Burma Update
News and updates on Burma31 December 2005
U.S. Sees Burma as 'Test Case' in Southeast Asia
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 28, 2005; A18
The Bush administration has mounted a diplomatic offensive against
the military government of Burma, suggesting to nations in the region
that it is a "test case" for whether they hold the same values and
standards as the United States.
The effort was jump-started in October after President Bush spent 50
minutes meeting in the Oval Office with a persuasive 24-year refugee
named Charm Tong. Bush followed up by pressing leaders at an Asian
economic summit in November, winning a written pledge from the
president of the Philippines that she would back an effort by the
United States to bring the issue before the U.N. Security Council.
Other officials, such as Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns,
also worked the phones to win the nine votes needed to call a meeting
of the 15-member council. The effort resulted in the first-ever
discussion of the situation in Burma by the council earlier this month.
That meeting was held in private -- a move required to preserve a
consensus -- but U.S. officials said they will push for the Security
Council to take up a resolution on Burma, perhaps by next month.
Some nations on the council have questioned whether Burma presents an
international security problem. U.S. officials have responded by
offering a raft of reasons that the Burmese government threatens the
stability of the region, including huge refugee flows, a record of
forced labor and government-sponsored drug trafficking. A number of
aid groups have pulled out of the country in the past year because
the government has imposed increasingly tough restrictions.
Ibrahim Gambari, the U.N. undersecretary general for political
affairs, privately told the Security Council that Burma is an
international concern, where the people "have many of their essential
rights and calls for democratic reform denied" and there is no
evidence the government is interested in investigating abuses,
according to a copy of his remarks. He said villages have been
relocated, with at least 240 destroyed; forced labor is widespread;
and there is a growing "humanitarian emergency" of HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria.
The United States, by itself, has little leverage over Burma, which
is also known as Myanmar. The country has faced a ban on exports to
the United States since 2003 after authorities placed under house
arrest Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate who was
prevented by the Burmese military from taking office after her party
won a landslide electoral victory in 1990. She has been in detention
for 10 of the past 16 years, and her most recent confinement began
after a bloody campaign by government-sponsored gangs against her and
her supporters in May 2003.
But until recently, the administration's diplomatic efforts had
little success in Asia. Burma's neighbors -- and their umbrella
group, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) -- were
content to continue doing business with the repressive government, in
part because many feared that a break in relations would give China
greater leverage in the resource-rich country.
India, Burma's neighbor to the west, and Thailand, on Burma's eastern
border, have also been eager to look the other way while they pursue
business deals, U.S. officials said. Japan, which maintained close
links because it ended British colonial rule during World War II,
also refused to pressure the regime.
The approaches taken by ASEAN, India and Japan "were not producing
results and enabling worse behavior by the regime," said a senior
administration official, who like other U.S. officials spoke on the
condition of anonymity in order to more freely discuss the
administration's strategy.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labeled Burma one of six
"outposts of tyranny" in her confirmation hearings. But although the
administration routinely denounced the government, its diplomatic
efforts were low-key.
That changed after Bush met on Oct. 31 with Charm Tong, one of
several dissidents he has brought to the White House in recent
months, including a North Korean defector, a Liberian refugee and the
Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibet.
Charm Tong was born in Shan state, home of Burma's largest ethnic
minority, and was smuggled out of the country by her parents at age
6. She co-wrote a report titled "License to Rape," which caught the
attention of the State Department three years ago with its accounts
of attacks against hundreds of Shan women and girls. The State
Department sent an investigator to verify the findings, which the
Burmese government adamantly disputed.
During the meeting, Charm Tong stressed to the president that Burma
has 50 million people, making it the second-largest country in
Southeast Asia, as a way to emphasize the large number of people who
would be positively affected by a determined U.S. push.
U.S. officials say such sessions energize Bush and give him a human
face to a policy problem. "When the president has a personal affinity
with someone, that dictates policy," one senior official said.
"That's the case here."
As a result, the president headed to the Asian economic summit
scheduled a couple of weeks later determined to make progress on the
issue. Coincidentally, the Burmese government announced on Nov. 7
that it had moved its capital about 200 miles north to a town without
running water, adding to the disquiet in the region.
Part of Bush's message was that "Burma is very important; it is a
test case for our whole agenda in the region," the official said. For
instance, the administration is trying to build a relationship with
India based on common values, and the Indians have been told their
approach to Burma is a way to prove their seriousness. The Chinese
were told that certain standards of behavior will be key to the U.S.-
Sino relationship, and one test will be how China deals with
governments with unsavory reputations.
Japan, one of the closest allies of the United States, was especially
reluctant to challenge Burma, but Tokyo has abruptly shifted
position, U.S. and Japanese diplomats said. The key, U.S. officials
said, is that Bush gave a speech in Kyoto during his trip in which he
extolled their common love of democracy -- and the Japanese were
bluntly told they would look silly if they continue to prop up Burma.
The one key ally that has proven a disappointment is Thailand, U.S.
officials said. The family of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, a
telecommunications billionaire who took office in 2001, is reported
to have business interests in Burma, and the Thai government believes
stability is essential to keep the lid on drug smuggling and human
trafficking, officials said.
Ends
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 28, 2005; A18
The Bush administration has mounted a diplomatic offensive against
the military government of Burma, suggesting to nations in the region
that it is a "test case" for whether they hold the same values and
standards as the United States.
The effort was jump-started in October after President Bush spent 50
minutes meeting in the Oval Office with a persuasive 24-year refugee
named Charm Tong. Bush followed up by pressing leaders at an Asian
economic summit in November, winning a written pledge from the
president of the Philippines that she would back an effort by the
United States to bring the issue before the U.N. Security Council.
Other officials, such as Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns,
also worked the phones to win the nine votes needed to call a meeting
of the 15-member council. The effort resulted in the first-ever
discussion of the situation in Burma by the council earlier this month.
That meeting was held in private -- a move required to preserve a
consensus -- but U.S. officials said they will push for the Security
Council to take up a resolution on Burma, perhaps by next month.
Some nations on the council have questioned whether Burma presents an
international security problem. U.S. officials have responded by
offering a raft of reasons that the Burmese government threatens the
stability of the region, including huge refugee flows, a record of
forced labor and government-sponsored drug trafficking. A number of
aid groups have pulled out of the country in the past year because
the government has imposed increasingly tough restrictions.
Ibrahim Gambari, the U.N. undersecretary general for political
affairs, privately told the Security Council that Burma is an
international concern, where the people "have many of their essential
rights and calls for democratic reform denied" and there is no
evidence the government is interested in investigating abuses,
according to a copy of his remarks. He said villages have been
relocated, with at least 240 destroyed; forced labor is widespread;
and there is a growing "humanitarian emergency" of HIV/AIDS,
tuberculosis and malaria.
The United States, by itself, has little leverage over Burma, which
is also known as Myanmar. The country has faced a ban on exports to
the United States since 2003 after authorities placed under house
arrest Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate who was
prevented by the Burmese military from taking office after her party
won a landslide electoral victory in 1990. She has been in detention
for 10 of the past 16 years, and her most recent confinement began
after a bloody campaign by government-sponsored gangs against her and
her supporters in May 2003.
But until recently, the administration's diplomatic efforts had
little success in Asia. Burma's neighbors -- and their umbrella
group, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) -- were
content to continue doing business with the repressive government, in
part because many feared that a break in relations would give China
greater leverage in the resource-rich country.
India, Burma's neighbor to the west, and Thailand, on Burma's eastern
border, have also been eager to look the other way while they pursue
business deals, U.S. officials said. Japan, which maintained close
links because it ended British colonial rule during World War II,
also refused to pressure the regime.
The approaches taken by ASEAN, India and Japan "were not producing
results and enabling worse behavior by the regime," said a senior
administration official, who like other U.S. officials spoke on the
condition of anonymity in order to more freely discuss the
administration's strategy.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice labeled Burma one of six
"outposts of tyranny" in her confirmation hearings. But although the
administration routinely denounced the government, its diplomatic
efforts were low-key.
That changed after Bush met on Oct. 31 with Charm Tong, one of
several dissidents he has brought to the White House in recent
months, including a North Korean defector, a Liberian refugee and the
Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of Tibet.
Charm Tong was born in Shan state, home of Burma's largest ethnic
minority, and was smuggled out of the country by her parents at age
6. She co-wrote a report titled "License to Rape," which caught the
attention of the State Department three years ago with its accounts
of attacks against hundreds of Shan women and girls. The State
Department sent an investigator to verify the findings, which the
Burmese government adamantly disputed.
During the meeting, Charm Tong stressed to the president that Burma
has 50 million people, making it the second-largest country in
Southeast Asia, as a way to emphasize the large number of people who
would be positively affected by a determined U.S. push.
U.S. officials say such sessions energize Bush and give him a human
face to a policy problem. "When the president has a personal affinity
with someone, that dictates policy," one senior official said.
"That's the case here."
As a result, the president headed to the Asian economic summit
scheduled a couple of weeks later determined to make progress on the
issue. Coincidentally, the Burmese government announced on Nov. 7
that it had moved its capital about 200 miles north to a town without
running water, adding to the disquiet in the region.
Part of Bush's message was that "Burma is very important; it is a
test case for our whole agenda in the region," the official said. For
instance, the administration is trying to build a relationship with
India based on common values, and the Indians have been told their
approach to Burma is a way to prove their seriousness. The Chinese
were told that certain standards of behavior will be key to the U.S.-
Sino relationship, and one test will be how China deals with
governments with unsavory reputations.
Japan, one of the closest allies of the United States, was especially
reluctant to challenge Burma, but Tokyo has abruptly shifted
position, U.S. and Japanese diplomats said. The key, U.S. officials
said, is that Bush gave a speech in Kyoto during his trip in which he
extolled their common love of democracy -- and the Japanese were
bluntly told they would look silly if they continue to prop up Burma.
The one key ally that has proven a disappointment is Thailand, U.S.
officials said. The family of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, a
telecommunications billionaire who took office in 2001, is reported
to have business interests in Burma, and the Thai government believes
stability is essential to keep the lid on drug smuggling and human
trafficking, officials said.
Ends
As Scrutiny Grows, Burma Moves Its Capital
Country's Isolation Is Taken One Step, and Many Miles, Further
By Alan Sipress
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, December 28, 2005; A01
RANGOON, Burma -- Military trucks rumble up in front of Rangoon's
ministries several times a week and workers lug ancient desks, chairs
and filing cabinets to the waiting vehicles. The convoys depart at
daybreak on a 12-hour journey along roads badly rutted and pocked,
then return for another load.
Burma's military rulers are rapidly transferring the country's
century-old capital from Rangoon to the desolate, rocky terrain of
Pyinmana about 200 miles to the north, aiming to empty most offices
by the end of next month.
Distraught civil servants, among the thousands scheduled to relocate,
have wept in front of foreign officials. Some government employees
have asked to quit, including many at the Irrigation Ministry who
tried to resign en masse, but have been told that is forbidden,
according to their family members.
"The government's crazy. Everybody hates this idea," said Soe, a
deliveryman whose cousin, a military officer, has been transferred.
"This Pyinmana, I wish I could blow the place up."
Few in Rangoon can fathom the motives for the abrupt move, which
began Nov. 6. Most observers and even some government officials say
they suspect it was solely the brainchild of Gen. Than Shwe, the
secretive head of Burma's ruling military junta. Some have speculated
that government fears of a U.S. invasion are to blame for the move,
or perhaps civil unrest or even the prophesies of a soothsayer.
Whatever the reason, the impact is clear. The move further isolates
the government at a time when demands are mounting at the United
Nations for the release of the imprisoned opposition leader Aung San
Suu Kyi. Burma's neighbors are expressing impatience with the
country's lack of democratic reform, and the Bush administration is
campaigning to bring the issue before the U.N. Security Council.
Burma's gradual retreat from contact with the outside world began in
October 2004, when Than Shwe fired his prime minister, Gen. Khin
Nyunt, and ordered his arrest, ostensibly for corruption. While Khin
Nyunt had been head of military intelligence, some Asian governments
regarded him as a moderating force on the issue of democratic change.
He was also the rulers' main interlocutor with foreign governments
and agencies. With his removal, the government purged several allied
cabinet ministers who had experience working with the United Nations.
Since then, Burma also has tightened travel restrictions on
foreigners and threatened to withdraw from the International Labor
Organization over its criticisms. The former British colony has been
controlled since 1988 by the military junta, which refused to accept
the results of 1990 legislative elections in which Suu Kyi and her
party won in a landslide.
Senior Burmese ministers were given just two days' notice of the
relocation from the port city of Rangoon to the heartland of the
majority Burman ethnic group. Witnesses recounted seeing the initial
convoy depart Rangoon at precisely 6:37 a.m., a time that many
Burmese attribute to the counsel of government astrologers. As the
trucks pulled away from the ministries, including several housed in
red brick Victorian buildings dating to the colonial era, army
officers led a ritual chant of "We're leaving! We're leaving!"
Only the next day did the Foreign Ministry of Burma, renamed Myanmar
by the junta, notify foreign diplomats that the capital had left town.
"You can communicate with the Myanmar government by letter. If you
have an urgent matter, you can send a letter by fax," said an Asian
diplomat, repeating the instructions he had been given by the Foreign
Ministry. "Can you believe that?"
Officials said foreigners would not be allowed to visit Pyinmana
until April at the earliest. Embassies will eventually be leased land
in a diplomatic compound and are expected by the government to begin
building new missions in late 2007.
The information minister, Brig. Gen. Kyaw Hsan, said in an interview
that the shift to Pyinmana would not interfere with government
operations. "The movement to Pyinmana will be made step by step to
ensure no difficulties for service personnel and to ensure continued
function of the departments," he said.
But civil servants have told their families that few buildings are
ready in the new capital, located about 20 miles west of the existing
town of Pyinmana in a region with one of the country's highest rates
of malaria. Government housing remains unfinished, with electricity
and water supplies running short. In one ministry building, about 90
people slept on the floor. Higher-ranking officials camped out atop
desks and tables. There were few signs of the schools, hospitals,
shopping mall and luxury hotels the government has promised.
"You know there's no psychiatric hospital in Pyinmana," a government
official quipped. "They'll need one because everyone is going to go
crazy."
The move has divided extended families, and parents are to be
separated even from their children, at least until schools are built
in Pyinmana. For civil servants, who often moonlight or sell their
government gasoline allowances on the black market to supplement
monthly pay of $20 or less, it also means they may lose their main
sources of income. There is no ready market in Pyinmana.
Kyaw Hsan said shifting the capital to the center of the country was
designed to help develop Burma's outlying regions, where the
government has been trying to ensure peace after years of insurgency
by minority ethnic groups.
"It's good for the future as regards management and administration of
the country," the information minister said.
Some foreign diplomats and Burmese exiles attribute the move more to
the regal presumptions of Than Shwe, 74, who has ruled for 13 years
and may be seeking to build a legacy like Burmese kings of old. They
noted he had already established a new military district to include
Pyinmana and dubbed it Naypyidaw, or Royal City.
Diplomats and exiles said the new location could also prove more
defensible, with a vast military complex being built nearby, nestled
against the mountains and, some say, housed partly in underground
tunnels. The new location could also insulate the government from
potential unrest generated by students and others suffering mounting
hardships in the rest of the country, especially Rangoon.
Two months ago, without advance notice or explanation, the government
slashed fuel subsidies, hiking gasoline prices by nine times, and
then boosted bus fares by as much as five times, forcing many day
laborers to stay home rather than look for work.
"We can't understand the reasons," said a man named Aung, who works
for a foreign company. "Who suffers? Only the ordinary people, the
office workers, government workers, gardeners. Inflation is
tremendous. Our money is worthless."
The escalating fuel prices have stoked inflation, now running as high
as 40 percent annually, up from about 10 percent a year ago,
according to statistics compiled for a Western embassy. U.N. agencies
report that malnutrition, rural landlessness and school dropout rates
are all on the rise.
"People are suffering. But they can't complain. Good or bad, people
have no right to say anything," said a Burmese businessman.
Yet Rangoon's markets still teem. Store shelves are heavy with cheap
goods from China and Thailand. Crowds of peddlers, hawking shoes,
shortwave radios and pirated software, make the sidewalks a maze, and
the narrow aisles of the traditional meat and vegetable markets are
clotted with shoppers.
Aware that a rice shortage could spark unrest, the government has
invested heavily in dams, reservoirs and pump stations for
irrigation, directing farmers about five years ago to raise two crops
annually rather than one. Rice exports are also regulated. As a
result, the staple is widely available and, in recent weeks, the
price has dropped.
As the military rulers have isolated themselves, they have done the
same with Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy.
The military has repressed the party in waves since an initial
clampdown in 1988.
The 60-year-old Nobel Peace Prize laureate was arrested for a third
time in 2003 and is now confined to her lakefront home in northern
Rangoon under heavy police guard. The government has eliminated most
of her household staff, leaving only two female companions. Her only
visitor is a doctor who comes once a month, and her communication
with the outside has grown even less frequent over the past six
months, foreign officials said.
Outside Suu Kyi's home, her party's flag -- a gold peacock on a red
field -- has faded. Members of her party said no one has been able to
replace it. About 300 of their offices have been shut down by the
government, leaving only the national headquarters, a two-floor
storefront operation cluttered with creaky, old wooden furniture and
stacks of musty files. Some members are jailed and others are barred
from holding meetings, party officials reported.
"They won't let us move an inch," explained one of the party's
leaders, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of government
reprisal. "What is our plan? To survive. We are still here after 17
years and this is how we intend to stay."
But another party figure was more melancholy than defiant.
"We are not pushing anything," said the activist, who had been
elected to parliament in the 1990 vote. "We are just floating on the
political current. We are trying not to drown."
Correspondent Ellen Nakashima in Bangkok contributed to this report.
Ends
By Alan Sipress
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, December 28, 2005; A01
RANGOON, Burma -- Military trucks rumble up in front of Rangoon's
ministries several times a week and workers lug ancient desks, chairs
and filing cabinets to the waiting vehicles. The convoys depart at
daybreak on a 12-hour journey along roads badly rutted and pocked,
then return for another load.
Burma's military rulers are rapidly transferring the country's
century-old capital from Rangoon to the desolate, rocky terrain of
Pyinmana about 200 miles to the north, aiming to empty most offices
by the end of next month.
Distraught civil servants, among the thousands scheduled to relocate,
have wept in front of foreign officials. Some government employees
have asked to quit, including many at the Irrigation Ministry who
tried to resign en masse, but have been told that is forbidden,
according to their family members.
"The government's crazy. Everybody hates this idea," said Soe, a
deliveryman whose cousin, a military officer, has been transferred.
"This Pyinmana, I wish I could blow the place up."
Few in Rangoon can fathom the motives for the abrupt move, which
began Nov. 6. Most observers and even some government officials say
they suspect it was solely the brainchild of Gen. Than Shwe, the
secretive head of Burma's ruling military junta. Some have speculated
that government fears of a U.S. invasion are to blame for the move,
or perhaps civil unrest or even the prophesies of a soothsayer.
Whatever the reason, the impact is clear. The move further isolates
the government at a time when demands are mounting at the United
Nations for the release of the imprisoned opposition leader Aung San
Suu Kyi. Burma's neighbors are expressing impatience with the
country's lack of democratic reform, and the Bush administration is
campaigning to bring the issue before the U.N. Security Council.
Burma's gradual retreat from contact with the outside world began in
October 2004, when Than Shwe fired his prime minister, Gen. Khin
Nyunt, and ordered his arrest, ostensibly for corruption. While Khin
Nyunt had been head of military intelligence, some Asian governments
regarded him as a moderating force on the issue of democratic change.
He was also the rulers' main interlocutor with foreign governments
and agencies. With his removal, the government purged several allied
cabinet ministers who had experience working with the United Nations.
Since then, Burma also has tightened travel restrictions on
foreigners and threatened to withdraw from the International Labor
Organization over its criticisms. The former British colony has been
controlled since 1988 by the military junta, which refused to accept
the results of 1990 legislative elections in which Suu Kyi and her
party won in a landslide.
Senior Burmese ministers were given just two days' notice of the
relocation from the port city of Rangoon to the heartland of the
majority Burman ethnic group. Witnesses recounted seeing the initial
convoy depart Rangoon at precisely 6:37 a.m., a time that many
Burmese attribute to the counsel of government astrologers. As the
trucks pulled away from the ministries, including several housed in
red brick Victorian buildings dating to the colonial era, army
officers led a ritual chant of "We're leaving! We're leaving!"
Only the next day did the Foreign Ministry of Burma, renamed Myanmar
by the junta, notify foreign diplomats that the capital had left town.
"You can communicate with the Myanmar government by letter. If you
have an urgent matter, you can send a letter by fax," said an Asian
diplomat, repeating the instructions he had been given by the Foreign
Ministry. "Can you believe that?"
Officials said foreigners would not be allowed to visit Pyinmana
until April at the earliest. Embassies will eventually be leased land
in a diplomatic compound and are expected by the government to begin
building new missions in late 2007.
The information minister, Brig. Gen. Kyaw Hsan, said in an interview
that the shift to Pyinmana would not interfere with government
operations. "The movement to Pyinmana will be made step by step to
ensure no difficulties for service personnel and to ensure continued
function of the departments," he said.
But civil servants have told their families that few buildings are
ready in the new capital, located about 20 miles west of the existing
town of Pyinmana in a region with one of the country's highest rates
of malaria. Government housing remains unfinished, with electricity
and water supplies running short. In one ministry building, about 90
people slept on the floor. Higher-ranking officials camped out atop
desks and tables. There were few signs of the schools, hospitals,
shopping mall and luxury hotels the government has promised.
"You know there's no psychiatric hospital in Pyinmana," a government
official quipped. "They'll need one because everyone is going to go
crazy."
The move has divided extended families, and parents are to be
separated even from their children, at least until schools are built
in Pyinmana. For civil servants, who often moonlight or sell their
government gasoline allowances on the black market to supplement
monthly pay of $20 or less, it also means they may lose their main
sources of income. There is no ready market in Pyinmana.
Kyaw Hsan said shifting the capital to the center of the country was
designed to help develop Burma's outlying regions, where the
government has been trying to ensure peace after years of insurgency
by minority ethnic groups.
"It's good for the future as regards management and administration of
the country," the information minister said.
Some foreign diplomats and Burmese exiles attribute the move more to
the regal presumptions of Than Shwe, 74, who has ruled for 13 years
and may be seeking to build a legacy like Burmese kings of old. They
noted he had already established a new military district to include
Pyinmana and dubbed it Naypyidaw, or Royal City.
Diplomats and exiles said the new location could also prove more
defensible, with a vast military complex being built nearby, nestled
against the mountains and, some say, housed partly in underground
tunnels. The new location could also insulate the government from
potential unrest generated by students and others suffering mounting
hardships in the rest of the country, especially Rangoon.
Two months ago, without advance notice or explanation, the government
slashed fuel subsidies, hiking gasoline prices by nine times, and
then boosted bus fares by as much as five times, forcing many day
laborers to stay home rather than look for work.
"We can't understand the reasons," said a man named Aung, who works
for a foreign company. "Who suffers? Only the ordinary people, the
office workers, government workers, gardeners. Inflation is
tremendous. Our money is worthless."
The escalating fuel prices have stoked inflation, now running as high
as 40 percent annually, up from about 10 percent a year ago,
according to statistics compiled for a Western embassy. U.N. agencies
report that malnutrition, rural landlessness and school dropout rates
are all on the rise.
"People are suffering. But they can't complain. Good or bad, people
have no right to say anything," said a Burmese businessman.
Yet Rangoon's markets still teem. Store shelves are heavy with cheap
goods from China and Thailand. Crowds of peddlers, hawking shoes,
shortwave radios and pirated software, make the sidewalks a maze, and
the narrow aisles of the traditional meat and vegetable markets are
clotted with shoppers.
Aware that a rice shortage could spark unrest, the government has
invested heavily in dams, reservoirs and pump stations for
irrigation, directing farmers about five years ago to raise two crops
annually rather than one. Rice exports are also regulated. As a
result, the staple is widely available and, in recent weeks, the
price has dropped.
As the military rulers have isolated themselves, they have done the
same with Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy.
The military has repressed the party in waves since an initial
clampdown in 1988.
The 60-year-old Nobel Peace Prize laureate was arrested for a third
time in 2003 and is now confined to her lakefront home in northern
Rangoon under heavy police guard. The government has eliminated most
of her household staff, leaving only two female companions. Her only
visitor is a doctor who comes once a month, and her communication
with the outside has grown even less frequent over the past six
months, foreign officials said.
Outside Suu Kyi's home, her party's flag -- a gold peacock on a red
field -- has faded. Members of her party said no one has been able to
replace it. About 300 of their offices have been shut down by the
government, leaving only the national headquarters, a two-floor
storefront operation cluttered with creaky, old wooden furniture and
stacks of musty files. Some members are jailed and others are barred
from holding meetings, party officials reported.
"They won't let us move an inch," explained one of the party's
leaders, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of government
reprisal. "What is our plan? To survive. We are still here after 17
years and this is how we intend to stay."
But another party figure was more melancholy than defiant.
"We are not pushing anything," said the activist, who had been
elected to parliament in the 1990 vote. "We are just floating on the
political current. We are trying not to drown."
Correspondent Ellen Nakashima in Bangkok contributed to this report.
Ends
30 December 2005
Talking democracy to Burma’s junta
Malaysiakini - Dec 28, 05 5:33pm
Salbiah Ahmad
Asean special envoy to Burma, Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar’s announcement that he will “check the progress of democracy” and “to see what is happening on the ground” is welcomed.
My friend from Burma sees much hope in this development. The atrocities of the ruling junta are well documented by local and international human rights groups. On Nov 27 this year the junta renewed the detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi for a further six months.
Vang (not his real name) is concerned with the increase in refugee movement out of Burma in recent months. There is every possibility that this may be caused by renewed or increased persecutions of the population at home. Further, Malaysia has no protection in law and in policy for refugees and asylum seekers.
Last week about 15 Burmese were detained allegedly for demonstrating at KLCC at the end of the 11th Asean summit. We mused that the occasion was an excuse to round up undocumented persons who happen to be in the area.
Refugees get arrested and detained all the time. The only difference is that on an eventful day, it gets noticed. He mentioned the difficulty of identifying those detained that day from the ‘outside’ as some of the Burmese used Thai passports to enter Malaysia and often forgot the Thai name they had assumed. His eyes laughed for a split second.
Burmese have little or no documents because the state does not function. It is ridiculous to demand passports or identity cards or birth certificates. Very few of us can imagine what it must be like for forced migrants.
Maimoun (not her real name) who is here with her incapacitated husband and children ekes a meager living sorting vegetables in a wet market near Gombak. The junta tortures villagers by forcing them to work or carry arms without food and wages. They work until they become ill, useless or die. Escape is the only way out.
“I come to look for peace here in Malaysia, but there is no peace here,” she said, referring to the harassment by law enforcers who look to refugees for money every other day.
“I have this dream, that one day I can sail away in a boat to a peaceful place. Will Maimoun live to see this?” she wondered with a sad smile.
Junta road map
Muslim refugees find it harder to be placed in a third country after September 11. Repatriation to Burma means incarceration or death (in custody or otherwise). Refugees left across the border by our immigration officers, invariably make their way back to Malaysia. Going home to Burma is not an option.
The Irrawaddy on-line reports that the National League for Democracy (NLD) wants Syed Hamid to meet the ethnic groups, NLD representatives and party leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other democratic forces to analyse Burma’s political circumstances.
For a long time now Asean governments have been talking to the junta leaders’ explanation of its roadmap to democracy. Even humanitarian groups have found that junta map perilous.
In August, the Global Fund which had committed US$100 million to fight HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis pulled out of Burma. This December, the French contingent of Medecin Sans Frontiers is preparing to withdraw from Burma citing difficulties in implementing their programme on treatment of malaria because “of restrictions imposed on our international staff regarding access to villagers”.
Like Syed Hamid, we hoped that the Asean mission would be credible.
Dr Mahathir Mohamed, former premier, in Asian-value speak said that demanding Burma to expedite its democracy reform would mean interference in Burma’s affairs. Imposing sanctions and forcing Burma “to do certain things was not the Asean way”.
Press for Suu Kyi’s release
Najib Razak, the deputy prime minister speaking at the Mahathir-inspired Perdana Global Peace Forum said to the effect that each country’s situation is circumscribed by their historical, social, economic and cultural conditions.
We seldom hear Najib’s take on the state of the world. His concerns are eerily similar to China’s views in its White Paper of 1991 (Human Rights in China). Najib appears to be Mahathir’s deputy in this. That or he is doing his bit in assuaging China of our good intentions in the midst of China’s furore of the treatment of her nationals by law enforcers here.
Syed Hamid is however Asean’s and not Malaysia’s envoy to Burma. Unfortunately, we know little of Asean’s concerns on democracy. Even if Asean democracy is high on electoral democracy alone, Burma has failed this test by denying the electoral mandate given to Suu Kyi in 1990. Asean must press for Suu Kyi’s release.
Trading with the junta is not frowned upon by Asian capitalists and its governments. Thailand’s premier, Thaksin Shinawatra is a friend to the junta’s leaders and they are business partners. We understand that it is business as usual for some Malaysian companies as well.
The UN special envoy to Burma, Razali Ismail, believes that trading with Burma is important so as “not to hurt innocent people”. But continued trading with Burma has not brought freedom from fear. It has not brought peace or safety. Nothing is changing on the ground and innocents in unimaginable numbers are forced to flee. We may wonder who in Burma actually benefits from trade.
Trade with Burma now comes with a democracy tag. We should exercise some caution with Asean democracy. The system set in place in most colonised countries in the South arguably limits political freedoms in support of a strong executive to bolster the market rather than democracy.
Rule of law
It is reasonable to assume that Asean leaders (in Malaysia, the party in power has not changed since independence), are familiar with the institutional arrangements which limits freedoms. The rule of law ingrained by imperialist powers in newly independent states in the South allows the state to assume a larger role.
The regime of general rights is undermined by state discretion and discrimination.
When human rights and democracy became conditionalities for trade after the Cold War, these conditionalities in the course of things protect the so-called free market rather than human
rights.
The components of the original facets to the rule of law such as the limits of state power, the broadening of political power of the community through democratic principles and the establishment of the welfare state or development of social justice (to alleviate the social consequences of the market) were not emphasised.
We have no information of the premises or conditionalities of Asean trade with Burma and whether these conditionalities merely serve to strengthen the state and its capitalist elites to the detriment of the peoples’ political participation and social welfare.
The other missing agenda in Asean is a concerted plan to the refugee and internally displaced. Let us first be clear that we have a refugee and IDP situation in the region except perhaps for the island republic of Singapore. Singapore does not allow any information out on the matter, although opposition politician Dr Chee Soon Juan in his sojourn in jail for speaking in public without state sanction, chanced to meet forced migrants in prison and he made that public.
Harassed refugees
Malaysia, as many countries in Asean, is not even party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its protocol. Malaysia then becomes highly selective on the refugee question. For example, retired premier Mahathir made continuous headlines about asylum for the 131 Thai nationals in Kelantan while hundreds of refugees including Burmese and Acehnese languish in police and immigration lock-ups and in Semenyih and other detention centres. Thousands of forced migrants in Malaysia are harassed daily on our streets by immigration and police and denied their basic human rights and dignity.
Malaysia does not formally recognise the principle of non-refoulement. We have sent refugees and asylum seekers back to their home countries without regard to the dire consequences that may await them. Often this means death or ‘disappearance’.
Malaysia has not developed a formal transparent policy on refugees and forced migrants. Much has been left to civil servants without clear direction and policy. This makes the humanitarian assistance of groups and the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees more arduous as ‘official’ government decisions become discretionary, selective and personal. We have to assume some real responsibility for the refugee communities in our midst.
Thus when Syed Hamid proceeds to Rangoon next month on his mission of democracy, we think it is prudent for Malaysia to also examine its human rights record on refugees and other forced migrants in Malaysia.
As for democracy for Burma, we hope and desire for the people of Burma what we ourselves aspire in peace and freedom.
* SALBIAH AHMAD is a lawyer and an independent researcher. MALAYA! as the name for this column was inspired by the meaning of 'Malaya' in Tagalog which means freedom. The events at the end of 1998 in KL offer a new inspiration. MALAYA! takes on the process of reclaiming the many facets of independence.
Salbiah Ahmad
Asean special envoy to Burma, Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar’s announcement that he will “check the progress of democracy” and “to see what is happening on the ground” is welcomed.
My friend from Burma sees much hope in this development. The atrocities of the ruling junta are well documented by local and international human rights groups. On Nov 27 this year the junta renewed the detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi for a further six months.
Vang (not his real name) is concerned with the increase in refugee movement out of Burma in recent months. There is every possibility that this may be caused by renewed or increased persecutions of the population at home. Further, Malaysia has no protection in law and in policy for refugees and asylum seekers.
Last week about 15 Burmese were detained allegedly for demonstrating at KLCC at the end of the 11th Asean summit. We mused that the occasion was an excuse to round up undocumented persons who happen to be in the area.
Refugees get arrested and detained all the time. The only difference is that on an eventful day, it gets noticed. He mentioned the difficulty of identifying those detained that day from the ‘outside’ as some of the Burmese used Thai passports to enter Malaysia and often forgot the Thai name they had assumed. His eyes laughed for a split second.
Burmese have little or no documents because the state does not function. It is ridiculous to demand passports or identity cards or birth certificates. Very few of us can imagine what it must be like for forced migrants.
Maimoun (not her real name) who is here with her incapacitated husband and children ekes a meager living sorting vegetables in a wet market near Gombak. The junta tortures villagers by forcing them to work or carry arms without food and wages. They work until they become ill, useless or die. Escape is the only way out.
“I come to look for peace here in Malaysia, but there is no peace here,” she said, referring to the harassment by law enforcers who look to refugees for money every other day.
“I have this dream, that one day I can sail away in a boat to a peaceful place. Will Maimoun live to see this?” she wondered with a sad smile.
Junta road map
Muslim refugees find it harder to be placed in a third country after September 11. Repatriation to Burma means incarceration or death (in custody or otherwise). Refugees left across the border by our immigration officers, invariably make their way back to Malaysia. Going home to Burma is not an option.
The Irrawaddy on-line reports that the National League for Democracy (NLD) wants Syed Hamid to meet the ethnic groups, NLD representatives and party leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other democratic forces to analyse Burma’s political circumstances.
For a long time now Asean governments have been talking to the junta leaders’ explanation of its roadmap to democracy. Even humanitarian groups have found that junta map perilous.
In August, the Global Fund which had committed US$100 million to fight HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis pulled out of Burma. This December, the French contingent of Medecin Sans Frontiers is preparing to withdraw from Burma citing difficulties in implementing their programme on treatment of malaria because “of restrictions imposed on our international staff regarding access to villagers”.
Like Syed Hamid, we hoped that the Asean mission would be credible.
Dr Mahathir Mohamed, former premier, in Asian-value speak said that demanding Burma to expedite its democracy reform would mean interference in Burma’s affairs. Imposing sanctions and forcing Burma “to do certain things was not the Asean way”.
Press for Suu Kyi’s release
Najib Razak, the deputy prime minister speaking at the Mahathir-inspired Perdana Global Peace Forum said to the effect that each country’s situation is circumscribed by their historical, social, economic and cultural conditions.
We seldom hear Najib’s take on the state of the world. His concerns are eerily similar to China’s views in its White Paper of 1991 (Human Rights in China). Najib appears to be Mahathir’s deputy in this. That or he is doing his bit in assuaging China of our good intentions in the midst of China’s furore of the treatment of her nationals by law enforcers here.
Syed Hamid is however Asean’s and not Malaysia’s envoy to Burma. Unfortunately, we know little of Asean’s concerns on democracy. Even if Asean democracy is high on electoral democracy alone, Burma has failed this test by denying the electoral mandate given to Suu Kyi in 1990. Asean must press for Suu Kyi’s release.
Trading with the junta is not frowned upon by Asian capitalists and its governments. Thailand’s premier, Thaksin Shinawatra is a friend to the junta’s leaders and they are business partners. We understand that it is business as usual for some Malaysian companies as well.
The UN special envoy to Burma, Razali Ismail, believes that trading with Burma is important so as “not to hurt innocent people”. But continued trading with Burma has not brought freedom from fear. It has not brought peace or safety. Nothing is changing on the ground and innocents in unimaginable numbers are forced to flee. We may wonder who in Burma actually benefits from trade.
Trade with Burma now comes with a democracy tag. We should exercise some caution with Asean democracy. The system set in place in most colonised countries in the South arguably limits political freedoms in support of a strong executive to bolster the market rather than democracy.
Rule of law
It is reasonable to assume that Asean leaders (in Malaysia, the party in power has not changed since independence), are familiar with the institutional arrangements which limits freedoms. The rule of law ingrained by imperialist powers in newly independent states in the South allows the state to assume a larger role.
The regime of general rights is undermined by state discretion and discrimination.
When human rights and democracy became conditionalities for trade after the Cold War, these conditionalities in the course of things protect the so-called free market rather than human
rights.
The components of the original facets to the rule of law such as the limits of state power, the broadening of political power of the community through democratic principles and the establishment of the welfare state or development of social justice (to alleviate the social consequences of the market) were not emphasised.
We have no information of the premises or conditionalities of Asean trade with Burma and whether these conditionalities merely serve to strengthen the state and its capitalist elites to the detriment of the peoples’ political participation and social welfare.
The other missing agenda in Asean is a concerted plan to the refugee and internally displaced. Let us first be clear that we have a refugee and IDP situation in the region except perhaps for the island republic of Singapore. Singapore does not allow any information out on the matter, although opposition politician Dr Chee Soon Juan in his sojourn in jail for speaking in public without state sanction, chanced to meet forced migrants in prison and he made that public.
Harassed refugees
Malaysia, as many countries in Asean, is not even party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its protocol. Malaysia then becomes highly selective on the refugee question. For example, retired premier Mahathir made continuous headlines about asylum for the 131 Thai nationals in Kelantan while hundreds of refugees including Burmese and Acehnese languish in police and immigration lock-ups and in Semenyih and other detention centres. Thousands of forced migrants in Malaysia are harassed daily on our streets by immigration and police and denied their basic human rights and dignity.
Malaysia does not formally recognise the principle of non-refoulement. We have sent refugees and asylum seekers back to their home countries without regard to the dire consequences that may await them. Often this means death or ‘disappearance’.
Malaysia has not developed a formal transparent policy on refugees and forced migrants. Much has been left to civil servants without clear direction and policy. This makes the humanitarian assistance of groups and the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees more arduous as ‘official’ government decisions become discretionary, selective and personal. We have to assume some real responsibility for the refugee communities in our midst.
Thus when Syed Hamid proceeds to Rangoon next month on his mission of democracy, we think it is prudent for Malaysia to also examine its human rights record on refugees and other forced migrants in Malaysia.
As for democracy for Burma, we hope and desire for the people of Burma what we ourselves aspire in peace and freedom.
* SALBIAH AHMAD is a lawyer and an independent researcher. MALAYA! as the name for this column was inspired by the meaning of 'Malaya' in Tagalog which means freedom. The events at the end of 1998 in KL offer a new inspiration. MALAYA! takes on the process of reclaiming the many facets of independence.
24 December 2005
Rights abuses piling up in Myanmar, UN told
scmp - Sunday, December 18, 2005
REUTERS in New York
A UN official has told the security council of Myanmar's overflowing jails, forced labour and lack of democracy - part of a US effort to take a tougher line against the country's ruling junta.
The US and other western nations want to put Myanmar formally on the council agenda, which could lead to resolutions of condemnation and raise pressure on the government.
Other nations, including China, Japan, Russia and Algeria, feel the council is intruding in areas beyond its mandate of international peace and security.
"I am not defending Myanmar," Algeria's UN ambassador said. "But when a situation does not threaten peace and security, the security council should not get involved."
UN undersecretary-general for political affairs Ibrahim Gambari said last week Myanmar had 1,147 political prisoners, employed forced labour and that 240 villages had been destroyed since 2002. He was speaking at the request of the council as part of a US initiative.
Many people had fled to forests "where there is inadequate food security, inadequate health care and no educational facilities", he said.
US Ambassador John Bolton said: "We felt that the continued deterioration of conditions in Burma warranted action in the security council."
In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the council's involvement was "another reminder of just how serious the situation in that country has become".
"The United States views continued UN and UN Security Council involvement as essential to putting Burma on a path towards democracy, greater prosperity and stability," he said.
British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, this month's council president, said he expected another briefing in January. But Danish Ambassador Ellen Margrethe Loj noted the issue still was not on the agenda, which takes a minimum of nine votes. Mr Bolton has about 10 votes but members prefer consensus on agenda issues, where veto rights do not count.
"I think it would be amiss of the council to go on as if nothing happened in Burma, considering the risks for regional stability," Ms Loj said.
"We happened to believe there's a risk for regional stability."
Mr Gambari said Aids cases are increasing, drug trafficking in border areas is rampant and that UN agencies are handling 140,000 Myanmese refugees in Thailand.
The government's plan to relocate key ministries from Yangon to Pyinmana 320km north of the capital, raised fears that the leadership would become even more isolated from the real situation in the country, Mr Gambari said.
Myanmar's military rulers no longer allow UN investigators or special envoys to visit, although Asean is soon to send Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar as its envoy.
The junta ignored a 1990 landslide victory for the National League for Democracy party, led by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. She is under house arrest and many of her supporters are in jail.
REUTERS in New York
A UN official has told the security council of Myanmar's overflowing jails, forced labour and lack of democracy - part of a US effort to take a tougher line against the country's ruling junta.
The US and other western nations want to put Myanmar formally on the council agenda, which could lead to resolutions of condemnation and raise pressure on the government.
Other nations, including China, Japan, Russia and Algeria, feel the council is intruding in areas beyond its mandate of international peace and security.
"I am not defending Myanmar," Algeria's UN ambassador said. "But when a situation does not threaten peace and security, the security council should not get involved."
UN undersecretary-general for political affairs Ibrahim Gambari said last week Myanmar had 1,147 political prisoners, employed forced labour and that 240 villages had been destroyed since 2002. He was speaking at the request of the council as part of a US initiative.
Many people had fled to forests "where there is inadequate food security, inadequate health care and no educational facilities", he said.
US Ambassador John Bolton said: "We felt that the continued deterioration of conditions in Burma warranted action in the security council."
In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the council's involvement was "another reminder of just how serious the situation in that country has become".
"The United States views continued UN and UN Security Council involvement as essential to putting Burma on a path towards democracy, greater prosperity and stability," he said.
British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, this month's council president, said he expected another briefing in January. But Danish Ambassador Ellen Margrethe Loj noted the issue still was not on the agenda, which takes a minimum of nine votes. Mr Bolton has about 10 votes but members prefer consensus on agenda issues, where veto rights do not count.
"I think it would be amiss of the council to go on as if nothing happened in Burma, considering the risks for regional stability," Ms Loj said.
"We happened to believe there's a risk for regional stability."
Mr Gambari said Aids cases are increasing, drug trafficking in border areas is rampant and that UN agencies are handling 140,000 Myanmese refugees in Thailand.
The government's plan to relocate key ministries from Yangon to Pyinmana 320km north of the capital, raised fears that the leadership would become even more isolated from the real situation in the country, Mr Gambari said.
Myanmar's military rulers no longer allow UN investigators or special envoys to visit, although Asean is soon to send Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar as its envoy.
The junta ignored a 1990 landslide victory for the National League for Democracy party, led by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. She is under house arrest and many of her supporters are in jail.
21 December 2005
Thailand goes against the flow in Myanmar
Asia Times Online
20 December 2005
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
BANGKOK - By agreeing to help build a large dam in military-ruled
Myanmar, Thailand's state-run power utility has laid the groundwork
for a potential water war in an area already troubled by ethnic
conflict and human-rights abuses.
The Hat Gyi hydroelectricity dam will be built in five to six years,
Kraisi Kanasuta, president of the EGAT Plc, said this month, with
hardly a hint of the many problems that may lie ahead.
The planned dam will be the first of five that EGAT and the Yangon
junta hope to build across the Salween River, and it is expected to
generate 1,200 megawatts of power.
But even before the ink dries on the memorandum of understanding that
EGAT signed with the State Peace a Development Council (SPDC), as
Myanmar's military regime is officially known, environmentalists and
human-rights groups have fired a salvo of questions.
What plans, for example, does EGAT and its partner have to conduct
the mandatory environment impact assessment (EIA) to gauge the extent
of damage that the dam could cause in Myanmar's Karen state, which
lies along Thailand's western border?
One group of environmental activists, Salween Watch, has expressed
its concern, in a statement, about the "secretive process involved in
the planning and implementation of these mega-projects".
Others said that the volatile nature of the area - where Myanmar's
military is locked in a decades-long conflict with the Karen National
Union (KNU), a rebel group of that Southeast Asian country's Karen
ethnic community - will make it impossible for a proper an EIA to be
conducted.
"There is fighting still going on there. I don't think the SPDC will
be in a position to conduct a proper EIA before building the dam,"
Lau Eh Roland, deputy director of Karen River Watch, a coalition of
Karen environmental and human-rights groups, told Inter Press Service
(IPS).
Already, there are signs of protest along the banks of the Salween
that Yangon and EGAT will find difficult to ignore. Notices have been
put up, supposedly by the KNU at regular intervals, declaring their
opposition to the damming of the Salween in Karen state.
Adding to this is Myanmar's lack of credibility. "You will not be
able to get an honest assessment of the damage to the environment and
the community from the villagers living in the area," Sai Sai,
coordinator for Salween Watch, said in an IPS interview. "The
military will be involved in any open attempt to collect information
for an EIA."
The military has earned itself a human-rights record in the region
bad enough to force thousands of Karen villagers to flee for safety
to Thailand over the past years.
Already global environmental lobbies, such as EarthRights
International, have expressed fears that the Hat Gyi dam would result
in forced relocation of local communities, forced labor and other
human-rights violations, besides greater militarization of the area.
The 2,800-kilometer Salween is Southeast Asia's last untouched body
of water and rivals the mighty Mekong River, which is 4,880
kilometers, in terms of its relevance to people in this region. As
with the Mekong, it begins its journey in the mountains of Tibet and
flows through China's southern Yunnan province before snaking across
Myanmar and along the Thai-Myanmar border, before flowing into the
Andaman Sea.
The Chinese government has already set its sights on exploiting the
upper reaches of the Salween, as it has done with the Mekong, to feed
its own voracious appetite for electricity. Beijing's plans will
result in a cascade of 13 dams being built across the Salween.
But the construction of these dams to exploit the Nu River, as the
Salween is called in China, has yet to commence due to protests from
environmentalists in downstream countries and green groups in China.
The dam developers have worsened their case by the manner in which
they conducted the EIA for this project - in secrecy and without a
public hearing about its findings.
Damming the Salween downstream will result in a loss of the area's
abundant forests, wildlife, fisheries and its spectacular rocky
landscape. "The flooding that will result after the dam is built will
also affect the Thai-Burmese border," said Luntharimar Longcharoen of
Towards Ecological Recovery and Regional Alliance, an independent
green group committed to protecting the environment in the Myanmar
and Indo-China region.
But little of that appears to be of concern to Thailand's state-run
power utility, as revealed in the deal with the SPDC. What matters to
EGAT executives is the cheap electricity that Thailand will be able
to buy from Myanmar to feed its high demand for power.
Currently, Thailand consumes 1,448 kilowatt-hours (kwh) of
electricity per capita, far higher than some of its neighbors, such
as China, where power consumption is 827 kwh per capita, or Vietnam,
where it is 286 kwh, or Myanmar, at 68 kwh.
EGAT may not be able to get away as easily as it has done so far, at
least in Thailand, said Luntharimar, since the Hat Gyi dam has
already become an issue that has angered Thai environmentalists.
Among the rallying cries is the secrecy of EGAT and the lack of
interest in conducting an honest, legally valid EIA.
(Inter Press Service)
20 December 2005
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
BANGKOK - By agreeing to help build a large dam in military-ruled
Myanmar, Thailand's state-run power utility has laid the groundwork
for a potential water war in an area already troubled by ethnic
conflict and human-rights abuses.
The Hat Gyi hydroelectricity dam will be built in five to six years,
Kraisi Kanasuta, president of the EGAT Plc, said this month, with
hardly a hint of the many problems that may lie ahead.
The planned dam will be the first of five that EGAT and the Yangon
junta hope to build across the Salween River, and it is expected to
generate 1,200 megawatts of power.
But even before the ink dries on the memorandum of understanding that
EGAT signed with the State Peace a Development Council (SPDC), as
Myanmar's military regime is officially known, environmentalists and
human-rights groups have fired a salvo of questions.
What plans, for example, does EGAT and its partner have to conduct
the mandatory environment impact assessment (EIA) to gauge the extent
of damage that the dam could cause in Myanmar's Karen state, which
lies along Thailand's western border?
One group of environmental activists, Salween Watch, has expressed
its concern, in a statement, about the "secretive process involved in
the planning and implementation of these mega-projects".
Others said that the volatile nature of the area - where Myanmar's
military is locked in a decades-long conflict with the Karen National
Union (KNU), a rebel group of that Southeast Asian country's Karen
ethnic community - will make it impossible for a proper an EIA to be
conducted.
"There is fighting still going on there. I don't think the SPDC will
be in a position to conduct a proper EIA before building the dam,"
Lau Eh Roland, deputy director of Karen River Watch, a coalition of
Karen environmental and human-rights groups, told Inter Press Service
(IPS).
Already, there are signs of protest along the banks of the Salween
that Yangon and EGAT will find difficult to ignore. Notices have been
put up, supposedly by the KNU at regular intervals, declaring their
opposition to the damming of the Salween in Karen state.
Adding to this is Myanmar's lack of credibility. "You will not be
able to get an honest assessment of the damage to the environment and
the community from the villagers living in the area," Sai Sai,
coordinator for Salween Watch, said in an IPS interview. "The
military will be involved in any open attempt to collect information
for an EIA."
The military has earned itself a human-rights record in the region
bad enough to force thousands of Karen villagers to flee for safety
to Thailand over the past years.
Already global environmental lobbies, such as EarthRights
International, have expressed fears that the Hat Gyi dam would result
in forced relocation of local communities, forced labor and other
human-rights violations, besides greater militarization of the area.
The 2,800-kilometer Salween is Southeast Asia's last untouched body
of water and rivals the mighty Mekong River, which is 4,880
kilometers, in terms of its relevance to people in this region. As
with the Mekong, it begins its journey in the mountains of Tibet and
flows through China's southern Yunnan province before snaking across
Myanmar and along the Thai-Myanmar border, before flowing into the
Andaman Sea.
The Chinese government has already set its sights on exploiting the
upper reaches of the Salween, as it has done with the Mekong, to feed
its own voracious appetite for electricity. Beijing's plans will
result in a cascade of 13 dams being built across the Salween.
But the construction of these dams to exploit the Nu River, as the
Salween is called in China, has yet to commence due to protests from
environmentalists in downstream countries and green groups in China.
The dam developers have worsened their case by the manner in which
they conducted the EIA for this project - in secrecy and without a
public hearing about its findings.
Damming the Salween downstream will result in a loss of the area's
abundant forests, wildlife, fisheries and its spectacular rocky
landscape. "The flooding that will result after the dam is built will
also affect the Thai-Burmese border," said Luntharimar Longcharoen of
Towards Ecological Recovery and Regional Alliance, an independent
green group committed to protecting the environment in the Myanmar
and Indo-China region.
But little of that appears to be of concern to Thailand's state-run
power utility, as revealed in the deal with the SPDC. What matters to
EGAT executives is the cheap electricity that Thailand will be able
to buy from Myanmar to feed its high demand for power.
Currently, Thailand consumes 1,448 kilowatt-hours (kwh) of
electricity per capita, far higher than some of its neighbors, such
as China, where power consumption is 827 kwh per capita, or Vietnam,
where it is 286 kwh, or Myanmar, at 68 kwh.
EGAT may not be able to get away as easily as it has done so far, at
least in Thailand, said Luntharimar, since the Hat Gyi dam has
already become an issue that has angered Thai environmentalists.
Among the rallying cries is the secrecy of EGAT and the lack of
interest in conducting an honest, legally valid EIA.
(Inter Press Service)
20 December 2005
An unusual rebuke to Myanmar on Suu Kyi
The Straits Times, Singapore
December 19, 2005
What would have made KL summits an unqualified success
An unusual rebuke to Myanmar on Suu Kyi aside, few could point to any real progress
By PAULINE NG KL CORRESPONDENT
WITH hundreds of delegates at the 11th Asean Summit and more than 1,000
registered reporters to cover the event and the nine summits related to it,
Kuala Lumpur was certainly abuzz last week.
But what did the hubhub have to do with the ordinary person who in Kuala
Lumpur probably only related to the summits in that the week before, sirens
had blared intermittently in the city as the police conducted mock runs to
get leaders to the venue on time - a vital necessity given the gridlock that
often grips the city at peak hours.
Unfortunately, officious gatherings such as these are notorious for being
little more than talk shops, and to be frank, few - media included -
expected the Asean Summit and the related summits to be any different. The
official declarations at the summits, liberally peppered with phrases such
as 'realisation of common interests, mutual respect, community building,
commitment to economic integration, promotion of peace and stability' went a
long way in confirming the 'yawn factor'. Asean is a 38-year-old
organisation after all, and most of the stated principles and objectives
would not be all that new.
But just when you thought nothing concrete was to materialise, Asean did the
unexpected: It told its fellow member Myanmar what an embarrassment it is to
the 10-member grouping - and that it should forthwith take steps to hasten
the release of pro-democracy leader and icon Aung San Suu Kyi from
restrictions placed on her movements. Sure, Asean's admonishment was the
result of international pressure and criticism of the bloc being only a talk
shop after its policy of constructive engagement and non-interference
yielded nothing in past years from Myanmar's military leaders. But it was
nevertheless a landmark decision by Asean that was warmly welcomed by the
international community, and especially the campaigners of human rights.
Only the most naive would think that Ms Suu Kyi is going to obtain her
freedom anytime soon. But Asean's unambiguous call at the very least gives
fresh hope and impetus to reform movements in Myanmar, particularly if the
grouping continues to leverage its influence to bring about a positive
change in the country.
That unusual rebuke aside, few could conclusively point to any real
progress. For example, despite the close ties within Asean, the perennial
haze that chokes the region and brings with it untold health and economic
problems to countries affected by it - such as Malaysia - is likely to recur
again next year, given that no solutions have emerged to counter the problem
which has been blamed mainly on crop-burning activities in Indonesia.
As chairman of the summits, Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
had no doubt they were a success. Leaders attended in person, reflecting the
importance of the meets, he pointed out. Moreover, there was a high degree
of acceptance by the leaders of the many common interests shared in the
region, and the belief that peace and prosperity should continue to reign in
the region.
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong probably put it in perspective best
with this summing up: 'We don't always have spectacular fireworks at
summits, big decisions, or a major change of policy. But step-by-step, each
time you meet, you are cultivating the ground, keeping it fertile,
maintaining the relationship and dealing with problems before they arise,
before they become serious.'
That being so, if the summits last week helped in any way to ease current
tensions between China and Japan, or if they assisted by setting in motion
the process to what peoples from all over hope to be the eventual release of
Ms Suu Kyi, then the summits in Kuala Lumpur would have been an unqualified
success.
Ends
December 19, 2005
What would have made KL summits an unqualified success
An unusual rebuke to Myanmar on Suu Kyi aside, few could point to any real progress
By PAULINE NG KL CORRESPONDENT
WITH hundreds of delegates at the 11th Asean Summit and more than 1,000
registered reporters to cover the event and the nine summits related to it,
Kuala Lumpur was certainly abuzz last week.
But what did the hubhub have to do with the ordinary person who in Kuala
Lumpur probably only related to the summits in that the week before, sirens
had blared intermittently in the city as the police conducted mock runs to
get leaders to the venue on time - a vital necessity given the gridlock that
often grips the city at peak hours.
Unfortunately, officious gatherings such as these are notorious for being
little more than talk shops, and to be frank, few - media included -
expected the Asean Summit and the related summits to be any different. The
official declarations at the summits, liberally peppered with phrases such
as 'realisation of common interests, mutual respect, community building,
commitment to economic integration, promotion of peace and stability' went a
long way in confirming the 'yawn factor'. Asean is a 38-year-old
organisation after all, and most of the stated principles and objectives
would not be all that new.
But just when you thought nothing concrete was to materialise, Asean did the
unexpected: It told its fellow member Myanmar what an embarrassment it is to
the 10-member grouping - and that it should forthwith take steps to hasten
the release of pro-democracy leader and icon Aung San Suu Kyi from
restrictions placed on her movements. Sure, Asean's admonishment was the
result of international pressure and criticism of the bloc being only a talk
shop after its policy of constructive engagement and non-interference
yielded nothing in past years from Myanmar's military leaders. But it was
nevertheless a landmark decision by Asean that was warmly welcomed by the
international community, and especially the campaigners of human rights.
Only the most naive would think that Ms Suu Kyi is going to obtain her
freedom anytime soon. But Asean's unambiguous call at the very least gives
fresh hope and impetus to reform movements in Myanmar, particularly if the
grouping continues to leverage its influence to bring about a positive
change in the country.
That unusual rebuke aside, few could conclusively point to any real
progress. For example, despite the close ties within Asean, the perennial
haze that chokes the region and brings with it untold health and economic
problems to countries affected by it - such as Malaysia - is likely to recur
again next year, given that no solutions have emerged to counter the problem
which has been blamed mainly on crop-burning activities in Indonesia.
As chairman of the summits, Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
had no doubt they were a success. Leaders attended in person, reflecting the
importance of the meets, he pointed out. Moreover, there was a high degree
of acceptance by the leaders of the many common interests shared in the
region, and the belief that peace and prosperity should continue to reign in
the region.
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong probably put it in perspective best
with this summing up: 'We don't always have spectacular fireworks at
summits, big decisions, or a major change of policy. But step-by-step, each
time you meet, you are cultivating the ground, keeping it fertile,
maintaining the relationship and dealing with problems before they arise,
before they become serious.'
That being so, if the summits last week helped in any way to ease current
tensions between China and Japan, or if they assisted by setting in motion
the process to what peoples from all over hope to be the eventual release of
Ms Suu Kyi, then the summits in Kuala Lumpur would have been an unqualified
success.
Ends
04 December 2005
Non-interference policy in Burma not working
MalaysiaKini - Dec 3, 05 6:58pm
Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (Asean) long-standing policy of non-interference in each other’s affairs have failed miserably in Burma, Malaysian lawmakers said.
Malaysian members of Parliament Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz and Zaid Ibrahim (left) yesterday led calls for Asean legislators to set aside diplomatic niceties to apply direct pressure on Burma’s military regime.
“Asean governments need to seriously review the relevance of the so-called non-interference principle,” Zaid told the Asean Inter-parliamentary Caucus on Burma yesterday.
“We should not be willing to politely ignore the misbehavior of a neighbour when the consequences are interfering with our own internal and regional stability.
“We must not allow ‘non-interference’ to shield our hearts and minds from the suffering of 50 million of our own neighbours,” he added.
He said this in his opening remarks to the caucus’ two-day conference on Good Governance, Democracy and Asean which ended today.
Other means exhausted
In his speech, Nazri stressed the point emphatically when he said he would not read from his prepared speech which did not reflect his true feelings on the matter but would speak off the cuff.
The regional governments’ attempts to engage Burma and persuade its military government into allowing democracy to take root had failed, he said.
“I believe that as parliamentarians the only way out is pressure from all parliamentarians in Asean. We are the only hope for the Burmese people. We should go ahead with pressuring them because all other means have been exhausted,” said Nazri.
“We have seen that the Burmese regime remains the same. In fact, (it has gotten) even worse because of the support that our governments give them,” he added.
‘No turning back’
Nazri also said it was merely a matter of time before the Burmese military government succumbed to pressure coming from Asean’s parliamentarians, who were the elected representatives of their respective populace.
“I feel that it is a matter of time, maybe not in two or three years, but the time will come when democracy returns to Burma,” he said.
“This will happen, God willing, with the help of all parliamentarians in Asean pressuring the Burmese regime to step down because this is the way. There is no turning back in promoting democracy in Burma.”
Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang, meanwhile, also took the opportunity to call for the regional bloc to move away from a “government-driven Asean to a Parliament-driven Asean and, eventually, a people-driven Asean.”
Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (Asean) long-standing policy of non-interference in each other’s affairs have failed miserably in Burma, Malaysian lawmakers said.
Malaysian members of Parliament Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz and Zaid Ibrahim (left) yesterday led calls for Asean legislators to set aside diplomatic niceties to apply direct pressure on Burma’s military regime.
“Asean governments need to seriously review the relevance of the so-called non-interference principle,” Zaid told the Asean Inter-parliamentary Caucus on Burma yesterday.
“We should not be willing to politely ignore the misbehavior of a neighbour when the consequences are interfering with our own internal and regional stability.
“We must not allow ‘non-interference’ to shield our hearts and minds from the suffering of 50 million of our own neighbours,” he added.
He said this in his opening remarks to the caucus’ two-day conference on Good Governance, Democracy and Asean which ended today.
Other means exhausted
In his speech, Nazri stressed the point emphatically when he said he would not read from his prepared speech which did not reflect his true feelings on the matter but would speak off the cuff.
The regional governments’ attempts to engage Burma and persuade its military government into allowing democracy to take root had failed, he said.
“I believe that as parliamentarians the only way out is pressure from all parliamentarians in Asean. We are the only hope for the Burmese people. We should go ahead with pressuring them because all other means have been exhausted,” said Nazri.
“We have seen that the Burmese regime remains the same. In fact, (it has gotten) even worse because of the support that our governments give them,” he added.
‘No turning back’
Nazri also said it was merely a matter of time before the Burmese military government succumbed to pressure coming from Asean’s parliamentarians, who were the elected representatives of their respective populace.
“I feel that it is a matter of time, maybe not in two or three years, but the time will come when democracy returns to Burma,” he said.
“This will happen, God willing, with the help of all parliamentarians in Asean pressuring the Burmese regime to step down because this is the way. There is no turning back in promoting democracy in Burma.”
Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang, meanwhile, also took the opportunity to call for the regional bloc to move away from a “government-driven Asean to a Parliament-driven Asean and, eventually, a people-driven Asean.”
01 December 2005
Change in Myanmar will take time, but is inevitable
SCMP editorial - Monday, November 28, 2005
Myanmar's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi was probably the least
surprised when the military government told her yesterday she would remain
under house arrest for at least another year. She has, after all, been
confined to her Yangon home since May 30, 2003, and spent more than 10 of
the past 16 years either there or in prison.
With the ruling generals as much in charge as when they seized power in
1962 - and equally as unwilling to give it up - there was little hope Ms Suu
Kyi would be freed anytime soon. Internal dissent is simply not tolerated
and international pressure is vastly weakened by the friendliness of
neighbouring countries.
That does not mean the cause of the world's best-known political prisoner is
lost, but while the generals remain firmly in control, change will come on
their terms and at a timetable to which they agree.
Such was the situation for South Africa's Nelson Mandela, who spent 27 years
behind bars, East Timor's Xanana Gusmao, jailed by Indonesia for six years,
and countless other freedom fighters of eras past. Their struggles were long
and often grim, but spirit and the righteousness of their cause eventually
won through.
Historical precedence is no justification for Myanmar's brutal regime,
however. The excesses of its soldiers and police are well documented -
torture, rape and forced labour abound. Ms Suu Kyi is only the best-known of
more than 1,000 political prisoners. Little attention is being paid,
meanwhile, to other problems in the country: some of the world's worst rates
of HIV/Aids and malaria, and the smuggling of great quantities of opium onto
international markets.
To appease critics, the generals have bought time with a seven-stage "road
map for democracy", the first step of which nears its conclusion next Monday
when the final session of a national convention to draw up a new
constitution is held. Ms Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy party
are not participating, despite their overwhelming, but disallowed, general
election win in 1990. That alone makes the process a sham.
Sanctions imposed by the United States and European Union have had no effect
on Myanmar, economically wedded to strategic rivals China and India. The
"constructive engagement" approach of fellow members of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations is making uncertain progress. Even the demands of
top-level human rights activists Desmond Tutu and Vaclav Havel that the
United Nations' Security Council take up the cause are not guaranteed to
succeed.
This does not amount to a reason for despair; pressure is slowly building on
the military. The longer it holds Ms Suu Kyi, the more her plight and cause
will gain attention and momentum. Eventually, the generals will have no
choice but to enter a proper dialogue with the people they so ruthlessly
rule.
Extended Suu Kyi detention points to possible ballot
scmp - Monday, November 28, 2005
LARRY JAGAN in Bangkok
Yesterday's decision by Myanmar's generals to extend the detention of
pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi for another year suggests the junta
plans to press ahead with its so-called democracy road map, and call an
election within a year.
However, without her participation, few in the international community would
take such steps seriously. Indeed, the National League for Democracy, which
Ms Suu Kyi heads, has previously said that it cannot take part in any
election as long as she remains under lock and key.
The democracy icon has now spent more than 10 of the past 16 years in
detention since the military regime first put her under house arrest in July
1989. She was detained again on May 30, 2003, after anti-democracy thugs
attacked her entourage. The renewal of her home detention was not
unexpected. The articulate and charismatic leader of the NLD has long been a
thorn in the generals' side.
Before she was rearrested in 2003, she told the South China Morning Post:
"We are in opposition to each other at the moment but we should work
together for the sake of the country. We certainly bear no grudges against
them [the generals]. We are not out for vengeance."
But junta leader General Than Shwe has continually rejected Ms Suu Kyi's
appeals for talk. "We don't want a dialogue to find out who is better or
smarter. The only winner, if we settle down to negotiations, should be the
country," he has said.
The NLD won the last national election in May 1990 but the military refused
to hand over power. Instead the junta launched a National Convention
composed of a thousand hand-picked delegates to draw up a new constitution.
The National Convention is to resume discussing the guidelines for the new
constitution next Monday. It has been meeting intermittently now for more
than a decade.
Most western diplomats are convinced the military regime has no intention of
handing over power in the near future and is simply using the constitutional
talks as a delaying tactic.
In August 2003, the then prime minister, General Khin Nyunt, announced a
seven-point road map to democracy. The first step in this national
reconciliation process, as the junta calls it, is the National Convention.
Although Khin Nyunt was arrested more than a year ago and sentenced to 44
years in jail for economic crimes and corruption, the regime remains
committed to the road map, Myanmar's foreign minister, Major-General Nyan
Win, recently told the Post. In an exclusive interview, he said that after
the National Convention completed the guidelines for the new constitution, a
legal committee selected by the attorney-general and the National Convention
Convening Committee would draft the actual constitution. But he refused to
comment on why political parties had been excluded.
The NLD and the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy have boycotted the
constitutional talks since they resumed after a seven-year gap in May last
year.
"Aung San Suu Kyi's extended detention suggests the referendum and new
elections may be held within the next 12 months," said a western diplomat in
Yangon. "There is no way the junta leaders will release her before then."
Junta maintains power grip as Suu Kyi's house arrest extended
scmp - Monday, November 28, 2005
LARRY JAGAN in Bangkok and AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE in Yangon
Myanmar's military junta has extended the house arrest of opposition leader
and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi for another 12 months.
Senior police officials visited the pro-democracy leader in her lakeside
residence in Yangon yesterday and read a statement outlining the government
decision to renew the detention order for another year, an interior ministry
source said.
U Lwin, a spokesman for Ms Suu Kyi's party, the National League for
Democracy (NLD), said it had not been informed of the decision, but a
renewal of an extension to the opposition leader's detention made last
November had been expected. Ms Suu Kyi, who celebrated her 60th birthday in
July, has spent more than 10 of the past 16 years in prison or under house
arrest as the military - which has run Myanmar under various guises since
1962 - shows little sign of wanting to loosen its grip on power.
This is the party leader's third period under house arrest. She was taken
into custody in May 2003, after pro-junta demonstrators attacked her convoy
as she travelled in northern Myanmar.
Since May last year she has been held in virtual solitary confinement. Her
phone has been cut and she has been refused visitors. Only her doctor has
been allowed to call on her periodically during the past year to check on
her medical condition after she had a hysterectomy while in detention in
August 2003. London-based rights watchdog Amnesty International on Saturday
called her continued house arrest a "travesty of justice". Both the United
States and the European Union have imposed sanctions on Myanmar for its
suppression of the pro-democracy movement.
Earlier this month, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution
criticising human rights violations in Myanmar, including extrajudicial
killings, torture, rape, forced labour and harassment of political
opponents.
The decision to prolong Ms Suu Kyi's detention comes just before Myanmar
resumes its National Convention next Monday, where handpicked delegates are
drafting a new constitution as part of the junta's road map to democracy.
The convention has been widely dismissed by the international community.
The NLD won the 1990 election, but was never allowed to govern.
Archives
September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 September 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 October 2011
