Myanmar: the new Asian investment frontier

MasterCard and Visa have already entered the country, together with multinationals such as Nestle, CocaCola, Uniliver, Total and Suzuki.

When Nobel prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi arrived at the Italian ministry of foreign affairs this week after visiting the Pope, she walked into the room with six little roses in her hair and many question marks over the future of her country of 60m inhabitants. She always calls it by the pre-regime name of Burma, crystallising in five letters her role as opposition leader and her 15 years spent under house arrest.

Only a week before, a delegation of the country’s officials that included foreign minister Wunna Maung Lwin were in the same building to illustrate the economic reforms aimed at attracting much-needed foreign investments into the nation they instead called with the official name of Myanmar.

The different choice of name was echoed in the western suits and ties of the government representatives, followed by the traditional Burmese dress worn by Ms Suu Kyi. “It is easier to change dress than mindset,” she said, stressing that “there are no economic reforms without political reforms”.

So, what’s for foreign investors out there? The pile of papers illustrating the economic measures enacted since 2011 contained the CVs of the delegation, with no intention to hide their links to the military.

Nobody seems to be too bothered either by the call by international observers in the room to link reforms with a fully democratic process. According to a representative of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a member of the delegation defined The Lady – Ms Su Kyi - “an inspiration”.

The source of the inspiration, however, warned the international community over the danger of overestimating the democratic opening the country is experiencing and urged to call on the  Myanmar government to change the constitution, which prevents her from running for president as a mother of foreign children. Currently, 25 per cent of seats in Parliament are reserved for the military.

For now, the government has set a target of almost 9 per cent growth by next year, saying it will prioritise poverty reduction, industrialisation, the development of the energy sector, telecommunications, education and the health sector.

MasterCard and Visa have already entered the country, together with multinationals such as Nestle, CocaCola, Uniliver, Total and Suzuki.

Italian energy giant ENI was among the winners of several onshore energy blocks and is already considering  Myanmar  its “new Asian frontier”, thanks to its strategic position and richness in raw materials, especially natural gas.  

“There have been only 150 explorations in the country so far, as much as in the  US  every two days,” ENI ‘s chief executive Paolo Scaroni said during the conference.

“Half of the population has no electricity and there is no economic development without it. Now, after decades of isolation,  Myanmar  could become a bridge between Southern Asia, the Asiatic Southern East and  China,” he added.

The main challenges however relate to uncertainty over future political stability and the possibility to proceed with the creation of a safe business environment. Doubts that have only began to ease following the endorsement in 2011 of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Myanmar delegation presented its packet of certainties offering a five-year tax holiday, the same rate of income tax between foreigners and  Myanmar  citizens, no taxes on imported machinery or raw material. The government also ticked the box of no nationalisations or expropriations, together with the right to repatriation.

Enough for the multinationals that have already expanded into Myanmar, while the challenges are still significant for smaller enterprises and range from an undeveloped banking system and a lack of capital market, to poor infrastructures and an inadequate insurance system.

In the words of the Myanmar delegation, this is not a nation ready-made for investors, but a bet on the future. A bet that UK investors are already supporting: if China tops the ranking, Britain is the fifth foreign investor and the first Western country, with twenty times the enterprises of the second foreign investor France and some 7 per cent slice of the total cake. 

As more stakeholders take the first steps into post-sanctions Myanmar, the focus ahead of the 2015 elections is not so much if the name, but if the mindset will change and who will benefit most from the forecast economic growth. 

 

Aung San Suu Kyi during a press conference in Italy. Photo: Getty

Sara Perria is the Assistant Editor for Banking and Payments, VRL Financial News

Getty.
Show Hide image

Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan are both slippery self-mythologisers – so why do we rate one more than the other?

Their obsessions with their childhoods have both become punchlines; but one of these jokes, it feels to me, is told with a lot more affection than the other.

Andy Burnham is a man whose policies and opinions seem to owe more to political expediency than they do to belief. He bangs on to the point of tedium about his own class, background and interests. As a result he’s widely seen as an unprincipled flip-flopper.

Sadiq Khan is a man whose policies and opinions seem to owe more to political expediency than they do to belief. He bangs on to the point of tedium about his own class, background and interests. As a result he’s the hugely popular mayor of London, the voice of those who’d be proud to think of themselves as the metropolitan liberal elite, and is even talked of as a possible future leader of the Labour party.

Oh, and also they were both born in 1970. So that’s a thing they have in common, too.

Why it is this approach to politics should have worked so much better for the mayor of London than the would-be mayor of Manchester is something I’ve been trying to work out for a while. There are definite parallels between Burnham’s attempts to present himself as a normal northern bloke who likes normal things like football, and Sadiq’s endless reminders that he’s a sarf London geezer whose dad drove a bus. They’ve both become punchlines; but one of these jokes, it feels to me, is told with a lot more affection than the other.

And yes, Burnham apparent tendency to switch sides, on everything from NHS privatisation to the 2015 welfare vote to the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, has given him a reputation for slipperiness. But Sadiq’s core campaign pledge was to freeze London transport fares; everyone said it was nonsense, and true to form it was, and you’d be hard pressed to find an observer who thought this an atypical lapse on the mayor’s part. (Khan, too, has switched sides on the matter of Jeremy Corbyn.)

 And yet, he seems to get away with this, in a way that Burnham doesn’t. His low-level duplicity is factored in, and it’s hard to judge him for it because, well, it’s just what he’s like, isn’t it? For a long time, the Tory leadership’s line on London’s last mayor was “Boris is Boris”, meaning, look, we don’t trust him either, but what you gonna do? Well: Sadiq is Sadiq.

Even the names we refer to them by suggest that one of these two guys is viewed very differently from the other. I’ve instinctively slipped into referring to the mayor of London by his first name: he’s always Sadiq, not Khan, just as his predecessors were Boris and Ken. But, despite Eoin Clarke’s brief attempt to promote his 2015 leadership campaign with a twitter feed called “Labour Andy”, Burnham is still Burnham: formal, not familiar. 

I’ve a few theories to explain all this, though I’ve no idea which is correct. For a while I’ve assumed it’s about sincerity. When Sadiq Khan mentions his dad’s bus for the 257th time in a day, he does it with a wink to the audience, making a crack about the fact he won’t stop going on about it. That way, the message gets through to the punters at home who are only half listening, but the bored lobby hacks who’ve heard this routine two dozen times before feel they’re in the joke.

Burnham, it seems to me, lacks this lightness of touch: when he won’t stop banging on about the fact he grew up in the north, it feels uncomfortably like he means it. And to take yourself seriously in politics is sometimes to invite others to make jokes at your expense.

Then again, perhaps the problem is that Burnham isn’t quite sincere enough. Sadiq Khan genuinely is the son of a bus-driving immigrant: he may keep going on about it, but it is at least true. Burnham’s “just a northern lad” narrative is true, too, but excludes some crucial facts: that he went to Cambridge, and was working in Parliament aged 24. Perhaps that shouldn’t change how we interpret his story; but I fear, nonetheless, it does.

Maybe that’s not it, though: maybe I’m just another London media snob. Because Burnham did grow up at the disadvantaged end of the country, a region where, for too many people, chasing opportunities means leaving. The idea London is a city where the son of a bus driver can become mayor flatters our metropolitan self-image; the idea that a northerner who wants to build a career in politics has to head south at the earliest opportunity does the opposite. 

So if we roll our eyes when Burnham talks about the north, perhaps that reflects badly on us, not him: the opposite of northern chippiness is southern snobbery.

There’s one last possibility for why we may rate Sadiq Khan more highly than Andy Burnham: Sadiq Khan won. We can titter a little at the jokes and the fibs but he is, nonetheless, mayor of London. Andy Burnham is just the bloke who lost two Labour leadership campaigns.

At least – for now. In six weeks time, he’s highly likely to the first mayor of Greater Manchester. Slipperiness is not the worst quality in a mayor; and so much of the job will be about banging the drum for the city, and the region, that Burnham’s tendency to wear his northernness on his sleeve will be a positive boon.

Sadiq Khan’s stature has grown because the fact he became London’s mayor seems to say something, about the kind of city London is and the kind we want it to be. Perhaps, after May, Andy Burnham can do the same for the north – and the north can do the same for Andy Burnham.

Jonn Elledge edits the New Statesman's sister site CityMetric, and writes for the NS about subjects including politics, history and Daniel Hannan. You can find him on Twitter or Facebook.