Burma v Myanmar – what's in a name?

Burma v Myanmar – what's in a name?

Obama sidesteps political storm by referring to former pariah as both Burma and Myanmar

By Jason Burke of guardian.co.uk, Monday 19 November 2012

 

Burma v Myanmar – Barack Obama's use of the latter during his visit to the country was described by his hosts as 'very positive'.

What's in a name? A lot if you're a south-east Asian country emerging from decades of military dictatorship.

The British, during their time as colonial overlords, referred to Burma and to its principal city Rangoon. Early independence fighters did not see any problem with this, nor for several decades did the army generals who took power in 1962.

But, after widespread pro-democracy protests in 1988, things changed and Burma became Myanmar, or, more specifically, the Republic of the Union of Myanmar; Rangoon became Yangon.

Some countries recognised the change. Others, such as the US and the UK, did not. As both names are used in the country – Burma is more popular, Myanmar is more literary – the decision was rooted more in a desire to show disapproval for the noxious regime.

President Barack Obama had reportedly considered avoiding either name but in the end used both Burma and Myanmar on Monday during his short visit to the country.

 

 

 

The use of the latter pleased his hosts – the Myanmar presidential adviser, Ko Ko Hlaing, called the wording "very positive" and an "acknowledgement of Myanmar's government" – but White House officials were quick to play down the move as a "diplomatic courtesy".

The debate is almost exclusively confined to the English language. The national anthem still refers to bama pyi or the "country of Burma".