent. By the end of the first decade of postconflict peace capital flight has risen further to 26.1 percent. Once a country has experienced a civil war it is much more likely to see further conflict, so that even though peace is an improvement, risk levels do not return to their pre-conflict level. Thus even once peace has returned, people may still wish to move more of their assets abroad that why they need to repatriate capital more than just peace. Now signal seems clear, economic life does not cease to exist during war. Rather, it adapts and takes on new forms. Even more by the shorthand term war economies, economic activities in wartime in fact serve different functions for different participants. Every conflict has its own history, dynamics, and stakeholders. The preferred means of resource generation include the predatory taxation of licit and illicit economic activities, extortion of local businesses, the control over the exploitation of natural resources, the imposition of customs in border areas or setting up roadblocks, the sale of future resource exploitation rights to foreign companies and foreign aid fail into bad cronies hands

(Ballentine&Nitzschke 2005, p.7). By seeing the consequences, Paris Peace Agreement, 1991, ratified for Cambodia by (1)International, regional and bilateral assistance to Cambodia should be coordinated as much as possible, complement and supplement local resources and be made available impartially with full regard for Cambodia's sovereignty, priorities, institutional means and absorptive capacity; (2) In the context of the reconstruction effort, economic aid should benefit all areas of Cambodia, especially the more disadvantaged, and reach all levels of society; (3) The implementation of an international aid effort would have to be phased in over a period that realistically acknowledges both political and technical imperatives. Meanwhile, open and liberal economic regime has fostered rapid expansion of trade and investment. Total trade between 1995 and 2009 increased at an annual average rate of 17.02 percent, reaching USD10.02 billion and exceeding GDP with total trade to GDP ratio at 105.7 percent (CDRI 2012, p.3). FDI grew from almost nothing in the late 1980s to an annual average of USD163 million between 1993 and 2004 and USD604 million in the second half of the 2000s. However, FDI in Cambodia, however, remains low compared to Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg8




its ASEAN neighbors. The World Banks Doing Business Survey has identied governance and corruption as the biggest obstacles to the growth of private business (World Bank 2010). Cambodia needs more than two decades to grow and so how about Myanmar, first election in 2010 after 60-year under military junta, Its socioeconomic indicators have continued to decline, and it remains one of the worlds least developed countries. In the UNDPs 2010 Human Development Index (HDI) report, it was ranked 132nd out of 169 countries, with the lowest HDI value in Southeast Asia. The gap between the small number of wealthy people and the poor has been widening. The national poverty rate is 32%, with a significant urban-rural gap and a much higher rate in rural areas. Myanmar is still an agricultural country, with about 70% of the population living in rural areas (BTI 2012, p.14). Burmas economic performance is poor in reality. The available quantitative data are mostly unreliable since the government invents numbers to match the top generals wishes. Although some international organizations have estimated Myanmars GDP growth rate at an average of more than 10% over the past few years, this double-digit rate appears exaggerated, and does not correspond with many realities on the ground. The Economist Intelligence Units (EIU) January 2011 country report estimated the growth rate to have been 1.8% in 2009 and 3.1% in 2010, which seems to be closer to reality (BTI 2012, p. 19). METHODOLOGY This paper will use secondary data virtually and hard copy from public to private school library for writing.Paper will use both quantitative and qualitative methods to analyze the study but because this paper is social research, I will use qualitative approach much more than quantitative. Question style will be observational/ rational and cause-and-effect questions and open-ended for discussions as follow. SCOPE OF RESEARCH Due to time limit, this paper only study the stage of civil war in Cambodia from 1975-1979 and solutions which proposed by Paris Peace Accord in 1991 and its impact between 1993 until 2012. Than again, paper will address briefly on the causes of civil war in Burma in Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg9




1948 then will focus on the last resort from 2000-2011 and solutions along with its impact following the introduced reform policy by the late General-president Thein Sein in 2011. FACTS AND FINDINGS Burma has been under military rule since 1962. However, in 2011 a new political system was introduced and a new military-backed government inaugurated that has reached out to the democratic opposition and armed ethnic opposition groups seeking more autonomy. Both of these groups reject the new constitution, which seeks to entrench the armys power (Kramer 2012, p.1). Solving ethnic conflict remains the key issue for the country. First of all, it is important for the Tatmadaw to end all its current military operations against ethnic armed groups in the country. Ceasefire agreements negotiated at the local level between different armed ethnic opposition groups and the government are a first important step. However, in order to end the conflict in Burma and achieve true ethnic peace, the current talks must move beyond establishing new ceasefires (Kramer 2012, p.10). The crucial next step is holding negotiations at the national level between all ethnic armed opposition groups and the government at a special national conference to agree on a permanent peace settlement. Failure to do so will undermine the current reform process in the country and will lead to a continuation of Burmas cycle of conflict (Smith, 2007). However, it is as yet unclear how and when such a conference will take place and achieve. In recent months, the resignation of Vice President Tin Aung Myint Oo, which has been one of the most significant political events of the new administration so far, has had an economic impact. Widely regarded as a patron of the old business elite and an obstacle to key reforms, his departure may facilitate easier decision-making and smooth the way for President Thein Sein to push ahead with his economic reform agenda. Current talks must lead to political dialogue to address ethnic issues, which remain the principle sources of conflict. Furthermore, although Burma is rich in resources, the country is extremely poor. Acknowledging the reform effort, the West, EU and USA, has reversed its sanctions on Burma, and there is great interest in engaging with Burma in the political Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg10




and economic spheres. However, regulations to manage foreign investment are weak, raising questions about prospects for sustainable and equitable economic development, especially in the contested and conflict-prone borderlands (Kramer 2012, p.4-7). In the case of Cambodia, thirty years of warfare most forms of social capital in Cambodia were destroyed. During the Lon Nol regime, traditional sources of social capital were severely eroded throughout Cambodia. Many villages were forced to reallocate or were split as a result of warfare, bombing, and Lon Nol recruitment. Within villages exchange slowed, and solidarity around the temple dissolved. The Khmer Rouge destroyed all social, political, and economic institutions in this extreme communistic experiment, the brutal Khmer Rouge regime transformed and depleted what little social capital had remained from the Lon Nol period (Colletta and Cullen 2000). In the UNDPs Human Development Report Cambodia falls into the ranks of countrys with medium human development, albeit at the lowest end. In the 2010 index, it was ranked 124th, a very slight improvement compared to 2005. Its HDI value is given as 0.49, which is less than the 0.59 given in 2007. According to a variety of sources, average annual per capita income has stabilized at about $1,800 (measured in purchasing power parity terms), which makes Cambodia one of the poorest countries in Asia. Around 90% of this population lives in rural areas. Poverty reduction has been slow, 1% per year as the commitment of countrys leader, and the rural population in particular has thus far seen little perceptible improvement (Human Development Report 2010, p.4). Persistent adverse legacy is the loss of social capital. Civil war can have the effect of switching behavior from an equilibrium in which there is an expectation of honesty to one in which there is an expectation of corruption. Once a reputation for honesty has been lost, the incentive for honest behavior in the future is greatly weakened. Clearly civil war is not the only way in which a society can become corrupted, but the point is that the costs inflicted by corruption are likely to persist long after the conflict is over. The main sector of the economy has always been agriculture. In the 1938 fiscal year, it contributed around 48 per cent of the countrys GDP; by 2007 the figure was estimated at around 43 per cent. The structure of exports is also revealing. In fiscal 1938, four Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg11




commodities rice, minerals, timber and other agricultural products accounted for nearly three quarters of the total. In the decade from 1990 to 1999, the picture was similar, with the same four commodities accounting for over 70 per cent by value (including border trade). Industrial development is at a very low level. Little value is added to the countrys abundant natural resources, and there is limited job creation (Crisis Group 2012, p. 2,&3). Over its decades of military control, the Burma has developed a huge footprint in the economy. Leaders of successive governments have used their power to issue licenses and permits to privilege their own business interests and build up a powerful military-economic complex. The main component of this is a pair of vast military holding companies: the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited (UMEHL) and the Myanmar Economic Corporation (MEC). A stable and predictable political environment is vital for achieving economic growth. This does not appear to be a major issue in the short term (Crisis Group 2012, p.9,17). RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS Even though, the new Burmese government has also held peace talks with all major ethnic armed opposition groups in the country, February 2012 initial peace agreements had been reached with most ethnic armed opposition groups, but they must have more dialogues nationally and at grassroots. The talks represent a much-needed change from the ethnic policies of recent decades and an important first step towards achieving peace across the country Remember, peace is the king of development and development is the lord of stability. For the momentum of political reform to continue in Burma, inclusive processes must be developed that allow the participation of all key stakeholders in the country. The next general elections of 2015 will serve as a key moment to judge how real the process of democratization is. It is also crucial that all remaining political prisoners are released. Furthermore, the judicial system is in need of reform to enable it to act independently. The newly established national Human Rights Commission should be able to function independently, receive complaints from the population, maintain confidentiality and provide justice trail and meaningful follow-up. Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg12




Following the reforms of the Thein Sein government, the West has reversed its policy, and there has been great interest in engaging with Burma in the political and economic arenas. The EU and U.S. have suspended almost all sanctions apart from an arms embargo, thus removing obstacles for companies seeking to invest in Burma. There have been a large number of high-level official visits to Burma from the West. International companies are also actively looking at opportunities to invest in Burma but good governance is the precondition. Ethnic conflicts need to be resolved in order to bring about a lasting political settlement in Burma. If the grievances and aspirations of ethnic groups are not addressed, the prospects for democracy, peace and development are grim. Furthermore, the ethnic issue should be primarily seen as a political issue that needs a political solution. It is vital that the process toward ethnic peace and justice be sustained by an inclusive political dialogue at the national level standing on the mutual benefit and co-existences principles. The international community should also understand peace as a national issue affecting all sectors of society. It should support efforts to build trust and mutual understanding between the Burman majority and ethnic minority communities, as well as among ethnic communities. To promote decentralization and local democracy, they should help support the new regional and state-level parliaments and governments, help them to address regional and ethnic nationality concerns and aspirations, and provide higher-quality basic services to their communities collaborating with the local NGOs. Democratization also means engaging with the military to ensure that it remains part of the process and does not become a spoiler, and addressing a number of key issues that relate to conflict and human rights abuses and violations. The army needs to end its widespread abuses against the civilian population, especially in ethnic regions. It should also be appropriately resourced by the state to prevent Tatmadaw units having to live of the land and the local population The international community should increase international humanitarian and development aid to Burma, in particular for ethnic areas that have been devastated by decades of civil war.If responsibly managed, foreign investment can provide capital to support more Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg13




sustainable and egalitarian economic development in the border areas of Burma. This investment could help address the long-term political grievances of the mostly non-Burman ethnic border populations, including poverty, the lack of economic opportunity and the inadequate implementation of foreign investment. The major reforms that have been initiated, underway or planned will fundamentally reshape the economic landscape. The aim is to create a more level playing field for business by eliminating the distortions associated with the multiple exchange rate regimes, dismantling monopolies, ending privileged access to licenses and import permits, and introducing competitive tendering procedures for government contracts. Economic liberalization does not necessarily lead to a more equitable distribution of resources. It can provide entrenched business interests with an opportunity to consolidate their hold over the economy. Under the military government, a small number of entrepreneurs had privileged access to business opportunities. Though typically referred to a cronies, it was perhaps more accurate to regard them as proxies of the military regime. Together, these fifteen to twenty individuals controlled a major part of the national economy and hold all the wealth of the nation. Economic development is central to reducing the incidence of conflict; however, this does not mean that the standard elements of development strategymarket access, policy reform, and aidare sufficient, or even appropriate, to address the problem. At the most basic level, development has to reach areas that it has so far missed. Beyond this, development strategies should look different between state to state facing a different risk of conflict, where the problems and priorities are distinctive. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,Nobel Lecture, 16 June 2012, having thoroughly examined the de facto and de jure HLP situation in the country based on numerous interviews recommends (1) National HLP Summit to launch a public discussion by Government and key stakeholders of the complex rural and urban housing, land and property challenges facing Myanmar today and how to best address them; (2) Initiate a transparent, and consultative public process leading to a comprehensive New National Housing, Land and Property Law; (3) Actively address land grabbing, speculation and displacement with a range of new Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg14




policies and legislation; (4) Facilitate capacity building for Parliamentarians, government agencies, political parties and civil society actors on protecting and implementing HLP rights. Even though Cambodia go beyond Burma but among longer-term strategic goals still have to create environmental security and sustainable working opportunities for young Cambodians will be vital. Economic growth has been prioritized over guaranteeing the protection of water sources and forests, and the production of garbage has become a major problem that endangers the living conditions of Cambodians both in urban and rural areas. Health risks and food insecurity can be avoided if a systematic environmental policy is enforced. Finally, investing in the education and employment of the young will be an important step toward guaranteeing social security and a stable level of economic growth in the future. Improved competitiveness promotes economic growth, which in turn enhances the capacity to promote human development. Economic growth is essential for human development, poverty reduction and improved standards of living. No country has achieved sustained poverty reduction in the absence of growth. Hence, competitiveness matters not only as a critical force behind economic growth, but is also essential for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Furthermore, Cambodia has to focus on good governance, anti-corruption, equal wealth distribution, and independent judicial system. CONCLUSIONS Along with sweeping political reforms, Myanmar has embarked on an ambitious program of economic changes, aimed at rebuilding its moribund economy and integrating it with the global system. It has begun a managed float of the currency, and is dismantling the old system of monopolies and privileged access to licenses, permits and contracts. These changes will have a big impact on the entrenched economic elite who will have to play by the same rules and even start paying tax. Myanmar has severe problems with its data quality. Even so, it is fair to say that (1) The level of macroeconomic stability in Myanmar is low; (2) High levels of savings and investment are within reach, but not well used; (3) Connection to the world economy, Prof. Dr. TROND Gilberg15




though growing, is still low; (4) Market allocation of resources is partial and distorted by politically driven policies; (5) Governance levels are very low, even if now two or three time as high as recently measured; (6) Spending on health and education is very low, even as results are implausibly reported to be good. Myanmar might choose to move in a certain direction, building upon past policies and look backward to Cambodia in 1990s. One policy is financial repression. A second current policy is a heavy weighting of government spending towards the military. A third current policy direction, related to the first two, is the lack of substantial tax revenues and large resultant fiscal deficits. A fourth outcome of current policy is one of increasing appreciation of the nominal exchange rate. A fifth current policy encourages large scale farming and plantations, often involving the taking of large areas of land previously occupied by small holders. A sixth policy has been uncompetitive privatization and the awarding of government contracts and licenses on a non-competitive basis. As Cambodia moves forward, some policy priorities to consider that would be fundamental to achieving its socio-economic development goals include (1) Diversify the economy; (2) Maintain a stable macroeconomic; (3) Increase revenue collection by strengthening the capacity of tax administration; (4) Establish a well-managed sovereign wealth fund; (5) Expand public investment in priority sectors to improve access to quality healthcare, education, agriculture and rural development, and transport infrastructure; (6) Develop human capital to address both the quality of education to equally benet women and men at all levels; (7) Promote the agricultural sector, making the most of factor endowments such as land and labour, lift agricultural productivity and diversify the agricultural base; (8) Deliver on commitment to sustainable use of natural resources; (9) Ensure the complementarily of mutually supportive objectives resourcing the GMS Programme and Initiatives for ASEAN Integration.


16



The Cambodia and Burma: Solutions to Get Out of the Conflict Trap REFERENCES

Kramer, T. (2012).Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Center.NOREFReport: Ending 50 years of military rule? Prospects for peace, democracy and development in Burma.12,4-5,7-8-9&10. Y, R. (2006). University of Tsukuba.Problems of Poverty in Contemporary Cambodian Society: A Sociological Study on Phnom Penh Urban Slum.15. Phnom Penh. International Crisis Group, (2012). Myanmar: The Politics of Economic Reform. Asia Report No. 231:2-3,8-9,17,&19. Collier, P., Elliott, L., Hegre, H., Hoeffler, A,.Reynal-Querol, M., &Sambanis, N. (2003).World Bank.Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and Development Policy.Policy Research Report:1-4,6-7,&13. Washington: World Bank &Oxford University Press. KivimKi, T., &Pasch, P. (2009). Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. The Dynamics of Conflict in the Multiethnic Union of Myanmar.21. Berlin. Hing, V,.Khieng, S., Lun, P., Saing, C. H., &Strange, L.(2012).Cambodias Development Research Institute (CDRI): Annual Development Review 2011-2012. 3,&10. Phnom Penh: CDRI Publication. United States Institute of Peace.Access via internet on November 2012.http://www.usip.org/publications/peace-agreements-cambodia 25th,

Dapice, O. D., Saich, J. A., Vallely, J. T., Montesano, J. M. (2012). HAVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL and RAJAWALI Foundation Institute for Asia. Appraising the PostSanctions Prospects for Myanmars Economy: Choosing the Right Path. 6,&7. Myanmar. Lipton, M. (2008).University of Sussex and Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.Bottom Billion: Countries or People?.Journal of Development Studies.44(5).750-760. UK. AusAID, (May 2008). Office of Development Effectiveness.Fact Sheet.Bottom Billion: Effectiveness Summary. Bertelsmann Stiftungs Transformation Index, (2012).BTI: Report.1,2,3,4,&6. Gtersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung. Cambodia Country

Fearon, D. J., Laitin, D. D.(2006).Stanford University.Burma (BurmaRN1.2).3.


17




South, A. (2011). Transnational Institute (tni) and Burma Center Netherlands (BCN).Burmas Longest War - Anatomy of the Karen Conflict. 48. Amsterdam: drukkerijPrimaveraQuint. Ballentine, K.,&Nitzschke, H. (2005).Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management.The Political Economy of Civil War and Conflict Transformation.7. UNDP, (2009).Cambodia Country Competitiveness: Driving Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction. Discussion Paper No.7. 6. Cambodia Hoeffler, A. (2009). University of Oxford: Centre for the Study of African Economies. State Failure and Conflict Recurrence.7. Smith, M. (2006).The Paradox of Burma: Conflict and Illegality as a Way of Life. IIAS NewletterNo. 42. 21. Aung-San, S. K. (2012). Displacement Solution.Myanmar at the HLP Crossroads: Proposals for Building an Improved Housing, Land and Property Rights Framework that Protects the People and Supports Sustainable Economic Development. Prelude 3. Fletcher, D.(Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2009). A Brief History of Khmer Rouge. Access internet on 30th November 2012.http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1879785,00.html#ixzz2DabrUS4 1


18


Date post:	28-Oct-2014
Category:	Documents
Upload:	kimkhorn-long
View:	639 times
Download:	2 times

Research Paper Global Politics Solutions for Cambodia and Burma From Civil War Trap

Documents