Open Migration: Burma

Here's a good piece on Burma in the New Yorker by George Packer. Burma's military junta, although it resembles North Korea's government minus the personality cult, is far more inept that North Korea. For one thing, it allows or even encourages some of its citizens to leave the country. As Packer writes, "The endgame seems to be a regime virtually without citizens."

So, Burma could be a good test case for my theory of open migration. What will actually happen to a regime that mistreats its citizens once they have all left? Will it become a no-mans land, populated only by the few remaining generals smoking cigars in their villas overlooking the deserted city streets? What would the costs of this sort of outcome be? There is value, for instance, in the history and resources of the land. Is it appropriate to forfeit these in order to "starve" a corrupt regime of its citizens? Also, will the regime be able to support itself even as it loses its potential workforce? North Korea, which prevents its citizens from emigrating, in effect holds them hostage, forcing South Korea and the US to send aid. This aid, even when in the form of food, is essentially just money in Kim Jong Il's bank. But, even if all of North Korea's citizens left and the aid stopped flowing, the regime would last for quite a while, I'd assume, by selling off natural resources, counterfeiting money or selling nuclear secrets. Will Burma's regime be able to similarly sustain itself? Will China continue to support it? We shall most likely see, since it is unlikely, unfortunately, that the regime will collapse without first losing all of its citizens.