China and Russia are not reliable interlocutors because they support the military junta of Myanmar

The repression in Myanmar is assuming ever greater dimensions, both for the violence carried out and for the tragic accounting of the victims, including children and minors. The extent of the force deployed by the military, functional to a repression, which aims to erase all forms of dissidence, reveals a fear that has generated a reaction beyond all reasonable expectations, especially in the ways. The fear of the military is undoubtedly due to the democratic path that the country had undertaken and which threatened the autonomy of the armed forces, especially from an economic and financial point of view; the production structure of the former Burma, in fact, is practically totally managed by the military, who divide the various industries of the country into the various armed forces. It is understandable how this leads to a strong inequality and the productive fabric is conditioned by a bureaucracy with a high rate of corruption. It is possible that even the small transfer of political power, which took place with the partial democratic restoration, had, among others, the consequence of an increase in control over the management of the economy: this was experienced by the military as a invasion of the field which provoked an angry reaction and the cancellation, by means of futile reasons, of the democratic threats. The European Union, through the High Representative for Foreign Policy, has condemned the merciless violence of the Burmese armies against their own people, which has assumed even greater proportions than in past days; Brussels also said it was working to stop the violence. The US president, Biden, also condemned the Myanmar army for causing unnecessary deaths and announced sanctions against the army and military junta of the former Burma, also guilty of the coup that dismissed the legitimately elected government. Therefore, the Western reactions against the Myanmar military by the two major Western subjects have been fast and very relevant from a diplomatic point of view, which will certainly be followed by sanctions that will hit, from a commercial and financial point of view. the wealth managed by the armed forces; however, there is an equally serious cause for concern, because it accentuates the growing difference between the western part of China and Russia. The high symbolic value of the declared support for the military junta of Myanmar by Beijing and Moscow seems to be a factor of no return for China and Russia in relation to the possibility of establishing a dialogue on a common basis with the US and Europe. The two countries, one ex-communist and one openly communist, but with a particular appreciation of the market without rights for workers, are getting closer and closer, discovering ever greater affinities in the denial of civil rights and also recognizing merits to the other international subjects who undertake this path. Supporting a bloody dictatorship has a particular significance, which goes beyond the intention of co-opting a country in one’s own zone of influence, and which wants to affirm the right of a government to repress internal dissent in any way: a common situation for both China. , which for Russia. The message that must reach Washington and Brussels is simply this, but it must be taken into account that for China, from the point of view of foreign policy, it is a question of breaking its taboo of non-interference in internal affairs: by manifestly supporting the junta putschist, makes clear his position to consider legitimate any form of repression that is used to contain and cancel internal dissent. If this is true, and there is no element to be able to believe the contrary, both Beijing and Moscow have made an advance from which they do not seem to be able to go back and, at this point, the West must reflect on any contact and relationship. intends to keep and maintain with these two countries. The diplomatic path is always the best, but in the face of such provocations, a decisive removal, even in commercial and economic relations, seems to be the best solution, also to escape any form of contamination, albeit apparently economically convenient, coming from the two countries. . The use of Chinese soft power and Russia’s vaccine policy must not condition the judgment of two governments that approve and support violent repression as a form of policy against dissent: it is better to seek autonomy in the Western field and not take any risks. resulting from the relationship with these nations.