Francis Fukuyama published his end of history thesis in 1989 and claimed that a new world order was upon us. He claimed that Liberal capitalism was the world’s choice after the collapse of communism. Riding on the crest of this popular ideology, the United States began to regard itself as the champion of Liberal democracy. Was it not their title? Had they not defeated the communists? The European Union followed suit, although in a more reluctant and less ostentatious manner. History had brought bloody wars upon Europe, and leading statesmen learned harsh lessons from their predecessors. To European statesmen, public support for a policy whether it is offered orally or promised in ink, is binding. It is not to be taken lightly; the people are not fools. They remember that revolution was born in Europe. America, perhaps, is only beginning to learn this lesson. The European Union, knowing the importance of holding on to a major ally, stays silent. They are partners.
So, the important spheres of democratic political influence are well and truly merged. Together, this great Union can monitor the rogue states of the world and fight for democracy for all. Not for some, for all they say. The United Nations, that international watchdog that can bark but not bite, also works to ensure these freedoms. What a pity that there is no such thing as International Law. Sanctions do not scare the powerful. Sanctions do not prevent war. Conventions and charters sound superb, their universality so humane. If only universal actually meant universal.
All crucial details aside, these global actors in their respective ways claim to be the guardians, the watchmen, the freedom fighters of the world. Do we accept this? If so, then at the very least we must ask a few questions. Right now, there are thousands of the most holiest and passive human beings in the world demanding democracy and freedom. They are being locked into their monasteries, murdered, tortured and silenced. Where are our freedom fighters?
Russia and China, policies and politics aside, are at least honest about their thoughts on the trouble calling the current situation there an “Internal matter”. Hence, they take no action. We can label them many things for this stance but we cannot call them hypocrites. What about our freedom lovers though? Surely they will not say that it is an internal matter?
We hear about Iraq every day. We hear of Patraeus and his surge. Most of us have no idea of the true realities of that war. We know that it was fought in the name of democracy though, do we?
What is different in the Burma equation? What is left out? Dare I say the O word? Is that a tired excuse? Why are America, the European Union and the United Nations only barking? Will they ever sink their teeth in and let us know that they are awake? We can all talk about how tragic the situation is, it won’t change anything though. Is there a good reason why there is no external interference in Burma? Can anyone offer a decent explanation? Besides meeting to arrange another meeting, has the west done anything to help, and more importantly, will they?
