by Trevor Wilson

While most outside observers and Myanmar people have no illusions about the likely nature of the 2010 elections, or about the extent of real political reform likely to accompany the election, it is by any measure a significant milestone and an event that the military authorities are taking very seriously. So it is reasonable
to ask what short- and long-term impacts it might have on the activities of international organisations in Myanmar.

Unfortunately, at this stage there are still many unknown factors, as the election law has yet to be published and it remains unclear what rules will apply to political parties, so it is difficult to be precise about any wider implications. Preparations for the elections seem to be proving difficult for the authorities, with some
tensions developing and even armed fighting breaking out. However, by and large conditions in the country remain peaceful, and life generally continues as normal throughout the country. The 2010 elections will probably have more direct impact on daily activities than the short process of the 2008 constitutional referendum, but the election process is likely to be manageable and unlikely to disturb routine activities. The authorities would want it to be this way.

Will travel be limited for NGO teams operating in Myanmar in 2010?
There is no reason for election campaigning or the actual conduct of the election to have much impact on
international NGO programs. Foreigners in Myanmar during this period will need to remember that they should not get directly involved in such political activities. Local people will no doubt want to discuss the elections, and the presence of foreigners across the country is potentially a valuable way of informally verifying whether official election activities are carried out properly, before during and after the election. Some foreign presence might be reassuring and indirectly helpful for the process.

Since the increase in international relief and recovery programs after Cyclone Nargis in 2008, foreigners are now a more common phenomenon in many areas of Myanmar. Their larger role has also become more accepted by the authorities, especially after the high-profile success of the ASEAN-led Tripartite Core Group during 2008-09, Overall, the smooth conduct of expanded international programs should be seen as welcome development which needs to continue, given the scale of the unmet needs of many Myanmar communities.

International NGOs can be expected to be very mindful of the desirability of sustaining their programs through such important national events as the 2010 elections. Wanting to ensure the continued viability of INGO programs should not require modifying or winding back proven worthwhile activities, but it
may require some sensitivity on the part of international workers to particular local situations. INGOs need always to be alert to any factors that might affect their programs at any time, positively or negatively, and must have strategies that can be deployed if circumstances demand. It will always be essential to be able to demonstrate that INGOs are operating openly and transparently and in accordance with the permissions of the authorities, as it will be to provide no grounds for denial of access. As always, reliance on the alertness of local partners will be important, and ensures that INGO activities are attuned to any changes in
local needs and conditions.

What changes are likely to happen in the short term as a result of the elections?
There is no obvious reason why NGO programs should be drastically changed or curtailed after the elections. While there may initially be some uncertainty about how new levels of regional authority function, and about what role regional bodies such a local assemblies play in relation to decisions about what  activities should be approved in their regions, it is only reasonable that they should support programs being conducted in their areas. This could mean that NGOs have opportunities to inform new political organisations and representatives about their programs and plans. It would probably be wise of international NGOSs to be ready to respond to any requests for information and explanations, rather than trying to proactively anticipate. Remember, it is a long time since Myanmar had local organisations with a
legitimate public role and voice.

As can happen in any transition, there may be some confusion at times about what has been previously approved and by whom. Resolving any such uncertainties could require considerable patience and flexibility on the part of INGOs, but priority should be given to maintaining presence and programs rather than giving them up. For several years now, the general attitude towards most forms of international presence has been positive and there are no signs that this is about to change. The recent shift in US policy in favour of limited engagement and a degree of “normalisation” in US dealings with the Myanmar authorities should provide a positive backdrop for all international cooperation. It also means that pressure from the pro-democracy movement for further sanctions or withdrawal of commercial and other activities inside Myanmar is less relevant.

The possible long-term effects of the election
Even under the “best case” scenario, the 2010 elections are no more than a first step towards political reform and national reconciliation. The more common assessment is that after the elections it will probably be “more of the same”. Much more needs to be done to improve the livelihood and opportunities for ordinary people of Myanmar; much more needs to be done to improve the operating environment for INGOs; and much moreneeds to be done to ensure the return of the rule of law. On the way forward, it will be necessary to avoid meaningless confrontation, to moderate unreasonable demands by particular groups, and to develop habits of negotiation and consultation that are not normally found in Myanmar. The potential for derailments is great, the likelihood of mistakes is high, and the chances of disappointment and
frustration uncomfortably close.

Trevor Wilson is currently the visiting Chair from the Faculty of Asia Pacific Studies at the Australian National University in Canberra. He is also the Chair of the Burmese Australian Conference and a consultant to Graceworks Myanmar. He is a former Australian Ambassador to Burma 2000 - 2003.

by Anthony Ware

Almost 30 years ago Robert Chambers coined the term ‘poverty trap.’ He described how poor families with few possessions become trapped, without access to the resources that could change their circumstances. For example, the poor are often sick because of poor nutrition and healthcare, but being sick reduces the amount they can work and hence their income. It becomes a trap.

Likewise, many poor are unable to borrow. Most don’t have guaranteed regular income. The poor are often denied property rights, so have no security to offer. Many poor people have great entrepreneurial ideas about ways to make money, or businesses they could start or expand – if only they had access to the
resources to get set up. Micro Enterprise Development and Micro-finance seek to break that poverty trap and release poor entrepreneurs. Women are the most excluded group, and most MED or microfinance programs target women more than men.

Micro Enterprise Development (MED) programs typically aim to provide both micro-loans and business coaching. MED programs are often run by development organisations in communities where they are also addressing essential needs, such as access to clean water, health care, nutritious food, basic education, and vocational training. Providing business coaching, then loans to those with sound business plans and support networks, MED is a catalyst to entrepreneurial activity allowing people to take charge of their finances and create a new future for themselves, their families and their communities. Typically, micro-loans are often less than $100, are expected to be repaid within a year, and interest is charged on the loan.

Micro-finance is a related idea. It is a broad term. It covers the micro-loans of a MED program, but can also mean all manner of credit co-ops within poor communities. For example, a ROSCA (Rotating Savings and Credit Association) is a small group of individuals who agree to meet for a defi ned period of time in order to pool their savings, so each can borrow off each other. ROSCAs are the poor man’s bank, similar to small credit unions. Many development organisations help communities start ROSCAs.

Micro-finance today is also a growing for-profit industry, attempting to provide full financial services to the poor traditionally excluded from banking. Muhammed Yunus began in 1974 by providing small loans to impoverished people, as capital to start or expand businesses in Bangladesh. Today the Grameen bank is the largest of hundreds of micro-fi nance institutions, with over US$ 6 billion – globally micro-finance institutions have over US$ 23 billion in outstanding loans. Micro-finance institutions also provide insurance, credit transfers, and other financial services to the poor. Instead of security, they will accept group guarantees, a savings history, or repayment history on a previous loan. Initially it was assumed that the poor required cheap, subsidised credit. However, the argument is that subsidised services are long-term unsustainable and that a market-based solution is necessary. Unfortunately, that means many microfinance institutions charge high interest. Because they typically provide less business plan development and coaching than MED programs, they are regularly accused of landing communities in spiralling debt levels – making poverty worse rather than breaking poverty.

Development agencies generally prefer the more holistic approach of a MED program.

Anthony Ware is a PhD student at Deakin University, Melbourne, researching ways Non-Government Organisations are able to work most effectively in Myanmar. Anthony is also Director of Community Transformation Inc, a Christian development organisation working into Myanmar.