Why is the UK so silent on Burma's human rights abuses?

While we were still watched by the secret police when we returned in 2013, we
could operate openly. People came over freely to speak to us. Burma is now a
country where comedian Zarganar (released from jail in October 2011)
performs satirical skits on corruption with the President apparently
watching on TV. Artists are pushing the boundaries of political art, Burmese
producers mock the government with films such as "Ban that scene" that
parodies the mean-spirit and laziness of bureaucratic censors and – for the
first time – horror films are being made inside the country legally.

Politics is vibrant too. Cafe88 in Mandalay hosts political discussions that
were illegal just a few years ago by former political prisoners, TV
celebrities and journalists. The media is more free as well. Daily
newspapers are back on sale and the infamous censorship boards that ruined
courageous journalism by painting physically over articles with black ink
have been abolished.

This new freedom, months old, is perilously fragile. As Index's
report on Burma found, the transition is not underpinned by essential
legal and political reform. The current atmosphere of freedom stems from the
police and security services not using their powers to curtail free speech.
The full apparatus of the military state exists – it just isn't being
employed to the same extent – at the moment.

For instance, using an email account for "political purposes" carries a prison
sentence of 15 years. If you use more than one account your sentence can be
increased by 15 years per email address. Restrictions on public protest or
performance are extremely strict, particularly outside Rangoon. At the start
of this month, Time Magazine was banned under emergency legislation after it
led with a front cover of nationalist monk U Wirathu and the title, "The
Face of Buddhist Terror". The ban criminalised the possession of even a
single copy of Time. Meanwhile newspapers face the threat of a new press law
that would bring in statutory regulation of the press.

President Thein Sein told Chatham House that in Burma "free speech exists ...
but of course more freedom can and will be granted when there is increased
understanding of the duties and responsibilities that go with it". This
isn't good enough. To protect free speech the government needs to put in
place reform now. Pleasantries at Downing Street and congratulations at the
Foreign Office can't mask the fact that progress has stalled. The UK mustn't
allow President Thein Sein to get away with stalling reform until after the
next election in 2015.

Unless the UK, EU and US are willing to put sanctions back on the table and in
the meantime insist on a clear road map for reform, an incredible
opportunity for a military dictatorship to become a civilian democracy will
be lost.

Michael Harris is Head of Advocacy at Index
on Censorship.

Source: http://www.news.myanmaronlinecentre.com/2013/07/19/why-is-the-uk-so-silent-on-burmas-human-rights-abuses-2/